TOXAPHENE STATUS REPORT
           November 1971
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
          Washington, D.C.

-------
        TOXAPHENE STATUS REPORT


            Special Report

                to the

Hazardous Materials Advisory Committee

    Environmental Protection Agency
     Consultant Group on Toxaphene

         Gordon E. Guyer, Convener
         Perry L. Adkisson
         Kenneth DuBois
         Calvin Menzie
         H. Page Nicholson
         Gunter Zweig
           Industry Liaison

           Charles L. Dunn
             November 1971

-------
                    HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
           Dr.  Erail M.  Mrak    Chairman
           Chancellor Emeritus
           University of California at  Davis

           Dr.  William J.  Darby    Cochairman
           President, Nutrition Foundation
             and Chairman,  Department of
             Biochemistry
           Vanderbilt University

 Mr.  Errett Deck
 Chairman,  Legislative  Committee
 Association  of American Pesticide
  Control  Officials
 Washington State Department of
  Agriculture
Dr.  Norton  Nelson
Director, Institute of
   Environmental Medicine
New  York University Medical
   Center
Dr. Leon Golberg
Scientific Director, Research Professor
  of Pathology
Institute of Experimental Pathology
  and Toxicology
Albany Medical College
Dr. Ruth Patrick
Chairman, Department of
  Limnology
Academy of Natural Sciences,
  Philadelphia
Dr. Frank Go1ley
Executive Director and Professor of
  Zoology, Institute of Ecology
University of Georgia at Athens
Dr. William R. Rothenberger
Agricultural Production
  Specialist
Frankfort, Indiana
Dr. Gordon E. Guyer
Chairman, Department of Entomology
Michigan State University
Dr. Paul E. Johnson
Executive Secretary, Food and
  Nutrition Board
National Academy of Sciences
Dr. Earl Swanson
Professor of Agricultural
  Economi cs
University of Illinois

Dr. Wilson K. Talley
Assistant Vice President
University of California,
  Berkeley
Mr. William Murphy
President, Campbell Soup Company,
  Camden
Dr. W. Leonard Weyl
Chief of Surgery
Northern Virginia Doctors
  Hospital
McLean, Virginia

-------
                             Regular  Consultants
Dr. Dale R. Lindsay
Associate Director of Medical and
  Allied Health  Education
Duke University
Dr. Caro Luhrs
Medical Advisor to the Secretary
U. S. Department of Agriculture
Mr. James G. Terrill, Jr.
Manager, Special Projects
Environmental Systems Department
Westinghouse Electric Company,
  Pittsburgh
                                    Staff
          Dr. William S. Murray
          Staff Director
Mr. W. Wade Talbot
Executive Officer
Mrs. Alva J. Ware
Clerk-Typist
Mrs. Dorothy I. Richards
Administrative Assistant
Miss Carolyn L. Osborne
Cl erk-Stenographer
Miss Ruby D. Armstrong
Secretary

-------
           CONSULTANTS ON TOXAPHENE
             List of Contributors
Convener and Member of the Hazardous Materials

              Advisory  Committee
Gordon E. Guyer, Ph.D.
Professor and Chairman of the Department of Entomology
Michigan State University
    Consultants to the Hazardous Materials
              Advisory Committee
    Perry L. Adkisson, Ph.D.
    Professor and Head of the Department of Entomology
    Texas A & M University

    Kenneth DuBois, Ph.D.
    Professor of the Department of Pharmacology
    University of Chicago

    Calvin Menzie
    Chief Toxicologist of the Office of
    Environmental Quality
    Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife
    Department of the Interior

    H. Page Nicholson
    Chief of the Agricultural and Industrial Water
    Pollution Control Research Program
    Southeast Water Laboratory
    Environmental Protection Agency

    Gunter Zweig, Ph.D.
    Director of the Life Sciences Division
    Syracuse University  Research Corporation
    Syracuse, New York
                     - x -

-------
       Industry Liaison with the

Hazardous Materials Advisory Committee
Charles L. Dunn
Manager of Ecological Research
Hercules Incorporated
                 - ii -

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                            Page No.

INTRODUCTION  	       1

     Use Patterns   -------------------       1


          U.S. Department of Agriculture Pesticide
          Use Census  ------v------------     .1


          Use Outside the U.S.A.	       5

     Future Trends  	       7



CHEMISTRY AND COMPOSITION	     10

     Chemical Structure and Production of Toxaphene   ~ ~     10

     Uniformity of Toxaphene Production   --------     n

     Composition of Toxaphene  -------------      12

     Partition Chromatography  -------------      14

     Fractional Crystallization  ------------      14

     Craig Liquid-Liquid Separation  ----------      15



METHODS OF ANALYSIS	       19

     Assay Procedures (Formulation Analysis)  -----       19

          Total Chlorine Method	       19

          Infrared Spectrophotometer  ----------       19

          Spectrophotometric Method   ---------       20

          Assays for Cattle Dips    ----------       20

     Residue Analyses for Toxaphene   ---------       21

          Clean-up Procedures   ------------       22

          Total Chlorine Method   ~	__--	       24




                              - iii -

-------
                    TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

                                                            Page No.

          Active-Metal Reaction Methods	24

          Spectrophotometric Method ____________   26

          Paper Chromatography  ______________   26

          Thin Layer Chromatography ------______   26

          Gas Chromatography  _______________   27

               (a)  Review of method	___   27

               (b)  Recommended procedures  ________   29

     Discussion of Analytical Methods and Reporting Data - -   30

     Conclusions on Analytical Techniques and Evaluation
     of Residue Data	,	32


FATE AND IMPLICATION IN THE ENVIRONMENT	44

     Effect on Fish and Wildlife	44

          Toxicity and Pharmacological Actions  ______   44

          Persistence of Toxaphene  ____________   44

          Residues  ____________________   45

          Summary and Comments  ______________   45

     Fate and Movement of Toxaphene in Terrestrial and
     Aquatic Systems  -------__-_--------   59

          Persistence in Soil	59

          Occurrence and Movement in Watercourses -----   63

          Biological Accumulation -------------   69

          Summary —————————————————————   73
                               — iv —

-------
                    TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

                                                            Page No.

     Toxaphene Residues in Atmospheric Samples  ------     89

     The Effect of Toxaphene on Beneficial Arthropods
     Populations  ----_-----____-_--_-_     93

          Effect of Toxaphene on Insect Pollinators  - - -     93
          a Summary --------------------     95

          Effect of Toxaphene on Insect Predators and
          Parasites - a Summary  _____________     99


RESIDUES IN FOOD CROPS AND FOODS -------------   104

     Tolerances for Toxaphene Residues ----------   104

     Residues in Food  -_-_-----__---_---   105

     Residues in Livestock ----------------   107

     Residues in Milk  __________________   1Q8

     Residue Decline - Controlled Studies  ________   109

     Possible Metabolities _--_--___---_--_   no

     Metabolism in the Honey Bee -------------
TOXICOLOGY IN MAN AND ANIMALS  , ------- -. ------   120

     Acute Toxicity and Pharmacological Actions  _____   120

     Subacute Toxicity --- ------ ---- -----   123

     Chronic Toxicity  - -- ----- - --- ------   124

     Reproduction, Tenatology and Mutagenesis  -__--_   124

     Interactions  ____________________   125

     Tissue Residues -_-_--_---__-------   126

     Summary -_-------------_-------   127

-------
                    TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)
                o
                                                            Page No.

TOXAPHENE RESISTANCE 	   131

     In Arthropods ____________________   131

     In Animals Other Than Insects, Mites and Ticks  _ - -   150
                               - vi -

-------
                          INDEX OF TABLES

                                                            Page No,

Table     Farm Use of Toxaphene — 1964 .and 1966
          Crop Years 	      3

Table     Regional Patterns of Toxaphene Farm Use —
          1964/1966 	      4

Table     Properties of Fractions from Fractional
          Crystallization of Toxaphene 	     15

Table     Craig Countercurrent Fractionation of Toxaphene .    17

Table     Summary of Reported Toxaphene Residues by GLC ..     34

Table     Toxaphene Residues                                   48

Table     Toxaphene Residues In Wild Bird Tissues 	     50

Table     Toxaphene Applied to Crops vs. Recovered
          from Soil 	     75

Table     Toxaphene by Seasons in Flint Creek, Alabama
          Water 	     76

Table     Toxaphene Concentration in California Surface
          Waters	     77

Table     Toxaphene in Agricultural Drains in California .     78

Table     Toxaphene in California San Joaquin Valley Tile
          Drain Effluents 	     79

Table     Toxaphene in California Central Valley Surface
          Agricultural Waste Water Drains 	     79

Table     Toxaphene in California Central Valley Surface
          Waters 	     80

Table     Toxaphene in California Bay and Oceans Waters ..     80

Table     Toxaphene in California Sediments 	     81

Table     Insecticides Residue in Alabama Soil Samples
          Collected from 33 Cotton Fields 	     82
                              - vii  -

-------
                     INDEX OF TABLES (Cont'd.)

                                                            Page No.

Table     Comparison of Insecticide Recovery from
          Sediment and Water, Hartselle, Alabama Water
          Treatment Plant 	     82

Table     Toxaphene in Wisconsin Lakes, 1965 	     83

Table     Insecticides in the Fat of Cattle after Multiple
          Spray Treatments 	     84

Table     Insecticide Residues Stored in the Fat of Cattle
          Fed Known Amounts in their Diet 	     85

Table     Toxaphene Residues in Atmospheric Samples 	     89

Table

Table     Domestic Foods Surveillance by FDA — 1964 to
          1967 	    114

Table     Summary of Toxaphene Residues in Oil Seeds, Oils,
          and By-Products (1964-1966)	    115

Table     Chlorinated Pesticide Residues in Meat and
          Poultry 1969-1971 	    116

Table     Toxaphene Residues Resulting From Supervised
          Trials	    117

Table     Evaporation Rates — DDT vs. Toxaphene 	    118

Table     Comparison of Toxicity of Toxaphene with
          Hypothetical Metabolites 	    119

Table     Acute Oral and Dermal 1050 Values for Toxaphene
          and Other Chlorinated Hydrocarbons to Rats 	    121

Table     Acute Toxicity of Toxaphene 	    122

Table     Tabulation of Pests Reported to be Resistant to
          Toxaphene, BBC, Organochlorine Insecticides and
          Cyclodiene Derivatives 	    136
                              - viii -

-------
                         INDEX OF FIGURES
                                                            Page No.
FIGURE
'Typical Gas Chromatogram with Toxaphene
36
FIGURE       Toxaphene Analysis by Gas-Liquid
             Chromatography and Microcoulometry
                                                  37
FIGURE       Electron Capture Detector Responses To:
             A-7 Nanograms Toxaphene, B-2.8 Nanograms DDT,
             C-7 Nanograms; Toxaphene + 3.5 Nanograms DDT ,
                                                   38
FIGURE       Gas Chromatogram for 30 ng. of Toxaphene
             Before Alkali Treatment and After Alkali
             Treatment 	
                                                  39
                              - rx -

-------
INTRODUCTION


     USE PATTERNS


      The amount  of polychloroterpene  insecticide  used  in  the  United


States during the past 25 years totals about 940 million pounds,


averaging 38 million pounds annually.   These figures, based on manu-


facturer production and sales information, are compared below with more


detailed knowledge developed in government studies of farm use of


pesticides.


     USDA Pesticide Use Census


          The Economic Research Service of USDA conducted the first


     national census of pesticide use  in 1965.  Data from that study


     were released in AES Report No. 131, January, 1968.  A follow-up


     study was conducted in 1967, and  reported (AES Report No. 179) in


     April, 1970.  In each survey, approximately 10,000 farmers were


     interviewed in depth to obtain the details of their use of pesti-


     cides.  Data concerning toxaphene have been abstracted from these


     reports and are tabulated below.   Because the crop designations are


     not identical in the 2 studies, certain details may not be directly


     compared, but the major uses and  amounts used are clearly set forth.


          The data indicate that crop  uses for toxaphene (and toxaphene-


     strobane in 1964) were in the range of 34 - 3 million pounds

                                                +
     annually (Table 1).  Livestock use was 4.2 - 0.5 million pounds.


     Combined usage was in the range of 38 - 4 million pounds annually.


     These figures are only for farm use, and do not include amounts

-------
used for any government programs.  Such usage would add only modest




amounts to the total, however, and the totals do agree reasonably




well with figures cited above, which are projected from production




and estimated consumption based on sales to formulators.  In this




regard, it should be recognized that the major producer, Hercules




Incorporated, does not market any toxaphene formulations, but




sells to formulators who blend, distribute and sell finished formu-




lations .  Toxaphene is sold by Hercules Incorporated as technical




toxaphene (100%), a 90% solution in xylene, and as a 40% dust base.




The 90% solution is preferred by many formulators because it




eliminates the inconvenience and expense of handling, melting, and




dissolving the waxy solid.  The solution is commonly bulk-shipped




in rail and truck tank cars.




     Certain regional discrepancies have been noted in the USDA




data (Table 2).  In the Pacific states, for example, the volume of




toxaphene used is apparently understated.  Major uses in the Pacific




states are on cotton, vegetables, and alfalfa seed.  California




state data for 1970 (from that state's first year of dealer sales




reporting) show a total of 2.7 million pounds of toxaphene used on




0.75 million acres.  Thus, the USDA data may understate toxaphene




usage for that region, but the total usage figures are believed to




be reasonably accurate.

-------
                       TABLE 1
   Farm Use of Toxaphene — 1964 and 1966 Crop Years


Crop Use
Corn
Cotton
Soybeans
Tobacco
Other field crops
Vegetables

      Total on Crops
Millions of Pounds in Indicated Years
   1966                        1964
    0.004
   27.3
    1.0
    0.2
    1.6
    0.8
   30.9
                                    Total on Crops
 0.1
26.9
 1.3
 0.3
 4.3
 1.2
34.2
 2.7 (Strobane)
                               36.9
Livestock Use

Cattle
Swine
Poultry
Sheep
Other
      Total on Livestock
    3.3
    0.3
     .02
     .05
    0.01
    3.7
 4.3
 0.3
 0.00
 0.1
 4.7
Total Crop + Livestock
   34.6
41.6

-------
                                 Table 2

                            Regional Patterns of

                    Toxaphene Farm Use — 1964/1966
Region

Northeast
Lake States
Corn Belt
Northern Plains
Appalachia
Southeast
Delta States
Southern Plains
Mountain
Pacific
                                   Millions of Pounds
                         Millions  of Acres
                          Treated  (a)(b)
1966
0.004
0.1
0.4
0.01
2.5
13.7
7.2
5.0
1.4
0.6
1964
.003
.05
1.3
.001
4.2
11.5
10.3
5.1
1.0
0.8
1966
.002
.01
0.3
.01
0.5
1.6
1.2
1.3
0.2
0.2
1964
.02
.05
0.9
.002
1.1
1.8
2.2
1.4
0.2
0.2
                   Total
30.9
34.2
5.4
8.0
                   All Insecticide Use — 1964/1966
All organochlorine
All organophosphorus
All carbamate
All insecticides
82.8
is 36.6
12.4
138.0
89.8
30.5
15.4
143.0
35.0
26.0
5.0
67.0
41.0
24.0
5.0
71.0
(a)  Acres treated do not distinguish between an acre treated only once in
     the crop year or an acre treated many times.

(b)  The same acre treated with 3 different insecticides is counted once for
     each pesticide — e.g., one acre treated with tox-DDT-methyl parathion
     would be tabulated as 2 organochlorine and one organophosphorus acres.

-------
Use Outside U.S.A.




     Use of toxaphene outside the United States is principally




on cotton and livestock, with a variety of smaller uses on




vegetables, small grain, peanuts, soybeans, bananas, and pineapple.




Toxaphene manufacturing plants are located in0Nicaragua and




Mexico with local ownership predominating in Mexico.  Russia is




believed to have toxaphene production facilities, but little is




known about the amount and nature of the material produced.




Other chlorinated terpene materials are encountered on the world




market.  One of these, called "Melipax," is made in East Germany.




Other so-called chlorinated camphenes have been encountered in




Asia.  In general, these other "chlorinated terpene" products




have been found to be of poor or highly variable quality, and in




bioassay tests often require doses several times that of toxaphene




to achieve equal insect kill.




     While the overseas market for toxaphene is appreciably less




than that in the United States, it is also complicated by factors




other than safety and effectiveness of the product.  Currency and




import restrictions, devaluations, trade policy agreements and




other complications can make pesticide marketing overseas more




difficult than in the United States; and product sales can vary




significantly from year to year.  Informed opinion concerning the




likely impact on the international market of United States




restrictions on domestic use of toxaphene is that further United

-------
     States restrictions would eliminate much of  the  use  of  toxaphene

     overseas.
Crop Use Outside U.S.A.

          Geographic Area

          Central America
          South America
          Africa
          Europe
          Asia

          Oceania
Principal Crop Use

cotton
cotton, small grains, soybean,
bananas
cotton, vegetables
cotton, rapeseed, vegetables
cotton, peanuts, vegetables,
rice
cotton
Livestock Use Outside U.S.A.
          Africa
          East, Central and South Africa, including Uganda,  Kenya,
          Tanzania, Rhodesia, Angola, Nigeria and South Africa
          South America

          Brazil
          Peru
          Ecuador
          Columbia
          Venezuela
          Central America

          Mexico
          Costa Rica
          El Salvador
          Panama
          North America
          Canada

-------
     None of  the countries listed, except Canada, has formally established




residue tolerances in meat, although many have noted the 7 ppm tolerance




in the United States and are aware of the 28-day preslaughter interval.




     FUTURE TRENDS




     Farm practices reflect changes in political and economic pressures.




Federal farm  programs, such as recent changes in acreage allotments and




projected yields for cotton, will undoubtedly cause re-examination of




insect control practices.  Optimum farm operation may not emphasize




maximum yields, and both crop choice and production practices will be




re-evaluated  for their net return to the producer.  This could lead




to a reduction in the amounts of pesticides and other economic inputs




used for the  production of certain crops.




     There is a continuing need for insect control in crop and live-




stock production, but only a limited number of new pesticides are in




view.  Older materials, such as toxaphene, as long as they are environ-




mentally acceptable, will continue to be used where they are still.




effective.  It should be recognized, however, that toxaphene has




probably reached its maturity and while a rather stable volume is used,




no great expansion in its use can reasonably be foreseen.




     The use of toxaphene on cotton (Table 1) far exceeds that on any




other agricultural commodity.  Thus, any changes in future cotton insect




pest control strategies may greatly affect the amounts of toxaphene

-------
                                                                      8



used in the United States.  Toxaphene is rarely used alone for the con-

trol of the insect pests of cotton.  Historically, the greatest use of

toxaphene on cotton has been in mixtures with DDT.  The toxaphene-DDT

mixture was synergistic to the chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide-


resistant strains of boll weevils, thrips and cotton fleahoppers which


developed during the 1950's.

     The combination of toxaphene with DDT provided a pesticide that was
                                                                    0
many times more toxic to the above pests than either component when used

alone.  The toxaphene-DDT mixture, marketed in a formulation containing

two parts of toxaphene to one of DDT, provided very effective and eco-


nomical control of the three above pests as well as the bollworm and


tobacco budworm.  The mixture also was very safe for applicators and

farm workers to handle.  Because of these reasons, toxaphene-DDT has


been, and probably continues to be, one of the most widely used pesti-

cides on cotton.


     If the use of DDT on cotton should be prohibited, this action


undoubtedly would have an effect on amounts of toxaphene used on the

crop.  In states where DDT has been banned (Arizona and California),

or where the toxaphene-DDT mixture has lost its utility because of the


continued development of insecticide-resistant insect pests (Texas),

the DDT component of the mixture has been replaced with methyl parathion.


However, the toxaphene-methyl parathion mixture is not synergistic

against resistant insects, but simply additive.  That is, each component

-------
provides  toxicity  to a given pest in direct proportion to the toxicity


of  the  component when used alone.


      In toxaphene-methyl parathion mixtures, methyl parathion is by far


the most  toxic  component to insects.  However, the addition of toxaphene


to  methyl parathion provides certain advantages in that the resultant
                   o

pesticide is measurably more toxic to pest species than either insecti-


cide  alone.  The toxaphene-methyl parathion mixture also is more persis-


tent  than methyl parathion; thus, the mixture may be applied with less


frequency than  methyl parathion alone.  In comparison to toxaphene-DDT,


the toxaphene-methyl parathion mixture poses a much greater acute hazard


to  applicators  and farm workers.  This mixture also is much more toxic


to  certain beneficial species of insect parasites and predators than


toxaphene-DDT.  The amounts of toxaphene applied in mixtures with methyl


parathion oftentimes is less than in the traditional toxaphene-DDT


mixtures.


     Future trends 'for the use of toxaphene on other crops and livestock


is  not expected to change greatly.  Toxaphene presently has considerable


utility in the production of small grains, pasture and hay crops, soy-


beans, vegetables and livestock.  It also has some use for the control


of  certain insect pests of corn, grain sorghum and other feed and food


crops.  Toxaphene has a particular advantage (as will be discussed in


detail later in this report) in that it may be used on seed alfalfa,


clover and certain vegetable crops without causing great damage to bee-


pollinators.

-------
                                                                   10
                     CHEMISTRY AND COMPOSITION









     Chemical structure and production of toxaphene.  Toxaphene is




defined as chlorinated camphene (67-69% chlorine) and has the empirical




formula CinH.._Clg with a molecular weight of 414.




     The commercial production of toxaphene (U. S. Patents 2,565,471




and 2,657,164, Hercules) consists of the reaction between camphene and




chlorine activated by ultraviolet irradiation and certain catalysts to




yield the final product of chlorinated camphene with a chlorine content




of 67-69%.  The final product is a relatively stable material with a




mild terpene odor and is a mixture of related compounds and isomers.




                        Physical Properties




Physical form;  Amber, waxy solid.




Melting point;  70°-90°C.




Solubility:  High solubility in most organic solvents, but greater in




             aromatic solvents; water solubility is about 0.5 ppm.




Vapor pressure;  0.2-0.4mm/25°; 3-4mm/90°C.







Product Specifications




Total organic chlorine, % by weight             67.0-69.0




Acidity, % by weight as HC1                     0.05% max.




Drop softening point, °C                        70 min.




Infrared absorptivity at 7.2u                   0.0177 max.




Specific gravity at 100°C/15.6°C                1.600 minimum

-------
                                                                   11
Typical Properties (Not Specifications)




Specific gravity at 100°C/15.6°C                 1.63 (average)




Specific gravity change per °C                   0.0012




Pounds per gallon at 75°C                       13.8




Viscosity, centipoises at 110°C                 89




                          120°C                 57




                          130°C                 39.1




Specific heat, cal/g/°C at 41°C                  0.258




                           95°C                  0.260




     Uniformity of toxaphene production.  Toxaphene produced by




Hercules is regularly bioassayed and subjected to chemical and physical




tests lot-by-lot during the manufacturing process.  The housefly is




a convenient test organism, although bioassay with other insects such




as plum curculio and Southern armyworm is also recommended to agencies




seeking standards of identity appropriate for specifying, purchasing




or evaluating toxaphene insecticides.




     Recently, a series of nine samples from retained toxaphene produc-




tion manufactured by Hercules in the interval 1949-1970 was bioassayed




against female houseflies by the topical method.  The laboratory toxa-




phene standard sample was used for comparison.  Infrared absorption




spectra and electron capture gas chromatograms were also prepared.  Re-




sults show that the toxaphene regularly produced by Hercules during




the past 23 years is quite uniform in its properties.

-------
                                                                   12
     Composition of toxaphene.  A large number of chlorinated compounds




are present in toxaphene.  A typical gas chromatogram suggests that 30




or 40 principal constituents may exist.  The chlorine content in the




commercial product is limited to 67-69% since insecticidal activity




peaks sharply in that band.




     Control of camphene feedstock quality and process variables is




important in achieving a material of uniform properties.  Listed




previously are product specifications established by Hercules for




toxaphene produced by that manufacturer.  The specification item of




infrared absorptivity at 7.2u helps distinguish toxaphene from other




chlorinated terpene products such as Strobane.




     Toxaphene is prepared by the chlorination of the bicyclic terpene




camphene to contain 67-69% chlorine.  The empirical formula for this




material is CL-H^Cl,,.  Chlorination-grade camphene is prepared by the




isomerization of a-pinene, a product derived from the Southern pine




tree.  Some tricyclene may accompany the camphene, but less than 5%




other terpenes are present.

-------
                                                                              13
camplicnc
             Structures  of  some of these perpenes  are as follows:
(II)     tricyclcne
                                   (in)
o-pjncnc
            (IV)    cyclofenclicr.e
 -fcuthcne
                (VI)   0-fenchcnc
                         (VII)   7-fencliene  .
                   (VIII)
bornvlcnc
   dipctilene
                     C18
                   (X)  toxaphene
                           (.XI)  toxaphene  according to Messing  (3)
        The structure X is commonly used to depict  the  structure of toxaphene.




        The only published chemical structure that  is more detailed than X  is




        that suggested by Messing (3), who proposed structure XI, though




       •apparently with qualifications (1, 2).




             Due to the complexity of the chemical  reactions in the synthesis




        of toxaphene,a large number of components is present in the product.




        Separation of these components by a variety of  means has been attempted.




        A description of ^oBit >A  these results J'.]]ov/s.

-------
                                                                   14
     Partition chromatography.  A system of heptane on carbon and 90%




aqueous methanol was most useful in separating toxaphene components.




However, sharply defined peaks were not obtained.  Melting points ranged




from 15°C to as high as 210°C, but none were sharp.  Only slight differ-




ences in infrared absorption spectra were observed.  Insecticidal




activity of v.arious fractions did not differ widely.






     Fractional crystallization.  A typical fractional crystallization




system applied to toxaphene utilized isopropanol solvent and carried




through 5 levels, combining mother liquors and crops to obtain addi-




tional fractionation.  Five crops (3 crystalline and 2 non-crystalline)




were obtained.  Melting points varied widely, but insecticidal activity




as measured by fly bioassay did not differ much.  A summary of the




results is shown in Table 1.

-------
                                                                    15
                               TABLE 1




                    Properties of Fractions from
Fractional Crystallization of Toxaphene





ZKill (Flies — Bell Jar)

Sample
Toxaphene
22
24
26
28

30

Melting Range
'
234-239°C
208-210°C
184-187°C
Noncrys t al 1 ine
semi solid
Viscous liquid
0.1% Cone.
AV. S. D.(b)
56(9) (a) 11.3
70(9) (a) 54
80(9) (a) 8.8
78(9) (a) 9.3
44(9) (a) 8.1

40 (9) (a) 8>3
0.05% Cone.
AV. S.
33 (8) (a)
39(8) (a)
40(8)(a)
40(8) (a)
29(8)00

22(8) (a)
D.(b)
16.1
8.1
11.8
11.4
13.4

7.5
(a) Numbers in parentheses are numbers of determinations.




(b)S.D. = standard deviation of test results.






      Craig liquid-liquid separation.  A 100-stage Craig liquid-liquid




 extractor was used with solvent pairs that included isooctane-acetonitrile




 isooctane-methyl cellosolve and isooctane-dimethyl formamide.   The lack




 of sharp peaks indicated isolation of individual components was not




 obtained, but the broad spread of the resolved sample and the  uneven

-------
                                                                   16
contour of the Craig profile do indicate some separation.  The biologi-
                                                         0

cal data for the indicated fractions are tabulated below.  The system


isooctane-acetonitrile -concentrated about 10% of the sample in the most


polar phase, and the material was relatively nontoxic to flies.


     Fractions separated in the system isooctane-methyl cellosolve were


tested individually.  The results show material of lower toxicity to


be at both ends of the most polar-least polar spectrum.  The fractions


between the extremes seem to approximate the toxicity of the middle


fractions of the isooctane-acetonitrile system.

-------
                                                         17
                    TABLE 2




Craig Countercurrent Fractionatlon of Toxaphene


Fraction No.
X9675-23-A
-B
-C
-D
-E
% of
Original
Sample
11.4
33.8
37.8
9.9
7.2
Toxaphene Standard
X9675-31-A
-B
-C
-D
-E
Tubes 5, 10,
Tube 45
Tube 85
Tube 125
Tube 185
Toxaphene Standard
% Fly Kill
at Indicated Concentration
Topical Application

0.6 mg
3
41
100
75
35
91
15 7
31
100
79
0
91

0.5 mg
0
22
100
54
3
81
0
22
97
63
3
57

0.4 mg
0
0
79
19
n
28
0
16
57
28
0
29

Solvent System
Isooctane-
Acetonitrile




Isooctane-Methyl
Cello solve





-------
                                                                   18
                            REFERENCES
1.  Donev, L. and Nikolov, N. I. (1965).  Some Structural Changes During
    Exhaustive Chlorination of Camphene and Bornylchloride.  Zh. Prikl.
    Khim.  (USSR) 38, 2603.  C. A.  64:3605h (1966).
2.  V. Messing (1956).  Khim Svedsta Zhaschitii Rasteni, 3, 70.  This
    journal is not listed in Chem. Abstracts or Current Contents.
    No C. A. listing for V. Messing.
3.  Nokolov, N. I. and L. D. Donev (1965).  Relationships Between Content
    of Bound Chlorine and Some Properties of Chlorinated Terpenes.  Zh.
    Prikl.  Khim. 38. (3) 612, 617.  C. A. 62:16302d (1965).

-------
                                                                   19
                       METHODS OF ANALYSIS
     Assay procedures (formulation analysis).  The procedures for




toxaphene assays were described in two recently published books (17, 34),




and are based on the following technologies:




          (1)  Total chlorine method (metallic sodium reduction).




          (2)  Total chlorine method (sodium biphenyl reduction).




          (3)  Infrared spectrophotometry.




          (4)  Colorimetric spectrophotometry (diphenylamine-zinc chloride),




     Total chlorine methods.  In practice, an isopropyl alcohol solution




of the toxaphene sample is treated with metallic sodium; or a benzene




solution of the sample is reduced with sodium biphenyl reagent.  The




liberated chloride is then titrated by the nitrobenzene modification of




the Volhard procedure.  An alternate organic chlorine method for




toxaphene-sulfur dusts involves the liberation of chloride by the Parr




peroxide bomb method and the determination of chloride as above.




     Infrared spectrophotometry.  Toxaphene formulated as a dust, wettable




powder or emulsifiable concentrate may be assayed by Clark's (9) infra-




red method, which may also be used to measure toxaphene and DDT simul-




taneously.  Concentrations of each component are read from calibration




curves prepared from CC1/-solutions of known toxaphene/DDT content, by




reading maximum and minimum absorbancies at 7.8y and 6.0y, respectively




for toxaphene and 9.ly and 5.8y for DDT.
I/ Contributed in part by F. J. Carlin, Hercules Res.  Center

-------
                                                                   20
     Spectrophotometric method.  Spectrophotometric methods may be used




to assay toxaphene formulations.  The procedure of Graupner and Dunn




(20), which involves the development of a greenish-blue color by the




fusion of toxaphene with diphenylamine in the presence of zinc chloride,




has been applied to assay and residue analysis.




     Two other methods were evaluated by Hercules.  The colorimetric




procedure developed by Nikolov and Donev (32) using alkali and pyridine




to develop a reddish-brown color appears to be unsatisfactory because




of poor precision and accuracy.  However, a procedure developed by




Hornstein (21) using thiourea and KOH to give a yellow color seems to




be satisfactory for toxaphene assay.




     Assays for cattle dips.  Total chlorine and infrared spectrophoto-




metric procedures were applied to the analysis of toxaphene in cattle




dips.  Infrared procedures are more specific for toxaphene.




     F. P. Czech (13) developed a rapid infrared method for toxaphene




in animal dips and sprays, which was based on the method by Clark (9).




The USDA also published a "Testing Procedure for Emulsifiable Concen-




trates of Toxaphene," which presented a compilation of total chlorine




and infrared procedures (41) applied to livestock dip analyses.  In a




series of publications, Czech presented a rapid vatside test for toxaphene




and many chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides (14, 16).  The preferred




method (16) involved "salting-out" the insecticide, extracting it into




an organic solvent, removal of chlorine with sodium biphenyl reagent and

-------
                                                                   21
coulometric titration of the chloride liberated.  Using an automatic




coulometric titrator improved the precision of the analysis.




     Both the total-chloride and colorimetric spectrophotometric methods




have been utilized for the analyses of toxaphene residues in agricultural




crops and foods.  However, these methods suffer from non-specificity




(total chloride) and lack of sensitivity (total chloride and colori-




metric) .  Infrared spectrophotometry has never achieved the required




sensitivity to become practicable for residue determinations.




     Residue analyses for toxaphene.  Until 1960, no analytical residue




methods for pesticides involved gas chromatographic techniques (11).




Thus, any pesticide residue data reported in the literature, at least




until 1960 , but more probably until 1963, were obtained by conventional




residue methods, e.g. spectrophotometry.  This assumption must also be




made for toxaphene.  The two methods of choice for residue analyses




of toxaphene until about 1963 were:  total chlorine determination and




colorimetric spectrophotometric method.




     As stated before, the total chloride method suffers from non-




specificity and the spectrophotometric from low sensitivity; both




methods require rigorous cleanup due to possible interferences from




plant or animal extractives.




     Since about 1963, reported toxaphene residues in crops, foods,




tissues and other natural samples were probably obtained by gas chroma-




tography.  Due  to the heterogenous composition of toxaphene and




related chlorinated camphene products, these reports must be carefully




scrutinized.  The inherent difficulty for toxaphene analysis is also

-------
                                                                   22
shared by other chlorinated pesticides like Strobane and chlordane




and will be discussed in greater detail below.




     In 1966, Archer and Crosby (1) described a pre-treatment of samples




suspected to contain toxaphene.  This resulted in a gas-chromatographic




elution pattern more suitable for qualitative and quantitative deter-




mination of toxaphene residues than the multi-peak pattern of untreated




samples.




     The treatment consisted of a partial dehydrohalogenation of




toxaphene by KOH in ethanol resulting in three major peaks emerging




sooner than DDE, the dehydrochlorinated product of DDT .  This method




was modified by Hercules chemists and forms the basis of the recommended




method of toxaphene residue determinations.




     Other ancillary techniques for residue determinations of toxaphene




are paper- and thin-layer chromatography, but these suffer from the




same diffuse patterns or multi-spots as the earlier gas chromatographic




technique.




     Clean-up procedures.  Two techniques are widely used to clean up




extracts for toxaphene residue analysis (35).  Absorption chromatography




on Florisil permits removal of plant pigments and some waxes; also,




separation of toxaphene from a few chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides




and most thiophosphate materials is accomplished by elution of toxaphene




with 6% (v/v) diethyl ether in hexane.  Fats and oils are separated from




toxaphene by contact with concentrated sulfuric-fuming sulfuric acid




mixtures. 'A 1:1 mixture of the sulfuric acids is ground with Celite 545

-------
                                                                   23
and packed into a chronatographic column.  A hexane solution of the




fatty material is applied to the top of the column.  Toxaphene is




eluted with hexane, while the sulfonated fats and oils are retained on




the column.




     After nitration of extracts, DDT was removed as an interference




in toxaphene residue analysis (18).  Also treatment with concentrated




sulfuric-fuming nitric acid mixtures did not alter the analytical




characteristics of toxaphene (23).




     Two procedures for eliminating polychlorinated biphenyl (PCS)




interferences from chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide residues were




evaluated.  In a procedure by Reynolds (35), PCB's, along with




heptachlor, aldrin and DDE  are eluted from Florisil with 200 ml of




hexane, but lindane, heptachlor epoxide, dieldrin, DDD and p,p-DDT




required 250 ml of 20% ethyl ether in hexane for complete elution.




     The procedure by Armour and Burke (2) involved elution of PCB's




from a silicic acid/Celite 545 column with 250 ml of hexane, while DDT




and its analogs were eluted with 200 ml of a mixture of 1% acetonitrile




+ 19% hexane + 80% methylene chloride.  Both procedures were applicable




to toxaphene; however, Reynolds' procedure is preferred.  Armour and




Burke's procedure requires prior cleanup on a Florisil column, but




Reynolds' procedure is cleanup and separation on a single column.




     Measurement of toxaphene residues may be accomplished by spectro-




photometric methods, total organic  chlorine determinations, or




chromatography.

-------
                                                                   24
                      Total Chlorine Methods
Schoniger Combustion
     A procedure for the determination of toxaphene residues in animal


fat and butterfat involves combustion of the sample followed by


amperometric titration of the liberated chloride with silver nitrate


(22).  Sensitivity of the method was 5 mg of toxaphene.  Another


combustion procedure applicable to toxaphene was published by Lisk (28).

                                                        ii
The procedure involves combustion of the sample in a Schoniger flask


and spectrophotometric determination of chloride by displacement of


thiocyanate in the presence of ferric ion.


     Zweig, at al (44) combined the Schoniger combustion method, following


fuming sulfuric acid treatment and amperometric titration of the liber-


ated Cl~ions to achieve an overall sensitivity of 0.02 ppm toxaphene in


whole milk.  However, the "total organic chlorine" method is recommended


for samples of a known history, e.g. milk from cows fed known quantities


of toxaphene.


Active-Metal-Reaction Methods


    . Sodium reduction techniques are widely used for residue analysis


of chlorinated hydrocarbons such as toxaphene.  Phillips and DeBenedictis


(33) modified the sodium-isopropanol reduction method as applied to the


determination of chlorinated pesticides.


     Liggett (27) and Chapman (8) used sodium biphenyl to determine


organic chlorine.  Menville j^t ^. (29) and Koblitsky et^ _al. (25),

-------
                                                                   25
utilized sodium dispersions for the decomposition of organic chlorine.




The latter method deals specifically with the detection of chlorinated




pesticides in animal fat.




     The techniques preferred by Hercules for the determination of total




organic chlorine consist of a sodium-liquid ammonia decomposition method




followed by an amperometric titration using coulometrically generated




silver ions.  The decomposition method is based on the work of Beckman




.eit_al. (3).




     For quantitative measurement of the chloride resulting from any of




the above-mentioned techniques the automatic chloride titrator is




preferred, based on an instrument described by Cotlove (10) and sold




commercially by American Instruments Company, Silver Springs, Maryland,




or Buechler Instruments, Inc., 514 West 147th Street, New York 31, New




York.




     This instrument has a silver coulometer to generate the reagent




and an amperometric end-point detecting system that automatically stop




the titration after the end point is reached.  The time needed to complete




a titration is recorded on a built-in electric timer.  This time is




easily related to chloride content of the sample.




     Lisk (28) prefers the spectrophotometric determination of chloride




based on the displacement of thiocyanate from mercuric thiocyanate -in




the presence of ferric ion.  The technique is suggested as an alternate




detection procedure for laboratories not equipped with the Cotlove




titrator.

-------
                                                                   26
                     Spectrophotometric Method




     The Spectrophotometric procedure (20, 17) is a moderately sensitive




method for qualitative and quantitative analysis.  The greatest short-




coming of the method is the need for exhaustive cleanup because small




amounts of plant waxes develop colors and interfere with the detection




of toxaphene.  The method may be used as a confirmatory technique,




however.




     Klein and Link (24), in their studies on toxaphene residues on




kale compared residue data obtained by the diphenylamine method with




gas chromatography data.  Agreement was good at residue levels about




10 ppm.  Blank color formation was significantly reduced after treatment




of the crop extracts with a concentrated sulfuric-fuming nitric acid




mixture.




                       Paper Chromatography




     Paper chromatography is used to detect and estimate chlorinated




organic pesticide residues (30).  The limit of detection is about 0.2




micrograms of toxaphene, but chromatograms result in streaks (38).




                     Thin-Layer Chromatography




     Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) resembles paper chromatography as




a technique, but provides the added advantages of greater speed, and




frequently, higher sensitivities.




     The preferred TLC procedure is similar to that of Schechter (37)




and Moats (31).  The TLC system employs layers of aluminum oxide and




the chromogenic agent, silver nitrate, added to the .absorbent when the

-------
                                                                   27
TLC plates are prepared.  The plates are spotted and developed in the




normal manner using hexane as the mobile phase.  After solvent devel-




opment ,  the plates are exposed to UV light to reveal toxaphene at the




0.5 microgram level.




                        Gas Chromatography




Review of Methods




      It  became apparent from the first work on gas chromatography that




chlordane, Strobane and toxaphene resulted in at least seven peaks  (12,




19) (See Fig. 1).  Witt (43) tried to reduce these multi-peaks into




a single peak using a 1 1/4-ft-long column instead of the conventional




6-ft  length.  Using microcoulometry, 0.5 yg of toxaphene could be de-




tected at a retention time of less than 2 min (see Fig. 2).




      This method was used to determine toxaphene levels in water,




aquatic  plants and fish from lakes treated with toxaphene (40).  Apparent




levels of toxaphene in untreated control samples ranged from an average




of 0.38  ppb in water to 0.55 ppm in fish.  However, using a short gas




chromatography column decreases the resolution of toxaphene isomers




and related compounds as well as other commonly occurring pesticides.




Thus,  absolute identification of single peaks is almost impossible.




      To  improve the method of identifying toxaphene residues by gas




chromatography, Bevenue and Beckman (3) fingerprinted toxaphene by three




major characteristic peaks on a 5% QF-1/Chromosorb-W column, eluting




after DDT, thus differentiating between DDT and toxaphene.  The detecti-




bility of toxaphene with an electron-capture detection is claimed to be

-------
                                                                   28
2 ng under ideal conditions but more usually 5-7 ng.   To stress the




limitation of this method, these authors state,




          ".... the pesticide residue chemist has been placing




     increased reliance on gas chromatographic data for the identifi-




     cation of a pesticide residue.  In the examination of a sample




     for toxaphene residue, such data are not reliable, either




     qualitatively or quantitatively.  In particular, when state or




     other regulatory agencies may wish to examine a shipment of




     produce suspected of excess toxaphene residue, the use of gas




     chromatography data alone for the basis for legal actions is an




     invitation for criticism and rebuttal.




          "We believe the same thesis could be applied to the compounds




     chlordane and Strobane.  Until it can be shown by some new, and




     presently unknown, technique that toxaphene can be unequivocally




     identified, the gas chromatographic procedure for the determina-




    . tion of toxaphene, alone or in combination with other pesticides,




     is at best highly questionable.  Further investigation into the




     '3-peak1 phenomena at the latter part of the gas chromatographic




     curve may possibly produce a definitive fingerprint."  (See Fig. 3)




     Gaul (19) has recommended the planimetry of the last four peaks as




a quantitative measurement of toxaphene in the presence of DDT.  If




Kelthane is present, superimposing a toxaphene standard at about the




same concentration  as  the  unknown  sample will  correct  the  situation.

-------
                                                                   29
     The last four peaks of a toxaphene chromatogram are not always



observed, and samples containing toxaphene should be treated with con-



centrated sulfuric acid - fuming nitric acid (18).  The acid treatment



does not appreciably alter toxaphene and chlorinated camphene, but it



effectively removes residues of DDT, aldrin, heptachlor, Kelthane,



Perthane, Tedion, Telodrin and Trithion (23).



     Archer and Crosby (1) measure chromatogram quantities of toxaphene



in milk, fat, blood and alfalfa hay with a simple alkali treatment



for cleanup, partial dehydrohalogenation, and electron capture gas



chromatography on a column of 5% DC-710 silicone oil and 5% silicone oil



and 5% SE-30 at 200 C.  They used a single modified toxaphene peak



eluting at 3.50 min for quantitative analysis and qualitative identifi-



cation.  This peak has a shorter retention time than the modified peaks



of the DDT group (DDE and related compounds) commonly present in



samples (see Fig. 4),


                     2/
Recommended Procedure



     The recommended method for the residue analysis of toxaphene involves



a sulfuric acid-Celite 545 column cleanup followed by dehydrohalogenation



and gas chromatography, which is a modification of the work of Archer



and Crosby.  The sulfuric acid column removes fats and oils, and the



dehydrohalogenation gives a characteristic, reproducible pattern for



dehydrohalogenated toxaphene.
21 Carlin, F. J. Jr., Hercules Inc. (1970)

-------
                                                                   30
    ' The sample to be analyzed is dissolved in a small amount of




n-hexane and passed through a H?SO.-Celite column with 100 ml of re-




distilled n-hexane.  The hexane is evaporated and the sample treated




with ethanolic 25% KOH at 75-80° for 15 min.  The reaction mixture is




diluted with water and extracted with 0.5 ml n-hexane.  Aliquots of the




hexane layer are gas-chromatographed.




     Gas chromatography is performed on a 9-ft. x 1/8 in. column, 1:1




mixture 5% SE-30, 5% DC-710 silicone oil on (100/120) Gas Chrom Q;




column temperature 200-210 ; electron capture detector.  Column condition-




ing for 2 days at 250° is highly recommended.  The area of major peak of




dehydrohalogenated toxaphene eluting at about 4.5 min or the entire




trace is measured by triangulation and used for quantitative analysis.




     If additional cleanup of sample is needed, this can be done by




Florisil chromatography, toxaphene eluting with the "6% ethyl ether in




petroleum ether" fraction.




     Thirty nanograms of toxaphene produced 80% of full-scale deflection




with .a 1 mv-recorder (1).




     Recommended gas chromatographic conditions for unmodified toxaphene




are the following:  5 ft. x 1/8 in. - glass column packed with 3.8%




UCW-98 on Diataport S (80/100 mesh); column temperature 150°C; carrier




gas (N ) flow - 45 ml/min.




Discussion of Analytical Methods and Reported Data




     The analysis of toxaphene by gas chromatography shows that due to




the heterogeneity of the compound, a definite identification of toxaphene

-------
                                                                   31
by distinct peaks or fingerprints is unsatisfactory.  Chemical modifica-


tions by acid-treatment and/or dehydrohalogenation result in a distinct


improvement of the elution pattern.  Samples with a known spray history


can be analyzed by most of the analytical methods described above

                                            o
including total chlorine, spectrophotometric and gas-liquid chromatog-


raphy.


     However, environmental samples of soil, water, air, fish and


wildlife and human specimens, which have been analyzed for chlorinated


pesticides by gas-liquid chromatography without prior chemical treatment


cannot be unequivocally analyzed for toxaphene residues.


     For example, Burke and Giuffrida (7) report the retention times,


relative to aldrin, of the major peaks of toxaphene on 10% DC200 at


200° and a carrier gas flow of 120 ml/min, to be:


               2.34; 3.06; 3.61; 4.51 (Aldrin = 1.00)


     Under the same conditions DDD has a relative retention time of 2.33


and p,p'-DDT, 3.03.  Gaul (19) illustrates that methoxychlor has the


same retention time as one of the major peaks of toxaphene (No value


is given, but it is possibly the 4.51 min peak quoted by Burke and


Giuffrida, 7).


     An attempt, therefore, was made to evaluate reports of the presence


or absence of toxaphene residues in natural samples of unknown spray


history in order to make a judgment of the validity of the reported


findings.  Some of these reports are summarized in Table 1.

-------
                                                                   32
     Table 1 does not give detailed summary of toxaphene residues found




in crops, tissues or food, but rather illustrates the gas chromatog-




raphic technique used and the apparent success to analyze for toxaphene




with a high degree of certainty.  Of the 10 examples chosen on the




basis of "toxaphene" in the title and published during the past 10




years, only one author, Archer (1) uses the chemical pre-treatment




method.  All other reports on toxaphene residues cited in Table 1 rely




on the multipeak phenomenon of toxaphene and some authors (examples 3,




5, 8, 9, Table 1) actually state their inability to identify toxaphene




due to the complexity of the GLC elution pattern.




                Conclusions on Analytical Techniques




                   and Evaluation of Residue Data




1.   Any samples for the analyses of toxaphene should use from hereon




     the recommended method involving acid clean-up and partial




     dehydrochlorination prior to GLC.




2.   Past reports on the monitoring of toxaphene should be scrutinized




     for statements of sensitivity of method and any special pre-




     treatment of samples prior to analysis.  In future work on toxaphene,




     explicit statements concerning lower limits of detection based on




     fortified samples must be included.




3.   While the modified GLC method for toxaphene is superior to




     previously reported general GLC, it is subject to additional




     improvement for specificity and sensitivity.  Research along these




     lines is encouraged.

-------
                                                                   33
4.   It would be highly useful to re-examine where possible, retained




     samples, as for example environmental samples, by the improved




     GLC clean-^up procedure for toxaphene and to verify previously




   •  reported results.




5.   Decline and feeding studies with a known treatment history must




     be considered to be reliable by whatever recognized analytical




     techniques were employed, including total-chlorine, spectrophoto-




     metric or "GLC-no treatment" methods.

-------
                                                                               34
                                          TABLE 1
                               Summary of Reported Toxaphene
Residues by GLC

Sample


Ladino clover seeds
1 Ib/A DDT; 2 Ibs/A toxaphene;
May 25, 1965
1.5 Ib/A DDT; 3 Ibs/A toxaphene;
1.5 Ib/A Aramite; July 5, 1965
Analyzed in May 1966
Ladino clover seeds (unknown
history)
Ladino clover seeds (unknown
history)
Kale, 2 Ibs/A toxaphene
Days after application: 0
3
7
14
' 21
28

Toxaphene
residue
(ppm)





65.7

16.0

6.3

155.0
44.3
16.9
1.4
0.3
0

Method of
analysis





GLC - dehydro-
chlorination

do. :

do.

GLC-EC
(no treatment)
(Area of 3
major peaks)



Lit.
Reference






(1)

do.

do.

(24)





3-  101  commercial  animal feeds
       containing  87 dairy feeds
       or supplement;
         15  samples  were positive
    Oysters,  133  samples
      6 positive  samples
    Milk
6-  Drinking water
7.  Air samples
 0.06-0.53(a)



med. 0.08


  	(b)


None detected
                                                      (c)
2520 ng/m
                                                  (c)
GLC-EC
(no treatment)     (30)
GLC-EC              (6)
(no treatment)

GLC-EC
(no treatment)

GLC-EC             (36)
(no treatment)

GLC-MC             (39)

-------
                                     TABLE 1 (Cont'd)
                                                                               35
                   Sample
Toxaphene
residue
(ppm)
Method of
analysis
   Lit.
Reference
 8.  Apples, broccoli, cabbage,
       grapes, lettuce, tea,
       carrots, potatoes, cabbage
 9.  Fish tissue
10.  Cows fed 15 mg/kg of toxaphene
       for two weeks
          I
               Whole milk
               butter
               cheddar cheese
               dry whole milk
     -(d)
                                           	(e)
25.3 (av.)
27.9
28.1
24.9
                   GLC-EC
                   (no treatment)

                   a. GLC-EC
                   b. Clean-up, TLC
                      IR
GLC-EC
(no treatment;
  measure 3
  major peaks)
                                                                                (5)
   (26)
(a)   Authors state that presence of toxaphene is somewhat uncertain and the
      presence of toxaphene must be inferred from the general shape of the
      chromatogram; the larger values are probably more reliable.

(b)   Authors state that toxaphene and Strobane could not be calculated.

(c)   Less than 2.5 ppb.

(d) •   Authors state that chlordane and toxaphene could not be detected because
      of their multi-component nature.

(e)   Authors state that the infrared spectrum of toxaphene was  not clear for
      positive identification at a level of  50 yg or 2.5 ppm.

      MC =.microcoulometry

      EC = electron capture

-------
                                                      36
FIG. 1  Typical gas chromatogram of toxaphene (10%
DC-200 on Anakrom ABS (90/100; Tritium electron capture
detector; Column temp. 200°C; 125 ml/min nitrogen
carrier gas) (19).

-------
                                                                  37
 Millivolts
  6
  5
      A- .
                 1   0       2
                       Retention Time in M.mutei
                               A
                                             A - 1.C2
                                                      Intcfrslion
                                                       cf A; el
   Millivolts
     5

     4

     3

     ?

     1

     0
A
4.i (iiicrciumv Tcuphfnc
       0  1  4  6   8   10  12  14  16  18   20  22  24  K  K  30  32 34
                          Retention Tin* in Minulrc
                               B
   Area in
   Square Inches
    2.0
                   0.$
                                 1.0
                           Merogumj Touphrne
                               C
                                              1.5
                                                            2.0
FIG.  2   Toxaphene analysis by  gas-liquid chromatography
and microcpulmometry  (43).

          A,  1  1/2-foot  column;  B, 6-foot  column;  C, standard
     curve of  toxaphene.

-------
                                                      38
FIG. 3  Electron capture detector responses to:  A-7 ng
toxaphene, B-2.8 ng DDT, C-7 ng, toxaphene + 3.5 ng DDT (3)
COLUMN:
4' x 1/4" with 5% QF - 1 on Chromosorb - W.

-------
                                                                  39
        O
             16   14
12  , 10   8   6
       Mlnutos
FIG.' 4  Gas chromatogram  from  30 ng.  of  toxaphene (A)
before alkali treatment and after  alkali treatment (B).

GLC conditions:  9' x 1/8" S.S. column mixed packing:  5%
DC 710 and 5% SE-30 on chromosorb  W  (HMDS-treated) 12"  section
packed with CaC (20/30).  Col.  temp.  200°   Nitrogen gas  flow:
40-60 ml/min (1).

-------
                                                                    40

                             REFERENCES
 1.   Archer, T. C. , and Crosby, D. G.  (1966).  Gas chromatographic
      measurement of toxaphene in milk, fat, blood and alfalfa hay.
      Bull. Exp. Cont. and Toxic. 1: 70.

 2.   Armour, A., and Burke, A. (1970).  Method for separating poly-
      chlorinated biphenyls from DDT and its analogs.  J.  of A.O.A.C.,
      53, (4): 761-768.

 3.   Beckman, H. F., Ibert, E. R., Adams, B. B., and Skoolin, D.  0.
      (1958).  Determination of total chlorine in pesticide by reduction
      with a liquid anhydrous ammonia-sodium mixture.  J.  Agri. and
      Food Chem. 6: 104.

 4.   Bevenue, A.,  and Beckman, H. F.  (1966).  The examination of
      toxaphene by gas chromatography.   Bull. Environ. Contain. Toxicol.
      1: 1.

 5.   Boyle, H. W. , Burttschell, R. H., and Rosen, A. R.  (1966).
      Infrared identification of chlorinated insecticides  in tissues
      of poisoned fish.  Chem. Ser., 207-218 pp.

 6.   Bugg Jr., J. C., Higgins, J. E.,  Robertson Jr., E. A. (1967).
      Residues in fish, wildlife, and estuaries.  Pesticides Monitoring
      Journal 1 (3): 9.

 7.   Burke, J., and Giuffrida, L. (1964).  Investigation  of EC gas
      chromatography for the analysis of multiple chlorinated pesticide
      residues in vegetables.  J. Assoc. Offie. Anal. Chem. 47: 326.

 8.   Chapman, F. W., and Sherwood, R.  M. (1957).  Spectrophotometric
      determination of chloride, bromide and iodide.  Analytical
      Chemistry, 29: 172.

 9.   Clark, W. H. (1962).  Infrared analysis of insecticides to determine
      toxaphene alone or in the presence of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
      (DDT).  J. Agr. Food Chem. 10: 214.

10.   Cotlove, E., Trantham, H. V., and Bowman, R. L. (1958).  An instru-
      ment and method for automatic, rapid, accurate, and  sensitive
      titration of chloride in biologic samples.  J. of Laboratory and
      Clinical Medicine 51: 461.

11.   Coulson, D. M., Cavanagh, L. A.,  and Stuart, J. (1959).  Gas
      chromatography of pesticides.  J. Agri. and Food Chem.  7: 250.

-------
                                                                    41
                        References (cont'd.)
12.   Coulson, D. M. (1962).  Gas chromatography of pesticides.   Adv.
      Pest Control Res. (ed. by R. L. Metcalf) Interscience, 153-190 pp.

13.   Czech, F. P. (1964).  Rapid infrared method for toxaphene  in
      animal dips and sprays.  J. Assoc. Offie. Agr. Chem.  47: 591.

14.   Czech, F. P. (1965).  Rapid quantitative vatside check test for
      chlorinated hydrocarbons in aqueous emulsions:  toxaphene  and
      lindane.  J. Assoc.  Offie. Agr. Chem. 48: 334.

15.   Czech, F. P. (1965).  Rapid quantitative vatside check test for
      chlorinated hydrocarbons in aqueous emulsions:  methoxychlor,
      DDT, dieldrin, and chlordane.  J. Assoc. Offie. Agr.  Chem.  48:
      1121.

16.   Czech, F. P. (1968).  Rapid analysis of malogenated organic
      insecticides in aqueous animal dips, using sodium biphenyl.
      J. Assoc. Offic.  Agr. Chem. 51: 568.

17.   Dunn, C. L. (1964).   Toxaphene in analytical methods  for pesticides,
      plant growth regulators and food additives, Vol. II (G.  Zweig,
      ed.) 523-543 pp.  Academic Press.

18.   Erro, F.,  Bevenue,  F. , and Beckman, H. F. (1967). A method for
      the determination of toxaphene in the presence of DDT.  Bull.
      Environ. Contain.  Toxicol. 2: 372.

19.   Gaul, J. A. (1966).   Quantitative calculation of gas  chromato-
      graphic peaks in  pesticide residue analyses.   J. Assoc.  Offic.
      Anal. Chem. 49: 389.

20.   Graupner, A. J.,  and Dunn, C. L. (1966).  Determination  of
      toxaphene by a spectrophotometric diphenylamine procedure.   J. Agr.
      Food Chem. 8:  286.

21.   Hornstein, I.  (1957).  Colorimetric determination of  toxaphene.
      J. Agr. Food Chem.  5: 446.

22.   Hudy, J. A., and  Dunn, C. L. (1957).   Determination of organic
      chlorides and residues from chlorinated pesticides by combustion
      analysis.  J.  Agr.  Food Chem. 5: 351.

-------
                                                                    42
                        References (cont'd)
23.   Kawano, H.,  Bevenue, A., Beckman, H. F., and Erro,  F.  (1969).
      Studies on the effect of sulfuric - fuming nitric acid  treatment
      on the analytical characteristics of toxaphene.   J.  Assoc.  Offie.
      Anal. Chem. 52: 167.

24.   Klein, A. K., and Link, J. D. (1967).  Field weathering of  toxaphene
      and chlordane.  J. Assoc. Offie.  Anal. Chem. 50:  586.

25.   Koblitsky, L. , Adams, H. R., and Schechter, M. S. (1962).   A
      screening method for the determination of organically bound chlorine
      from certain insecticides in fat.  J. Agri. and  Food Chem.  10:
      2-3.

26.   Li, C. F., Bradley Jr., R. L., and Schultz, L. H. (1970).   Fate of
      organo chlorine pesticides during processing of  milk into dairy
      products.  J. Assoc. Offie. Anal. Chem. 53: 127.

27.   Liggett, L. M. (1964).  Determination of organic halogen with
      sodium biphenyl reagent.  Analytical Chemistry,  26:  74'8.

28.   Lisk, D. J. (1960).  Rapid combustion and determination of  residues
      of chlorinated pesticides using a modified schoniger method.  J.
      Agri. and Food Chem. 8: 119.

29.   Menville, R. L. and Parker, W. W. (1959).  Determination of organic
      halides with dispersed sodium.  Analytical Chemistry, 31: 1901.

30.   Mills, P. A. (1959).  Detection and semiquantitative estimation
      of chlorinated organic pesticide residues in foods by paper
      chromatography.  J. Assoc. Official Agr. Chem. 42: 734.

31.   Moats, W. A. (1966).  Analysis of dairy products for chlorinated
      insecticide residues by thin layer chromatography.  J.  Assoc.
      Offie. Agr. Chem. 49: 795.

32.   Nikolov, N. I., and Donev, L. D.  (1963).  A photometric method
      for the determination of polychloroterpenes.  Zh. Analit. Khim. 18,
      532; CA 59, 4494.

33.   Phillips, W. F., and DeBenedictis, M. E. (1959).   Sodium reduction
      technique for microdetermination of chlorine in  organic insecti-
      cides.  J. Agr. and Food Chem. 2: 1226.

34.   Raw, G. R. (1970).  CIPAC Handbook, Vol. I - Analysis of technical
      and formulated pesticides, publ.  by Collaborative International
      Pesticides Analytical Council Ltd. 132-170 pp.

-------
                                                                    43
                        References (cont'd.)
35.   Reynolds, L. M. (1969).  Polychlorobiphenyls (PCB's)  and their
      interference with pesticide residue analysis.   Bull.  Environ.  Contain.
      Toxicol. 4: 128.

36.   Schaffer, M. L., Peeler, J. T., Gardner, W.  S., and Campbell,
      J. E. (1969).  Pesticides in drinking water  -  waters  from the
      Mississippi and Missouri Rivers.  Environ.  Sci. and Tech. 3: 1261.

37.   Schechter, M. S.  Comments on pesticide residue situation.  J. of
      A.O.A.C., 46, (6):  1063-9.

38.   Sherma, J., and Zweig, G. (1971).  Paper Chromatography. Vol.  II
      of Paper Chromatography and Electrophoresis.  Academic Press p.  359.

39.   Stanley, C. W., Barney II, J. E., Helton, M. R. and Yobs, A. R.
      (1971).  Measurement of atmospheric levels of  pesticides.  Envir.
      Sci. and Tech. 5: 431.

40.   Terriere, L. C., Kiigemagi, U., Gerlach, A.  R., and Borovicka,
      R. L. (1966).  The persistence of toxaphene  in lake water and  its
      uptake by aquatic plants and animals.  J. Agr.  Food Chem. 14:  66.

41.   U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agr. Research Service Publ.
      TSC-0264 (June 1964).

42.   U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,  Food And Drug
      Administration, Pesticide Analytical Manual, Volume 1, Second
      Ed., 1968.

43.   Witt, J. M., Bagatella, G. F., and Percious, J. K.  (1962).
      Chromatography of toxaphene using a shortened  column.   SRI
      Pesticide Res. Bull. 2: 4.

44.   Zweig, G., Pye, E. L., Sitlani, R., and Peoples, S. A. (1963).
      Residues in milk from dairy cows fed low levels of  toxaphene in
      their daily ration.  J. Agr. Food Chem. 11:  70.

-------
                                                                   44





              FATE AND IMPLICATION IN THE ENVIRONMENT




                   EFFECTS ON FISH AND WILDLIFE







Toxieity and Pharmacological Actions






     Acutely toxic doses of toxaphene administered to birds produced




symptoms similar to those observed with other chlorinated hydrocarbon




insecticides.  The symptoms consisted of ataxia, goose-stepping




ataxia, circling, low or high carriage, ptosis of eyelid, tremors,




phonation, tenesmus, hyperthermia, wing-beat convulsions or opisthotonos.




In some species of birds, symptoms were observed within 20 min;




however, mortality usually took 2 to 14 days (22).




     Acute toxicity of toxaphene was measured in several species of




mammals, amphibia, birds, fish and invertebrates (21).  In general,




toxaphene exhibited a higher acute toxicity to fish and wildlife than




DDT (Table 1).




     Some feeding studies on quail and pheasant indicated an adverse




effect on reproduction.  Additional studies were conducted at the




Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, Maryland.  However,




tabulated results are not available.






Persistence of Toxaphene




     The length of time that a pesticide will persist varies and




depends on diverse factors such as temperature, rainfall, absorption,




pH, microbiological populations and exposure to UV.  Although toxaphene

-------
                                                                   45




apparently dissipates rapidly from crops in a few days, in soil this




may vary from several months to more than 10 years; and variations up




to 9 years were seen in lakes and ponds (10, 11, 12, 17, 21).






 Residues
      Analyses for toxaphene,are limited,  probably  due  to  lengthy  and




 time-consuming procedures  involved.   In fish monitoring studies con-




 ducted by the Bureau of  Sport  Fisheries and Wildlife  (8),  toxaphene




 was  found at low levels  (0.01-1.25 ppm) in fish  taken  in Maine, New




 Jersey, Pennsylvania,  South Carolina,  Louisiana, Arkansas, Arizona




 and  Utah.




      In soil monitoring  studies conducted by the U.S.D.A.  (20), toxaphene




 was  also observed in some  samples.   However, analyses  for  toxaphene




 were conducted only  on a small number  of  the collected samples.   Tox-




 aphene analyses in birds,  eggs, fish and  reptiles  are  summarized  in




 Table 2.




      Analyses of catfish from  fish farmers were  conducted by the  Bureau




 of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife at the Fish Pesticide  Research Laboratory,




 Columbia,  Missouri.   Toxaphene residues in catfish fillet  ranged  from




 0.3  ppm to 8.0 ppm;  in mature  channel  catfish  fat, 6-60 ppm  (Av.  30);




 and  in ovaries, N.D.  to  3  ppm  (Av. 1.8) (7).






 Summary and Comments




      After some initial  testing,  the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and




 Wildlife concluded that  toxaphene should  not be  used as a pisciscide.




 It is toxic to fish  and  wildlife and may  persist for extended periods,

-------
sometimes preventing the re-stocking of waters for several years.  In




waters treated with toxaphene, aquatic plants, benthic invertebrates




and fish accumulate toxaphene.  Fish may accumulate in their tissues




several parts per million of toxaphene as long as a year after the




treated waters are no longer toxic.




     Monitoring studies indicate that toxaphene may be adsorbed to soil




particles and carried into rivers.  The mortality of fish-eating birds




at the Tule Lake and Lower Klamath Refuges was associated with residues




of toxaphene and other chlorinated hydrocarbons.  Some birds were




found dead after toxaphene was used in some Nebraska lakes and in




Montana to control grasshoppers.




     Research indicates that toxaphene "half-life" in soil may vary




from 3-10 years; and in water, up to 6 years.  The data also indicate




that toxaphene can undergo bio-magnification, although to a lesser de-




gree than most hydrocarbon pesticides.







     Analysis of fish and wildlife tissues for toxaphene residues is




most difficult and time consuming.  Few laboratories can or are will-




ing to undertake the task of analyzing large numbers of samples for




toxaphene.  This probably accounts for the fact that quantitative data




for toxaphene is meager.  Data for monitoring studies is sometimes con-




flicting and inadequate.




     Improved sensitive analytical procedures, capable of screening




many compounds, are needed for analysis of fish and wildlife tissues.




Information is also needed in respect to the effects of toxaphene on

-------
                                                                  47
the reproduction of birds.  These should be available soon at the




Patuxent Wildlife Research Center.




     Beyond the fact that toxaphene toxicity dissipates in the environ-




ment, and that lakes and ponds become habitable for fish after




toxaphene treatment, we have no significant information concerning the




metabolism or degradation of toxaphene in the environment — neither




physiological nor chemical data.  The void created by this situation




must be filled.

-------
                                                                     48
                                TABLE- 1

                            Toxaphene Residues
                 Organism
                          Toxaphene
Common Name

Bullhead, black
Carp
Minnow,  fathead
Goldfish
Sunfish
Bass, largemouth
Perch, yellow
Catfish, channel
Minnow,  sheepshead
Spot
Bluegill
Trout, rainbow
Killifish, longnose
Mullet,  striped
Salmon,  coho
Salmon,  chinook
Trout, brown
Scientific Name
                                                    48 hr LC  (a) (ppm)
Ictalurus melas
Cyprinus carpio
Pimephales promelas
Carassius auratus
Lepomis cyanellus
Micropterus salmoides
Perca flarescens
Ictalurus punctatus
Cyprenodon Variegatus
Leiostomus xanthurus
Lepomis Macrochirus
Salmo Gairdneri
Fundulus similis
Mugil cephalus
Oncorhynchus kisutch
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
Salmo trutta
0.005
0.0053
0.019
0.014
0.018
0.0051
0.018
0.0172
0.007
0.0032
0.014
0.014
0.028 (24 hr)
0.0032
0.012
0.008 (96 hr)
0.0084
Toad, Woodhouse's
Frog, n  rthern  chorus
Bufo woodhousi
Pseudacris triseriata
0.29
0.7
Oyster,  eastern
Shrimp,  brown
Shrimp,  pink
Shrimp,  glass
Shrimp,  grass
Shrimp,  Korean
Daphnia
Flea, water
Scud
Scud
Stoneflies

Stoneflies
Stoneflies
Damselflies
Crassostrea virginica
Peneus aztecus
Peneus duorarum
Palemonetes kadiakensis
Palemonetes pugio
Palemonetes macrodactylus
Daphnia pulex
Daphnia serrulatus
Gammarus fasciatus
Gammarus lacustris
Pteronareys californica
              (Newport)
Clossonia sabulosa (Banks)
Pteronarcella Bodia (Hagen)
Ischmura verticalis
0.02  (96 hr)
0.0027
0.0042
0.006
0.0052
0.037
0.015
0.01
0.022
0.07

0.007
0.0032
0.0056
0.086
(a)   These values may vary with temperature,  pH, water  hardness  or  the
     pesticide formulation itself.

-------
                                                                   49
                            TABLE 1 (CONT.)
                               Sex
Age
                                                              LD50(mg/Kg)*
Mallard ducklings
Mallards
Pheasants
Bobwhite quail
Sharp-tailed grouse
Fulvous tree ducks
Lesser sandhill cranes
Domestic goats
Mule deer
„
9.
9
0*
0"
0"
o
&
cf
7 days + 1
3-5 mo.
3 mo.
3 mo.
1-4 yr.
3-6 mo.
—
>5 yr.
16—17 mo.
30.8 (23.3-40.6)
70.7 (37.6-133)
40.0
85.4 (59.2-123)
10-20
99.0 (37.2-264)
100-316
>160
139-240
*95% conf. lim.

-------
                                                   TABLE 2

                                   TOXAPHENE RESIDUES IN WILD BIRD TISSUES
Species
Tissues Analyzed(a)    No. of Analyses
                       Range or Average of
                       Residues found in
                             ppm
                                  Reference
Grebe, Western              Fat
 Aechmophorus occidentalis  WB
                    1960    Carcass
                    1960    Fat
Gull, Ring-Billed
 Larus delawarensis
Fat
5 analyses
8 analyses
6 analyses
2 analyses

1 analysis
         0.0-39.0 Av. 12.66
         0.0-0.8 Av. 0.02
      Av.0.3
     Av.31.5

         4.8
16
16
14
14

16
Heron, Black-Crowned Night
 Nycticorax nycticorax      WB?
                            WB
                    1961    Carcass
                            WB found dead
Heron, Great Blue
 Ardea herodias

Killdeer
 Charadrius vociferus

Kingbird, Western
 Tyrannus verticalis

Lark, Horned
 Eremophila alpestris

Meadowlark, Western
 Sturnella neglecta
WB
WB
Carcass
WB
WB found dead

WB young
WB sacrificed
WB found dead

WB found dead
WB
WB young
                       No. not given  Up to 5.0
                       3 analyses           0.0-15.0 Av. 5.0
                       1 analysis          15.0
                       1/1                . 64.0
1/1
1/1
1/1
2/2
1/1

1/1
4/4
3/3

3/3
2/2
3/3
        10.0
        10.0
        10.0
         6.0
         9.6

         4.0
         0.41-0.96 Av. 0.7
    Tr., 2.5. 3.3

Tr.,Tr., 0.6
        13.0
         3.0
15
16
14
14

 2
16
14
14
 9

14
 9
 9

 9
14
14
                                                                                                               Ul
                                                                                                               o
(a)  WB-whole body; L-liver; K-kidney; H-heart; BM-breast muscle

-------
Species
                   TABLE 2 (CONT.)

    TOXAPHENE RESIDUES IN WILD BIRD TISSUES



Tissues Analyzed (a)   No. of Analyses
Range or Average
of Residues found
      in ppm
Reference
Blackbird, Brewer's
Euphagus cyanocephalus
Coot, American
Fulica americana
Cormorant, Double-Crested
Phalacrocorax auritus
Cowbird, Brown-Headed
Molothrus ater
Dove, Mourning
Zenaidura macroura
Duck, Mallard
Anas...platyrhnchose
Duck Shoveler
Spatula clypeata
Egret , Common
Casmerodius albus

Grebe, Eared
Podiceps caspicus
WB found dead

WB found dead

WB
Carcass found dead
WB found dead

WB found dead

WB found dead

WB found dead

WB
Carcass
WB
WB

1/1

1/1

2/2
1/1
1/1

1/1

1/1

1/1

1/1
3 analyses
4 analyses
5 samples

5.0

17.0

2.2-9.5 Ave. 5.8
9.5
0.98

Tr.

10.0

12.0

17.0
Av. 9.2
0.0-17.0 Av. 6.92
0.0-4.0 Av. 1.9

14

14

16
14
9

9

14

14

2
14
16
16

(a)  WB Whole body; L-liver; K-kidney; H-heart; BM-breast muscle

-------
                                           TABLE  2  (CONT.)

                              TOXAPHENE RESIDUES  IN WILD BIRD  TISSUES
                                                                        Range or Average
                                                                        of  Residues  found
Species
Pelican, White
Pelecanus ervthrorhynchos









1960
1960
1960
1961
Phalarope, Wilson's
Steganopus tricolor
Sandpiper
Sp. not given
Shrike, Loggerhead
Lanius ludovicianus
Teal, Blue-Winged
,_Anas discors
Wren, House
JTroglodytes aedon
Tissues Analyzed (a)
L ^--1 bird
K )
L 2--1 bird
K )
1/2 bird (
L 1 bird -
K (
H,L,K,BM
L
K

Carcass
L
K
H,L,K,BM
WB found dead

WB found dead

WB sacrificed

WB

WB

No. of Analyses
1/1

1/1


1/1

49 analyses
3 analyses
3 analyses

1 analysis
3 analyses
3 analyses
12 analyses
4/4

1/1

1/1

3/3

2/2

in ppm
8.0
13.0
9.0
14.0
4.0
7.0

0.0-82.0 Av. 3.6
7.0-9.0 Av. 8.0
4.0-14.0 Av. 10.33

4.0
8.0
10.3
7.6
41.0

10.0

Tr.

7.0

41.0 -

Reference
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
16
16
16
13
13
13
13
13
14

14

9

14

14

(a)   WB-wliole body;  L-liver; K-kidney; H-heart; BM-breast muscle

-------
                                            TABLE 2 (CONT.)

                                TOXAPHENE RESIDUES IN WILD BIRD TISSUES
Species
Tissues Analyzed
No. of Analyses
Range or Average
of Residues found
       in
      ppm
Blackbird, Red-Winged
 Agelaius phoeniceus
Fat, B, K, L, H 1
Gizzard, m      )
Not given
Tr. in all tissues
Reference
Pelican, White
Pelecanus erythrorhynchos
Lark, Horned
Eremophila alpestris
Shrike
Lanius ludovicianus
H,L,K,M

WB?
WB?
WB?

Not given

4 shot
7 found dead
1 shot

82.0

0.7
Tr. 9.6
0.7

• 22

22
22
22

                                                                                                              Ln
                                                                                                              U>

-------
                                           TABLE 2 (CONT.)




                               TOXAPHENE RESIDUES IN WILD BIRD TISSUES
Species
Cormorant, Double-Crested
Phalacrocorax auritus
Duck, Gadwall
Anas strepera
Gull, Ring-Billed
Larus delawarensis
Pelican, White
Pelecanus erythrorhynchos
Tern, Forster's
Eggs Analyzed
Yolk
Yolk
Yolk
Egg
Yolk
No. of Analyses
2 analyses
5 analyses
1 analysis
22 analyses
1 analysis
Range or Average of
Residue found in
ppm
10.0
Av. 0.04
0.2
0.0-6.7 A. 0.39
15.5
Reference
16
16
16
16
16
Sterna forsteri

-------
                                            TABLE 2 (CONT.)


                                TOXAPHENE RESIDUES IN FISH AND REPTILES
                                                                        Range  or Average  of
                                                                        Residues found  in
Species
Bass, Largemouth
Micropterus salmoides
Bluegill
Lepomis macrochirus
Bullhead, Black
Ictalurus melas
Bullhead, Brown
Ictalurus nebulosus
Carp
Cyprinus carpio
Catfish, Channel
Ictalurus pjanctatus
Crappie, Black
Pomoxis nigromaculatus
Chub, Tui
Siphateles bicolor
Fish
Sp. not given
Pumpkinseed
Lepomis gibbosus
Tissues Analyzed
Flesh
Viscera
WB?
WB
Flesh
Flesh
Viscera
WB?
Fat
WB
WB
WB
WB
No. of Analyses'
13 analyses
8 analyses
22 analyses
89 analyses
3 analyses
1 analysis
2 analyses
27 analyses
8 analyses
3 analyses
29 analyses
Not given
1 analysis
ppm
0.0-0.3 Av. 0.05
0.2-2.0 Av. 1.13
0.0-2.06AV. 0.48
0.37-15-2
0.0-0.19 Av. 0.6
0.1
0.0-0.1 Av. 0.05
0.0-6.6 Av. 2.23
0.4
0.0-0.1 Av. 0.03
0.0-8.0 Av. 1.09
Tr.8.0
0.04
Reference
16
4
12
16
16
16
4
16
16
16
14
16
                                                                                                               Ol
                                                                                                               Ul
Fish
30 analyses
0.1-10.9 (8 samples)
19

-------
                                            TABLE 2 (CONT.)

                                TOXAPHENE RESIDUES IN FISH AND REPITLES
Species
          Tissues  Analyzed
                       No. of Analyses
                      Range or Average of
                      Residues found in
                             ppm
Spot
Leiostomus xanthrus
Trout, Brown
.Salmo trutta
          Juvenile (No  mor-
          tality but  thickened
          gill lamallae at 0.1
          and  0.01 ppb)

          Juvenile (50% mor-
          tality within 6 days at
          0.5  ppb)
Trout, Rainbow
Salmo gairdneri
(1962)
(1963)
(1964)
Turtle, Softshell
Trionyx spinifer
          Tissue  extract
Whole Body
Tissue extract
Tissue extract
Tissue extract
Whole body
Flesh

Viscera
                      5+ analyses
37 analyses
 6 or more analyses
 6 or more analyses
 6 or more analyses
 5/5
19 analyses

 1 analysis
                        Reference
Salmon, Atlantic (1962
Salmo salar (1963)
(1964)
Shad, Gizzard
Dorsoma cepedianum
Tissue extract
Tissue extract
Tissue extract
Whole body?
2 analyses
2 analyses
2 analyses
17 analyses
2.6-2.9 Av. 2.75
1.11-5.5 Av. -3.24
1.5-2.1 Av. 1.8
0.0-4.75 Av. 1.49
21
21
21
4
                      8.3-24.8 Av. 12.46
0.43-5.4
1.2-12.0 Av. 5.7
2.75-13.7 Av. 7.72
3.2-3.8 Av. 3.5
0.13,0.28,0.43,0.98,1.3
0.0-2.57 Av. 0.22

1.0
                            1

                           21
 1
21
21
21
 5
16

16
                                                                                                               Ul

-------
                                                                   57

                             REFERENCES
 1.   Butler, P. A. (1964).  Commercial fishery investigations—chronic
      exposure of fish to pesticides.  In "Pesticide-Wildlife Studies,
      1963." p.9.  U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circ.  199.

 2.   DeWitt, J. R., Crabtree, D. G., Finley, R. B., and  George, J.  L.
      (1962).  Effects of pesticides on fish and wildlife:   A review
      of investigations during 1960.  U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
      Circ. 143.

 3.   El Sayed, E. I., Graves, J. B., and Bonner, F. L.  (1967).   Chlorin-
      ated hydrocarbon insecticide residues in selected insects  and
      birds found in association with cotton fields.  J.  Agr. Food Chem.
      15, 1014-1017.

 4.   Epps, E. A., Bonner, F. L., Newsom, L. D., Carlton, R., and
      Smitherman, R. O. (1967). Preliminary report on a pesticide moni-
      toring study in Louisiana.  Bull. Environ. Contarn.  &  Toxicol.  2,
      333-339.

 5.   Genelly, R. E., and Rudd, R. L. CL958).  Effects of DDT, toxaphene,
      and dieldrin on pheasant reproduction.  AUK 73, 529-539.

 6.   Grant, B. F. (1970).  Pesticide influence in channel  catfish
      culture.  Presented at 32nd Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference,
      Winnipeg, Manitoba, Dec. 6-9.

 7.   Henderson, C., Johnson, W. L., and Inglis, A. (1969).  Organo-
      chlorine insecticide residues in fish.  Pest. Monitor. J.,
      3(3) 145-171.

 8.   Hillen, R. H. (1967).  Special report—pesticide surveillance
      program—range caterpillar control project.  Coifax and Union  Cos.,
      New Mexico, Bur. Spt. Fish. Wildlife, Div. Wildlife Services,
      Fort Collins, Colorado, 31 pp.

 9.   Johnson, W. C. (1966).  Toxaphene treatment of Big  Bear Lake,
      California.  Calif. Fish and Game, 52(3) 173-179.

10.   Johnson, W. D., Lee, G. F., and Spyridakis, D. (1966).  Persistence
      of toxaphene in treated lakes.  Air and Water Pollut. Int. J., 10,
      555-560.

-------
                                                                   58


                        References (cont'd.)
11.   Keith, J. 0. (1966).  The effect of pesticides on white pelicans.
      4th Conf.  Use of Agr. Chem. in Calif., Feb.  8, 1966,  Davis,
      Calif., 8pp.

12.   	 (1966)a.  Insecticide contaminations in wetland
      habitats and their effects on fish-eating birds.  Pesticides  in
      the environment and their effects on wildlife.  J. Appl. Ecol. ,
      3(Suppl.) 71-85.

13.   Keith, J. 0., Mohn, M. H. and Ise, G. (1965).  Pesticide contamina-
      tions in wildlife refuges.  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular
      No. 226, 37-40 pp.

14.   Keith, J. 0., and Hunt, E. G. (1966).  Levels of insecticide
      .residues in fish and wildlife in California.   Trans. 31st N.  Amer.
      Wildlife and Nat. Res. Conf., 150-177

15.   Klein, A. K., and Link, J. D. (1967).  Field  weathering of toxaphene
      and chlordane. J.A.O.A.C., 50(3): 586-591.

16.   Nicholson, H. P. (1967).  Livers of fish from Tombigbee - Alabama
      River Complex north of Mobile, Alabama (Oct.  1964).  Science  158,
      871-6.

17.   Rucker, R. R. (1967).  Ground water toxic to  fish.  Proc. N.W.  Fish
      Culture Conf., 87 p.

18.   Terriere, L. C., Kiigemagi, G.,        , A. R., Borovicka, R. L.
      The persistence of toxaphene in lake water and its uptake by  aquatic
      plants and animals.  J. Ag. Food Chem., 14(1): 66-69.

19.   Tucker, R. K., and Crabtree, D. G. (1970). Handbook of toxicity of
      pesticides to wildlife.  Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
      Resource Publication No. 84, 116-117.

20.   U. S. Department of Agriculture, ARS (1966).   Monitoring agricultural
      pesticide residues.  A Preliminary Report of  Studies on Soil, Sediment
      and Water in Mississippi River Delta.  U.S.D.A., A.R.S. 13-81.

21.   U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
      Laboratories at Columbia, Missouri and Denver, Colorado; and  the
      laboratory at Gulf Breeze, Florida, formerly  B.C.F. and now E.P.A.

22.   U. S. Department of Interior  (1967).  Bureau  of Sport Fisheries and
      Wildlife.  Publication 43.

-------
                                                                         59






      FATE  AND MOVEMENT  OF TOXAPHENE  IN TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC  SYSTEMS









      .Persistence in soil0.   The  fate  and  movement  of  a pesticide in and




 from the soil are influenced by the  following broadly categorized  factors:




 (a)  the pesticide characteristics;  (b) edaphic considerations;  (c)




 climate;  (d)  topography; and (e)  land use Cand management.   Any  of  these




 factors that  tend to promote the  pesticide's  persistence will tend to




 increase its  potential  for  environmental dispersion.







      Pesticide movement through or across soil is facilitated by the move-




 ment of water.   Overland flow is  generally more important  in pesticide




 transport  than passage  through  soil.  Two processes  are involved:   (a)




 pesticide  movement while dissolved in water and (b)  pesticide movement




 while dissolved  in water:   Sodium humate, a natural  organic compound




 found in water,  can increase the  water solubility of DDT by a factor of




 20  (32).   Thus,  the solution and  movement of  other organic pesticides




 may  be facilitated by a variety of dissolved  or emulsified organic  sub-




 stances found in water.  The water solubility of  toxaphene is variously




 reported as 0.4  mg/1 and 3  mg/1.  (10)






      Bailey and  White (2) stated  that the principal means  of pesticide




 transport  within soils  are:   (a)  diffusion in the airspaces of soil (b)




 diffusion  in  soil water; (c)  downward flowing water; and (d) upward moving




 water.







     Movement by diffusion through the soil and air spaces  is important




with pesticides having high vapor pressure such as soil fumigants.   This

-------
                                                                       60




process plays a dominant role in the eventual loss of pesticides from the




soil by volatilization.  Percolation is the principal means of movement




of relatively non-volatile pesticides; diffusion in soil water is impor-




tant in transport over very short distances.  Upward movement may occur




in irrigated areas where high evapo transpiration ratios are prevalent.







     Therefore, the total amount of rainfall or irrigation water received,




intensity  (water flux), and frequency of received water all appear to




affect pesticide movement in soils.  These also influence overland trans-




port and facilitate the entrance of pesticides into solution.







     Most  literature on toxaphene persistence in soil is disappointing




in quality and quantity, especially that predating the era of general




availability of gas-liquid chromatography.  During this time, analytical




results were based on nonspecific methods.  Some studies at grossly




exaggerated application rates or other abnormal conditions, are useful




for specific purposes, but may be misleading in calculating the half-




life of toxaphene.  Abnormally high concentrations in the soil may over-




come the ability of soil microorganisms to detoxify the compound.  There




is little  information specifically related to toxaphene degradation by




soil microbiota.








     Mulla (23) applied toxaphene at the rate of 17.2 Ib/acre to well




prepared irrigated soil in California to evaluate Hippelates control




methods.  The toxaphene was disked into the soil.  One month after




application,  effective control was 77%.  The percentage of control




remaining slightly over 2 years later varied from 13 to 19%.  Shaw and

-------
                                                                     61






Riviello  (26),  in  laboratory  and small scale  field  tests with  toxaphene




applied topically  to  the soil at 50 Ib/acre,  found  that effectiveness in




killing Mexican fruit  fly  larvae declined  to  zero after 373 days.  Thus




persistence on  the soil surface may be much less than when incorporated




into the  soil.






     Bradley, et al.,  (6) working on small plots of Norfolk loamy sand and




Goldsboro sandy loam soil  in  North Carolina on which cotton grew, applied




toxaphene as foliar sprays of aqueous emulsion at approximately weekly




intervals from  early June  until September  1969.  The accumulated applica-




tion was  23.9 Ib/acre.  Respectively, 10 and  5% remained in the soil in




September of 1969; 4% was  found the following March.  Less than one per-




cent was  accounted for in water and sediment  runoff.






     Stevens, et al. .  (28) conducted studies  nationwide at 51 locations




in 1965-1967 to determine pesticide levels in soils..  Samples were col-




lected from 17 areas in which pesticides are  used regularly, 16 areas with




a record of at least one pesticide application and in 18 areas with no




history of pesticide use.  The only evidence  of pesticide build-up was in




some orchards that had been treated repeatedly with DDT over a number of




years.







     The data in Table 1 show that residues of toxaphene from crop appli-




cations over periods ranging  from 1-14 years  are present at only small




t r.-u-t ions ot t lu* araoimt applied.   In areas of regular pesticide use, 60%




ot the vegetable and/or cotton-growing fields sampled contained toxaphene/




Scrobano  (0.66-9. J8 mg/kg).   Only one orchard (3%) and 12% of small grain

-------
                                                                        62
and root crop-growing areas were positive.  None was found in limited use




and no use areas.  In Montana toxaphene was applied at 1.5 Ib/acre in




diesel oil to range land and 44% could be accounted for in the soil after




one day; only 3% remained after 84 days  (8).







     Nash and Woolson (24) determined the vertical distribution of toxa-




phene in Congaree sandy loam soil of .Maryland that had received accumulated




applications of 65 or 130 Ib/acre during 1951-1953.  Between 85 and 90%




of the toxaphene remaining 13 years after the last application was found




in the upper 23 cm, which corresponds to the cultivated zone.  The




quantity in the surface 7.6 cm was less than the mean quantity between




7.6 cm and 23 cm depths.







     Volatility and photodecomposition may play an important part in dis-




sipation of chlorinated insecticides in the surface layers.  Thomas (30)




working in natural watersheds in Texas studied the potential for insecticide




vertical movement through soil to a depth of 5 ft.  Very little toxaphene




occurred below a depth of 1 ft.  About 20% of the toxaphene applied in the




preceding 10 years could be accounted for in the soil profile.







     Formulation also apparently can influence the persistence of toxa-




phene.  The United States Forest Service at Gulfport, Mississippi (27) is




continuing studies of insecticides in soil to prevent termite damage.




Toxaphene in No. 2 fuel oil applied to the soil surface at 1/2 pint/sq ft




(0.4 Ib toxaphene or 17,000 Ibs/acre) was 100% effective for 16 years and




90% effective for 22 years.  Soil depth penetration was estimated at 6 in.

-------
                                                                    63



 However,  when applied  at  the  same  rate  as  an  emulsion  (1/2  pt  contain-


 ing 0.4  Ib  toxaphene),  only 80%  effectiveness remained at the  end  of


 one year  and 50%  at  3  years.


      The  references  indicate  that  toxaphene is a  long-lived, but by no


 means "immortal"  insecticide.  Residues in and on the  soil  may be  de-


 tected for  several months  to  several years, but there  is no evidence


 that build-up has occurred in the  soil  in  areas of regular  usage.   Major


 losses occur from the  soil surface by processes suggested but  not  well


 documented.   These include microbial decomposition, photodecomposition


 and/or volatilization.





      Incorporation of toxaphene into soil  tends to prolong persistence.


This  insecticide  is not normally used to control soil  insects, but


residues remaining on the  soil from foliar applications may be turned


under by cultivation and plowing.  Downward migration  through  the soil


does not normally occur to any significant degree.  The formulation in


which  toxaphene is applied may also influence persistence.  Studies are


needed to clarify the fundamental mechanisms that control persistence

                                                       a
and loss of  toxaphene from the soil.



       Note  on the Half-Life of Toxaphene in Sandy Clay Soil


     A recent report (14) gives half-life figures on a number of chlori-


nated pesticides,  including toxaphene,  in Holtville sandy clay.  The


application of toxaphene sprayed onto the soil surface and disked the


same day into the upper 6 in.  of the soil was as follows:

-------
                                                                    64
               Year          Ib/A active ingredient
                              toxaphene        DDT
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
19.6
20.0
20.8
20.8
22.4
19.5
20.0
20.8
23.2
20.0
By regression analysis, the half-lives of•toxaphene and DDT were 4

years.

     Occurrence and movement in watercourses.  The most intensive in-

vestigation in a single watershed of toxaphene occurrence in surface

water is reported by Nicholson, et al., (25) who studied a 400/sq mile

cotton producing watershed in Alabama for 6 1/2 years.  Water samples of

2,000 to 10,000 gal were processed through activated carbon adsorption

units for recovery of insecticides.  Analysis was by gas chromatography.

     A peculiarity of the method was that water was extracted over

periods 1 to 2 weeks thus averaging peak occurrences.  The extended

sampling period insured against missing toxaphene if its presence was

discontinuous.  The values were not absolute because of possible incom-

plete extraction from water and recovery from carbon.  However, at least

the indicated amounts were present.  Efficiency may be about 50%.  The

sampling devices were operated almost continuously for the entire study

period.

     The cotton acreage varied annually from 12,700 to 16,500.  Annual,

toxaphene usage and recovery data are given in Table 2.  The authors

attribute the presence of toxaphene in Flint Creek primarily to surface

runoff.

-------
                                                                     65







     Significant  findings of this study were:   (a)   low  toxaphene con-




centrations  (less  than 1 Mg/1) were recovered  from Flint Creek and were




associated with small cotton farm operations where ground equipment  was




primarily used; (b) the source of toxaphene was  the  watershed as a




whole rather than  a few favorably located fields; (c) occurrence in  the




samples was year around with largest recoveries  in the summer applica-




tion season; and  (d) there were indications of  a reduction in frequency




of occurrence and  in concentration in river water beginning about 6  mos.




after the first of several seasons of much reduced toxaphene usage.  The




letter suggests the period required under Alabama conditions for land




surface cleansing  to begin.




     Bradley, et al., (6) studies runoff from  180 sq. ft. instrumented




plots in North Carolina on which cotton was grown and treated with toxa-




phene and DDT singly and combined.  Less than  one percent of the toxa-




phene occurred in  the water and sediment running off these plots.  Where




DDT alone was used, 2.83% ran off, while 1.03% of DDT was found in run-




off from those plots also treated with toxaphene.  The rate of toxaphene




application was about twice that of DDT.




     These data do not imply that these percentages  of toxaphene and DDT




in runoff would reach lakes and streams.  A large proportion of the




transported insecticides were tied up on soil particles  (96% of the  DDT




and 75% of the toxaphene) and is expected to deposit in the first low spot




or settling area reached.  Thus, the field location  relative to a lake or




watercourse is important.




     Nearly 20% of all pesticides used in the United States is applied

-------
                                                                       66







in-California.  Therefore, data from California have special significance.




Irrigation farming is widely practiced and a peculiarity, in some areas,




is the presence of underground tile drainage systems.               :




     Bailey and Hannum (3) reported on the analysis of more than 630




samples taken in California of surface waters, agricultural drainage,




sediments and aquatic organisms.  Data for surface waters are given in




Table 3.  Although toxaphene was recovered at 14 of 20 sampling stations,




concentration values were less than 1 pg/1.  The concentrations found of




DDT/DDD, DDE, heptachlor epoxide, lindane, dieldrin and BHC each were




within the same range.




     Somewhat more toxaphene was recovered in water from agricultural




drains (Table 4).  Pesticide concentrations were highest in areas affected




by agricultural development and decrease in surface water in proportion




to inflow dilution and uptake by sediments and aquatic organisms.  The




temporal distribution was related to agricultural drainage practices and




to runoff from heavy rainfall.




     Johnson, et al., (18) studied pesticide concentrations in tile drain-




age and open drains in the San Joaquin Valley of California between 1963




and 1965.  Toxaphene was detected in 13 of 66 analyses of tile drainage




effluent in concentrations varying from 0.13 pg/1 to 0.95 Mg/1 and




averaging 0.53 Mg/1.  Water from surface drains that collected surface




and subsurface water was positive for toxaphene 60 out of 61 samples.




Concentrations varied from 0.10 ug/1 to 7.90 ug/1 and averaged 2.01 ug/1.




The predominant residues found in surface water were DDT/DDD and toxa-




phene.  The average concentration of toxaphene was higher than any other




chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide and it was found most frequently.

-------
                                                                    67







     The annual reports of the San Joaquin District of the California




Department of Water Resources (1963-1969) contain a wealth of data on




toxaphene occurrence in Central Valley tile drainage effluent (Table 5)




and in surface waste water drains (Table 6) from irrigated areas, in




other Central Valley surface waters  (Table 7), and in bay and ocean water




(Table 8).




     Twelve percent of 422 water samples from tile drainage systems con-




tained toxaphene in concentrations ranging from 0.2 pg/1 to 1.26 Mg/1.




Forty-eight percent of 447 agricultural surface water drains contained




concentrations ranging from 0.04 ug/1 to 7/yg/l.  Due to the small de-




gree of vertical movement through the soil demonstrated elsewhere for




toxaphene, its recovery in underground tile drains in the concentrations




indicated needs explanation.




     There is a strong possibility of direct access of surface water to




the drains under some conditions (5).  Toxaphene was found in 12% of 712




other Central Valley surface waters in concentrations ranging from 0.02




Ug/1 to 0.93 pg/1, and in 4% bay and ocean water samples in concentra-




tions of 0.03 yg/1 to 0.60 yg/1.




     Routine monitoring (7, 20, 22, 31) of waters of the United States




has not indicated the presence of toxaphene.  One reason may be that the




amount required for detection in routine screening analyses is greater




than that of most pesticides reported.  Lichtenberg (21) states that




the minimum toxaphene concentration required for recognition in his




monitoring of 1 liter water samples is 1 pg/1,  although lesser amounts




may be determined in samples in which toxaphene presence is anticipated.

-------
                                                                  68



     Toxaphene may be transported by water in solution or dissolved in


organic constituents.  It may also be absorbed on sediment that is


suspended or deposited permanently or temporarily.  Sometimes it is


transported in or on the bodies of aquatic organisms.


     The amount of toxaphene in sediment undoubtedly reflects the degree

                                                                   0
of usage as well as watershed soil management practices.  Baily and


Hannum (3) working in California reported toxaphene in sediment in much


higher concentrations than they found in water (Tables 3, 4 and 9).


Generally, sediments of smaller particle size had higher pesticide con-


centrations than did those of larger size.


     Barthel, et al., (4) studied agricultural chemicals contained in


stream bed materials of the Lower Mississippi River.  Toxaphene/Strobane


was found only in a  5-mile stretch in the vicinity of West Memphis,


Arkansas.  The concentrations varied from 100 to 600 yg/kg and were


attributed to upstream agricultural usage.


     Grzenda and Nicholson (9) studied cotton field soil, water, river


bottom sediments, bottom fauna and fish at Flint Creek, Alabama, to de-


termine the distribution of toxaphene, DDT and BHC among the biotic and


abiotic components of a stream system.  Soils from 33 cotton fields


representing 206 acres were sampled.  Data on insecticide residues in


soils are given in Table 10 (See Table 2 for data on insecticide residues


in water.)


     No toxaphene was recovered from river bottom sediment, but DDT/DDE


was found in 23 of 58 samples at 8 to 6400 pg/kg, and 6 contained traces


of BHC.  This was reflected in infrequent occurrence of toxaphene and BHC

-------
                                                                    69







in bottom fauna, while DDT/DDE was found in all samples.  All fish




samples, however, contained toxaphene, DDT/DDE and BHC.




     Nicholson, et al.,  (25) showed the relative importance of sediment




versus solution in the transport of toxaphene, DDT and BHC in Flint Creek,




Alabama.  Suspended sediment seemed less frequently involved in toxa-




phene and BHC transport  than in DDT transport (Table 11).  This suggests




a lesser affinity for solid substrates of toxaphene in low water concen-




trations than that possessed by DDT, which is notoriously hydrophobic.




Support for this contention comes from the fact that toxaphene was fre-




quently recovered in clarified and treated municipal drinking water while




DDT rarely was found.




     Although toxaphene  is not registered for use in fishery management,




some of the experiences with its use for that purpose cast light on the




fate of toxaphene in lake water.  Various studies reported that toxaphene




persistence was influenced by the concentration applied, sunlight, tem-




perature, oxygen, alkalinity, hardness, turbidity, presence of bacteria,




and pH, but no quantitative relationships were found between these factors




and persistence.  Previous conclusions were based on the time required




for detoxification and restocking.  Johnson, et al. (17) used gas chro-




matography to study the mechanisms of detoxification.   Their results are




given in Table 12.




     This tudy shows that toxaphene may persist in a lake for several




years after application for fishery management even though detoxifica-




tion is rapid.  All of the lakes were shallow and eutrophic.   The authors




point out that detoxification is accomplished, in part,  by sorption

-------
                                                                 70







reactions rather than degradation, but indicate some evidence that toxa-




phene may be modified based on the shape of the gas chromatographic




"fingerprint."




     Virtually no information seems to be available on the chemical break-




down products of toxaphene in soil and water.




     Biological accumulation.  Biological accumulation occurs by two pro-




cesses i.e., direct absorption through body surfaces exposed to the ex-




ternal environment, and through the food.  When natural food is involved,




especially when increased concentrations of a contaminant occur through




ascending trophic levels of a food chain, this accumulation is called




"biological magnification."




     Research shows that toxaphene is sufficiently stable to be available,




in areas of regular usage, for biological accumulation if other critical




requirements are satisfied; namely, that rates of uptake, metabolism and




excretion are favorable for accumulation.  Information is available on




biological accumulation of toxaphene in warm blooded animals from feed-




ing studies using domestic animals.  Toxaphene/Strobane storage in




animal fat will occur.  The degree of concentration seems less than for




some other chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides and persistence of the




toxaphene residues is of shorter duration (Tables 13 and 14).




     Comparatively little information is available about bioaccumulation




of toxaphene/Strobane in aquatic organisms.  Studies indicate the




presence of toxaphene residues in fish, but little information is given




relating exposure rate and frequency values, and none have determined




residue residence time after cessation of exposure.

-------
                                                                      71


     Johnson and Lew  (16) determined chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide

residues in fish of the Lower Colorado River system which drains on

irrigated agricultural area where insecticides are often used.  The fol-

lowing residues of DDT and its congeners, DDE and TDE, and toxaphene were

reported in the fat and/or viscera of these fish.

     Carp:  DDT, etc., 2.0 - 185.0 mg/kg  (87.0 ave.); toxaphene, 50.0 mg/kg

     Channel Catfish:  DDT, etc., 10.0 -  77.0 mg/kg (47.8 ave.); toxaphene,
                       8.2 - 11.4 mg/kg (9.8 ave.)

     Sonoran Sucker:   DDT, etc., 7.3 - 46.3 mg/kg (23.9 ave.); toxaphene,
                       2.8 - 172.9 mg/kg  (32.5 ave.)

     Gila Sucker:      DDT, etc., 36.2 -  39.5 mg/kg (37.8 ave.); toxaphene,
                       25.2 - 49.9 mg/kg  (34.9 ave.)

     Henderson et^ al^., (12, 13) reported  the results of the National

Monitoring Program analysis of organochlorine insecticide residues in

fish collected from 50 sampling stations  located in the Great Lakes and

major river basins throughout the United  States.  Twelve toxaphene re-

coveries were reported from 590 composite samples taken in the fall of

1967 and spring of 1968.  Concentrations  ranged from 0.01 mg/kg to 1.25

mg/kg.  Toxaphene was not reported in the 1969 survey.  A check with the

two laboratories making the analyses indicated that toxaphene was sus-

pected in a number of samples but was not reported because of inherent

analytical difficulties (11).  These difficulties seem in part responsi-

ble for the relative scarcity in the technical literature of data on

toxaphene in aquatic life.

     Although the practice of applying toxaphene in lakes for fisheries

management has been discouraged, one study of that usage revealed infor-

mation on bioaccumulation in the hydrosphere under conditions of gross

-------
                                                                   72







contamination.  Terriere et^ al_., (29) applied toxaphene in Davis Lake,




Oregon at 88 yg/1 in 1961 and found in 1962 and 1963 that toxaphene was




present in water at average values of 2.1 ug/1 and 1.2 yg/1, respectively.




They reported a concentration factor of about 500 for aquatic plants,




1000 to 2000 for aquatic invertebrates, 10,000 to 20,000 for rainbow trout,




4,000 to 8,000 for Atlantic salmon and 1000 to 2000 for lake bottom mud.




This lake was successfully restocked one year after treatment.




     Hughes (15) has made the most complete recent study of biological




accumulation in the aquatic environment in his study of toxaphene per-




sistence in Wisconsin lakes.  When applied to the lakes in fisheries man-




agement, toxaphene in the lake water declined rapidly to less than detect-




able amount (1 yg/liter) within 9 to 12 months.  However, aquatic fauna,




particularly fish stocked in the lakes following treatment, accumulated




as much as 18 pg of toxaphene residues per gram of body weight.  In gen-




eral, prey fish accumulated higher concentrations of toxaphene than did




predators.  Bluegills stocked in Fox Lake about eight months following




the last of 3 treatments accumulated 9.4 yg/g in 176 days and then toxa-




phene residues began declining until, after 787 days, 0.8 ug/g remained.




Two months after fish were stocked, plankton contained 34 Mg/g.  Hughes




believes that toxaphene was accumulated through both the food chain and




directly from water.




     More information is needed to evaluate the nature and significance




of biological accumulation and food chain involvement, especially in




aquatic life.  Controlled studies will more adequately reveal the re-




lationship of exposure to build-up in the tissues, and also indicate

-------
                                                                    73







rates of metabolism and excretion once exposure is discontinued.  Im-




proved analytical techniques' and the availability of 36Cl-labeled toxa-




phene should make rapid a quisition of needed data possible.

-------
                                                                   74  '







SUMMARY




     Toxaphene is a long-lived insecticide.  Residues in soil may be de-




tected for several months to several years, but no build-up has occurred




in the soil in areas of regular usage.  Microbial decomposition, photo-




decomposition and/or volatilization may account for major losses from




the soil surface but this is not well documented.  Downward migration




through the soil does not normally occur to a large degree.  Studies are




needed to clarify the fundamental mechanisms controlling the persistence




and loss of toxaphene from the soil, and to identify break-down products.




     Toxaphene can be transported from the soil surface to watercourses,




"dissolved" in runoff water and adsorbed on mineral and organic sediment.




Concentrations reported from stream and lake water are usually less than




1 ug/1; values for bottom sediments may be several thousand times




greater.  There is no evidence at this time of wide-spread occurrence of




toxaphene in the nation's waters comparable to the distribution of DDT




and dieldrin.  However, chemists are beset by analytical limitations with




toxaphene not experienced with DDT and dieldrin.




     Little information is available about bioaccumulation of toxaphene/




Strobane in aquatic life and of food chain involvement.  Toxaphene is




sufficiently persistent in the physical environment to be available, in




areas of regular usage, for biological accumulation if other critical re-




quirements are satisfied; namely, that rates of uptake, metabolism and




excretion are favorable for accumulation.

-------
                                                                       75
     A study in a lake where toxaphene was applied for fisheries manage-




ment suggests that biological accumulation and transfer through the food




chain to higher trophic levels can occur under such conditions.  However,




direct application to water resulting in sustained gross exposure of




aquatic organisms is not recommended.  Toxaphene residues have been found




in fish, but little data are available relating frequency and rate of




exposure to residue concentrations, and none have determined rate of




metabolism and/or excretion during exposure or after cessation of exposure




These studies are needed.

-------
                              TABLE  1
                                               76
          Toxaphene Applied  to  Crops vs  Recovered  from Soil  (a)
 LOCATION
   LB APPLIED/ACRE
 RESIDUE IN mg/kg
Lower Rio Grand Valley
Field 1
Field 2
Field 3
Field 4
Field 5
Dade County, Fla.
Field 1
Field 2
Field 3
Field 4
Field 5
Eastern So. Carolina
Field 1
Field 2
Field 3
1956-64
16.2
1958-64
47
1958-64
34(+1.7 Strobane)
1955-64
29.25
1956-64
39.16
1958-64
8
1962-64
2.2
1962-64
31.59
1952-64
3
1956-64
15
1957-64
47
1965 1966
3 • 2
1965 1966
7 1.25
1965 1966
9 1.
1965
4
1965 1966
4 2
1965
4
1965
9
1965
19.90
1966
3
1965 1966
9 18
Oct 1966
2.90
Oct 1966
1.98
Oct 1966
1.77
Oct 1966
2.01
Oct 1966
2.43
Mar 1968
1.21
Mar 1968
2.64
Mar 1965
0.66
Mar 1968
4.14
Mar 1968
7.00
Aug 1966
2.99
Aug 1966
5.64
Aug 1966
0.99
Field 4
1956-64
   38
j   Aug 1966
i     2.04

-------
                                                     Table 2




                        Toxaphene  by  Seasons  in Flint Creek,  Alabama Water (yg/1)  (a) (b)
Thousand Lb . Technical
Agricultural Toxaphene Applied in
Year Study Area
1959-60
1960-61
1961-62
1962-63
1963-64
1964-65
1965
56.5
37.9
64.6
72.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
Summer Fall Winter Spring
Max. Min. Average
0.28
0.41
0.11
0.15
0.08
•0.11
0.08
0.04
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.11
0.21
0.07
0.10
0.16
0.05
0.01
Average Average Average
0.08
0.06
0.03
0.07
0.03
0.01
0.00
0.05
0.02
0.05
0.05
0.01
0.00
—
0.05
Positive
No Sample
0.07
0.01
0.00
—
»   Source  (25)




'b)   Values  are not corrected for the efficiency of the sampling and extraction methods.

-------
                                    Table 3

   Toxaphene Concentration in California Surface Waters (yg/1) (a)  (b)
                            78
Sampling Station
Max.
Min.
Average
Feather River at Nicolaus Bridge
American River at Sacramento
Sacramento River at Walnut Grove
Mokelumne River at Highway 99
Little Connection Slough at Atherton Road
Middle River at Victoria Canal
Delta Mendoto Canal at Head
San Joaquin River at Antioch
Suisan Bay at Martinez
Nap a River at Duttons Landing
San Pablo Bay at Pt. San Pablo
San Francisco Bay at Berkeley Pier
San Fran'cisco Bay at Treasure Island
So. San Francisco Bay at San Mateo Br.
Golden Gate Br. at Fort Point
San Joaquin River at Vernalis
San Joaquin River at Fremont Ford
Salton Sea near North Shore
Alamo River
All American Canal at Alamo River
_.
—
0.40
—
—
—
0.12
0.32
0.09
—
—
0.23
—
—
—
0.93
0.46
0.40
0.65
0.08

—
0.03
—
—
—
0.03
0.05
0.05
—
—
0.03
—
—
—
0.02
0.04
0.05
0.30
0.04

—
0.10
0.04
0.16
—
0.08
0.15
0.06
—
0.08
0.13
—
0.26
—
0.26
0.13
0.14
0.47
0.06
(a)   Source (3)

(b)   Sample size 5 liters; analytical method, microcoulometric gas chromatography;
     sensitivity of method, 0.02 to 0.05 ug/1.

-------
                                 Table 4




   Toxaphene in Agricultural Drains in California  (ug/1)  (a)
                                                                             79
 Sampling Station
Max.
Min.
Average
Reclamation District
No. 108 Drain
Colusa Basin
Drain
Staten Island
Drain
Roberts Island Drain at Whiskey Slough
Panoche
Drain
Salt
Slough




5.50
0.44




0.10
0.04

0.23


1.47
0.17
(a)   Adapted from Daily and Hannum (3).

-------
                                                                               80
                                     Table  5




Toxaphene in California  San Joaquin Valley  Tile Drain Effluents  (ug/1)  (a)







                                                             Concentration
Number Times
Year Samples Detected
Sept. 1963-Dec. 1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
16
50
105
121
79
51
6
7
17
4
10
7
Max. Min. Average (b)
0.70
0.95
0.88
0.32
0.50
1.26
0.20
0.13
0.21
0.02
0.02
0.09
0.43
0.61
0.37
0.15
0.26
0.44
    Totals
422
   51




 12 %
 1.26
0.02
(a)  Source (1)




(b)  Average of positive samples.                                    !






                                   Table 6




Toxaphene in California Central Valley Surface Agricultural Waste Water Drains(ug/1)(a)




                                                           Concentration
Number Times
Year Samples Detected
Sept. 1963-Dec. 1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
73
115
89
95
56
19
40
67
56
15
27
11
Max. Min. Average (b)
5.50
8.16
7.60
71.00
15.00
31.50 •
0.04
0.23
0.115
0.06
0.11
0.216
1.02
2.08
1.42
10.13
2.47
4.80
  Totals
447
  216




48  %
71.00
0.04

-------
                                                                                 81
                                        Table  7

Toxaphene in California Central Valley Surface Waters  (ug/1)  (a)
                                                           Concentration
Number Times
Year Samples Detected
Sept. 1963-Dec. 1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
232
158
203
61
58
73
12
2
0
1
Max. Min. Average (b)
0.90
0.93
0.31
—
—
0.02
0.29
0.08
—
—
0.11
0.50
0.20
—
0.10
Totals 712 88
12 %
(a)  Source (1).

(b)  Average of positive samples.


                                      Table 8

Toxaphene in California Bay and Ocean Waters (ug/1)  (a)
                                                        Concentration
Number Times
Year Samples Detected
Sept . 1963-Dec . 1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
32
49
51
47
21
7
1
0
0
0
Max. Min. Average (b)
0.26
—
—
—
—
0.03
—
—
—
—
0.12
0.60
—
—
—
Totals 200 8
4 %
    (a)   Source (1).
    (b)   Average of positive samples.

-------
                                                                             82
                                     Table 9

                   Toxaphene in California Sediments (ug/1) (a)(b)
    Source
Max.
Min.
Average
 Streams
    Feather River at Nicolaus Br.
    Sacramento River at Walnut Grove
    Little Connection Slough at Altherton Road
    Middle River at Victoria Canal
    San Joaquin River at Antioch
    San Joaquin River at Vernalis

Bays

    Sunset Bay at Martinez
    San Pablo Bay at Pt. San Pablo
    So. San Francisco Bay at San Mateo Br.

Agricultural Drains

    Reclamation District #108 Drain
    Colusa Basin Drain
    Staten Island Drain
    Roberts Island Drain at Whiskey Slough
130
110
88
          57
         170

         140
110
 99
                  210

                  110
                  380
(a)  Source (3)

(b)  The method of reporting concentration is unique and not relatable to ug/g
     of sediment in the usual manner.  Concentrations are reported as parts of
     pesticide per parts of wet sediment.  A representative location of the sample
     was dried and a moisture content determination was made.  The pesticide con-
     centrations were then adjusted to parts per parts of dry sediments from the
     relationship Cs=100C-CwSm in which Cs=dry weight pesticide concentration in
                        Sd
     overlying water sample; Sm=percent soil moisture in sample; and Sd=percent
     dry material in sample.

-------
                                    Table 10
                                                                             83
Insecticide Residue in Alabama Soil Samples Collected from  33 Cotton Fields  (a)
                                   (ug/kg)
Mean Cone. Mean Cone.
Compound Percent Positive All Samples Positive Samp. Range
Toxaphene
DDT
BHC
58
85
49
410
250
20
710
300
50
160-1600
20-530
10-380
(a)  Source (9)
                                    Table 11

           Comparison of Insecticide Recovery from Sediment and Water,
                    Hartselle, Alabama Water Treatment Plant (a)
Sample Source
No. Sample
Percent Positive for
                                                DDT
                           DDEToxaphene
                          BHC
Sediment from treatment
plant settling basis
Suspended sediment extracted
from raw water by filtra-
tion prior to carbon
filtration (b)
Carbon adsorption samples
collected from water after
removal by above filtra-
tion

45



77



77

71



69



13

64



62



12

18



10



31

22



17



74
(a)   Source (25)

(b)   A Cuno Micro-Klean filter that removed sedimentary particles larger
     than 25 microns was used.  Smaller particles pass through to the carbon
     adsorption units.

-------
                                                 Table 12

                                    Toxaphene in Wisconsin Lakes, 1965 (a)
                                              (parts per billion)
Lake
 Year of
Treatment
Treatment
  Rate
Water (b)
Suspended
 Matter
Aquatic
Plants
Sediment
Little Green
Emily
Kusel
Marl
Big Twin
Wilson
Round
Corns tock
(Surface)
6.5 meters
1956
1959
1960
1960
1963
1964
May 1965
1964 & 1965
June, 1965 (c)
100
100
100
100
100 & 50
2.5-3.5
5 Epilimnion only
5 + 5
100
1
4
3
3
2
4
2
. 20
4
40
20
200
9
20
80
200
100
500
—
400
70
80
40
50
80
50
20
200
400
1000
800
500
600
1000
(a)   Source (17)

(b)   Remaining in water after filtration through Whatman GF/A glass filters,

(c)   Cornstock Lake was treated 14 days prior to sampling.
                                                                                                                 00

-------
                                                                            35
                                Table 13




Insecticides in the Fat of Cattle after Multiple Spray Treatments (a)
Insecticide


DDT, 0.5%


Dieldrin,
0.5%


Heptachler,
0.5%


Strobane,
2%


Toxaphene ,
0.5%

Spray
Interval
(weeks )


3


3



2



2


2


After indicated sprayings (b) mg/kg
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th

18


7



11






0



31


10



14






0






16



14






1



33


24



20






7










18






10



35






19



29


6


After last spraying
mg/kg
12
wks
8
11
wks
17

8
wks
16

6
wks
9
4
wks
4


24
wks
5
28
wks
6

16
wks
2

10
wks
4
6
wks
4


36
wks
2








14
wks
3





(a)   Source (19).




(b)   Fat samples were taken at the end of the intervals between spraying.

-------
                                                                          86
                                Table 14
             Insecticide Residues Stored in the Fat of Cattle Fed
             Known Amounts in Their Diet (a)
Insecticide

Aldrin
BHC
Chlordane
DDT
Toxaphene
mg/kg
in Feed

25
100
25
25
100
mg/kg
Weeks after feeding
4 8 12 16
50
159
12
22
26
78
223
18
34
34

230

42
33

250

40
38
mg/kg
Weeks after feeding ceased
4 8 16 20 24
51
84
14
19
14
36

5

3

17

11

20

0





6

(a)   Source (19).

-------
                                                                   87
                            REFERENCES
 1.  Anonymous.  Annual summaries of water-borne chlorinated hydrocarbon
     pesticide program, 1963-1969.  San Joaquin District Dept. of Water
     Resources, Calif.

 2.  Bailey, G. W. and White, J. L. (1970).  Factors influencing the ad-
     sorption, desorption, and movement of pesticides in soil.  Residue
     Reviews.  32, 29-92.

 3.  Bailey, T. E. and Hannum, J. R. (1967).  Distribution of pesticides
     in California.  J. Sanitary Engineering Div., Proc. Amer. Soc.
     Civil Engineers, SA 5: 27-43.

 4.  Barthel, W. F. , Parsons, D. A., McDowell, L. L., and Grissinger,
     E. H. (1966).  Surface hydrology and pesticides.  In Pesticides and
     their effects on soils and water.   ASA Spec Publ #8.  Soils Sci.
     Soc. America, Madison, Wis. 128-144 pp.

 5.  Beck, Louis A., Senior Sanitary Engineer, Calif.  Dept. of Water
     Resources, Sacramento.  Personal Communication (1971).

 6.  Bradley, J. F., Jr., Sheets, T. J., and Jackson, M. D.  DDT and
     toxaphene movement in surface water from cotton plots.  N. C. State
     Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta.  To be published.

 7.  Brown, E. and Nishioka, Y. A.  (1967).  Pesticides in selected
     western streams - A contribution to the national program.  Pest.
     Monit. Jour. 1(2): 38-46.

 8.  (Ent. Res. Div., ARS, USDA) (1959).  Residues in fatty acid, brain
     and milk of cattle from insecticides supplied for grasshopper con-
     trol on range land.  J. Ent. Soc.  Am. 52(6): 1206-1210.

 9.  Grzenda, A. R. and Nicholson, H.  P. (1965).  The distribution and
     magnitude of insecticide residues  among various components of a
     stream system.  Proc. 14th Southern Water Resources and Pollution
     Control Conf., Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 165-174 pp.

10.  Gunther, F. A., Westlake, W. E.,  and Jaglan, P. S.  (1968).  Re-
     ported solubilities of 738 pesticide chemicals in water.  Residue
     Reviews.  20, 1-145.

11.  Henderson, C., Chief of Environmental Improvement Branch Div.
     Fisheries Services Branch Bur.  Sports Fisheries and Wildlife, Dept.
     of the Interior, Washington, D. C.   Personal communication, July 15,
     1971.

-------
                                                                     88

12.  Henderson, C., Johnson, W. L., and Inglis, A. (1969).  Organochlorine
     insecticide residues in fish (National Pesticide Monitoring Program).
     Pest. Monit. Jour. 3(3): 145-171.

13.  Henderson, C., Johnson, W. L. and Inglis, A.  (1969).  Organochloride
     insecticide residues in fish - fall 1969 National Pesticide Monitor-
     ing Program.  Pest. Monit. Jour. 5(1): 1-11.

14.  Humanson, H. P., Gunther, F. A., Anderson, L. D. and Garber, M. J.
     (1971).  Installment application effects upon insecticide residue
     content of a California soil.  J. Agr. Food Chem. 19: 722.

15.  Hughes, R. A. (1970).  Studies on the persistence of toxaphene in
     treated lakes.  PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin  (Water Chemistry).

16.  Johnson, D. W. and Lew, S.  (1970).  Chlorinated hydrocarbon pesti-
     cides in representative fishes of Southern Arizona.  Pest. Monit.
     Jour. 4(2): 57-61.

17.  Johnson, W. D., Lee, G. F., and Spyridakis, D.  (1966).  Persistence
     of toxaphene in treated lakes.  Univ. of Wise. Eng. Exp. Sta. Reprint
     #914.  Air and Water Pollut. Int. J. Pergamon Press, 10: 555-560.

18.  Johnson, W. R. , Ittihadieh, F. T., and Craig, K. R.  (1967).  In-
     secticides in the tile drainage effluent.  Water Resources Research
     3(2): 525-537.

19.  Knipling, E. F. and Westlake, W. E. (1966).  Insecticide use in live-
     stock production.  Residue Reviews 13: 1-32.

20.  Lichtenberg, J. J., Eichelberger, J. W., Dressman, R. C., and Long-
     bottom, J. E. (1970).  Pesticides in surface waters of the United
     States - A 5-year summary, 1964-68.  Pest. Monit. Jour. 4(2): 71-86.

21.  Lichtenberg, J. J., Analytical Quality Control Laboratory, EPA,
     Cincinnati, Ohio.  Personal communication  (1971).

22.  Manigold, D. B. and Schulze, J. A. (1969).  Pesticides in Selected
     western streams - A progress report.  Pest. Monit. Jour. 3(2):
     124-135.

23.  Mulla, M. S. (1961).  Control of Hippelates gnats with soil treat-
     ment using organochlorine insecticides.  J. EC. Ent. 54(4):  637-641.

24.  Nash, R. G. and Woolson, Q. E. (1968).  Distribution of chlorinated
     insecticides in cultivated soils.  Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc- 32,
     525-527.

25.  Nicholson, H. P., Grzenda, A. R. and Teasley, J. I.  (1966).  Water
     pollution by insecticides:  a six and one-half year study of a water-
     shed.  Proc. Symposium on Agricultural Waste Waters.  Rept. #10 of
     Water Resources Center, Univ. of Calif., Davis.  132-141 pp.

-------
                                                                     89
26.  Shaw, J. G. and Rlviello, M. S.  (1961).  Exploratory studies with
     soil toxicants to control the Mexican fruit fly.  J. EC. Ent.
     54(4): 666-668.

27.  Smith, V. K. Forest Service, USDA, Gulfport, Miss.0 Personal com-
     munication July 1, 1971.

28.  Stevens, L. J., Collier, C. W., and Woodham, D. W. (1970).  Moni-
     toring pesticides in soils from areas of regular, limited, and no
     pesticide use.  Pest. Monit. Jour. 4(3): 145-164.

29.  Terriere, L. C., Kiigemagi, U., Gerlach, A. R., and Borovicka,
     R. L. (1966).  The persistence of toxaphene in lake water and its
     uptake by aquatic plants and animals.  Agr. and Food Chem.  14(1):
     66-69.                   °

30.  Thomas, G. W. (1970).  Movement of insecticides in soil and water.
     Entry 5.1472, Water Resources Research Catalogue, Vol. 6, 1-653 pp.

31.  Weaver, L., Gunnerson, C. G., Breidenbach, A. W., and Lichtenberg,
     J. J. (1965).  Chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides in major U. S.
     river basins.  Public Health Reports 80(6): 481-493.

32.  Wershaw, R. L., Burcar, P. J., and Goldberg, M. C., (1969).  Inter-
     action of pesticides with natural organic material.  Environmental
     Science and Technology.  3: 271-273.

-------
                                                                        90
              TOXAPHENE RESIDUES IN ATMOSPHERIC SAMPLES
     Data of toxaphene residues in atmospheric samples are very limited




(1,3).  Nine locations for pesticide monitoring were established at




Baltimore, Md. , Buffalo, N. Y., Dothan, Ala., Fresno, Calif., Iowa City,




Iowa, Orlando, Fla., Riverside, Calif., Salt Lake City, Utah, and Stone-




ville, Miss.  The identification of toxaphene was carried out by gas-liquid




chromatography using two different column packings.  Toxaphene identi-




fication was verified by three characteristic elution peaks on the




chromatograph, one peak emerging just before p,p'-DDT and the other two




after DDT (2).  Further verification of the presence of toxaphene in the




air samples was obtained from the person collecting the samples in Stone-




ville.  He reported that toxaphene, DDT, and methyl parathion had been




recently used at the Stoneville location (2).




     Of the nine locations monitored, three showed significant toxaphene




residues as follows (1):
Location

Dothan
Orlando
Stoneville
Total Number
of Samples
90
99
99
Positive
Samples
11
9
57
Range
(ng/m3)
27.3-79.0
20.0-2520.0
16. -1110.

-------
                                                                      91






     Syracuse University Research Corporation under contract with NAPCA




(now Research and Monitoring, EPA) has monitored pesticides in the atmos-




phere at six locations in New York State, one at Winter Haven, Fla., and




one at Lubbock, Tex. for the past 6 mo.  No toxaphene residues were present,




although DDT, aldrin and endrin residues were found in some of the




stations (4).

-------
                                                                      92
                            REFERENCES
1.  Stanley, C. W. Study to determine the atmospheric contamination by
    pesticides.  Final Report, PHS Contract PH 21-2006; Midwest Reserach
    Institute Project No. 3068-C.  October, 1968.-

2.  Stanley, C. W. Letter to A. R. Yobs, EPA, Chambley, Ge., dated
    July 6, 1971.

3.  Stanley, C. W., Barney II, J. E., Helton, M. R., and Yobs, A. R.
    1971).  Measurement of atmospheric levels of pesticides.  Envir.
    Sci. and Techn. 5: 431.

4.  Syracuse University Research Corporation.  Progress Report to EPA,
    Contract No. CPA 70-145.

-------
                                                                    93
               THE EFFECT OF TOXAPHENE ON BENEFICIAL




                       ARTHROPOD POPULATIONS






     The information presented on this general subject has been sepa-




rated into effects of toxaphene on pollinators and insect parasites and




predators.  Some excellent reviews have been published on the effect of




pesticides on nontarget organisms (1, 25, 34, 39).




     Effect of toxaphene on insect pollinators.  The honey bee has been




used in many toxicity tests because it is the most beneficial pollinating




insect.  The honey bee is the major agent in the pollination of most of




fruit, vegetable, seed and pasture crops.  The work conducted on the




effect of arsenicals on honey bees, before the introduction of toxaphene,




is not discussed in this review.  Since the development of organochlorines,




researchers have used laboratory and field observations to determine the




effect of synthetic organic insecticides on pollinators.  This work has




been centered in Washington, California, Arizona, Texas and to some ex-




tent in other states and countries.  In Texas tests were conducted to




determine the effect of organochlorines on honey bees (49, 50, 51, 52,




53, 54).  Toxaphene applied as a dust (20% toxaphene - 40% sulphur) was




practically nontoxic producing only 5% mortality.  Toxaphene sprays had




little toxicity to bees when applied to cotton inside large cages while




toxaphen - DDT, dusts of toxaphene, DDT. gamma BHC-DDT and chlordane




killed from 8.2 to 10.4% of the bbes after eight applications.




     In tests to determine the toxicity of organic insecticidal sprays




to bees, the decreasing order of toxicity was gamma BHC>chlordane>DDT>




toxaphene.

-------
                                                                          94
In another series of tests toxaphene dusts were slightly more toxic to bees




than sprays.  To summarize, the decreasing order of toxicity to bees of




several insecticides was calcium arsenate>parathlon>dieldrin>aldrin>BHC>chlor-




dane>DDT>toxaphene. Toxaphene applied to vetch before it bloomed heavily




showed promise for control of lygus bugs and pea aphids with minimum damage




to pollinating insects.




    Commercial applications of toxaphene to control injurious insects in




alfalfa can be made without serious loss of bees (5, 7, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30).




Toxaphene is low to moderate in toxicity and is not hazardous if applied when




bees are not foraging.  Roberts and Barnes (40) grouped pesticides according




to their toxicity to bees as:  (1) highly toxic, (2) moderately toxic and




(3) relatively nontoxic.  Toxaphene and Strobane were grouped as relatively




nontoxic.  In a USDA leaflet (450), toxaphene was listed as relatively non-




hazardous to bees.




     Todd and McGregar  (43)  classified  the agricultural chemicals




according to toxicity to bees and  indicated that toxaphene was least




dangerous to bees.  Toxaphene, methoxychlor and sulphur were classi-




fied as materials which could be used with safety.  Hocking  (23) in-




dicated that the danger of  toxaphene to honey bees was very low.  Todd




et al  (44)  indicated that  toxaphene was much less lethal to bees than




parathion,  chlordane or DDT and caused  no damage to the colonies.









    In laboratory tests conducted  in New Zealand, the ascending order of




toxicity to honey bees was  toxaphene>Strobane>thiodan>diazinon (36, 37).




Toxaphene and Strobane were sprayed on white clover fields early in the




morning without causing bee mortality.  In Canada, toxaphene was also applied

-------
                                                                      95







 to red clover without causing abnormal mortality to  pollinating  insects




 (32).




      Johansen (26)  indicated that  toxaphene  was  hazardous  to  the alfalfa




 leaf cutter,  but not to alkali bees.   Menke  (33) concluded that  15%  toxa-




 phene dust  applied  to blossoming alfalfa had little  effect on the activity




 of the alkali bee.




      Effect of toxaphene on  insect predators and parasites.   Since




 arthropod species tend to come to  an  equilibrium or  "balance," removing




 one or more species by frequent pesticide applications may upset the




 balance in  arthropod populations at any given time.   The resurgence  of




.pest populations after insecticide treatment is  explained  by  (1)  the re-




 duction of  natural  enemies by the  pesticide  along with the pest,  (2)




 favorable influences of pesticides on the phytophagus arthropods and (3)




 removal of  competitive species (39).




      The effect of  toxaphene on beneficial insects has been studied  by




 many entomologists.   Soon after toxaphene became available for cotton in-




 sect control,  Parcencia and  Ewing  (38)  found that in experiments where




 no sulphur  was added to toxaphene  an  increase in red spider mite popula-




 tions  was evident.   Spider mite infestations were also present in cotton




 fields next to pastures where toxaphene was  used to  control grasshoppers




 (16).   Where  sulphur was added to  the toxaphene  no spider  mite increases




 were seen.  Apparently toxaphene destroyed the parasites or predators




 of the red  spider mites,  creating  an  environment conductive to mite




 increases.

-------
                                                                        96
an environment conducive to mite increases.




    A single application of toxaphene for cotton fleahopper control reduced




populations of beneficial insects; but, the populations increased in the




following - 3 weeks if no further applications of toxaphene were made (17, 18).




After the second to fourth application of toxaphene—sulphur dust made in a




regular boll weevil control program, the beneficial arthropod populations




(lady beetles, flower bugs, lacewings, Geocoris, assassin bugs and spiders)




were practically eliminated.




    In laboratory tests, toxaphene at the rate of 2.5 Ibs per acre killed




from 84 to 85% of the spotted ladybeetle, Ceratomegilla fuscilabris and




Scymnus sp., but only about 50% of the convergent ladybeetle, Hippodamia




convergens, population (12).  Results of field observations indicate that




toxaphene showed a moderate to high effect on all predators in the cotton




fields.




    Burke (10, lla) reported that toxaphene was less toxic to adults of




Cpllops balteatus, larvae of Hippodamis convergens and adult Orius insidiosus




than dieldrin or endrin.  Toxaphene, dieldrin and endrin were of about the




same toxicity to larvae of Chrysopa oculata when applied by the dipping




technique.   Toxaphene and dieldrin exhibited a low level of toxicity to the




several insects included in these studies.




    Almand (2) reported the results of observations made on three cotton




fields following insecticidal treatments.  Carbofuran and toxaphene treated




fields contained the greatest number of predaceous insects.  Attallah and




Newsome (6) reported that toxaphene decreased longevity and prevented ovi—




position of Coleomegilla maculata.

-------
                                                                       97


    Newsom and Smith (35) reported that toxaphene-sulphur (20%-40%) reduced


the population of beneficial species.  Severe bollworm infestations developed


on a large cotton acreage which received 3 to 5 applications of either a 20%


toxaphene dust or benzene hexachloride-DDT mixture for boll weevil control.


Injurious bollworm infestations developed from comparatively small numbers of


eggs in fields treated with chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides.


    Bartlett (8) tested 61 pesticides against 5 hymenopterous parasites and


6 coccinellids.  Toxaphene was highly toxic to all species of hymenopterous


parasites and showed low to medium toxicity to the coccinellids.

                                                                             c
    Van Den Bosch et al (46) tested the toxicity of widely used insecticides


on beneficial insects in cotton and alfalfa fields of California.  Insects of


the following genera were included in the study:   Orius, Geocoris, Nabis,


Chrysopa, and Hippodamia.  All insecticides studied were toxic to the bene-


ficial insects to some degree but seemed to fall into three distinct groups:


 1.  highly toxic-parathion  and toxaphene DDT combinations;  2. moderately


toxic - toxaphene, endrin,  and DDT;  3.  slightly toxic - demeton.  Considerable


specificity was evident in the toxicities of the various insecticides.


Chrysopa larvae and Orius sp. were relatively tolerant to the wide variety of


insecticides tested.


    Toxaphene - DDT spray mixtures applied at the rate of 1.3 Ibs DDT and


2.6 Ibs toxaphene were extremely toxic to Hippodamia convergens, and aphid


parasite, (Trioxys utilies), Geocoris spp.  Orius spp., Nabis ferus and Sinea


diadima (42).  DDT applied at the rate of 1.3 Ibs per acre was nearly as toxic


to the beneficial insects as the toxaphene DDT mixture.

-------
                                                                         98






    Toxaphene applied at the rate of 2.7 Ibs per acre was not as toxic as




DDT and was far less toxic than the toxaphene-DDT mixture.  Parathion applied




at the rate of 3.6 oz per acre was comparable to toxaphene - DDT and had




generally drastic effects on the beneficial species.




    Harries and Valcarce (21) found that 5% toxaphene killed 32% of the




Collops vittatus 12% of the Hippodamia convergens and 36% of the Colesmegilla




maculata; while 5% Strobane killed 10%, 18% and 12%, respectively.  These




chlorinated hydrocarbons were not as toxic to these beneficial insects as the




organophosphorus compounds.




    Lingren et al (31) reported that toxaphene-DDT and azodrin were highly




toxic to spiders.  The mean numbers of all predators were significantly




greater in plots treated with trichlorofon than in those treated with Azodrin,




Bidrin®and toxaphene-DDT.




    Toxaphene was not as toxic to Hippodamia convergens, Qrius^ insidiosus and




Scymnus spp. as Strobane - DDT, carbaryl, trichlorfon or dicrotophos applied




for cotton fleahopper control (48).  Toxaphene was more toxic to spiders




than Strobane-DDT mixture.  About 2 weeks after the second application was




made, the beneficial insect population resurged to effective predatory levels.




    Wille  (55) reported a large increase of Heliothis virescens occurred




following treatments of DDT, BHC or toxaphene.  Apparently these materials




killed the beneficial insects without eliminating the pest.




    Click and Lattimore (19) found that toxaphene BHC and chlordane reduced




the beneficial insects in cotton.  Toxaphene was less destructive of pre-




dators than either BHC or chlordane and the addition of DDT to the chlorinated




hydrocarbons increased the toxicity to predators.

-------
                                                                    99







     Fenton (15) studied the effect of several insecticides applied to




alfalfa on beneficial insect populations.  Toxaphene generally reduced




the beneficial insects less than parathion, endrin or demeton.




     Toxaphene is only slightly toxic to bees and can be safely used




in bee pastures to control injurious insects, particularly if the mate-




rial is applied when the bees are not foraging.






                              SUMMARY




     Toxaphene is highly toxic to predators and parasites of some




species and low in toxicity to others.  Apparently one application of




toxaphene will reduce certain beneficial insects, but they usually re-




surge to normal levels within a few weeks.  Regularly scheduled toxa-




phene treatments applied at intervals of 5 to 7 days generally will




eliminate beneficial insect populations in crops.

-------
                                                                 100
                             REFERENCES
 1.  Akesson, N. B., and Yates W. E. (1964).  Problems relating to appli-
     cation of agricultural chemicals and resulting drift residues.  Ann.
     Rev. Ent. 9285-318.

 2.  Almand, L. K. (1970).  The effects of insecticide applications on
     predaceous insect and spider populations in cotton fields and a
     comparison of sampling methods.  M.S. Thesis.  Texas A & M Univ.

 3.  Anderson, L. D., and Atkins, Jr. E. L., (1958).  Effects of pesti-
     cides on bees.  Calif. Agri. 12(11): 3-4.                     '

 4.  Anderson, L. D., and Atkins, Jr. E. L., (1958).  Toxicity of pesti-
     cides to honeybees in laboratory and field tests in souther Cali-
     fornia, 1955-1956.  Econ. Ent. 51(1): 103-8.

 5.  Anderson, L. D., and Tuft, T. 0. (1952).  Toxicity of several new
     insecticides to honeybees.  J. Econ. Ent. 45(3): 466-69.

 6.  Attallah, Yousef H. and Newsome, L. D., (1966).  Ecological and
     nutritional studies on Colemegilla macalata DeGeer (Coleoptera:
     Coccinellidae) III.  The effect of DDT, toxaphene and endrin on the
     reproductive and survival potential.  J. Econ. Ent. 59(5): 1181-87.

 7.  Atkins, E. L., Jr., and Anderson, L. D., (1954).  Toxicity of pesti-
     cides dusts to honeybees.  J. Econ. Ent. 47(6): 969-972.

 8.  Bartlett, B. R. (1963).  The contact toxicity of some pesticide resi-
     dues to hymenopterous parasites and cocinellid predators.  J. Econ.
     Ent. 56 (5): 694-98.

 9.  Bartlett, B. R. (1964).  Toxicity of some pesticides to eggs, larvae
     and adults of the Green lacewing, Chrysopa carnea.  J. Econ. Ent.
     57(3): 366-69.

10.  Burke, H. R. (1959).  Insecticidal studies on several predaceous in-
     sects associated with cotton.  Ph.D., Thesis, Texas A&M Univ.

11.  (1959a).  Toxicity of several insecticides to two species of bene-
     ficial insects on cotton.  J. Econ. Ent. 52(4): 616-18.

12.  Campbell, W. V. and Hutchins, E., (1952).  Toxicity of insecticides
     to some predaceous insects on cotton.  J. Econ. Ent. 45(5):829-33.

13.  Daniels, N. E.  (1955).  Insects affecting alfalfa seed production.
     J. Econ. Ent. 48(3):  339-340.

-------
                                                                 101
14.  Eckert, J. E. (1949).  Determining toxicity of Agricultural Chemi-
     cals to honeybees.  J. Econ. Ent. 42(3): 261-265.

15.  Fenton, F. A. (1959).  The effect of several insecticides on the
     total arthropodopopulation in alfalfa.  J. Econ. Ent. 52(3): 428-32.

16.  Gaines, J. C. and Dean, H. A., (1949).  Insecticide tests for boll
     weevil control during 1948.  J. Econ. Ent. 42(5): 795-798.

17.  Gaines, R. C., (1954).  Effect on beneficial insects of several
     insecticides applied for cotton insect control during 1954.  J.
     Econ. Ent. 47(3): 543-44.

18.  Gaines, R. C. (1955).  Effect of beneficial insects of three in-
     secticide mixtures applied for cotton insect control during 1954.
     J. Econ. Ent. 48(4): 477-78.

19.  Click, P. A. and Lattimore, W. B., Jr. (1954).  The relation of
     insecticides to insect populations in cotton fields.  J. Econ. Ent.
     47(4); 681-684.

20.  Graves, J. B. and Mackensen, 0., (1965).  Topical application and
     insecticide resistance studies on the honeybee.  J. Econ. Ent.
     58(5): 990-93.

21.  Harries, F. H. and Valcarce, A. C. (1955).  Laboratory tests of
     the effect of insecticides on some beneficial insects.  J. Econ.
     Ent. 48(5): 614.

22.  Hetrick, L. A. and Moses, P. J., (1953).  Value of insecticides
     for protection of pine pulpwood.  J.  Econ. Ent. 46(1): 160-161.

23.  Hocking, B. (1950).  The Honeybees and agricultural chemicals.  The
     Bee World 31(7):  49-53.

24.  Johansen, C. A.,  (1965).  Bee poisoning, a hazard of applying agri-
     cultural chemicals.  Wash. Agr. Exp.  Sta., Cir. 356 1-13.

25.  Johansen, C. A.,  (1966).  Digest of bee poisoning, its effects and
     prevention.  The  Bee World 47(1): 9-25.

26.  Johansen, A., (1969).  The bee pisoning hazard from pesticides.
     Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 709 1-14.

27.  Jones, D. G. and  Connell, J. U. (1954).  Studies of the toxicity to
     worker honeybees  (Aphis mellifera L.) of certain chemicals used in
     plan protection.   Ann. Appl. Biol. 41(2): 271-279.

-------
                                                                 102
28.  King, D. R. and Rosberg D. W., (1956).  Control of Tetranychus
     hicoriae McG. on pecans.  J. Econ. Ent. 49(3): 404-405.

29.  La Croix, E. A. (1962).  Use of some miticides in the control of
     red spider mites on cotton.  Emp. Cott. Gr. Rev. 39(3): 197-202.

30.  Lieberman, F. V., Bohart, G. E., Knowlton, G. F. and Nye, W. P.,
     (1954).  Additional studies on the effect of field applications of
     insecticides on honeybees.  J. Econ. Ent. 47(2): 316-320.

31.  Lingren, P. D., Ridgway, R. L., Cowan, C. B., Jr., Davis, J. W., and
     Watkins, W. C., (1968).  Biological control of the bollworm and
     tobacco budworm by arthropod predators affected by insecticides.
    : J. Econ. Ent. 61(6): 1521-25.

32.  MacVicar, R. M., Braun, E., Gibson, D. R., and.Jamieson, C. A.
     (1952).  Studies in the Red Clover seed production.  Sci. Agri.
     32(2): 67-80.

33.  Menke, H- F. (1954).  Repellency of toxaphene dust and parathlon
     spray to Nomia melanderi in blossoming alfalfa.  J. Econ. Ent.
     47(3): 539-540.

34.  Newsom, L. D. (1967).  Consequences of insecticide use on nontarget
     organisms.  Ann. Rev. Ent. 12:257-286.

35.  Newsom, L. D. and Smith, C. E., (1949).  Destruction of certain in-
     sect predators by .applications of insecticides to control cotton
     pests.  J. Econ. Ent. 42(6): 904-908.

36.  Palmer-Jones, T. (1958).  Laboratory methods for measuring the
     toxicity of pesticides to honeybees.  New Zeal. Agri. Res. 1(3):
     290-300.

37.  Palmer-Jones, T., Foster, I. W. and Line, L. S., (1958).  Effect of
     honeybees of toxaphene and strobane applied to white clover pasture.
     N. Zeal, Agr. Res. 1(5): 694-706.

38.  Parencia, C. R. and Ewing, K. P.  (1948).  Control of cotton flea-
     hopper by chlorinated camphene, DDT and sulphur.  J. Econ. Ent.
     41(5): 735-738.

39.  Ripper, W. E. (1956).  Effect of pesticides on balance of arthropod
     populations.  Ann. Rev. of Ent. 1:403-83.

40.  Roberts, J. E. and Barnes, G. (1966).  Suggestions for protecting
     honeybees from pesticides.  Agr. Ext. Serv., Univ. of Arkansas,
     leaflet unnumbered.

41.  Ruinard, J. (1958).  Onderzoekingen omtrent levensivijze, economishe
     betekenis en beslrijdengmogelijkhenden der Stengel boorders van Let
     suikeriet op Java.  Proefschr.  Landbbuwhogesch.  Wagenining.

-------
                                                                  103
42.  Stern, V. M., Van den Bosch, R. and Reynolds, H. T., 1959.  Effects
     of Dylox and other insecticides on entomophagous insects attacking
     field crop pests in California.  J. Econ. Ent. 53(1): 67-72.

43.  Todd, F. E. and S. E. McGregor, (1952).  Insecticides and bees.
     Insects USDA Agriculture Yearbook pp. 131-135.

44.  Todd, F. E., Lieberman, F. V., Nye, W. P., and Knowlton, G. F.
     (1949).  The effect of field applications of insecticides on honey-
     bees.  Agri. Chemicals (8) 27-29, 77.

45.  USDA.  (1967).  Protecting honey bees from pesticides.  544 1-6.

46.  Van den Bosch, R., Reynolds R. T. and Dietrick, E. J. (1956).
     Toxicity of widely used insecticides to beneficial insects in Cali-
     fornia cotton and alfalfa fields.  J. Econ.! Ent. 49(3): 359-63.

47.  Van den Laan, R. A. (1951).  De mogelijkhenden van destryding det
     rijsolboorders (possibilities of controlling rice-borers) Landborer
     23(7-9) 295-356.  Djakarta (From Review of Applied Entomology).

48.  Walker, J. K., Jr., Shepard, and Sterling, W. L. (1970).  Effect of
     insecticide applications for the cotton fleahopper on beneficial in-
     sects and spiders.  Tex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Prog. Rept. 2755 1-11.

49.  Weaver, N., (1949).  Toxicity of certain organic insecticides to
     honey bees.  J. Econ. Ent. 42(6): 973-75.

50.  Weaver, N..± (1950).  Toxicity of organic insecticides to honey bees:
     Stomach poison and field tests.  J. Econ. Ent. 43(3): 333-37.

51.  Weaver, N., (1951).  Toxicity of organic insecticides to honey
     bees:  Contact spray and field tests.  J. Econ. Ent. 44(3): 393-397.

52.  Weaver, N., (1952).  The toxicity of organic insecticides to honey
     bees.  J. Econ. Ent. 45(3): 537-538.

53.  Weaver, N., (1953).  Toxicity of insecticides to honey bees.  Texas.
     Agri. Exp. Sta. Prog. Rept. 1554 1-3.

54.  Weaver, N., and Garner, C. F. (1955).  Control of insects on hairy
     vetch.  J. Econ. Ent. 48(5): 625-626.

55.  Wene, G. P., (1955).  Effect of some organic insecticides on the
     population levels of the serpentine leaf miner and its parasites.
     J. Econ. Ent. 48(5): 596-597.

56.  Wille, J. E., (1951).  Biological control of certain cotton insects
     and application of new organic insecticides in Peru.  J. Econ. Ent.
     44(1):  13-18.

-------
                                                                 104
                 RESIDUES IN FOOD CROPS AND FOODS


                 Tolerances for Toxaphene Residues


     The following tolerances for toxaphene residues in raw agricultural

crops have been established and were in effect as of September 1971 in

the United States, Canada, Germany and The Netherlands:

United States

     2 ppm

          Soybeans

     3 ppm

          Pineapples
          Bananas (0.3 ppm in edible pulp)

     5^ ppm

          Grain (Barley, oats, rice, rye, sorghum grain, wheat,
          cottonseed)

     6 ppm

          Crude Soybean Oil

     7_ ppm

          Fruits (stone, pome, citrus, cane and strawberries)
          Nuts (Hazel, hickory, pecan, walnut)
          Meat Fat (Beef, sheep, goat, swine, horse)
          Vegetables (Beans, black-eyed peas, broccoli, brussels  sprouts,
          cabbage, cauliflower, carrots, celery, collards,  corn,  cowpeas,
          eggplant, green beans, horseradish, kale, kohlrabi,  lettuce,
          lima beans, okra, onions, parsnips, peanuts,  peas, peppers,
          radishes, rutabagas, snap beans, spinach, tomatoes)

-------
                                                                  105
Canada

     3 ppm

          Oats, rye, wheat, pineapples

     5 ppm

          Barley, grain sorghum, rice

     7 ppm

          Fruits (citrus, peas, strawberries)
          Meat fat (cattle, goats, sheep, swine)
          Vegetables (beans, black-eyed peas, broccoli, brussels sprouts,
          cabbage, cauliflower, celery, eggplant, kohlrabi, lettuce,
          okra, onions, peas, tomatoes)

Germany

     0.4 ppm

          Pears, strawberries, raspberries, cherries, plums

The Netherlands

     0^.4 ppm
          Fruit, vegetables (except potatoes)


                         Residues in Food

     Toxaphene is registered for a variety of uses on food crops and

livestock.  During 1965-1968, FDA market-basket surveys showed toxaphene

to be virtually absent from these samples.  The frequency of occurrence

of toxaphene residues in these studies was less than that of the first

15 most commonly found pesticides.  The market— basket samples represent

the total diet of a 16-19 year-old male , and are obtained from retail

stores in 5 regions at bi-monthly intervals.  Food is prepared for

-------
                                                                   106







consumption and analyzed for pesticide residues using gas-liquid




chromatography methods.







     In the later period June 1968-April 1969, toxaphene was detected




in 13 of the 360 composite samples analyzed.  Range  of residues was




0.02 to 0.33 ppm in food categories, garden fruit, vegetables, and




meat fat.  DDT was the most frequently found residue being detected in




176 samples in the range of 0.003 to 0.47 ppm.







     FDA surveillance studies include an annual examination of about




25,000 samples.  These samples are taken objectively to characterize




the pesticide residues of food shipped and consumed in the United




States.  They are in addition to those that are analyzed in enforcement




programs designed to verify suspicions of excessive residues resulting




from pesticide misuse.







     A summary of the surveillance program results for toxaphene in




the period 1964-67 is given below using the food categories established




by FDA (see Table 1).  These data reflect the widespread usage of




toxaphene on vegetables and the retention of some of the residue in




the processed (canned, dried, or frozen) food.  Toxaphene residues were




sixth most frequent in occurrence of all pesticides in processed foods,




but few, if any, were in excess of the 7 ppm tolerance.

-------
                                                                  107
     Toxaphene finds its most intensive agricultural use on cotton.



It is also used to a lesser extent on other oil seed crops such as



soybeans, peanuts and corn.  Analysis of oil and other products derived



from these crops show toxaphene is found in about 30% of the cotton-



seed samples, 8% of the soybean samples and 2% of the peanut samples.



Above-tolerance residues have not been a problem either in the raw



agricultural commodities or in the processed oils and meals.  Table 2



is a summary of toxaphene residues found during 1964-1966 in oily crops.






                       Residues in Livestock
     Toxaphene residues can be accumulated in fat of animals from



ingestion and by dermal absorption.  The storage level is much less



than that of most other chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides, and an



equilibrium with the exposure level is rather quickly achieved.  Elimi-



nation of toxaphene from the fat is quite rapid when the input is



reduced.  Storage—feed ratios for various animal species are summarized



as follows:


                                        (a.)
                            Storage-feedv '        Observation
          Cattle

          Sheep

          Dog

          Rat
ratio
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.4
ppm in fat
Tat--ir* — i-= 	
Period
16 weeks
16 weeks
2 years
2 years

           / \ o_      c  j   *. •     ppm -in rat
           (a) Storage-feed ratio  =	:—^—-
                    &                ppm in feed
     The rapid elimination of toxaphene residues from the fat of neat



animals allows it to be used for ectoparasite control on livestock

-------
                                                                  108
within 28 days of slaughter.  Where shorter pre-slaughter intervals




are required, other pesticides must be used.




     USDA Meat and Poultry Inspection Programs have been established




to regularly examine tissues from meat animals and poultry slaughtered




in federally-inspected plants.  Total number of animal tissue samples




analyzed in the 27-month period from January, 1969 through March, 1971




was 7,265.  Of these, only 5 contained toxaphene residues.  In the




same period, of 5,504 poultry samples analyzed, 2 contained toxaphene.




A tabulation of these data is given in Table 3.  No residue levels




are given in this summary report.  Only 1-2% of the samples found to




contain any pesticide residues were above the tolerance limit.







                         Residues in Milk




     Consistent with the fat-storage properties of toxaphene in live-




stock, transmission of toxaphene residues to milk follows the same




pattern (8).  Equilibrium with input is reached within about one week,




and the ratio of toxaphene concentration in the feed to that in the




milk is about 100:1.  Excretion of toxaphene in milk declines quickly




when exposure ceases.




     In feeding trials, milk free of toxaphene residues was produced




within 2 weeks after cessation of feeding at levels of 10 ppm.  Fluid




milk or dairy products do not often contain toxaphene in FDA sur-




veillance programs.  At a feeding level of 20 ppm in the daily diet




for 11 weeks, toxaphene-free milk was produced A weeks after toxaphene-




containing feed was discontinued.

-------
                                                                  109
               Residue Decline - Controlled Studies




     Table 4 is  taken from the FAO-WHO monograph on toxaphene residues




in food.  It selectively.summarizes toxaphene residue data on repre-




sentative crops  when normal agricultural practices are followed.




     Half-lives  of toxaphene residues on growing leafy crops are in




the range of 5-10 days; residues from emulsifiable formulations are




typically higher than those from wettable powders or dusts.




     Studies of  toxaphene residues on alfalfa and clover show that




.half-lives  (corrected for crop growth dilution) are consistently in the




range of 9 to 13 days under widely varying climatic conditions.  Studies




were conducted in Arizona, California and Delaware.







                     Mechanism of Residue Loss
     Evaporation.  Summarized in Table 5 are data comparing volatility




of toxaphene with that of DDT.  These measurements as well as field




studies indicate that toxaphene is more volatile than DDT, and that




volatility can be a significant factor in the loss of toxaphene from




treated areas.  Tests of toxaphene volatility from thin film on glass




plates show greater loss of early-eluting GC components.  Examination




of field—weathered crop residues do not show evidence of such selective




loss, but are similar in composition to parent toxaphene.




     Toxaphene was easily washed from smooth glass surfaces by heavy




rains, in contrast to deposits on crops, which are much more resistant




to wash-off by rain.  Sunlight had little effect on the rate of loss

-------
                                                                  110
of thin films of toxaphene from glass plates.  Half-lives of 4 days




were found under conditions of indoor exposure at summer temperatures




ranging to 34°C.  Indoor exposure during winter months (19-24°C)




revealed a half-life of 26 days.  In an oven heated to 38 C, a half-




life of 3 days was observed.  Addition of alfalfa plant wax caused an




appreciable decrease in the rate of loss at 38°C, the observed half-




life being 8 days.




     Attempts to detect possible toxaphene metabolites.  The complex




composition of toxaphene has made explicit metabolic fate studies in




crops and animals impossible.  Early research workers have used non-




specific "total organic chloride" methods, lacking specificity, and




yet accounting for all of the chlorine-containing species, whether




parent compound or derived therefrom.  Other methods for analyzing




possible toxaphene metabolites were also unsuccessful, including




paper-and thin-layer chromatography and gas-liquid chromatography.




     There is no evidence for the existence of toxaphene conversion




products in weathered crop residues or in fat deposits from animals




exposed or fed with toxaphene.  Carter ^jt 
-------
                                                                  Ill
     Klein and Link  (6) examined residues on toxaphene-sprayed kale




and found that over 99% of the original residue was lost during the




first two weeks.  Gas chromatographic analysis of the residues indicated




a modest loss of early-eluting GLC components.  However, the composition




of the residue even after 4 weeks was readily recognizable as toxaphene




from the GLC elution pattern.




     Carlin (2) concluded that no toxaphene conversion products were




formed in alfalfa treated with toxaphene and allowed to weather.  These




conclusions were based on "total chloride" methods, electron capture




GLC, and bioassays, the last showing no greater toxicity than authentic




toxaphene.




     Possible metabolites of toxaphene.  Attempts to introduce functional




groups into toxaphene by in vitro chemical reaction have been unsuccess-




ful, and the availability of model compounds as authentic reference




standards for various separation and detection systems has been limited.




     Recently, samples of "keto-toxaphene" and "hydroxy-toxaphene" were




prepared by Buntin. (1)  Camphor was chlorinated to a value correspond-




ing to the addition of 7 atoms of chlorine.  The resulting "keto-




toxaphene," a viscous pale yellow liquid, was reduced with lithium




aluminum hydride to form "hydroxy-toxaphene."  These compounds are less




toxic to flies and rats than toxaphene; gas chromatography shows they




elute with the early peaks of toxaphene.




     Cleanup techniques applied to keto-toxaphene and hydroxy—toxaphene




show that the former survives fuming sulfuric acid, but that hydroxy-

-------
                                                                    112




 toxaphene does not.  Dehydrohalogenation (as applied to toxaphene prior


 to gas chrbmatography)'showed"-that'2 these 'compounds are retained^in  the


 alkaline'aqueous phase  when^it is  extracted with hexarie. nBoth-compounds


• are extracted" by hexane from-distilled1 wate"rr;-:-  -    .;,:-i^?,.  ..•••;•:> ;'• .: i



  '-'  r Weathered toxaphene residues  from alfalfa:were-exainined-for1 the -
                                                             o

 possible presence of' keto-toxaphene  or hydroxy-toxaphenei • No -evidence


 for their presence was  found  (2).
                     Metabolism in the Honey Bee


      A study of toxaphene residues in rape oil, honey, and bees was
 conducted by Jumar and Sieber  (5).   They prepared a   Cl-tagged toxaphene
• '..  "/ .'':.'  :_; ••   ;. •:.':•:•::'• -;^.,.;-".  i .-,  ...'".-'?.'.- : •:::.'. .-?;•:; ' .:. '.:. i?.-. :•  :  • •-':   j.'.:.

 and determined that residues were  transmitted to rape oil in the range


 of 0.3 to 1.5 ppm, depending on the  method of application to the rape


 plant.  Honey made by bees  exposed to the toxaphene-treated rape plants


 contained less than 0.01 ppm toxaphene.   The study on toxaphene in  the


 bee  employed 82Br-toxaphene  (one  Cl atom replaced by 82Br).  More  than


 95% of toxaphene absorbed by bees  from feeding was stored briefly in the


 body before release as a chlorine-containing water-soluble compound


 which was not identified.

-------
                                                                  113
                            REFERENCES
1.   Buntin, G. A. (1970).  Hercules Research Center, Wilmington,
     Delaware.  Unpublished Results.

2.   Carlin, F. J. (1970).  Hercules Research Center, Wilmington,
     Delaware.  Unpublished Results.

3.   Carter, R. H., Nelson, R. H., and Gersdorff, W.  A.  (1950).
     Organic-chlorine determinations as a measure of  insecticide
     residues in agricultural products.  Advances in  Chem.  1:  271-3.

4.   Hercules Research Center, Wilmington, Delaware.   Unpublished
     Results.

5.   Jumar, A. and Sieber, K. (1967).  Residue studies in rapeseed
     oil and honey with toxaphene - 36 Cl.  Z. Lebens,-  Unters,
     Forsch. 133: 357-364.

6.   Klein, A. K., and Link, J. D. (1967).  Field weathering of
     toxaphene and chlordane, J. Assoc. Off Anal. Chem.  50:  586-591.

7.   Lloyd-Jones, C.  P. (1971).  Evaporation of DDT.   Nature 229:
     65-66.

8.   Zweig, G., Pye,  E. L., Sitlani, R., and Peoples, S. A.  (1963).
     Residues in milk from dairy cows fed low levels  of  toxaphene
     in their daily ration.  J. Agr. Food Chem. 11: 70.

-------
                                                               114
                           TABLE 1
      DOMESTIC FOODS SURVEILLANCE BY FDA — 1964 to 1967
                                       Toxaphene Residues
       Food Category

Large Fruits
Small Fruits
Grains and Cereals for
  human use
Leaf and Stem Vegetables
Vine and Ear Vegetables
Root Vegetables
Beans
Eggs
Nuts
Processed Foods
Grains (animal)
Fluid Milk (fat basis)
Dairy Products (fat basis)
Incidence
 Percent
   0.3
   1.3
   0.3

   6.4
   1.4
   1.1
   0.9
   0.2
   0.3
   5.0
   0.1
Average
  ppm
  T*
  0.01
  T

  0.18
  0.01
  T
  T
  T
  T
  0.45
  T
     T* = < 0.005 ppm (trace)

-------
                           TABLE 2


                Summary of Toxaphene Residues

        In Oil Seeds, Oils, and By-Products (1964-66)
Toxaphene
Incidence Average

SOYBEANS
Crude Oil
Meal (cake)
Refined Oil
PEANUTS
Crude Oil
Meal (cake)
Refined Oil
COTTONSEED
Crude Oil
Meal (cale)
Refined Oil
CORN GRAIN
Crude Oil
Refined Oil
Percent

8.0
4.1
_*
4.3
1.7
2.8
_*
_*
30.4
1.3
1.1
12.2
_*
_*
_*
ppm

0.004
0.024
**T
0.006
0.008
0.023
0.010
0.003
0.140


  *  Signifies not detected
**T  Signifies less than 0.001 ppm

-------
                                                             116
                            TABLE 3




                  Chlorinated  Pesticide  Residues




                   In Meat  and Poultry 1969-1971






(Frequency of a specific residue in animal and poultry tissue)
Animal
Pesticide
Aldrin
BHC
Chlordane
Dieldrin
DDT + me tab.
Endrin
Heptachlor
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Toxaphene
Total with residue
Total Samples
Total over limits
1969
14
523
2
1,336
2,671
27
752
505
74
2
2,907
3,169
35
1970
66
610
2
1,549
2,835
104
1,006
425
39
3
3,238
3,528
55
3 mo. 1971
2
59
1
219
402
18
61
34
13 '
0
473
568
4
1969
6
294
0
1,639
2,187
87
313
197
28
2
2,181
2,199
10
Poultry
1970
51
517
0
2,270
2,850
111
877
242
27
0
2,951
2,999
33
3 mo. 1971
0
14
0
138
299
29
54
13
0
0
303
306
2

-------
                       TABLE 4




Toxaphene Residues Resulting From Supervised Trials
117


Vegetables
Lettuce
Kale
Cabbage
Spinach
Celery

Cauliflower
Broccoli

Tomatoes
Greenbeans
Lima Beans
Carrots
Potatoes
Field Peas
Oil Seeds
Cotton (seed)
Soybeans
Peanuts
(shelled)
Fruit
Oranges

Bananas
Pineapple
Cereal Grains
Wheat
Barley
Oats
Rice
Sorghum
Corn (maize)
Fat of Meat
Animals
Beef
Swine
Shelled Nuts
Almonds
Rate of
Application
(kg/ha)


5.5
5.0
1.9-12
5.0
1.1-1.6

3.8
10

1.3-2.5
7.5
3.9
25
0.95-2.5
2.5

3.9-5.0
3.8

25-50

5.7

3.8
2.8

1.9-3.8
1.9-3.8
1.9-3.8
1.9-3.8
2.5
2.5


0.5%
0.5%

4.0
No. of
Treat-
ments


1-1
4
2-6
4
9

1
1

8-9
1
1
2-4
6
,. 3

15
3

1

2

1
2

1
1
1
1
1
1


12
2

3
Pre-harvest*
Interval
(days)


10
36
9-38
30
13

8
8

5-7
7
14

21
4

6
60



7-70

1
81-96

14-21
7-28
7
7-28
28
12


28
28

136
Residue
at Harvest
(ppm)


5.8-7.9
3.3-7.2
0.8-6.6
16.7-18.8
1.8 stalks
6 . 5 leaves
1.1
3.4

2.0-4.3
1.3
0.3
0.9-3.3
0 detected
1.8

3.6-5.2
0.5

0 detected

0-10.9 skins
0-0.3 pulp
0.3-1.3
1.3-2.7

0.5-1.8
0.7-14.2
1.0-2.6
1.5-5,6
2.5-3.1
0.08 kernals


5.0
0-0.6

1.5
Comments



whole head

on outer leaves

washed

(processed com-
mercially & frozen
before analysis)

unwashed
shelled beans
soil applic. 1 yr.



lint bearing seed


soil treat.



whole fruit
whole fruit




unfinished grain




12 weekly sprays
2 sprays



-------
                                                                          118
                                   Table 5




                 Evaporation Rates — DDT(7) vs. Toxaphene(4)
                      \j



                                               yg/cm2/hr         Ibs/acre/year
          Conditions                        DDT     Toxaphene    DDT  Toxaphene

Room Temperature - no sunlight           2 x 10"3    5 x 10~3    1.6    3.9

Outdoors                                 3 x I0"k  6.4 x 10~3    0.2    5.0

Outdoors - 20°C, 10 mph wind             1 x 10"3                0.8

Framglass, summer                                                2.0

Framglass, winter                                                0.3

32-38°C,  (oven) - toxaphene alone                 11.9 x 10-3           9.3

32-38°C,  (oven) - toxaphene + alfalfa wax          1.7 x 10~3           1.3

-------
                              Table 6









                 Comparison of Toxicity of Toxaphene




                    with Hypothetical Metabolites
                                                                   119
                          Housefly  Bioassay
     Compound
                              LC
                                50!
(a)  From earlier test
Toxicity Ratio
Toxaphene standard
Keto-toxaphene
Hydroxy-toxaphene
0.052
0.17
0.32
1
1/3
1/6
Rat Toxicity
Rat Toxicity
Compound

Toxaphene standard (a)
Ke to- toxaphene
Hydroxy-toxaphene
.LD_n, mg/kg
50'

120
425
>1,080
Toxicity Ratio

1
I/A
>l/9

-------
                                                                  120
                      TOXICOLOGY IN MAN AND ANIMALS
     Acute toxicity and pharmacological actions.  Acutely toxic doses




of toxaphene produce effects that are typical of the chlorinated hydro-




carbon insecticides (1, 5, 12).  Symptoms include salivation, spasms




of the leg and back muscles, nausea, vomiting, hyperexcitability, tremors,




chronic convulsions and tetanic contractions of all skeletal muscles.




     Most of these effects are the results of diffuse stimulation of the




cerebrospinal axis.  After lethal doses the convulsions continue until




death occurs.  Respiration is arrested due to tetanic muscular contractions




and then increases in amplitude and rate as the muscles relax (17, 18).




     Toxic symptoms begin within an hour and death occurs in 4 to 8




hours, but may be delayed as long as 24 hours after lethal doses.  The




pathological changes in acute toxaphene poisoning consist of petechial




hemorrhages and congestion in the brain, lungs, spinal cord, heart and




intestine.  Pulmonary edema and focal areas of degeneration in the brain




and spinal cord are also present.




     The basic mechanism responsible for the toxicity of toxaphene is




unknown since no studies on this aspect of the toxicology of toxaphene




have been reported.  However, due to the close similarity between the




pharmacological actions of toxaphene and DDT, it seems likely that




findings made on the action of DDT will be applicable to toxaphene.  The




similarity between the pharmacological actions of toxaphene and DDT is

-------
                                                                    121
   substantiated by the  fact  that phenobarbital and other barbiturates




   effectively treat acute poisoning by both compounds.




        The pharmacological actions  of  toxaphene and  its mammalian  toxicity




   have been known for almost 20 years.  As  a result, the references




   commonly used as sources of information for diagnosis and  emergency




   treatment of pesticide  poisoning  (4,  10,  11, 20) contain essential




   information needed to prevent and treat toxaphene  poisoning.




        The acute  toxicity of toxaphene was  measured  in a number of species.




   A comparison of the oral and dermal  toxicity of several chlorinated




   hydrocarbon insecticides in rats  under standardized conditions was




   published by Gaines (8).   Table I contains data from that  report.  For




   oral administration,  the compounds were dissolved  or suspended in peanut




   oil  and  for dermal application xylene solutions were used.







                                 TABLE  1




   Acute Oral and  Dermal LD,.- Values for Toxaphene and Other  Chlorinated




                           Hydrocarbons  to Rats (a)
Compound
Toxaphene
DDT
Chlordane
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Oral LD3
Males
90
113
335
39
46
18
0 (mg/kg)
Females
80
118
430
60
46
8
Dermal LI
Males
1075
-
840
98
90
-
)5Q (mg/kg)
Females
780
2510
690
98
60
15
(a) Data  from Caines  (8)

-------
                                                                    122
                                                 o






       The data in Table 1 show that toxaphene resembles DDT in acute




  oral toxicity to rats but is more toxic by single dose dermal applica-




  tion than DDT.  A number of factors influence the toxicity of toxaphene.




  The route of administration, the solvent used for the tests, and the




  species must be considered in evaluating the potential hazard.  Informa-




  tion on the influence of these factors on the toxicity of toxaphene was




  obtained by compiling the acute toxicity data in the literature.




       The data in Table 2 show the range of variation in toxicity of toxa-




  phene given orally to several common species.
                                 Table 2




                      Acute Toxicity of Toxaphene (a)
Species
Rat
Rat
Rat
Mouse
Dog
Dog
Guinea pig
Guinea pig
Cat
Rabbit
Rabbit
Cattle
Goat
Sheep
Rat
Rabbit
Rabbit
Route
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
oral
dermal
dermal
dermal
LD50
(mg/kg)
90
60
120
112
49
>250
270
365
25-40
75-100
250-500
144
200
200
930
>4000
< 250
Vehicle
peanut oil
corn oil
kerosene
corn oil
corn oil
kerosene
corn oil
kerosene
peanut oil
peanut oil
kerosene
grain
xylene
xylene
xylene
dust
peanut oil
(a) Bulletin by Hercules Incorporated (12)

-------
                                                                  123






     Assuming man resembles the most sensitive experimental species, the




lethal dose for a 70 kg adult would be around 2 to 3.5g.  The fatal dose




for man was estimated to be from 2 to 7g (1, 4, 10).




     Acute toxaphene poisoning in humans is rare.  When this material was




first  used (17),  four cases  of poisoning by ingestion in children under




4 years of age were reported occurred.  The same report contained a




description of severe toxaphene poisoning in adults following misuse of




the pesticide in agriculture.  The quantity of toxaphene estimated to




have been ingested by three of the people ranged from 9.5 to 47 mg/kg.




     Due-to the long period of use and experience with toxaphene and its




moderate toxicity, accidental poisoning by this insecticide is now




extremely uncommon.  In contrast, accidental poisoning by possible




substitutes such as the organophosphorus insecticides are expected to




exceed those that resulted from toxaphene because of the higher toxicity




of the organophosphates.




     Inhalation of toxaphene can cause irritation of the respiratory tract.




Warraki (22) has described acute bronchopneumonia with miliary shadows in




two men with an occupational history of heavy and prolonged exposure to




toxaphene sprays.  The threshold limit value for atmospheric levels of




toxaphene has been established at 0.5 mg per cubic meter of air (7).




     Subacute toxicity.  The subacute toxicity of toxaphene was studied




by Ortega et al., (19) in small groups of rats fed 50 and 200 ppm in the




diet.  These dietary levels produced no clinical signs of toxicity or




inhibition of food consumption or growth rate.  Only the livers, spleens




and kidneys were examined histologically.  There was no damage to the

-------
                                                                  124
kidney or spleen but the livers of 3 of 12 rats that received 50 ppm




showed slight liver changes.  Six of 12 rats fed 200 ppm showed distinct




liver changes.




     A subacute toxicity study on dogs was done (16) in which two dogs




received 4 rag/kg (about 160 ppm) for 44 days and two other dogs received




the same dose for 106 days.  There was occasional central nervous system




stimulation for a short time after administration.  Degenerative changes




in the kidney tubules and liver parenchyma were seen.




     Cattle and sheep were fed toxaphene at concentrations as high as




320 ppm in the diet for 134 and 151 days.  At the highest level (320 ppm)




two steers showed central nervous system stimulation with tremors.  There




was no hematological or pathological changes in the tissues.




     Chronic toxicity.  The chronic toxicity of toxaphene has been




studied in rats using the conventional 2-year feeding period at levels




of 25, 100 and 400 ppm in the diet (6).  Only the liver showed signi-




ficant changes at the 100 and 400 ppm levels.




     In dogs fed 40 ppm of toxaphene in the diet for 2 years there was




slight degeneration of the liver, and at 200 ppm moderate degeneration




of the liver occurred (21).  There were no liver changes in groups of




2 dogs fed 5, 10 or 20 ppm of toxaphene for 2 years (2).




     Reproduction, teratology and mutagenesis.  A three-generation re-




production study was conducted on rats fed 25 and 100 ppm toxaphene (14).




This study was carried out using the currently accepted protocol with




respect to numbers of animals and the types of measurements that were made.

-------
                                                                  125






There were no  differences between control and  toxaphene-treated rats in




reproductive performance, fertility, lactation, or the viability, size and




anatomical structure of progeny.




     An  earlier study was done on pheasants fed 100 and 300 ppm of




toxaphene (9).  The 300 ppm level caused a decrease in egg laying and




hatchability and  in the food intake and weight gain.  Both dose levels




caused greater mortality in young pheasants during the first 2 weeks after




hatching than was observed in the controls.




     No  evidence  of a carcinogenic action by toxaphene was obtained  in




the chronic toxicity studies described above.  A recent experiment (13)




was conducted  to  detect turmorigenicity of pesticides by oral administra-




tion of  maximum tolerated doses to mice starting at 7 days of age and




continuing to  4 weeks of age.  From 4 weeks of age until 18 months of




age, the chemicals were fed in the diet at levels near the maximum tolerated




dose.  Toxaphene was not included in that study but the closely related




material, strobane, given at a daily dose of 4.64 mg/kg caused a higher




incidence of lymphomas than was seen in controls.  No studies on the




possible mutagenic effects of toxaphene have been reported.




     Interactions.  Toxaphene can change the toxicity of drugs and other




chemicals detoxified by hepatic microsomal enzymes and alter steroid




metabolism because it induces synthesis of hepatic microsomal enzymes




(15).  Dose-response relationships for enzyme induction by toxaphene




were measured by  feeding various dietary levels to rats for 13 weeks.




The lowest dietary level of toxaphene that cause induction of one or more




of the three microsomal enzyme systems studied was 5 ppm.

-------
                                                                  126
                                 o
Maximum induction occurred within the first 3 weeks of the feeding
period at all levels of toxaphene that cause enzyme induction.  After
this time the activity was maintained at a constant elevated level until
feeding of the pesticide was discontinued.
     These results show that levels of 5 ppm and higher could alter the
metabolism rate of other chemicals.  Similar enzyme induction was
obtained with DDT at a dietary level of 1 ppm.  'No similar quantitative
measurements of dose-response relationships for enzyme induction with
toxaphene were conducted on other species.
     Except for interactions caused by enzyme induction, there have been
no studies showing any other type of interactions that could be caused
by toxaphene.
     Tissue residues.  Toxaphene accumulates in the fat of man and
animals.  With any given rate of subacute intake, a certain storage level
is attained with no build up above this level, and when the intake of
toxaphene is stopped the residue rapidly decreased (3).
     The storage level of toxaphene is lower and elimination is more
rapid .than with most other chlorinated hydrocarbons.  In cattle and
sheep ,the storage level in fat is one-fourth to one-half of the level in
the feed.  The storage level in fat of hogs is somewhat less than in
other .livestock probably because of the greater total fat content.  No
residue studies were reported on human tissues.  Future analysis of
autopsy material for pesticide levels should include toxaphene.

-------
                                                                  127
                               Summary




     The mammalian toxicity of toxaphene was measured in various




experimental animals.  Since toxaphene was one of the earliest chlori-




nated hydrocarbons intoduced into widespread use, the toxicity studies




conducted over 20 years ago are summarized in most of the common refer-




ences on the toxicity, diagnosis and treatment of poisoning by pesticides.




     A few cases of fatal accidental poisoning from ingestion of toxaphene




occurred during the early period of the practical use of toxaphene.




Evaluation of the acute toxicity of toxaphene and its pharmacological




actions is adequate as it resembles other chlorinated hydrocarbon insecti-




cides in many respects.




     Measurements of the subacute and chronic toxicity of toxaphene in




experimental animals revealed that repeated high doses cause central




nervous system excitation and liver injury.  The latter effect occurs at




lower doses fed to animals over a prolonged period.  However, no liver




injury occurred when rats were fed 25 ppm of toxaphene or when dogs




were fed 20 ppm of toxaphene for two years.




     The conventional three generation rat reproduction study showed no




adverse reproductive or congenital effects by toxaphene in this species




at dietary levels of 25 and 100 ppm.  Egg production and hatchability




decreased in pheasants fed 300 ppm and at this level, as well as 100 ppm,




there was greater mortality of young pheasants during the first 2 weeks




after hatching.

-------
                                                                      128






     The conventional 2-year feeding studies in rats and dogs showed no




evidence that toxaphene is carcinogenic.   However, a different type of




exposure in which young mice were treated from 7 days to 18 mo of age with




a maximum tolerated dose indicated that Strobane caused a higher incidence




of lymphomas than was seen in control mice.  Toxaphene has not yet been




tested for mutagenicity.




     The pattern of uptake and storage of toxaphene in animal tissues is




biochemically similar but quantitatively different from most other




chlorinated hydrocarbons.  The level of uptake is lower and the rate of




elimination more rapid than with most other chlorinated hydrocarbons.




     The metabolism of toxaphene, including the use of isotope-labeled




material, has received very little attention.  Most investigators are




reluctant to study a substance that is a mixture of related compounds




rather than a single chemical agent.




     Toxaphene causes induction of hepatic microsomal enzymes when




dietary levels of at least 5 ppm are fed to rats.  There is no evidence




that toxaphene could change the toxicity of other chemicals through any




mechanism other than enzyme induction.

-------
                                                                   129
                            REFERENCES
 1.  Amer. Med. Assoc. Committee on Pesticides, (1952).  Pharmacological
     properties of toxaphene, a chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide.
     J. A. M.A. 149: 1135-1137.

 2.  Calandra, J. C. (1965).  Unpublished report of Industrial Bio-Test
     Laboratories, Inc.

 3.  Claborn, H. V., Radeleff, R. D., and Bushland, R. C. (1960).  Pesti-
     cide residues in meat and milk.  United States Department of Agri-
     culture, ARS, 33-36.

 4.  Dreisbach, R. H.  (1969)  Handbook of Poisoning.  Diagnosis and
     Treatment, 6th Edition.  Lange Medical Publications, Los Altos,
     California. 91-93 pp.

 5.  FAO/WHO-(1968).  Evaluations of some pesticide residues in food.
     267-283 pp.

 6.  Fitzhugh, 0. G., and Nelson, A. A. (1951).  Comparison of chronic
     effects produced in rats by several chlorinated hydrocarbon in-
     secticides.  Fed. Proc. 10, 295.

 7.  Gafafer, W. M. (1964).  Occupational Diseases, A Guide to Their
     Recognition.  U. S. Public Health Service, Division of Occupational
     Health.  244 pp.

 8.  Gaines, T. B. (1960).  The acute toxicity of pesticides to rats.
     Toxicol.  Appl. Pharm. 2, 88-99.

 9.  Genelly, R. E. and Rudd, R. L. (1958).  Effects of DDT, toxaphene,
     and dieldrin on pheasant reproduction.  Auk.  73:529-539.  Chem.
     Abstr. 52: 1658c.

10.  Gleason, M. W., Gosselin, R. E., Hodge, H. C., and Smith. R. P.
     (1969).  Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products.  3rd Edition.
     The Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore,  p 222.

11.  Hayes, W. J. (1963).  Clinical Handbook on Economic Poisons.  Emer-
     gency Information for Treating Poisons,  U, S. Dept. of Health, Edu-
     cation and Welfare, Communicable Disease Center.

12.  Hercules Inc.  (1970).  Toxaphene, use patters and environmental
     aspects.  Bull. 172 pp.

13.  Innes, J. R. M., Ulland, B. M., Valerio, M. G., Petrucelli, L. ,
     Fishbein, L., Hart, E. R., Pallotta,  A. J., Bates, R.  R., Falk,
     H. L., Gart, J. J., Klein, M., Mitchell, I., and Peters, J. (1969).
     Bioassay of pesticides and industrial chemicals for tumorigenicity
     in mice; A preliminary note.  J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 42(11): 1-1114.

-------
                                                                   130
14.  Kennedy, G., Frawley, J. P., and Calandra, J. C. Multi-generation
     reproduction study in rats fed Delnav, Herban, and toxaphene.
     Toxicol. App. Pharmacol.  (Accepted for publication.)

15.  Kinoshita, F. K., Frawley, J. P., and DuBois, K. P. (1966).
     Quantitative measurement of induction of hepatic microsomal enzymes
     by various dietary levels of DDT and toxaphene in rats.  Toxicol.
     Appl. Pharmacol. 9: 505-513.

16.  Lackey, R. W. (1949).  Observations on the acute and chronic toxicity
     of toxaphene in the dog.  J. Ind. Hyg. Toxicol. 31: 117-120.

17.  McGee, L. C., Reed, H. L., and Fleming, J. P. (1952).  Accidental
     poisoning by toxaphene.  J.A.M.A. 149: 1124-1126.

18.  Negherbon, W. 0. (1959).  Toxaphene.  Handbook of Toxicology.  Vol.
     III.  Insecticides, a compendium.  754-769 pp.

19.  Ortega, P., Hayes, W. J., and Durham, W. F.  (1951).  Pathologic
     changes in the liver or rats after feeding low levels of various
     insecticides.  A.M.A. Arch. Pathol. 64: 614-622.

20.  von Oettingen, W. F. Poisoning.  A Guide to clinical Diagnosis and
     Treatment.  2nd Edition.  W. B. Saunders Co. p. 577 (1958).

21.  Treon, J. F., Cleveland, F., Poynter, B., Wagner, B., and Gahegan,
     T. (1952).  The physiologic effects of feeding experimental animals
     on diets containing toxaphene in various concentrations over pro-
     longed periods.  Unpublished report of the Kettering Laboratory.

22.  Warraki, S.  (1963)  Respiratory hazards of chlorinated camphene.
     Arch. Environ. Health 7: 253-256.

-------
                                                                131
                       TOXAPHENE RESISTANCE

                          IN ARTHROPODS


     Some insects have always been able to survive the most effective

insecticidal treatments that man has been able to devise.  Insect re-

sistance to insecticides was first realized in 1908, when the San Jose

scale developed resistance to lime-sulphur in the State of Washington.

The term resistance is used here to describe an insect population which

consistently exhibits greater survival from repeated exposures to a

chemical insecticide than was noticed when the chemical was first used

(16).  The World Health Organization Expert Committee on Insecticides

(7), proposed the following definition:

     "Resistance to insecticides is the development of an ability
     in a strain of insects to tolerate doses of toxicants which
     would prove lethal to the majority of individuals in a normal
     population of the same species.  The term "behavioristic" re-
     sistance describes the development of the ability to avoid a
     dose which would prove lethal."

     The "behavioristic resistance" concept is associated with the feed-

ing preferences or the avoidance of a chemical deposit.  For example,

certain mosquitoes may move away from an insecticidal before absoring a

lethal dose or they may not remain on an insecticidally treated surface

long enough to be poisoned before being stimulated to fly away.  Thus,

they have developed behavioral traits which prevent them from being

poisoned by certain chemicals.

     There are two types of resistance to chlorinated hydrocarbon, in-

secticides:  (1)   to DDT and its analogues,  and (2) to the cycLodiene

derivatives such as dieldrin, chlordane,  toxaphene and gamma-BHC.   In-

sects, made DDT-resistant with DDT selection pressure are cross-resistant

-------
                                                                 132




to DDD, and  resistant to methoxychlor and perthane, but not the cyclo-




diene derivatives, toxaphene or BHC.  Insects made dieldrin-resistant




by dieldrin selection pressure are cross-resistant to the other cyclo-




diene derivatives and to BHC, but not to DDT and its relatives.  Cyclo-




diene-resistant strains of insects are cross-resistant to gamma BHC,




and gamma BHC-resistant insects are cross-resistant to cyclodienes.




Cyclodiene-resistant strains are apparently always resistant to toxa-




phene (7, 8).




     According to Brown (8), all cases of resistance to dieldrin and




other cyclodiene derivatives, and to BHC involves resistance to toxa-




phene also.  Where the word toxaphene or dieldrin is listed under in-




secticide (Table 1), it is because this type of cyclodiene-BHC-resistance




was induced under toxaphene or dieldrin pressure.




     Several authors  (5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 19, 20, 23) have reviewed the




literature on insect resistance.  The mechanism of resistance to cyclo-




diene derivatives such as dieldrin, endrin and heptachlor still is un-




known.  The well-known cyclodiene-resistant strains of the boll weevil




do not absorb less dieldrin than nonresistant strains and apparently do




not detoxify this compound.




     The nerves of cyclodiene-resistant flies refract high levels of




dieldrin, which means the composition of the ganglia may be crucial for




developing this kind of resistance.  The excretory activity of the




Malpighian tubules is inhibited by dieldrin.  Cyclodiene-resistant flies




continue to excrete dieldrin long after susceptible flies have ceased




activity, but this may be a consequence, not a cause.

-------
                                                                  133







     Some BHC-resistant flies absorb gamma BHC at a lower rate .than




normal resistant flies.  However, the lower rate of absorption and higher




detoxification does not fully explain BHC-resistance.  As with cyclo-




dienes, resistance apparently resides in the ganglia themselves.




     Insecticide-resistant pests are a problem in both agricultural and




medical entomology.  Melander (21) is generally credited with publishing




the first report of an insect developing resistance to an insecticide.




In field experiments conducted at several locations in the State of




Washington, Melander found that San Jose scale was resistant to lime-




sulphur at Clarkston.  Flint also (12) reported the same findings in




Illinois.  The examples of resistance to lime-sulphur, lead arsenate,




hydrogen cyanide, phenothiazine and tarter emetic are discussed in the




reviews.




     In 1946, 2 years after the introduction of DDT, housefly resistance




to this compound was demonstrated in Italy and Sweden.  In 1947, DDT re-




sistance in the housefly appeared in Egypt and New York and in 1948




was reported in many state in the United States.  Resistance of the house-




fly to DDT led many scientists to study the physiology, mechanism and




genetics of resistance.  Many of these studies included the other organo-




chlorines.  Most scientists agree that cyclodiene-resistance is com-




pletely separate from DDT resistance.  By 1962, the housefly was resistant




to the BHC-dieldrin group in the United States, Scandinavia, South




America, Africa, USSR, Japan, India, Caribbean and Romania.




     It is estimated that DDT-resistance developed in the housefly two




years after the introduction of DDT, and cyclodiene-resistance usually




develops within one year after the substitution of BHC or dieldrin.

-------
                                                                   134







     Thirty-six species of Anopheles are resistant to dieldrin in various




countries of the world.  Twelve species of Culicine mosquitoes are re-




sistant to the BHC-dieldrin group of insecticides (13).




     DDT-resistance first appeared in the body louse during 1951 in Korea




(11).  At this time, toxaphene gave complete kill of the DDT-resistant




lice, indicating they were not resistant to toxaphene.  Later, BHC-




resistant strains appeared in Japan that were also resistant to toxa-




phene.  Malathion is now used to control the BHC-resistant lice.




     Seven species of ticks are resistant to the BHC-dieldrin group of




insecticides; (8, 34, 36) two of these species are found in the United




States.




     The boll weevil developed resistance to the chlorinated hydrocarbon




insecticides, i.e., endrin, heptachlor, dieldrin and toxaphene (26, 27)




in 1955.  Soon after the first report of chlorinated hydrocarbon-resistance




in the boll weevil in Louisiana, resistant weevils were reported in Texas




(31), in most of the other cotton growing states where weevils occur




(4, 17, 24), and in Mexico and Venezuela (8).




     Cyclodiene resistance now has been reported in at least 18 species




of insects that attack cotton.  This list includes:  boll weevil (17, 27,




31); bollworm (2); tobacco budworm (1, 2); cabbage looper (4); cotton




leafworm (4); cotton fleahopper (24); Lygus sp. (3, 22); thrips spp. (25,




30); and salt-marsh caterpillar (29, 32).  According to Brown (8) there




also has been a marked increase in the past five years in the number of




cyclodiene-resistant species of tobacco, rice and stored products insects.




     Toxaphene-resistance in the Egyptian cotton leafworrn had al.most as

-------
                                                                   135







drastic an effect on cotton production in Egypt as the development of in-




secticide resistance in the boll weevil in the U. S.  BHC-resistance of




the sugar-cane borer in Trinidad and -the rice stem borer in Japan has




also caused similar crises in agricultural production.




     The resistance to aldrin, dieldrin and heptachlor in soil insects




has become widespread.  Three species of wireworms are resistant to cyclo-




diene insecticides.  Dieldrin resistance in the onion maggot, cabbage




maggot and carrot rust fly is now widespread and has increased in the




seed corn maggot and turnip maggot.  Insecticide resistance also has been




developed by four species of Diabrotica root worms, the alfalfa weevil




and white fringed beetle.^''




                              Summary




     Cyclodiene-resistant strains of insects are cross-resistant to gamma




BHC and gamma BHC-resistant insects are cross-resistant to the cyclodienes.




Cyclodiene-resistant strains are apparently always resistant to toxaphene.




     Among the 149 insect species that have developed resistance to




toxaphene, BHC, organochlorine insecticides and cyclodiene derivatives,




65 are of agricultural importance and 84 of public health or veterinary




importance.   The list of resistant agricultural pests include such im-




portant crop pests as the boll weevil, bollworm, tobacco budworm, cab-




bage looper, cotton fleahopper, rice steam borer and others; while the




list of resistant public health pests include 26 species of Anopheles




and 12 species of culicine mosquitoes as well as many ticks, flies, lice,




roaches, etc.

-------
                                                                        136
                                    Table 1.


   Tabulation of Pests Reported to be Resistant to Toxaphene, BHC,

Organochlorine Insecticides and Cyclodiene Derivatives (a).
Pest
Insecticides
 Location
Beet armyworm
Spodoptera exigua

Boll weevil
Anthonomus "grandis
Bollworm
Heliothis zea

Cabbage looper
Trichoplusia ni
Cotton leaf worm
Alabama argillacea

Spodoptera littoralis

Lygus hesperus

Salt marsh caterpillar
Estigmene acraea

Stink bug
Euschistus conspersus

Frankliniella occidentalis
   Cotton

Organochlorine com-
  pounds

Organochlorine com-
  pounds
Toxaphene - DDT
Organochlorine com-
  pounds

Endrin and Toxaphene

Organochlorine com-
  pounds

Toxaphene

Toxaphene

Toxaphene, DDT
  Endrin

Organochlorine com-
  pounds

Organochlorine com-
  pounds
 Ariz., Ark., Calif.,
 Miss.

 Ala., Ark., Geo.,
 La., Miss., N.C.,
 Oklah., S.C., Tenn.
Tex., Mex., Venezuela

 Texas
 Ala., Ark., Calif.
 La., Miss., Okla

 Ariz.

 Ark., La., Tex.,
 Venezuela, Colombia

 Egypt, India

 Calif.

 Ariz., Calif.


 Calif.


 Texas
                                 Toxaphene
                          New Mexico

-------
                                                                        137
Pest
Insecticides
Location
Thrips
tabaci

Anomis texana

Tobacco budworm
Heliothis virescens
Cotton fleahopper
Pseudatomoscelis serlatus

Cotton leaf perforator
Bucculatrix thurberiella

Cotton aphid
Aphis gossypii
Spiny bollworm
Earias insulana

Cotton stainer
Dysdercus peruvianus
Sugarcane Froghopper
Aeneolamia varia

Sugarcane borer
Diatraea saccharalia
Tomato hornworm
Protoparce sexta

Dark sided cutworm
Euxoa messoria

Sandhill cutworm
Euxoa detersa
Organochlorine com-
  pounds

Toxaphene

Strobane plus DDT


Toxaphene plus DDT

Endrin

Chlorinated hydrocar-
  bons

Chlorinated hydrocar-
  bons

BHC


Endrin


BHC
                                    Sugarcane
BHC
Endrin
                                    Tobacco
Endrin
Dieldrin
Aldrin
Texas


Peru

Texas


Texas

La., Miss., Tex.,

S.E. USA


Calif.


S.E. USA


Israel, Spain


Peru
Trinidad
La.
S.C., N.C.
Ont.
Ont.

-------
                                                                         138
Pest
Insecticides
Location
Potatoe tuber moth
Phthorimaea opercullella
Rice leaf beetle
Lema oryzae

Rice stem borer
Chilo suppressalis

Rice water weevil
Lissorhoptrus oryzophilus
Smaller brown plant hopper
Delphacodes striatella

Rice paddy bug
Leptocoris varicornis

Black rice bug
Scotinophora lurdia
Red flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum

Rice weevil
Sitophilus oryzal

Granary weevil
Sitophilus granarius

Maize weevil
Sitophilus zeamais
Black cutworm
Agrotis ypsilon

Singhara beetle
Galerucella birmancia

Chinch bug
Blissus pulchellus
Endrin


   Rice


BHC


BHC


Aldrin


BHC


BHC, Endrin


BHC


Stored Products

BHC


BHC


BHC


BHC


Miscellaneous

Aldrin


BHC


BHC
Queensland
Japan
Japan, Taiwan
Ark., La., Miss.,
Tex.

Japan
Ceylon, Thailand
Taiwan
Kenya
England, Queensland
S. Africa
Kenya
Brazil, Taiwan
N. India
Panama

-------
                                                                         139
Pest
Insecticides
                                                           Location
Coca capsid
Distantiella theobroma

Wooly apple aphid
Eriosoma lanigerum

Pear psylla
Psylla pyricola

Brown coca capsid
Sahlbergiella singularis

Citrus thrips
Scirtothrips citri

Banana tree weevil
Cosmopolites sordidus

Tuber flea beetle
Epitrix tuberis

Potato beetle
Leptinotarsa decomlineata
Strawberry aphid
Chaetosiphon fragaefolii

Serpentine leaf miner
Liriomyza archboldi
Southern potato wireworm
Conoderus fallii

Tobacco wireworm
Conoderus vespertinus

Sugarbeet wireworm
Limonius californicus

Western corn rootworm
Di.ibrolica virgifera

Northern corn rootworm
Diabrotica longicornis
BHC


BHC


Dieldrin


BHC


Dieldrin


Dieldrin


Dieldrin


BHC


Endosulfan


Aldrin


Soil Insects

Chlordane


Dieldrin


Aldrin


Aldrin


Aldrin
Ghana, Nigeria


Queensland


Washington


Nigeria


Calif.
Guinea, Ivory
Coast, Cameroun

B.C.
Europe
Wash.
Florida
S.C.
N.C.
Washington
Nebr., Kan., S.D.
Iowa, Mo., Minn.

S.D., Ohio, 111.,

-------
                                                                         140
Pest
Insecticides
Location
Southern corn rootworm           Aldrin
Diabrotica undecimpunctata

Banded cucumber beetle           Aldrin
Diabrotica balteata
                          N.C.,  Va.


                          La.,  S. C.
Alfalfa weevil
Hypera postica
White fringed beetle
Graphognathus leucoloma

Onion maggot
Hylemya antiqua
Bean seed maggot
Hylemya liturata

Cabbage maggot
Hylemya brassicae
Seed corn maggot
Hylemya platura

Turnip maggot
Hylemya floralis
Barley fly
Hylemya arambougi

Spotted root maggot
Euxesta notata
Heptachlor
Dieldrin
Dieldrin
Dieldrin
Dieldrin
Dieldrin
Heptachlor
Dieldrin
Dieldrin
Utah, Mont., Wyo.,
Nev., Calif., Va., Md;  ,
N.Y., Pa., Del., N.C.,

Ala.
Wis., Mich., Ont., Wash.,
Ore., B.C., 111., N.Y.,
Man. Que., Minn., Me.,
Ohio, France, Holland,
Japan

Ont., Conn., Que.,
Nfld.

Ill, Wis., Wash., B.C.,
Que., Nfld.
Ont., Eng., N.Y., N.S.,
Maine, Pa., Ohio,
.Belgium, Germany,
Sweden

B.C., Ont., Japan,
England

Saskatchewan,
Germany, Norway

Kenya
Ont.
Large blub fly
Merodon equestris
Aldrin
England
Carrot rust fly
Pslla rusae
Dieldrin
Ore, B.C., Ont., Wash.,
France, Holland

-------
                                                                         141
Pest
Insecticides
Location
                    Public Health and Veterinary Importance
Body louse
Pediculus corporis
Lingonathus africanus and
Lingonathus stenopsis

Cattle sucking louse
Haematopinus eurysternos

Goat biting louse
Boophilus limbata and
Boophilus caprae

Oriental cockroach
Blatta orientalis
BHC, dieldrin
German cockroach
Blattella germanica
BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin



BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin
France, Japan,
West Africa, South Africa,
Iran, India, Korea,
Tanganyika, Sudan

South Africa
Alberta
Texas
Germany,
Czechoslovakia

Texas, S.E. U.S.A.
N.E. USA, Calif.,
Panama,
Cuba,
Puerto Rico,
Canada,
Trinidad,
Japan,
Poland,
England,
Germany
Denmark,  Hawaii,
Australia, New Guinea

-------
                                                                        142
Pest
Insecticides
Location
Periplanta brunnea

Bed bug
Cimex lectularius
BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin
Tropical bed bug
Cimex hemipterus
Human flea
Pulex irritans

Dog and cat flea
Ctenoeephalides canis
and/or Ctenoeephalides felis

Oriental rat flea
Xenopsylla cheopis
Xenopsylla astiu

Blue tick
Boophilus decoloratus

Cattle tick
Boophilus microplus
Lone star tick
Ambloyomma americanum

Brown dog tick
Rhipicephalus sangujneus

African red tick
Rhipicephalus evertsi

Brown ear tick
Rhipicephalus appendiculatus

American dog tick
Dermacentor variabilis
BHC, dieldrin
BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin



BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin



BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin
Florida

Italy, Israel,
Indonesia,"Zambia,
Rhodesia, Borneo,
S.olndia, S. Africa,
N. India, Egypt

West India, Tanganyika,
Kenya, Haute, Volta,
Dahomey, Zanzibar,
Malaya, Gambia,
Malagasy, S. India

Tanganyika,
Turkey, Egypt

USA, Hong Kong,
Hawaii, Japan
W. India, S.E. India
Thailand

S. India

Cape Province, Transvaal,
Northern Rhodesia

Queensland, Brazil,
N. India, Guadeloupe
Madagascar

Okla., Madagascar
N. Jersey, Panama,
Tex., Puerto Rico

S. Africa
S. Africa
Mass.

-------
                                                                         143
Pest
Insecticides
Location
House fly
Musca domestica
Stable fly
Stomoxys calcitrans

Sheep blowfly
Phaenicia cuprina

Green bottle fly
Phaenicia sericata

African latrine
Chrysomyla putoria

Horn fly
Haematobia irritans
Little house fly
Fannia canicularis

Fannia femoralis

Midge
Chironmus zealandicus

Midge
Glyptotendipes paripes

Filter fly
Psychoda alternate

Biting midge
Cullcoides furens

Eye gnat
Hippelates collusor

Borborid fly
Leptocera hirtula
BHC, dieldrin
BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin
Calif., Sardinia,
USA, Scandinavia,
S. America, Africa,
USSR, Japan, India,
Caribbean, Romania

Norway, Florida,
Germany

Norway, Florida,
Germany, Australia

New Zealand,
S. Africa

Congo, Malagasy,
Zanzibar

Texas
Calif.


Calif.

New Zealand


Florida


England


Florida, Panama


Calif.


Malaya

-------
                                                                        144
Pest
Insecticides
Location
Culex fatigans
(quinquesfasciatus)
BHC, dieldrin
Culex pipiens
Culex tarsalis
Culex tritaeniorhynchus
Aedes aegypti
Aedes sollicitans

Aedes taeniorhynchus

Aedes nigromaculis

Aedes melanimon

Aedes cantator

Psorophora confinnis

Psorophora discolor

Anopheles sacharovi
BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin


BHC, dieldrin
BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin

BHC, dieldrin

Dieldrin
Calif.,,Malaya, India,
E. Asia, S. America,
W. Africa, Panama,
Zanzibar, Congo, Tex.,
Mali, Madagascar,
Brazil, Tanganyika,
China, Togo, Ivory
Coas t, Queensland

Italy, Israel, .France,
Japan, Korea, Morocco

Calif., Ore.

Dahomey, Ryukyus,
Korea

Puerto Rico, Jamaica,
Haiti, Curacas,
Virgin Islands, Sur-
inam, Guyane, Cambodia,
S. Vietnam, Tex.,
Cameroun, Tahiti,
Thailand, Congo, Senegal,
Ivory Coast, Liberia,
Togo, Nigeria, Upper
Volta

Florida, Delaware

Florida, Georgia

California

California

New Brunswick

Mississippi

Mississippi]

Greece

-------
                                                                          145
Pest
Insecticides
Location
Anopheles quadrimaculatus

Anopheles gambiae
Dieldrin

Dieldrin
Anopheles subpictus


Anopheles CPUS tani

Anopheles pulcherrimus

Anopheles albimanus
Anopheles pseudopunctipennis



Anopheles aquasalis


Anopheles culcifacies

Anopheles vagus

Anopheles barbirostris

Anopheles annularis

Anopheles sergenti

Anopheles fluviatilis

Anopheles splendidus
Dieldrin


Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin
Dieldrin



Dieldrin


Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin
Miss., Ga., Mex.,

Nigeria, Liberia,
Ivory Coast, Da-
homey, Upper Volta,
Cameroun,  Sierra Leone,
Togo, Ghana, Mali,
Conga (Brazz), Sudan,
Mauritius, Madagascar

Java, Ceylon, N.
India, W.  Pakistan

Arabia

Arabia

Salvador,  Guatemala,
Nicargua,  Honduras,
Jamaica, Ecuador,
Mexico, Br. Honduras,
Cuba, Dominican Rep.
Haiti, Colombia

Mexico, Nicaragua,
Peru, Venezuela,
Ecuador

Trinidad, Venezuela,
Brazil

W. India, Nepal

Java, Philippines

Java

Java

Jordan

Arabia

N. India

-------
                                                                         146
Pest
Insecticides
                                                           Location
Anopheles Stephensi

Anopheles minimus flavirostris

Anopheles Pharoensis

Anopheles albitarsis

Anopheles labranchiae

Anopheles strodei

Anopheles triannulatus

Anopheles sundaicus

Anopheles aconitus

Anopheles neomaculipalpus

Anopheles crucians


Anopheles filipinae

Anopheles maculipennis

Anopheles rangeli

Anopheles maculipennis
messeae
Anopheles labranchiae
atroparvus

Anopheles philippinens is

Anopheles funestus

Anopheles nili

Anopheles rufipes
Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin


Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin


Dieldrin


Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin

Dieldrin
Iran, Iraq

Philippines, Java

Egypt, Sudan, Israel

Colombia, Venezuela

Morocco, Algeria

Venezuela

Venezuela, Colombia

Java, Sumatra, Sabah

Java, India

Trinidad, Colombia

Carolina, Dominican
Rep.

Philippines

Romania

Venezuela

Romania


Romania, Bulgaria


Sabah

Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya

Ghana

Mali
(a) Source (4).

-------
                                                                  147
                             REFERENCES
 1.  Adkisson, P. L. (1967).  Development of resistance by the tobacco
     budworm to mixtures of toxaphene or strobane plus DDT.  Econ. Ent.
     69(3): 788-91.

 2.  Adkisson, P. L. and Nemec, S. J. (1966).  Comparative effectiveness
     of certain insecticides for killing bollworms and tobacco budworms.
     Tex. Agri. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 1048 1-4 pp.

 3.  Andres, L. A., Burton, V. E., Smith, Ray F. and Swift, J. E. (1955).
     DDT tolerance by Lygus bugs on seed alfalfa.  Econ. Ent. 48(5):
     509-513.

 4.  Annual (24th) Conference Report on Cotton insect research and contro.
     1971.  USDA, Agri. Res. Serv. in cooperation with 13 cotton-growing
     states.

 5.  Babers, F. H. (1949).  Development of insect resistance to insecti-
     cides.  USDA Bur. Ent. Pit. Quar. E-776 1-31 pp.

 6.  Babers, F. H. and Pratt, J. (1951).  Development of insect resistance
     to insecticides II— a critical review of the literature up to 1951.
     USDA, Bur. of Ent. Pit. Quar. E-818 1-45 pp.

 7.  Brown, A. W. (1958).  Insecticide resistance in arthropods.  World
     Health Organization, Monograph Series No. 38: 1-240.

 8.  Brown, A. W. (1969).  Insecticide resistant part 1:  nature and
     prevalence of resistance; part II:  mechanisms of resistance; part
     III:  development and inheritance of resistance; part IV:  counter-
     measures for resistance, farm chemicals, 132(9): 50-51, 54-56, 58,
     60, 62, 64, 66, 68, (10): 42-43, 46-47, (11): 52, 54-55, 58, 133
     (2): 50-51, 54, 56, 84-85.

 9.  Bruce, W. N. and Decker, G. C. (1950)-  House fly tolerance for in-
     secticides.  Soap and Sanitary Chemicals 26(3): 122-25; 145-147.

10.  Crow, J. F. (1957).  Genetics of insect resistance to chemicals.
     Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2 227-246.

11.  Eddy, G. W. (1952).  Effectiveness of certain insecticides against
     DDT-Resistance body lice in Korea.  Econ. Ent. 45(6):  1043-1051.

12.  Flint, W. P. (1923).  Shall we change our recommendations for San
     Jose scale control.  Econ. Ent. 16 209-212.

-------
                                                                 148
13.  Gjullin, C. M. and Peters, R. F, (1952).  Recent studies of
     mosquito resistance to insecticides in California.  Mosquito News
     12(1):  1-7.

14.  Graves, J. B., Glower, D. F. and Bradley, J. R., Jr. (1967).  Re-
     sistance of the tobacco budworm to several insecticides in Louisiana.
     Econ. Ent. 60(3): 887-88.

15.  Grayson, J. McD. (1953).  Selection of the large milkweed bug
     through seventeen generations for survival to sublethal concentra-
     tions of DDT and toxaphene.  Econ. Ent. 46(5): 888-890.

16.  Grayson, J. M. and Cochran, D. G. (1955).  On the nature of insect
     resistance to insecticides.  Vir. Jour. Sci. 6(3): 134-145.

17.  Hamner, A. L. and Hutchins, E.  (1957).  Boll weevil resistant to
     poison.  Miss. Agr. Exp. Sta., Miss. Farm Research 20(1).  1 and 5.

18.  Herrera, A. J. (1958).  Resistencia de ciertas plagas del algodonero
     a los insecticidas organicos en el Valle de Canete.  Rev. Peruana
     Ent. Agr. 1(1): 47-51.   (From the English summary.)

19.  Hoskins, W. M. and Gordon, H. T. (1956).  Arthropod resistance .to
     chemicals, Ann. Rev. Ent. 1: 89-122.

20.  Knipling, E. F. (1954).  On the insecticide resistance problem.
     Agr. Chem. 9(6): 46-47, 155.

21.  Melander, A. L. (1914).  Can insects become resistant to sprays?
     Econ. Ent. 7 167-173.

22.  Menke, H. F. (1954).  Indications of Lygus resistance to DDT in
     Washington, J. Econ. Ent. 47(4): 704-705.

23.  Metcalf, R. L. (1955).  Physiological basis for insect resistance
     to insecticides.  Physiol. Reviews. 35(1): 197-232.

24.  Parencia, C. R., Jr. and Cowan, C. B., Jr. (1960).  Increased
     tolerance of the boll weevil and cotton fleahopper to some chlori-
     nated hydrocarbon insecticides in central Texas in 1958.  Econ.
     Ent. 53(1): 52-56.

25.  Richardson, Ben H. and Wene G. P. (1956).  Control of onion thrips
     and its tolerance to Certain chlorinated hydrocarbons.  J. Econ.
     Ent. 49(3): 333-335.

26.  Roussel, J. S. and Clower, D. F. (1055).  Resistance to chlorinated
     hydrocarbon insecticide in the boll weevil (Anthonomus grandis Boh.)
     La. Agr. Exp. Sta. Cir. 41 1-9.

-------
                                                                  149
27.  Roussel, J. S. and Glower, D. F. (1957).  Resistant to chlorinated
     hydrocarbon insecticides in the boll weevil.  J. Econ. Ent. 50(4):
     463-468.

28.  Smith, H. S. (1941).  General discussion of segregation of resistant
     races. J. Econ, Ent. 34(1): 1-3.

29.  Stevenson, W. A., Sheets, W. and Kaufman W. (1957).  The saltmarsh
     caterpillar and its control in Arizona.  J. Econ. Ent. 50(3):
     278-280.

30.  Tuttle, D. M. and Wene, G. P. (1959).  Early season cotton thrips
     control in Yuma,' Arizona area.  J. Econ Ent. 52(1): 35-36.

31.  Walker, J. K., Jr., Hightower, B. G. Hanna, R. L. and Martin, D. F.
     (1956).  Control of boll weevils resistant to chlorinated hydro-
     carbons.  Tex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Prog. Rept. No. 1902 1-4 pp.  ,

32.  Wene, G. P., Tuttle, D. M. and Sheets, L. W. (1960).  Salt-marsh
     caterpillar control on cotton in Arizona.  J. Econ. Ent. 53(1):
     78-80.

33.  Wilson, H. G. and Graham, J. B. (1948).  Susceptibility of DDT-
     resistant houseflies to other insecticidal sprays.  Sci. 107: 276-
     277.

34.  Wharton, R. H., Roulston (1970).  Resistance of ticks to chemicals.
     Ann. Rev. Ent. 15: 381-404.

35.  Whitehead, G. B. (1958).  Acaricide resistance in the blue tick,
     Boophilus decoloratus (Koch.).  Bull. Ent. Res. 49(4): 661-673.

36.  Whitehead, G. B. and Baker, J. A. (1961).  Acaridae resistance in
     the red tick, Rhipicephalus evertsi Neuman.  Bull. Ent. Res. 51(4):
     755-765.

37.  Wolfenbarger, D. O. (1958).  Serpentine leaf miner:  brief history
     and summary of decade of control measures in South Florida.  J.
     Econ. Ent. 51(3): 357-359.

-------
                                                                 150



                  TOXAPHENE RESISTANCE IN ANIMALS


                OTHER THAN INSECTS, MITES AND TICKS



     Since many pest  species have developed resistance to the chlori-


nated hydrocarbon insecticides, it seems unlikely that nontarget species


have remained unaffected.  That nontarget organisms have been affected


is shown by the occurrence of small numbers of resistant individuals in


susceptible populations  of certain fish coupled with cross-resistance


and retention of resistance in several generations of fish reared in


the absence of insecticides.  This suggests that a genetically based


development of insecticide-resistant strains of fish have evolved in


areas which have been subjected to intensive insecticidal treatment


(1 and 13).


     Endrin resistance in mosquito fish was attributed to physiological


tolerance, when no evidence of excretion or detoxification was found


(10 and 11).  In heavily contaminated environments supporting insecti-


cide resistant strains of marine organisms, top piscivores such as

                     /
largemouth bass maybe absent.  This suggests that selection in the food


chain may occur through biological magnification.  Presumably, the re-


sistant fish which survive accumulate and tolerate high levels of


residues.  These individuals aggravate the problem, because the preda-


tors which feed on them may be killed by the insecticides in the bodies


of the resistant fish.


     Insecticide contamination of runoff water apparently is a major


factor involved in the development of insecticide resistant fish popu-


lations (13).  According to Ferguson et al (5 and 6), muds from natural

-------
                                                                  151







waters in runoff from cotton fields may contain sorbed pesticides




greatly in excess of levels lethal to certain fish.  Although lethal




quantities of these sorbed insecticides can be extracted with organic




solvents, they are not released in lethal amounts into standing water.




     Resistance in fish.  Resistance and cross-resistance has been re-




ported in populations of mosquito fish to DDT, endrin, aldrin, dieldrin,




toxaphene and heptachlor (1 and 2).  Although fish may be cross-




resistant to an insecticide to which they have had no prior exposure,




the nature of cross-resistance seems to differ from that of insects.




Only low levels of DDT-resistance are known in fish; cross-resistance




to DDT is poorly developed or absent.




     Resistance in invertebrates other than insects.  Ferguson et al




(4, 5, 6) states that invertebrates known to contain resistant popula-




tions include a clam, Eupera singleyi; a snail, Physa gyrina; 6 species




of cyclopoid copepods and a freshwater shrimp, Paleomonetes kadiakensis.




     Resistance in vertebrates.   Among the vertebrates, pesticide-




resistance has been demonstrated in fishes, anuran amphibians and mammals.




Six species of fishes (golden shiner, black bullhead, yellow bullhead,




mosquito fish, bluegills, and green sunfish) from cotton-producing areas




in the Mississippi delta are known to be resistant when compared with




the same species for areas of minimal pesticide use.  Most species re-




sist several pesticides, particularly the chlorinated hydrocarbons endrin,




toxaphene and Strobane (4,  8 and 15).




     Northern and southern cricket frogs and Fowler's toads near cotton




fields show as much as 50-fold levels of resistance when tested against




several chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides (10).

-------
                                                                 152







     In Virginia apple orchards endrin did not control wild pine mice




in certain areas.  Webb and Horsfall (19) reported a 12-fold endrin re-




sistance in the pine mouse, Pitymys pinetorum.




     Ferguson (10, 11) indicated that in general, levels of resistance




are highest for the most stable chlorinated hydrocarbons especially the




cyclodiene derivatives including toxaphene.







                               Summary




     Invertebrates other than insects known to be resistant to chlori-




nated hydrocarbon insecticides include a clam, a snail, a freshwater




shrimp and 6 species of cyclopoid copepods.




     Among the vertebrates, resistance has been demonstrated in fishes,




anuran amphibians and a mammal.  Six species of fish are resistant to




insecticides in the cotton-producing areas in the Mississippi delta when




compared with the same species collected from areas of minimal pesticide




use.




     Among the amphibians, northern and southern cricket frogs and




Fowler's toad from near cotton fields show as much as 50-fold levels of




resistance when tested against several chlorinated hydrocarbon insecti-




cides.




     A wild population of pine-mice is resistant to endrin.

-------
                                                                    153
                 SPECIES RESISTANT TO CHLORINATED HYDROCARBONS
Black bullhead
Ictalurus melas

Yellow bullhead
Ictalurus natalis

Golden shiner
Notemigonus crysoleucas

Mosquito fish
Gambusia affinis

Bluegills
Lepomis macrochirus

Green sunfish
Lepomis cyanellus

Cyclopoid copepods
    Eucyclops agilis
    Orthocyclops modestus
    Macrocyclops albids
    Cyclops vernalis
    Cyclops bicuspidatus
    Cyclops varicans
Pine mouse
Pitymys pinetorum

Clam
Eupera singleyi

Snail
Physa gyrina
Freshwater shrimp
Paleomonetes kadiakensis

Fowler's toad
Bufo woodhousei fowleri

Cricket frog
Acris cfepitans

Cricket frog
Acris gryllus

-------
                                                                  154
                              REFERENCES
 1.  Boyd, E. E. and Ferguson, D. E. (1964).  Susceptibility and resis-
     tance of mosquito fish to several insecticides.  J. Econ. Ent.
     57(4): 430-431.

 2.  Burke, W. D. and Ferguson,D.°E. (1969). Toxicities of four insecti-
     cides to resistant and susceptible mosquito fish in static and flow-
     ing solutions.  Mosquito News.  29(1): 96-101.

 3.  Culley, D. D., and Ferguson, D. E. (1969).  Patterns of insecticide
     resistance in the mosquito fish, Gambusia affinis.  Fish Research'
     Board of Canada.  26(9): 2395-2401.

 4.  Ferguson, D. E. and Cully, D. C., Cotton, W. D., and Dodds, R. P.
     (1964).  Resistance to chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides in
     three species of freshwater fish.  Bio Sci. 14(11): 43-44.

 5.  Ferguson, D. E., Culley, D. D. and Cotton, W. D. (1965).  Tolerances
     of two populations of fresh water shrimp to five chlorinated hydro-
     carbon insecticides.  Miss. Acad. Sci. 11: 235-7.

 6.  Ferguson, D. E., Ludke, J. L., Wood, J. P., and Prather, J. W.
     (1965).  The effects of mud on the bioactivity of pesticides on
     fishes.  Miss. Acad. Sci. 11: 219-28.

 7.  Ferguson, D. E., Ludke, J. and Murphy, G. G. (1966).  Dynamics of
     endrin uptake and release by; resistant and susceptible strains of
     mosquito fish.  Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 95 (4): 335-344.

 8.  Ferguson, D. E. and Bingham, C. R. (1966).  Endrin resistance in  the
     yellow bullhead, Ictalurus natalis.  Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 95(3):
     325-326.

 9.  Ferguson, D. E. (1967).  The ecological consequences of pesticide
     resistance in fishes.  Trans. 32nd N. Amer. Wildlife and Natur.
     Resources Conference.  103-107 pp.

10.  Ferguson, D. E. and Gilbert, C. C. (1967).  Tolerances of three
     species of anuran amphibians to five chlorinated hydrocarbon in-
     secticides.  Miss. Acad. Sci. 13: 135-138.

11.  Ferguson, D. E., Ludke, J. L., Finley, M. T. and Murphy, G. G.
     (1967).  Insecticide-resistant fishes:  a potential hazard to con-
     sumers.  Miss. Acad. Sci. 13: 138-140.

-------
                                                                   155
12.  Ferguson, D. E. (1969).  The compatible existence of nontarget
     species to pesticides.  Bull. Ent. Soc. of Amer. 15(4): 363-366.

13.  Finley, M. T., Ferguson, D. E. and Ludke, J. L. (1970).  Possible
     selective mechanisms in the development of insecticide—resistant
     fish.  Pest. Monit. Jour. 3(4): 212-218.

14.  Ludke, J. L., Ferguson, D. E., and Burke, W. D. (1968).  Some re-
     lationships in resistant and susceptible populations of golden
     shiner, Notemigonus cyrscleucas.  Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 97(3):
     260-263.

15.  Minchew, C. D. and Ferguson, D. E. (1970).  Toxicities of six in-
     secticides to resistant and susceptible green sunfish and golden
     shiner in static bioassays.  Miss. Acad. Sci. 15: 29-32.

16.  Naqui, S. M. and Ferguson, D. E. (1968).  Pesticides tolerances of
     selected freshwater invertebrates.  Miss. Acad. Sci. 14: 120-26.

17.  Rosato, P. and Ferguson, D. E. (1968).  The toxicity of endrin-
     resistant mosquito fish to eleven species of vertebrates.  Bio
     Sci. 18(8): 783-784.

18.  Vinson, S. B., Boyd, C. E. and Ferguson D. E. (1963).  Aldrin
     toxicity and possible cross-resistance in cricket frogs.
     Herpetologica 19(2): 77-80.

19.  Webb, R. E. and Horsfall, Jr. (1967).  Endrin resistance in pine
     mouse.  Sci. 156:  1762.

-------