The following Pesticide Hazard Tricolour (PHT) 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. The alerts for Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs) are based on applying the FAO/WHO (Type 1) and the PAN (Type II) criteria to PPDB data. Further details on the HHP indicators are given in the tables below. Neither the PHT nor the HHP hazard alerts take account of usage patterns or exposure, thus they do not represent risk.
PHT: Environmental fate
PHT: Ecotoxicity
PHT: Human health
Highly Hazardous Pesticide
Ecotoxicity Moderate alert: Fish acute ecotoxicity: Moderate
Warning: Significant data are missing
Human health Low alert
Warning: Significant data are missing
GENERAL INFORMATION
Description
A botanical extract intended for use as a natural elicitor to enhance plant defences against fungal infections
Example pests controlled
Botrytis; Yield; Quality
Example applications
Wine and table grapes; Soft berries; Some vegetables
Efficacy & activity
Efficacy and crop safety trials conducted support the claim of suppression of Botrytis bunch rot
GB regulatory status
GB COPR regulatory status
Not approved
Date COPR inclusion expires
Not applicable
GB LERAP status
No UK approval for use as a plant protection agent
EC Regulation 1107/2009 (repealing 91/414)
EC Regulation 1107/2009 status
Not approved
Dossier rapporteur/co-rapporteur
Not applicable
Date EC 1107/2009 inclusion expires
Not applicable
EU Candidate for substitution (CfS)
Not applicable
Listed in EU database
No
Approved for use (✓) under EC 1107/2009 in the following EU Member States
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
Approved for use (✓) under EC 1107/2009 by Mutual Recognition of Authorisation and/or national regulations in the following EEA countries
Contaminants potentially arising from production and formulation (e.g. endotoxins and chemical residues) may mediate Horizontal Gene Transfer or allergic reactions - purity is important
Substance origin
Natural; Complex mixture
Mode of action
Not direct fungicidal activity but acts through indirect modes of action including as an osmo-protectant & resistance inducer which up-regulates the plants own defences against fungal infections.
Example manufacturers & suppliers of products using this active now or historically
Adama Australia Pty Ltd
Example products using this active
Actavan Bio Plant Defence Elicitor
Actavan
Formulation and application details
Available as a soluble concentrate and applied as a dilute aqueous spray; a non-ionic adjuvant is recommended
Commercial production
Sugar beet leaf extract is produced by first harvesting the leaves during sugar beet root collection, followed by cleaning, washing to remove soil, and drying, most commonly freeze-drying to preserve nutrients, though oven-drying or air-drying may be used. The dried leaves are then ground into a fine powder, often with liquid nitrogen for better cell disruption. Extraction employs various methods, including conventional solvent maceration (e.g., with 50-70% methanol or ethanol, often acidified with formic acid), ultrasound-assisted extraction, microwave-assisted extraction, pressurised liquid extraction, or subcritical water extraction. The mixture is filtered or centrifuged to separate the liquid extract, which may undergo concentration (e.g., evaporation) and further drying (often freeze-drying) to yield a powdered or concentrated form.
Impact on climate of production and use
Data for the GHG emissions from the production of sugarbeet root extract are not available in open literature. Emissions will vary significantly based on factors like cultivation practices, extraction method (water-based is lower-impact than solvent-based), energy sources (fossil vs. renewable), and whether the extract is a dedicated product or byproduct (affecting allocation of emissions). Based on sugarbeet LCAs and bio-stimulant analogs, rough estimates can be determined. For efficient process (e.g. byproduct-based with renewable energy extraction) emissions can be expected to be low at around 0.5-2 kg CO₂e per kg concentrated extract (cradle-to-gate). Mid-range efficiency process (e.g. typical water diffusion and using fossil energy): emissions would be expected to be 1.0-5.0 kg CO₂e per kg. However, for extract production based on dedicated cultivation and energy-intensive concentration steps emissions would be higher and typically in the range: 3-10 kg CO₂e per kg.
ENVIRONMENTAL FATE
Property
Value
Source; quality score; and other information
Interpretation
Solubility - In water at 20 °C at pH 7 (mg l⁻¹)
-
-
-
Solubility - In organic solvents at 20 °C (mg l⁻¹)
10000
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
Toluene
-
10000
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
Methanol
-
10000
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
Dichloromethane
-
10000
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
Ethyl acetate
-
Melting point (°C)
-
-
-
Boiling point (°C)
100
P3 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 3 = Unverified data of known source
-
Degradation point (°C)
-
-
-
Flashpoint (°C)
-
-
-
Octanol-water partition coefficient at pH 7, 20 °C
P
-
-
-
Log P
-
-
-
Fat solubility of residues
Solubility
-
-
-
Data type
-
-
-
Density (g ml⁻¹)
1.179
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
-
Surface tension (mN m⁻¹)
-
-
-
Degradation
Property
Value
Source; quality score; and other information
Interpretation
General biodegradability
-
Soil degradation (days) (aerobic)
DT₅₀ (typical)
-
-
-
DT₅₀ (lab at 20 °C)
-
-
-
DT₅₀ (field)
-
-
-
DT₉₀ (lab at 20 °C)
-
-
-
DT₉₀ (field)
-
-
-
DT₅₀ modelling endpoint
-
-
-
Note
-
Dissipation rate RL₅₀ (days) on plant matrix
Value
-
-
-
Note
-
Dissipation rate RL₅₀ (days) on and in plant matrix
Value
-
-
-
Note
-
Aqueous photolysis DT₅₀ (days) at pH 7
Value
-
-
-
Note
-
Aqueous hydrolysis DT₅₀ (days) at 20 °C and pH 7
Value
-
-
-
Note
-
Water-sediment DT₅₀ (days)
-
-
-
Water phase only DT₅₀ (days)
1.0
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
Moderately fast
Sediment phase only DT₅₀ (days)
-
-
-
Air degradation
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.
Decay in stored produce DT₅₀
-
Soil adsorption and mobility
Property
Value
Source; quality score; and other information
Interpretation
Linear
Kd (mL g⁻¹)
-
-
-
Koc (mL g⁻¹)
-
Notes and range
-
Freundlich
Kf (mL g⁻¹)
-
-
-
Kfoc (mL g⁻¹)
-
1/n
-
Notes and range
-
pH sensitivity
-
Fate indices
Property
Value
Source; quality score; and other information
Interpretation
GUS leaching potential index
-
-
-
SCI-GROW groundwater index (μg l⁻¹) for a 1 kg ha⁻¹ or 1 l ha⁻¹ application rate
Value
Cannot be calculated
-
-
Note
-
Potential for particle bound transport index
-
-
-
Potential for loss via drain flow
-
-
-
Photochemical oxidative DT₅₀ (hrs) as indicator of long-range air transport risk
-
-
-
Bio-concentration factor
BCF (l kg⁻¹)
-
-
-
CT₅₀ (days)
-
-
Known metabolites
None
ECOTOXICOLOGY
Terrestrial ecotoxicology
Property
Value
Source; quality score; and other information
Interpretation
Mammals - Acute oral LD₅₀ (mg kg⁻¹)
-
-
-
Mammals - Short Term Oral NOAEL (mg kg⁻¹ bw d⁻¹)
-
-
-
Mammals - Long Term (Chronic) Oral NOAEL (mg kg⁻¹ bw d⁻¹)
> 1560
P4 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 4 = Verified data
Rat as trimethylglycine
Low
Birds - Acute LD₅₀ (mg kg⁻¹)
> 2000
P3 P = Other non-EU, UK or US Governments and Regulators 3 = Unverified data of known source
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
Your use of this website and its various databases is subject to the terms detailed in the University of Hertfordshire’s copyright and IPR statement that can be found at https://www.herts.ac.uk/about-us/legal.
In addition, your use of this website and its various databases is subject to the terms of this additional Copyright Statement and the database Conditions of use document.
Unless explicitly stated otherwise, the content of this website and databases are owned and controlled by the University of Hertfordshire. Site content, including its selection and arrangement, is owned by the University of Hertfordshire and is protected by copyright and other laws.
Except as otherwise expressly permitted under copyright law or within the database Conditions of Use document, the content of this site may not be copied, reproduced, republished, downloaded, posted, broadcast or transmitted in any way without first obtaining the University of Hertfordshire’s written permission.
By using our databases the user is deemed to have agreed to comply with all of the terms and conditions as described above and within all relevant documentation.
Ecotoxicity
Warning:
Human health
