Prediction of ^OrbornŠ Pesticide Distributional
Parameters by Physiochemical Properties

Peter P. Egeghy 1, Daniel M. Stout II1, Rogelio Tornero-Velez 1 and Edwin J. Furtaw Jr.2
U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development / National Exposure Research Laboratory
1 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina USA 2 Las Vegas, Nevada USA

i

Issue

7&Approach

Exposure models are increasingly used in assessing risk
from exposure to pesticides.

Both stochastic and deterministic models often rely on
distributional parameters observed in field studies.
The mix of current use pesticides is continually changing,
but field studies rarely measure emerging pesticides.
The environmental behavior of a chemical is governed by
its intrinsic physicochemical properties.

In the absence of sufficient field measurement data, is it
possible to estimate important distributional parameters
based on physiocochemical properties?

Indoor airborne concentrations of representative organochlorine,
organophosphate, and pyrethroid pesticides were obtained from the
North Carolina Children's Total Exposure to Persistent Pesticides and
Other Persistent Organic Pollutants (CTEPP) study.

Vapor pressure (VP) values were obtained from the Extension
Toxicology Network (EXTOXNET).

The observed geometric mean concentration (ng/m3) of each
compound was regressed on its logged vapor pressure (!og10mPa).
The relationship will be compared to that found with airborne concen-
trations measured in the EPA Indoor Air Quality Research House
following crack-and-crevice type applications.

3

Methods

CTEPP: Indoor air concentrations of multiple pesticides were
available from 129 homes and 13 daycare in North Carolina
(Table 1). Samples were collected over 48 hr with quartz fiber
filters/XAD-2 cartridges (10 pm inlet) and analyzed by GC/MS.
Vapor Pressure: Estimates (Table 1) were from Pesticide Infor-
mation Profiles (PiP) on the Extension Toxicity Network website
maintained by Oregon State University (extoxnet.orst.edu).
Statistical Analysis: Linear regression analysis and plotting was
performed using Microsoft Excel.

Research House: Crack-and-crevice type applications of four
pesticides with vapor pressures spanning a wide range (Table 2)
were performed to investigate residential translocation.

Class

Compound

VP

(mPa)

log10VP

Location

GM

(ng/m3)

GSD

organophosphate

chlorpyrifos

2.5

0.40

home

7.0

3.9

daycare

3.9

3.6

diazinon

0.097

-1.0

home

2.4

6.1

daycare

2.5

6.9

pyrethroid

cyfluthrin

0.002

-2.7

home

0.6

1.7

daycare

0.6

1.4

CAS-permethrin

0.045

-1.3

home

0.46

5.8

daycare

0.21

4.1

organochlorine

a-chlordane

1.3

0.11

home

1.2

4.7

daycare

0.79

4.5

heptachlor

53

1.7

home

7.3

6.6

daycare

8.9

4.3

Class

Compound

VP

(mPa)

log10VP

phenyl pyrazole

fipronil

0.00037

-3.4

pyrethroid

cypermethrin

0.00041

-3.4

pyrethroid

permethrin

0.045

-1.3

carbamate

propoxur

1.29

0.11

VP, vapor pressure

Table 2. Vapor pressures of
pesticides applied in the Indoor
Air Quality Research House.

VP, vapor pressure; GM, geometric mean; GSD, geometric standard deviation

Table 1. Vapor pressures of selected pesticides
and indoor air concentrations measured in CTEPP.

4

Results

A strong association between geometric mean concentration and
logged vapor pressure was observed in both residential (r2 =
0.65) and daycare (r2 = 0.66) environments (Figure 1).

A crude estimate of expected indoor air concentration can be
obtained using: 1.7*log10(VP) + 3.8, with VP in mPa.

Because of the large geometric standard deviations associated
with the indoor air concentrations (Table 1), the estimates based
on vapor pressure are expected to be imprecise.

Results of airborne concentrations measurements of pesticides
applied in the EPA Indoor Air Quality Research House in support
of the model (Table 2) were not yet available.

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2

Vapor Pressure (logi0mPa)	Vapor Pressure (logi0mPa)	Vapor Pressure (logi0mPa)

Figure 1. Pesticide concentrations in indoor air as a function of vapor pressure in
(a) homes (y = 1,7x + 3.9, r2 = 0.65), (b) daycares (y = 1,7x + 3.6, r2 = 0.66), and
(c) homes and daycares together (y = 1,7x + 3.8, r2 = 0.65).



Discussion

These results demonstrate that in the absence of a recent application, a crude estimate of pesticide concentration in indoor air can be
made from at least one of the physiochemical properties, namely the vapor pressure.

Results from applications in the Indoor Air Quality Research House will be available shortly. Those results will be used to assess the
how well the relationship between vapor pressure and concentration is maintained following an application.

Future work should investigate whether including other physiocochemical properties (e.g., molecular weight, melting point, boiling point,
water solubility, octanol/water partition coefficient) improves the model.

International Conference

on Environmental
Epidemiology & Exposure

2 > 6 September 2006
la Villette Conference Centre, Paris

&

O J

Although this work was reviewed by EPA and approved for publication, it may not necessarily reflect official Agency policy


-------