RESUMEN
Atrazine, an herbicide used on most of the US corn (maize) crop, is the subject of ongoing controversy, with increasing documentation of its potentially harmful health and environmental impacts. Supporters of atrazine often claim that it is of great value to farmers; most recently, Syngenta, the producer of atrazine, sponsored an "Atrazine Benefits Team" (ABT) of researchers who released a set of five papers in 2011, reporting huge economic benefits from atrazine use in US agriculture. A critical review of the ABT papers shows that they have underestimated the growing problem of atrazine-resistant weeds, offered only a partial review of the effectiveness of alternative herbicides, and ignored the promising option of nonchemical weed management techniques. In addition, the most complete economic analysis in the ABT papers implies that withdrawal of atrazine would lead to a decrease in corn yields of 4.4% and an increase in corn prices of 8.0%. The result would be an increase in corn growers' revenues, equal to US$1.7 billion annually under ABT assumptions. Price impacts on consumers would be minimal: at current levels of ethanol production and use, gasoline prices would rise by no more than US$0.03 per gallon; beef prices would rise by an estimated US$0.01 for a 4-ounce hamburger and US$0.05 for an 8-ounce steak. Thus withdrawal of atrazine would boost farm revenues, while only changing consumer prices by pennies.
Asunto(s)
Atrazina/análisis , Herbicidas/análisis , Control de Malezas/métodos , Zea mays/efectos de los fármacos , Atrazina/economía , Política Ambiental , Regulación Gubernamental , Herbicidas/economía , Estados Unidos , Control de Malezas/economía , Control de Malezas/instrumentación , Zea mays/economíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Atrazine and other triazine herbicides are widely used in US maize and sorghum production, yet the most recent market-level assessment of the economic benefits of atrazine is for market conditions prevalent in the early 1990s, before commercialization of transgenic crops. Grain markets have changed substantially since that time; for example, the size of the US maize market increased by 170% from 1990-1992 to 2007-2009. This paper reports a current assessment of the economic benefits of atrazine. RESULTS: Yield increases and cost changes implied by triazine herbicides are projected to reduce maize prices by 7-8% and sorghum prices by 19-20%. Projected consumer benefits from lower prices range from $US 3.6 to 4.4 × 10(9) annually, with the net projected economic benefit for triazine herbicides to the US economy ranging from $US 2.9 to 3.4 × 10(9) annually because lower prices imply reduced producer income. Productivity gains from triazine herbicides maintain an estimated 270 000-390 000 ha of land in non-crop uses that generate environmental benefits not accounted for in this analysis. CONCLUSION: Even in the current era, with transgenic varieties dominating crop production, atrazine and the other triazine herbicides continue to be a key part of maize and sorghum production and generate substantial economic benefits.
Asunto(s)
Atrazina/economía , Productos Agrícolas/economía , Control de Plagas/economía , Agricultura/métodos , Productos Agrícolas/crecimiento & desarrollo , Herbicidas/economía , Sorghum/crecimiento & desarrollo , Estados Unidos , Zea mays/economía , Zea mays/crecimiento & desarrolloRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The biological effects of the herbicide atrazine on freshwater vertebrates are highly controversial. In an effort to resolve the controversy, we conducted a qualitative meta-analysis on the effects of ecologically relevant atrazine concentrations on amphibian and fish survival, behavior, metamorphic traits, infections, and immune, endocrine, and reproductive systems. DATA SOURCES: We used published, peer-reviewed research and applied strict quality criteria for inclusion of studies in the meta-analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: We found little evidence that atrazine consistently caused direct mortality of fish or amphibians, but we found evidence that it can have indirect and sublethal effects. The relationship between atrazine concentration and timing of amphibian metamorphosis was regularly nonmonotonic, indicating that atrazine can both accelerate and delay metamorphosis. Atrazine reduced size at or near metamorphosis in 15 of 17 studies and 14 of 14 species. Atrazine elevated amphibian and fish activity in 12 of 13 studies, reduced antipredator behaviors in 6 of 7 studies, and reduced olfactory abilities for fish but not for amphibians. Atrazine was associated with a reduction in 33 of 43 immune function end points and with an increase in 13 of 16 infection end points. Atrazine altered at least one aspect of gonadal morphology in 7 of 10 studies and consistently affected gonadal function, altering spermatogenesis in 2 of 2 studies and sex hormone concentrations in 6 of 7 studies. Atrazine did not affect vitellogenin in 5 studies and increased aromatase in only 1 of 6 studies. Effects of atrazine on fish and amphibian reproductive success, sex ratios, gene frequencies, populations, and communities remain uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is much left to learn about the effects of atrazine, we identified several consistent effects of atrazine that must be weighed against any of its benefits and the costs and benefits of alternatives to atrazine use.
Asunto(s)
Anfibios , Atrazina/toxicidad , Peces , Herbicidas/toxicidad , Contaminantes Químicos del Agua/toxicidad , Anfibios/fisiología , Animales , Atrazina/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Monitoreo del Ambiente , Femenino , Peces/fisiología , Agua Dulce , Herbicidas/economía , Masculino , Reproducción/efectos de los fármacosRESUMEN
It is often claimed that atrazine is of great economic benefit to corn growers, but support for this claim is limited. Some cost-benefit studies have assumed that atrazine boosts corn yields by 6%; an extensive review found a 3%-4% average yield increase; other research suggests only a 1% yield effect. Syngenta, the producer of atrazine, also makes mesotrione, an alternative herbicide that does about the same amount for corn yields as atrazine. Italy and Germany both banned atrazine in 1991, with no decrease in corn yields or harvested area. Even if atrazine leads to 6% more corn production, it is not certain that this would justify its continued use; a 1%, or perhaps zero, change does not warrant large-scale exposure of humans and the environment to this potentially hazardous chemical.