Lindane (BHC)
PESTICIDE NAME: Lindane (BHC)
______________
Trade name(s): Isotox Seed Treater F, Gamma BHC
______________
Manufacturer(s): Rhone-Poulence Agrochimie
_______________
14-20 rue Pierre Bouizet
Lyon 69009 France
I. Basic information
_________________
A. Molecular structure: C6H6Cl6
___________________
B. Chemical name: Gamma isomer of 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro
_____________
cyclohexane
C. Derivatives: crude BHC metabolizes to beta, gamma, delta and
___________
alpha isomers; gammma BHC metabolizes to gamma-pentachloro cyclohexene
D. Molecular weight: 290.8 g/mole
________________
E. Solubility in water: 10 mg/l
___________________
F. Common physical appearance: colorless crystals
__________________________
G. Oral LD50(rat): 89-91 mg/kg
______________
H. Pesticide classification: organochlorine insecticide
________________________
I. Restricted use list (N.Y.): yes
__________________________
EPA priority pesticide list: no
__________________________
J. Crop use: general pesticide on ornamentals
________
II. Text
____
Lindane is an immobile, long-lived organochlorine insecticide
widely examined in the scientific literature. The persistence of
lindane in soil is a matter of contention. Adsorption is considered to
be reversible and can vary from 4 to 90% depending upon conditions.
Organic matter is an important factor in adsorption of lindane; an
increase in organic matter increases persistence whereas increasing
solubility of lindane results in an increase in mobility.
The literature contains substantial information concerning
adsorption coefficients, degradation rates and leaching of lindane.
III. Soil information
________________
A. Degradation and transformation
______________________________
The degradation of lindane results in formation of the isomers
alpha, beta, delta, and gamma BHC. These metabolites must be a
consideration in discussion of the persistence of lindane.
Individually, their persistence is beta>gamma>delta>alpha(13) and their
dissipation in cultivated sandy soil has been reported to be
alpha>gamma>delta>beta(17). The half-lives and recovery rates of these
isomers as well as those of total lindane have been investigated.
Values vary according to conditions: lindane added as crude BHC, at
43mo ca.50% remained as beta(13); half-life of lindane in silty clay =
10mo and sandy loam = 8mo(5); surface recovery of BHC in sandy loam at
6mo = 26.8-32.4% with subsoil recovery = 3.7-4.6% of applied(4). In
uncultivated loam, no decrease in pesticide was found whereas in
flooded sandy loam, there was a rapid decrease of BHC. In sandy loam
cultivated twice, no decrease in alpha, gamma or delta isomers was seen
and little decrease occurred in the beta isomer(17).
Degradation of lindane is influenced by several soil factors. In
loam and sand increased organic matter resulted in an increase of
lindane persistence(6). Loss is also pH dependent in that degradation
under alkali conditions is higher than under normal conditions pointing
to the influence of chemical factors. In sandy loam at pH8.2 and 9.5,
the loss of BHC in 9mo was 28.6-33.4% of applied (pH8.2) and 41.7-45.4%
of applied (pH9.5). Loss during the first 3mo was the highest, i.e.,
12-13% (pH8.2) and 14-20%(pH9.5)(4). It has been shown that lindane
degrades to a non-toxic residue which still responds to colorimetric
analysis for BHC thus overestimation of lindane can result(4). Gamma
BHC metabolizes to gamma-pentachlorocyclohexene with a toxicity 1/1000
that of lindane. In a mixture of muck, loam, sandy loam and clay loam,
lindane was detoxified by an enzymatic process. Dechlorination occurs
in moist acidic to neutral soils(20).
The following tables present data concerning degradation of
lindane in soils. The reference is given in parentheses at the end of
each title.
Concentration (ppm) of lindane in 3 Hawaiian soil materials 7yrs after
application of the recommended dose(3)
Coral Sandy loam Clay
____________________________________________________________
applied found applied found applied found
_______________ ________________ ________________
286 0.44 379 0.66 402 0.90
***********************************************************************
Residues of lindane isomers in sandy loam soil with pesticide
applications from 1950-1953(16)
Isomer Make-up of Tech.BHC %iso. as total %applied remain
__________________________________________________________________
(1968) (1968)
alpha 70 36 4
beta 6 36 44
gamma 12 16 10
delta 6 12 14
**********************************************************************
Residues of lindane (% of applied) in silt loam soil at 2 application
rates(11)
Time(yrs) Applic.Rate(lb/A-6in) Residue lindane (%)
__________________________________________________________
1 10 43
100 55
11 10 0.50
100 5.28
15 10 0.20
100 0.17
B. Adsorption and transport
________________________
Lindane is readily adsorbed onto all types of soils. The rates of
adsorption are related to soil adsorption capacity; soil bound residues
are lower in sandy than loam soil(6). A study on adsorption of lindane
on four soils found that equilibrium on mineral soils was reached in
<2hrs whereas in muck the time was >10hrs. Adsorption percentages in
this study were reported to be 97.74%(loamy sand), 98.07%(loam), 98.27%
(sandy loam), and 99.89%(muck) of the total lindane applied. This
equilibrium will be maintained until saturation is approached and the
isotherm becomes non-linear(10). In sixteen Minnesota soils the
lindane sorbed varied from 4-90%. The variability was not found to be
mainly due to soil texture but to the organic carbon present(1,7).
This was subtantiated in a study on flooded soils which reported that
sorption of lindane occurs almost entirely on organic matter(19).
These authors reported that flooded soils adsorb less lindane than
non-flooded especially under anaerobic, low organic matter conditions.
Desorption is not affected by anaerobiosis as Fe3+ reduces to Fe2+
thereby decreasing inorganic surface area and resulting in interference
with lindane adsorption(19).
The degree of desorption and leaching of lindane from soils is a
subject of disagreement in the literature. A study on fine sandy loam
and silty clay reported an application of 10cm water/mo to half the
field plots whereas the other half were only irrigated when the
pesticide was applied. Diffusion to untreated lower zones and to the
surface where volatilization could occur was reported. Movement was
greater in sandy loam soil than in the silty clay. In the second year
of this study, lindane increased at the surface of both treatments.
Lateral movement amounted to <15cm in 2yrs(5). Another study found
lindane to be desorbed from a variety of soils in 2-4 washings(1).
If the solubility of lindane is increased, the mobility is
increased(6). Volatilization increases with an increase in the vapor
density of lindane; however, soil water content has no effect on the
vapor density until the soil is dried to a monolayer of water(15).
Lindane adsorption decreases (or desorption increases) as temperature
increases(15).
The tables below present data concerning lindane adsorption in
soils. The reference is given in parentheses at the end of each title.
Adsorption of lindane (percent of total) in organic and sandy loam
soils(14)
soil time % adsorbed
_________________________________________
organic 1min 55
30min 70
2hr 78
24hr 79
sandy loam 1min 22
30min 34
***********************************************************************
Adsorption coefficients on four soils(14)
org. sed s.l. s
_________________________
l/n 0.98% 0.96 0.97 0.99
K 899 24 16 8
***********************************************************************
Residues of lindane (ug/g) in light sandy soil receiving regular
lindane application over 15yr period (3 plots)(18)
Plot no. Year 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60(cm)
____________________________________________________________
B 1969 0.09 0.01 - - - -
C 1969 0.34 0.07 - - - -
1973 0.03 0.02 - - - -
D 1969 1.30 0.23 - - - -
1973 0.32 0.35 0.10 0.11 - 0.01
***********************************************************************
Distribution coefficient (P) of lindane in four soils(10)
Soil P(ml/g)
___________________
sl 22.7
l 20.4
ls 17.3
muck 368
***********************************************************************
Amount of lindane not recovered as parent compound (original
___
application = 21kg/ha)(5)
Placement sandy clay(kg/ha) fsl(kg/ha)
_________________________________________________
depth (cm) 1yr 2yr 1yr 2yr
__________________________________________________
irrigated 0-7.5 14.2 18.9 14.2 18.2
7.5-15 12.0 17.1 16.0 18.6
non-irrig. 0-7.5 11.4 17.1 14.3 17.7
7.5-15 10.6 16.3 9.5 18.2
***********************************************************************
Percent lindane recovered in four soils under two water regimes(7)
12.7cm water added 25.4cm water added
_________________________________________________
cm depth c sicl l ls c sicl l ls
0-3 79 82 47 60 77 68 31 37
3-6 1 4 24 17 4 12 38 28
6-9 T T 1 2 T 1 6 4
9-12 0 0 0 T T T 1 1
***********************************************************************
Adsorption coefficients for beta and gamma isomers on varied
adsorbents: Ca-peaty muck, Ca-clay, Ca-bentonite, and silica gel in
aqueous solutions where k=log x/m vs log c and k'=log x/m vs log
c/co(12)
Aq. gamma-BHC: deg.C k k' l/n
_____________ ______________________________
muck 10 377 .956
20 331 2630 .969
30 269 3350 .981
40 197 .983
clay 10 53.8 .866
20 45.7 277 .841
30 41.3 363 .845
40 36.1 .846
bentonite 20 2.92 19.5 .886
30 2.71 28.2 .911
gel 20 6.88 61.2 .938
30 4.62 54.2 .957
Aq. beta-BHC:
____________
muck 20 456 1170 .950
30 437 1550 .990
clay 20 62.8 148 .861
30 60.2 187 .883
bentonite 19.8 3.96 9.33 .863
30 4.46 13.9 .885
gel 19.8 2.13 5.60 .971
30 1.64 5.80 .985
***********************************************************************
IV. References (*denotes key reference)
__________
1.Adams, R.S., Jr. and P. Li. 1971. SSSAP. 35. 78-81.
____
2.Agnihotri, N.P., S.Y. Pandey, H.K. Jain and K.P. Srivastava.
1977. J.Ent.Res. 1. 89-91.
_________
3.Bess, H.A. and J.W. Hylin. 1970. J.Econ.Ento. 63. 633-8.
___________
*4.Chawla, R.P. and S.L. Chopra. 1967. Punjab Ag.Univ.J.Res.
______________________
4.96-103.
*5.Cliath, M.M. and W.F. Spencer. 1971. SSSAP. 35. 791-95.
____
6.Fuhremann, T.W. and E.P. Lichtenstein. 1980. J.Ag.FoodChem 28.
_____________
446-52.
7.Guenzi, W.D. and W.E. Beard. 1967. SSSAP. 31. 644-7.
_____
8.Huggenberger, F., J. Letey and W.J. Farmer. 1972. SSSAP. 36.
_____
544-48.
9.Kahn, S.U. 1980. Pesticides in the Soil Environment. Amsterdam:
__________________________________
Elsevier Press.
*10.Kay, B.D. and D.E. Elrick. 1967. Soil Science. 104. 314-22.
____________
11.Lichtenstein, E.P., T.W. Fuhremann and K.R. Schulz. 1971.
J.Ag.FoodChem. 19. 718-21.
_____________
*12.Mills, A.C. and J.W. Biggar. 1969. SSSAP. 33. 210-16.
_____
13.Queensland. Tech. Comm. Bur. Sugar Exp. Sta. 1972. 43-44.
*14.Sharom, M.S., J.R.W. Miles, C.R. Harris, F.L. McEwen. Water Res.
__________
14. 1095-1100.
15.Spencer, W.F. and M.M. Cliath. 1970. SSSAP. 34. 574-8.
_____
16.Stewart, D.K.R. and D. Chisholm. 1971. Can.J.SS. 51. 379-83.
________
*17.Suzuki, M., Y. Yamato and T. Watanabe. 1975.
Bull.Environ.Contam.Toxicol. 14. 520-9.
___________________________
*18.Voerman, S. and A.F.H. Besemer. 1975.
Bull.Environ.Contam.Toxicol. 13. 501-5.
___________________________
19.Wahid, P.A. and N. Sethunathan. 1980. J.Ag.FoodChem. 28. 623-25.
_____________
20.Yule, W.N., M.Chiba and A.V. Morley. 1967. J.Ag.FoodChem. 15.
_____________
1000-4.
Disclaimer: Please read
the pesticide label prior to use. The information contained at this web
site is not a substitute for a pesticide label. Trade names used herein
are for convenience only; no endorsement of products is intended, nor is
criticism of unnamed products implied. Most of this information is historical
in nature and may no longer be applicable.
To Top
For more information relative to pesticides and their use, please contact the PMEP staff at:
Pesticide Safety Education Pgm.
5123 Comstock Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-0901
(607) 255-1866 |
Pesticide Sales & Use Reporting Database Grp.
Cornell University
20 Thornwood Dr. #106
Ithaca, NY 14850
(607) 257-5706 |
|
 |
This site is supported, in part, by funding from the
 |
Questions regarding the development of this web site should be directed to the
PMEP Webmaster
