| Bacillus firmus I-1582 |  Last updated: 25/10/2025
 |  | 
(Not known by any other names) | 
The following alerts are based on the data in the tables below. An absence of an alert does not imply the substance has no implications for human health, biodiversity or the environment but just that we do not have the data to form a judgement. These hazard alerts do not take account of usage patterns or exposure, thus do not represent risk.
| Environmental fate | Ecotoxicity | Human health | 
|   |   |  | 
|  | A gram-positive bacterium isolated from cultivated soil used to control damaging plant parasitic nematodes | 
|  | Plant-parasitic nematodes including the cyst nematode Heterodera schachtii and root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) | 
|  | Vegetables; Fruit; Herbs; Cotton; Ornamentals; Turf; Glasshouse crops | 
|  | - | 
|  | An aerobic, Gram-positive, rod-shaped species | 
|  | Class: Bacilli; Order: Bacillales; Family: Bacillaceae | 
| EC Regulation 1107/2009 (repealing 91/414) | 
|  | Not approved | 
|  | France | 
|  | - | 
|  | No | 
|  | Yes | 
|  | 
| ATAustria | BEBelgium | BGBulgaria | CYCyprus | CZCzech Republic | DEGermany | DKDenmark | EEEstonia | ELGreece |  
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  
| ESSpain | FIFinland | FRFrance | HRCroatia | HUHungary | IEIreland | ITItaly | LTLithuania | LULuxembourg |  
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  
| LVLatvia | MTMalta | NLNetherlands | PLPoland | PTPortugal | RORomania | SESweden | SISlovenia | SKSlovakia |  
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  | 
|  | 
| ISIceland | NONorway | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 |  
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  | 
|  | Not applicable | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | No | 
|  | Nematicide | 
|  | Micro-organism | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | Natural | 
|  | Actual mode of action is complex using various mechanisms including enzymatic action, degradation of root exudates and the production of a phytohormone. | 
|  | A naturally occurring soil bacterium which possesses nematicidal activity. Strain originally isolated from agricultural soil in Israel | 
|  | Crop protection; Leisure - golf courses | 
|  | Plant-parasitic nematodes including the cyst nematode Heterodera schachtii and root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) | 
|  | Vegetables; Fruit; Herbs; Cotton; Ornamentals; Turf | 
|  | Suitable for use inall farming systems where approved for use in that country | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | 029072 | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | Bacillus firmus isolate 1582 | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | 
| UK Poisons List Order 1972 | Rotterdam Convention | Montreal Protocol |  
|  |  |  |  
| Stockholm Convention | OSPAR | EU Water Framework Directive |  
|  |  |  |  | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | Not applicable | 
|  | Not applicable | 
|  | Not applicable | 
|  | Not applicable | 
|  | - | 
|  | Bacterium | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Current | 
|  | Circa 2000, introduced | 
|  | Agrogreen Biological DivisionBayer CropScience
 | 
|  | ChancellorPoncho VotivoNortica
 | 
|  | Available in a variety of formulations including dry powders and those for use as drenches, sprays and with drip irrigation systems | 
|  | Commercial production of Bacillus species typically involves large-scale aerobic fermentation. The process begins with selecting a robust strain, often genetically optimised for yield and stability. These bacteria are cultivated in bioreactors under tightly controlled conditions, temperature (usually 30–37 degrees C), pH (neutral to slightly alkaline), and oxygen levels are carefully regulated to maximise growth and productivity. Nutrient-rich media, often containing glucose or other carbon sources, support rapid biomass accumulation. After fermentation, the culture is harvested, and the desired products, such as enzymes or spores, are extracted and purified. | 
|  | As microbial-based products tend to use fermentation-based production processes rather than chemical synthesis, they typically have a lower fossil fuel input in formulation and active ingredient creation, and also have reduced downstream emissions due to biodegradability and minimal soil disruption, their life-cycle GHG emissions are expected to be low. Whilst hard and precise data is not available, broad estimates suggest that typically emissions are likely to be below 5 kg CO₂e/kg. As an example, an ISO 14044-compliant cradle-to-gate LCA undertaken in 2023 for a Bacillus firmus-based microbial seed treatment nematicide determined GHG emissions at 1.9 kg CO₂e/kg. | 
|  |   | 
|  |  |  |  | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
| - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  |  |  | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | Soil persistence is dependant on the availability of nutrients within the rhizosphere | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | As this parameter is not normally measured directly, a surrogate measure is used: ‘Photochemical oxidative DT₅₀’. Where data is available, this can be found in the Fate Indices section below. | 
|  | - | 
| Soil adsorption and mobility |  | 
|  |  |  |  | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | Soil mobility depends on soil conditions and water availability | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
None
| Terrestrial ecotoxicology | 
|  |  |  |  | 
|  | - | Q3 Q = Miscellaneous data from online sourcesNo adverse effects identified or expected3 = Unverified data of known source
 | - | 
|  |  | - | Q3 Q = Miscellaneous data from online sourcesNo adverse effects identified or expected3 = Unverified data of known source
 | - | 
|  | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | No adverse effects identified or expected | - | 
|  | - | Q3 Q = Miscellaneous data from online sourcesNo adverse effects identified or expected3 = Unverified data of known source
 | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | > 3.51 x 1009 | Eisenia foetida as spores/Kg | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | > 3.51 x 1005 | as spores/bee | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
| - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
| - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | 2.8 x 1014 | Aphidius rhopalosiphi | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  |  |  | 
|  | > 1.05 x 1010 | Oncorhynchus mykiss as CFU/L | - | 
|  | - | Q3 Q = Miscellaneous data from online sourcesNo adverse effects identified or expected3 = Unverified data of known source
 | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | > 1.5 x 1010 | Daphnia magna as CFU/L | - | 
|  | 1.38 x 1005 | Daphnia magna as CFU/L | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | Q3 Q = Miscellaneous data from online sourcesNo adverse effects identified or expected3 = Unverified data of known source
 | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | 20.6 x 1008 | Unknown species as CFU/L | - | 
|  | - | Q3 Q = Miscellaneous data from online sourcesNo adverse effects identified or expected3 = Unverified data of known source
 | - | 
|  |  | - | - | - | 
 | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
| 
| HUMAN HEALTH AND PROTECTION |  |   | 
|  |  |  |  | 
|  | Not applicable | - | - | 
|  | - | Q3 Q = Miscellaneous data from online sourcesNo adverse effects identified or expected3 = Unverified data of known source
 | - | 
|  | > 5050 | Rat | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  |  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | - | - | 
|  | 
| Carcinogen |  | Endocrine disruptor |  
| XNo, known not to cause a problem | A0 A = Chromosome aberration (EFSA database);0 = No data
 B0 B = DNA damage/repair (EFSA database);0 = No data
 C0 C = Gene mutation (EFSA database);0 = No data
 D0 D = Genome mutation (EFSA database);0 = No data
 E3 E = Unspecified genotoxicity type (miscellaneous data source)3 = Negative
 | XNo, known not to cause a problem |  
| Reproduction / development effects | Acetyl cholinesterase inhibitor | Neurotoxicant |  
| XNo, known not to cause a problem | XNo, known not to cause a problem | XNo, known not to cause a problem |  
| Respiratory tract irritant | Skin irritant | Skin sensitiser |  
| XNo, known not to cause a problem | XNo, known not to cause a problem | ?Possibly, status not identified |  
| Eye irritant | Phototoxicant |   |  
| XNo, known not to cause a problem | No data found |   |  | 
|  | Not expected to be harmful to humans Micro-organisms may cause sensitising reactions
 | 
|  |  | 
|  | No information available | 
|  | Not classified as hazardous | 
|  | Not listed (Not listed) | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  | - | 
|  |  | 
|  | Bacillus firmus I-1582 | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | Bacillus firmus | 
|  | - | 
| Record last updated: | 25/10/2025 | 
| Contact: | aeru@herts.ac.uk | 
| Please cite as: | Lewis, K.A., Tzilivakis, J., Warner, D. and Green, A. (2016) An international database for pesticide risk assessments and management. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 22(4), 1050-1064. DOI: 10.1080/10807039.2015.1133242 |