974 research outputs found
Monitoring Herbicides and Nitrates Leaching in Groundwater
No full textLo scopo principale di questa ricerca è stato di monitorare la concentrazione di nitrati, dell'erbicida terbutilazina e di un suo metabolita, la desethylterbuthylazina, in acque sotterranee superficiali, secondo le normali pratiche agronomiche in differenti aree italiane rappresentative della coltura maidicola.
Il primo passo è stato identificare i siti di monitoraggio, quindi è stata creata una procedura generale al fine di individuare aree rappresentative per il mais in Italia. Dentro tali aree sono stati selezionati dei siti di: 4 in Lombardia, 2 in Emilia Romagna, 2 in Veneto, 2 in Piemonte e uno in Friuli-Venezia Giulia.
In Aprile 2005 il monitoraggio ha avuto inizio e i campionamenti sono stati eseguiti ogni due mesi.
L'indice “IDPR”, strumento per la mappatura della vulnerabilità a livello regionale e nazionale, è stato applicato alle aree oggetto di studio. L'indice riflette l'influenza che le formazioni geologiche del sottosuolo hanno sullo scorrimento superficiale e sull'infiltrazione.
L'analisi della probabilità di distribuzione dei risultati ha mostrato che una bassa probabilità di superare i limiti fissati per legge, questa probabilità è risultata più alta per il metabolita.
Le concentrazioni dei nitrati nelle acque sotterranee sono risultate molto basse.
Inoltre, è stato applicato un modello matematico (MACRO vs 5.1) di previsione che calcola la percolazione dei pesticidi.The main aim of the research was to monitor the concentrations of nitrates, the herbicide terbuthylazine and its products of the environmental degradation, desethyl-terbuthylazine, in shallow groundwater, according to the normal agricultural practices in different Italian areas representative of maize crop.
The first step was to identify the monitoring sites, therefore it was necessary to create a general procedure to individuate maize representative areas in Italy. Inside these area 11 monitoring sites were selected: 4 in Lombardy, 2 in Emilia Romagna, 2 in Veneto, 2 in Piedmont and one in Friuli-Venezia Giulia.
In April 2005 the monitoring started. Groundwater samplings were carried out every two months. The IDPR index, a tool for national and regional vulnerability mapping, was applied. The index reflects the influence of the subsurface geological formations on the surface water runoff or infiltration.
The distribution probability analysis of the results showed that there was a very low probability of exceeding the limit fixed by law, this probability was higher for the metabolite. The greater probability of exceed the 0.1 μg/L occurred in two sites, both irrigated with basin irrigation system. Nitrate concentrations resulted to be very low in shallow groundwater.
Moreover, it was used a mathematical model which calculate the leaching of pesticides (MACRO 5.1)
Who`s My Neighbour?
No full textThe EU is approaching bordering countries offering them Òneighbourhood relationsÓ, but it fails short of taking into consideration how this concept may be perceived by its partners. This paper will propose a reconsideration of the term ÒneighbourÓ in the conviction that this operation is of fundamental importance in order to solve any eventual misunderstanding on its meaning and to define, in the context of the ENP, what the nature of a relationship of neighbourhood may imply. In particular, it will look at the literature to show that this term, far from being uncontested, fundamentally implies an ÒotheringÓ practice which transcends the Christian teaching to Òlove oneÕs neighbour as oneselfÓ. Then, it will underline that this word may have different connotations in partner countries which may go beyond a neutral indication of geographical proximity and which may not correspond to the meaning consolidated in the Anglo Saxon tradition which basically refers to a neighbour as to a ÒfellowÓ. Finally, the paper will underline that the same fundamental ambiguity which marks the term here considered lies at the very core of the ENP. As a matter of fact, this policy shows persisting uncertainties on how to substantiate the relationship with neighbouring countries, whether in terms of fellowship and integration or in terms of an Òother than meÓ who still represents a security threat.Neighbourhood, ENP, integration-security dilemma
Who's my Neighbour? European Political Economy Review No. 7 (2007), p. 24-37
No full textThis paper will propose a reconsideration of the term “neighbour” in the conviction that this operation is of fundamental importance in order to solve any eventual misunderstanding on its meaning and to define what the nature of a relationship of neighbourhood may imply. In particular, it will look into the literature to show that this term, far from being uncontested, fundamentally implies an “othering” practice which transcends the Christian teaching to “love one’s neighbour as oneself”. Then, it will underline that this word may have different connotations in partner countries which may go beyond a neutral indication of geographical proximity and which may not correspond to the meaning consolidated in the anglo-saxon tradition which basically refers to a neighbour as to a “fellow”. Finally, the paper will underline that the same fundamental ambiguity which marks the term here considered lies at the very core of the ENP. As a matter of fact, this policy shows persisting uncertainties on how to substantiate the relationship with neighbouring countries, whether in terms of fellowship and integration or in terms of an “other than me” who still represents a security threat
The environmental properties of selected chemical methyl bromide alternatives for the pre-plant use as soil.
No full textN/
Higher-tier assessment of the potential for groundwater issues due to the use of 1,3-D soil fumigant; evaluation of the active ingredient,metabolites
No full textBACKGROUND: 1,3-Dichloropropene (1,3-D, CAS No. 542-75-6)is a broad-spectrum soil fumigant used to control numerousspecies of soilborne plant-parasitic nematodes. 1,3-D consists of two isomers, (Z)- and (E)-1,3-D. There are a number oflow-level chlorinated compounds that could potentially be produced as a part of the 1,3-D manufacturing process. 1,3-D andits metabolites, as well as potentially related chlorinated compounds, represent potential groundwater contaminants.RESULTS: This study has investigated the hydrolytic stability,under biotic and abiotic conditions in the laboratory, of anextensive representative list of 1,3-D and potentially related chlorinated compounds in order to predict their environmentalfate. All of these compounds showed intrinsic hydrolytic instability under both abiotic and biotic test conditions. Furthermore,a monitoring programme was carried out. Twenty-five wells were monitored in five Italian regions characterised by historicaland existing use of 1,3-D. The parent compound, its two major metabolites and potentially related chlorinated compoundswere not detected in the well water at>0.1μgL−1at any sampling location.CONCLUSION: The soil fumigant (E,Z)-1,3-D, its metabolites and potentially related chlorinated compounds constitute a lowrisk to groundwater
Field Study of the Impact of Different Irrigation Practices on Herbicide Leaching.
No full textAgricultural practices, such as subsurface drainage, irrigation and tillage,maysignificantly affect pesticide leaching and, consequently, the risk of groundwater contamination. The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of different irrigation systems on herbicide leaching to shallow groundwater through direct monitoring at the field scale in northern Italy over a 3-year period. Concentrations of the herbicide terbuthylazine (TBA) and its metabolite desethylterbuthylazine (DES) were monitored on 10 farms cropped with maize and irrigated by sprinkler, basin and border systems. Considering the results grouped according to the different irrigation systems, the mean TBA and DES concentrations was lower than the arbitrary non-health based legal limit of 0.1 g/L using sprinkler and border systems, while it was 0.19 and 0.30 g/L respectively for TBA and DES using basin systems. However, since many factors other than the irrigation systems can contribute to pesticide leaching and in a field study it is impossible to discriminate between all the different variables, the concentrations of both compounds were simulated with and without irrigation using the model MACRO 5.1 in order to gain a deeper understanding of the role of irrigation on leaching. First, the groundwater table depth, which was measured daily in all fields, was used to calibrate the model and thus achieve a good soil hydrology calibration. To assess the performance of the model the root mean squared error (RMSE) was used. RMSE ranged from 0.2 to 0.5 m, showing that a satisfactory hydrology calibration was obtained. Afterward, the solutes were modelled and the results showed that under non-irrigated conditions, concentrations of both compounds would be very low. These findings validate the hypothesis that careful selection of agricultural practices, such as the type of irrigation, can reduce pesticide leaching
MERLIN-Expo: An integrated advanced chemicalsexposure assessment tool for legislation requirements
No full textThe assessment of exposure and risks to human health from
chemicals is of major concern for policy and ultimately
benefits all citizens. The objective of the 4FUN project,
funded under the EU 7th Framework Programme, is to merge
and integrate advanced exposure assessment methodologies
in a common tool (MERLIN-Expo), allowing the building of
complex scenarios involving several pollution sources and
targets. For example, using the river, soil, plant and animal
models, available on the tool, it is possible to estimate
concentrations of chemicals in these media in order to
evaluate the risk to exceed a given regulatory threshold for
environmental risk. Furthermore, coupling these models with
a human ingestion model it is possible to evaluate the risk to
exceed a given regulatory threshold for human health. The
development and operational fusion of the advanced
exposure assessment methodologies envisaged in the
MERLIN-Expo tool will have a significant impact on several
sectorial policies dealing with chemicals' management. There
are more than 30 agencies in Europe related to exposure
and risk evaluation of chemicals. These agencies have an
important role in implementing EU policies, especially tasks
of a technical, scientific, operational and/or regulatory
nature. Therefore, the scope of MERLIN-Expo Tool is to
facilitate policymaker's work for updating and improving the
regulations
Soil enzymology: classical and molecular approaches
No full textIt is still problematic to use enzyme activities as indicators of soil functions because: (1) enzyme assays determine potential and not real enzyme activities; (2) the meaning of measured enzyme activities is not known; (3) the assumption that a single enzyme activity is an indicator of nutrient dynamics in soil neglects that the many enzyme activities are involved in such dynamic processes; (4) spatio-temporal variations in natural environments are not always considered when measuring enzyme activities; and (5) many direct and indirect effects make difficult the interpretation of the response of the enzyme activity to perturbations, changes in the soil management, changes in the plant cover of soil, etc. This is the first review discussing the links between enzyme-encoding genes and the relative enzyme activity of soil. By combining measurements of enzyme activity in soil with expression (transcriptomics and proteomics) of genes, encoding the relative enzymes may contribute to understanding the mode and timing of microbial communities’ responses to substrate availability and persistence and stabilization of enzymes in the soil
Corrigendum: Human mental workload: A survey and a novel inclusive definition
No full textIn the published article, the name of Gabriella Hancock was incorrectly written as “Gabriela M. Hancock.” The correct name is “Gabriella Hancock.” In the published article, there was also an error in the author list as published. Gabriella Hancock was listed as the last author, but should have been listed as third author. P. A. Hancock was listed as third author but should be listed as the last author. The corrected author list appears below. Luca Longo1, Christopher D.Wickens, Gabriella Hancock and P. A. Hancock. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated
- …
