Meeting no 4

1. Steering Committee Meeting #4
Sept 6, 2021

2. Aims of Project
PEST-MAN aims to:
(1) understand the drivers and pressures for the use of pesticides in
the environment
(2) examine their fate and persistence
(3) evaluate any potential impact and risks to the environment and
human health
(4) develop a low-cost, passive, in-situ method to remediate pesticides
in the environment, and
(5) disseminate knowledge and engage stakeholders and the general
public

3. Methodological Framework
Source
Pathway
Receptor
Objective:
• To identify pesticides of
concern for human health
• To elucidate the pressures
and drivers for pesticide
use in Ireland
• To identify pesticides for
examination in this study
Objective:
• Ascertain the effect of the soil
environment on pesticide
persistence
• Identify the influence of
pesticides on soil quality, incl.
microbial diversity
Objective:
• Identification of appropriate
media for pesticide
adsorption and design of
passive treatment units at lab
and field-scale
• Health risk assessment of
impacted populations and
quantification of reduction in
risk arising from our
interventions
WP 1
WP 2
WP 3

4. Methodological Framework
Source
Objective:
• To identify pesticides of
concern for human health
• To elucidate the pressures
and drivers for pesticide
use in Ireland
• To identify pesticides for
examination in this study
WP 1

5. F = Fungicide, H = Herbicide, I = Insecticide, GR = Growth Regulator
# Ingredient Type Treated area
(ha)
%
1 Chlorothalonil F 197,113 19
2 Chlormequat GR 171,519 16
3 Glyphosate H 112,340 11
4 Isoproturan H 105,122 10
5 Fenpropimorph F 48,936 5
6 Prothiconazole F 40,924 4
7 Mancozeb F 30,238 3
8 Propamocarb hydrochloride F 19,902 2
9 Fluroxypyr H 19,227 2
10 Pyraclostrobin F 16,397 2
Arable land (2016)1
As kg
WP1: Pesticide use in Ireland
# Ingredient Type Treated area
(ha)
%
1 MCPA H 127,060 25
2 Glyphosate H 124,229 24
3 2,4-DB H 48,156 9
4 Triclopyr H 33,915 7
5 2,4-D H 33,178 6
6 Fluroxypyr H 32,534 6
7 Pendimethalin H 21,598 4
8 Metamitron H 20,517 4
9 Mecoprop-P H 13,125 3
10 Chlorothalonil F 8,959 2
Grassland and fodder crops (2017)2
As kg
1 https://www.pcs.agriculture.gov.ie/media/pesticides/content/sud/pesticidestatistics/ArableReport2016Final100620.pdf
2 https://www.pcs.agriculture.gov.ie/media/pesticides/content/sud/pesticidestatistics/2GrasslandReport2017FinalVersion290520.pdf
Banned pesticides
Measured pesticides in PestMan

6. Methodological Framework
Source
Pathway
Receptor
Objective:
• To identify pesticides of
concern for human health
• To elucidate the pressures
and drivers for pesticide
use in Ireland
• To identify pesticides for
examination in this study
Objective:
• Ascertain the effect of the soil
environment on pesticide
persistence
• Identify the influence of
pesticides on soil quality, incl.
microbial diversity
Objective:
• Identification of appropriate
media for pesticide
adsorption and design of
passive treatment units at lab
and field-scale
• Health risk assessment of
impacted populations and
quantification of reduction in
risk arising from our
interventions
WP 1
WP 2
WP 3

7. Methodological Framework
Pathway
Objective:
• Ascertain the effect of the soil
environment on pesticide
persistence
• Identify the influence of
pesticides on soil quality, incl.
microbial diversity
WP 2

8. WP2: Soil texture and pesticide adsorption
Pesticides divided into three groups:
1. Herbicides
2. Fungicides
3. Insecticides

9. WP2: Soil texture and pesticide adsorption
Soil texture-specific environmental
risk ranking for each group
developed based on:
- Soil permeability
- Adsorbancy
- Solubility
- Half-life
Pesticides divided into three groups:
1. Herbicides
2. Fungicides
3. Insecticides

10. Soil texture-specific environmental
risk ranking for each group
developed based on:
- Soil permeability
- Adsorbancy
- Solubility
- Half-life
WP2: Soil texture and pesticide adsorption
Data will inform GIS-based CSA (critical
source area) model, which will identify
areas most at risk of pesticide loss.
The higher the score, the higher the risk of transmission
Pesticides divided into three groups:
1. Herbicides
2. Fungicides
3. Insecticides

11. Methodological Framework
Source
Pathway
Receptor
Objective:
• To identify pesticides of
concern for human health
• To elucidate the pressures
and drivers for pesticide
use in Ireland
• To identify pesticides for
examination in this study
Objective:
• Ascertain the effect of the soil
environment on pesticide
persistence
• Identify the influence of
pesticides on soil quality, incl.
microbial diversity
Objective:
• Identification of appropriate
media for pesticide
adsorption and design of
passive treatment units at lab
and field-scale
• Health risk assessment of
impacted populations and
quantification of reduction in
risk arising from our
interventions
WP 1
WP 2
WP 3

12. Methodological Framework
Receptor
Objective:
• Identification of appropriate
media for pesticide
adsorption and design of
passive treatment units at lab
and field-scale
• Health risk assessment of
impacted populations and
quantification of reduction in
risk arising from our
interventions
WP 3

13. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
Media examined to
date:
Peat fibre, Bottom Ash,
Fly Ash, Blast slag,
Granulated activated
carbon, four different
types of biochars
Reciprocating
shaker
Adsorption isotherms
(graph is illustrative)
Media placed in streams

14. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
0
20
40
60
80
100
%
Removal
MCPA
Mecoprop-P
2,4-D
Triclopyr
Fluroxypyr
Glyphosate

15. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 5 10 15 20 25
%
Removal
Time (hr)
Raw Data
MCPA
Mecoprop-P
2,4-D
Triclopyr
Fluroxypyr

16. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Qe
Ce
Freundlich Adsorption Isotherm Data
Raw MCPA data
Modelled MCPA data
Raw 2,4-D Data
Modelled 2,4-D
Raw Triclopyr Data
Modelled Triclopyr Data
Raw Fluroxypyr Data
Modelled Fluroxypyr Data
Raw Glyphosate Data
Modelled Glyphosate Data

17. Cregduff
Dunleer
Corduff
WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
Field analysis of pesticide loss is currently being monitored in
three agricultural catchments and one urban area.
After 1 year of analysis, our designed interventions will be
placed in the catchments.
Urban

18. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Pesticide
concentration
(ng/L)
Rainfall
(mm)
Calendar Month
Dunleer Monthly Rainfall
Maximum Single Pesticide
Concentration
Maximum Total Pesticide
Concentration
MCPA
Mecoprop-P
2,4-D
Fluroxypyr
Total pesticide Amount
Triclopyr
Clopyralid
Dicamba

19. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
0.0
1000.0
2000.0
3000.0
4000.0
5000.0
6000.0
7000.0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Pesticide
concentration
(ng/L)
Rainfall
(mm)
Calendar Month
Corduff Monthly Rainfall
MCPA
Mecoprop-P
2,4-D
Fluroxypyr
Triclopyr
Clopyralid
Total pesticide Amount
Maximum Single Pesticide
Concentration
Maximum Total Pesticide Concentration

20. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
0.0
1000.0
2000.0
3000.0
4000.0
5000.0
6000.0
7000.0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Pesticide
concentration
(ng/L)
Rainfall
(mm)
Calendar Month
Cregduff Monthly Rainfall
MCPA
Mecoprop-P
2,4-D
Triclopyr
Clopyralid
Total pesticide Amount
Maximum Single Pesticide
Concentration
Maximum Total Pesticide
Concentration

21. WP3: Receptors – response & intervention
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Jan-21 Feb-21 Mar-21 Apr-21 May-21 Jun-21 Jul-21
Pesticide
Concentration
(ng/L)
Rainfall
(mm)
Calendar Month
Golf Course Monthly Rainfall
MCPA
Mecoprop-P
2,4-D
Fluroxypyr
Triclopyr
Clopyralid
Total pesticide Amount
Maximum Single Pesticide
Concentration
Maximum Total Pesticide
Concentration

22. Methodological Framework
Source
Pathway
Receptor
Objective:
• To identify pesticides of
concern for human health
• To elucidate the pressures
and drivers for pesticide
use in Ireland
• To identify pesticides for
examination in this study
Objective:
• Ascertain the effect of the soil
environment on pesticide
persistence
• Identify the influence of
pesticides on soil quality, incl.
microbial diversity
Objective:
• Identification of appropriate
media for pesticide
adsorption and design of
passive treatment units at lab
and field-scale
• Health risk assessment of
impacted populations and
quantification of reduction in
risk arising from our
interventions
WP 1
WP 2
WP 3

23. Methodological Framework
Receptor
Objective:
• Identification of appropriate
media for pesticide
adsorption and design of
passive treatment units at lab
and field-scale
• Health risk assessment of
impacted populations and
quantification of reduction in
risk arising from our
interventions
WP 3

24. Pesticide Risk Analysis Progress
Stage 1:
Preliminary risk
ranking
Stage 2:
Development of
probabilistic
model
Stage 3:
Quantitative risk
analysis
Stage 4:
Modelling impact
from in-site
remedial works

25. Stage 1: Pesticide Risk Ranking Methodology Framework

26. Stage 1: Likelihood of Exposure and Consequence of Exposure
Scores in Cregduff
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
2 7 12 17 22
Likelihood
of
Exposure
Consequence of Exposure
Cregduff: Likelihood vs Consequence of Exposure
Area of bubble is proportional to quantity of use (kg)
Glyphosate
Chlormequat Chloride
MCPA
Fluroxypr
2,4-DB
Prothioconazole
Pendimethalin
Mancozeb
Triclopyr
2,4-D
Mecoprop-P
Metamitron
Propamocarb Hydrochloride
Pyraclostrobin
Boscalid
Spiroxamine
Prosulfocarb
Diflufenican
Clopyralid
Tebuconazole
Mepiquat Chloride
Fluxapyroxad
Cyprodinil
Metazachlor
Azoxystrobin
Risk

27. Stage 1: Likelihood of Exposure and Consequence of Exposure Scores
in Dunleer
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
2 7 12 17 22
Likelihood
of
Exposure
Consequence of Exposure
Dunleer: Likelihood vs Consequence of Exposure
Area of bubble is proportional to quantity of use (kg)
Glyphosate
Chlormequat Chloride
MCPA
Fluroxypr
2,4-DB
Prothioconazole
Pendimethalin
Mancozeb
Triclopyr
2,4-D
Mecoprop-P
Metamitron
Propamocarb Hydrochloride
Pyraclostrobin
Boscalid
Spiroxamine
Prosulfocarb
Diflufenican
Clopyralid
Tebuconazole
Mepiquat Chloride
Fluxapyroxad
Cyprodinil
Metazachlor
Azoxystrobin

28. Stage 1: Pesticide Risk Ranking Methodology Framework

29. Stage 1: Top 30 Pesticide Hazard Scores

30. Stage 1: Top Weighted Hazard Scores
Rank Active Ingredient Weighted Hazard
Score
1 Glyphosate 7.5
2 Chlormequat 4.5
3 Mancozeb 2.1
4 Pendimethalin 2.0
5 MCPA 1.9
6 2,4-D 1.8
7 2,4-DB 1.2
8 Fluroxypr 0.93
9 Prothioconazole 0.9
10 Boscalid 0.8
11 Propamocarb hydrochloride 0.74
12 Triclopyr 0.73
13 Metamitron 0.72
14 Mecoprop-P 0.64
15 Fluxapyroxad 0.42
16 Spiroxamine 0.4
17 Prosulfocarb 0.37
18 Diflufenican 0.35
19 Pyraclostrobin 0.348
20 Metazachlor 0.31

31. Stage 1: Pesticide Risk Ranking Methodology Framework incl
Metabolites

32. Stage 1: Comparing Scores for (i)Pesticide Only and (ii) Pesticides
and Metabolites
Glyphosate
Glyphosate
MCPA
MCPA
Fluroxypr
Fluroxypr
2,4-DB
2,4-DB
Prothioconazole
Prothioconazole
Pendimethalin
Pendimethalin
Mancozeb
Mancozeb
Triclopyr
Triclopyr
2,4-D
2,4-D
Mecoprop-P
Mecoprop-P
6
8
10
12
14
16
2 7 12 17 22
Likelihood
of
Exposure
Score
Consequence of Exposure Score
Likelihood vs. Consequence of Exposure for (i) Pesticide Only and (ii) Pesticide + Metabolite
Area of bubble is proportional to quantity of use (kg)
Pesticide and
Metabolite
Pesticide only

33. Stage 1: Pesticide Hazard Scores (incl. Metabolites)
Rank Pesticide HSDMET
Rank
Change
Rank Active Ingredient WHSDMET
Rank
Change
1 Propyzamide 155.4 +1 1 Glyphosate 12.4 0
2 Mancozeb 131.4 -1 2 Chlormequat* 5.0 0
3 Boscalid 130.3 +6 3 MCPA 3.5 +2
4 Prochloraz 130.3 -2 4 Pendimethalin 3.0 0
5 Isopyrazam 126.3 +2 5 Mancozeb 2.8 -2
6 Penthiopyrad 126.3 -1 6 2,4-D 2.3 0
7 Phenmedipham 123.4 -1 7 Prothioconazole 2.0 0
8 Terbuthylazine 123.4 +3 8 2,4-DB 1.8 0
9 Pendimethalin 120.0 -1 9 Triclopyr 1.48 +3
10 2,4-D 111.4 -6 10 Fluroxypr 1.47 -1
11 Fluazinam 104.0 +3 11 Boscalid 1.3 -1
12 Thifensulfuron-methyl 104.0 +1 12 Metamitron 1.1 +1
13 Fluxapyroxad 100.6 -3 13 Mecoprop-P 1.0 +1
14 Metribuzin 96.6 -1 14 Propamocarb* 0.8 -3
15 Propaquizafop 96.0 +1 15 Pyraclostrobin 0.7 +4
16 Metazachlor 89.1 -4 16 Prosulfocarb 0.66 +1
17 Diflufenican 87.4 +7 17 Diflufenican 0.65 +1
18 Metamitron 85.7 +1 18 Fluxapyroxad 0.6 -3
19 Glyphosate 82.3 +3 19 Spiroxamine* 0.43 +4
20 Folpet 81.7 -2 20 Penthiopyrad 0.42 +1
21 Metconazole 77.1 +8 21 Metazachlor 0.41 -1
22 Prothioconazole 77.1 +3 22 Tebuconazole 0.40 +2
23 Flufenacet 75.4 +4 23 Fluazinam 0.38 -1
24 Trifloxystrobin 74.3 -4 24 Terbuthylazine 0.33 +1
25 Cypermethrin 72.3 +3 25 Trinexapac-ethyl 0.30 -1
*Pesticides in italics do not have any key metabolites

34. Stage 2: Probabilistic Model Framework (Preliminary Stages)

35. Twitter handle: @PestMan_NUIG
Total number of impressions: 26632
Total engagements: 1649
WP4: Engagement of stakeholders & public
Website (pestman.ie) launched in September, 2020

36. WP4: Engagement of stakeholders & public
Presentations delivered:
PestMan Team. 2020. Introduction to PestMan Project. Presentation to Catchments.ie programme. December, 2020.
PestMan Team. 2021. Introduction to PestMan Project. Presentation at National Pesticides and Drinking Water Action
Group Webex meeting. 22 Feb, 2021.
PestMan Team. 2021. The PestMan Project. Environmental Research Institute Seminar, UCC. April 1, 2021.
PestMan Team. 2021. Introduction to PestMan. Lough Forbes Focus Group Meeting. (Online) June 10.
PestMan Team. 2021. Introduction to PestMan. Newport Focus Group Meeting. (Online) June 22.
PestMan Team. 2021. Introduction to PestMan. Cavan/Belturbet Focus Group Meeting. (Online) July 6.

37. WP4: Engagement of stakeholders & public
Papers underway/submitted:
McGinley et al. An assessment of potential pesticide transmission to waterways, considering the combined impact of soil
texture and pesticide properties. Submitted to J. Environ. Manage.
McGinley et al. Adsorption paper title TBC. (underway)
Harmon O’Driscoll et al. Pesticide prioritisation for chronic health effects in Irish drinking water. (underway)

38. Plan for the coming months
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
WP Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 Lit review
Drivers/pressures
ID of pesticides
ID of study sites
High level risk assessment
Identifying pressures,
understanding drivers
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
2020 2021
Original schedule
Extended schedule
Adsorption paper submitted to
J. Env. Manage.
2022
Ongoing

39. Plan for the coming months
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
WP Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
2 Soil characterisation
Batch-scale studies
Pesticide leaching/runoff
Original schedule
Extended schedule
Pathways of pesticides in the
environment
Studies to be completed by MSc student, Shane Scannell
The literature review (WP1) focused on soil/pesticide interaction (and
identified knowledge gaps). WP2 will address these knowledge gaps.
To start
To start
To start
2020 2021 2022

40. Plan for the coming months
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
WP Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
3 Identification of media
Monitoring - agric.
Monitoring - urban
Pilot-scale assessment
Quantit. risk assessment
Original schedule
Extended schedule
Complete
Ongoing
Ongoing
To start
Ongoing
Batch-scale adsorption studies completed
and first draft of paper written
2020 2021 2022
Receptors: response and
intervention

41. Plan for the coming months
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
WP Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
4 Stakeholder engagement
Presentations
Distribution of
communication material
Original schedule
Extended schedule
Stakeholder engagement
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
2020 2021 2022

42. Plan for the coming months
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
WP Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
5 Management
Communication
Original schedule
Extended schedule
Ongoing
Ongoing
Project Management 2020 2021 2022

43. Plan for the coming months
NUIG
1. Design of ‘filter bags’ containing GAC/Sludge and further performance testing on their performance
- Performance and longevity under normal drain flow conditions
Long-term large-scale column tests Rapid small-scale column tests
(RSSCTs)
Callery and Healy
(2017). Wat. Res. 123:
556-68.

44. Plan for the coming months
NUIG
2. Identification of optimal locations for placement of the ‘filter bags’ in each catchment Catchment
outlet

45. Plan for the coming months
NUIG
2. Identification of optimal locations for placement of the ‘filter bags’ in each catchment
Obtained using EPA Maps software
tool
(https://gis.epa.ie/EPAMaps/Water),
which was developed for
phosphorus, but flow delivery points
and delivery paths may be
applicable for pesticide transmission

46. Plan for the coming months
NUIG
3. Investigation of relationship between soil texture and adsorbancy

47. Plan for Future Work in Next Six Months – Health Risks
• Investigate other exposure pathways to be included in modelling
• Confirm best equations and methods are selected for model
• Obtain model data from site studies, collaborators and databases
• Develop a database for model inputs
• Fit data to distribution curves