Skip to main content

Exposure and risk assessment of insecticide methomyl for applicator during treatment on apple orchard

An Erratum to this article was published on 29 February 2012


Exposure and risk assessments were conducted to evaluate safety of speed spayer (SS) and power sprayer (PS) used for treatment of insecticide methomyl in apple orchard on the operator. Dermal patches, gloves, socks, and masks were used to monitor the potential dermal exposure, and personal air monitor with XAD-2 resins was used to evaluate the potential inhalation exposure. Validation of methods for limit of detection, limit of quantitation, recovery, reproducibility, linearity of calibration, trapping efficiency, and breakthrough tests were performed to obtain reasonable results for quantitative exposure study of methomyl. During application of methomyl, PS resulted in more dermal exposure than SS. Important contaminated parts of body were upper arms, thigh, chest, shin, hand, forearm, and head for both SS and PS. Exposure rate was 44–176 mL/h. Although the level of inhalation exposure was very low during application, relatively higher level was observed for PS than for SS. During mixing/loading, more dermal exposure occurred by SS than that of PS probably due to drift of wettable powder (WP) formulation. Exposure was mostly observed on hand, and 99.9% of hand exposure to soluble liquid formulation (215 mg) in PS was from spill of liquid formulation on gloves. However, the body exposure ratio to total mixing/loading amount and inhalation exposure during mixing/loading was very low. Margin of safety in risk assessment was much larger than 1 in all cases, indicating low risk.


  • Byoun JY, Choi H, Moon JK, Park HW, Liu KH, Ihm YB, Park BS, and Kim JH (2005) Risk Assessment of Human Exposure to Methidathion during Harvest of Cucumber in Green House. J Toxicol Pub Health 21, 297–301.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Choi H, Moon JK, Liu KH, Park HW, Ihm YB, Park BS, and Kim JH (2006) Risk assessment of human exposure to cypermethrin during treatment of mandarin fields. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 50, 437–442.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby DG (1998) Exposure and risk. In Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, pp. 185–204. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • David JS (1984) Use of Exposure Data for Risk assessment. In Studies in Environmental Science, Marie S (ed.), pp. 13–19, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Protection Agency (1996) Occupational and Residential Exposure Test Guidelines, OPPTS 875. 1000, EPA 712-C-96-261. Washington DC.

  • Fenske RA (1990) Nonuniform dermal deposition patterns during occupational exposure to pesticides. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 19, 332–337.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hong SS, Lee JB, Park YK, Shin JS, Im GJ, and Ryu GH (2007) The proposal for pesticide exposure estimation of Korean orchard farmer. J Pesti Sci 11, 281–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes EA, Zalts A, Ojeda JJ, Flores AP, Glass RC, and Montserrat JM (2006) Analytical method for assessing potential dermal exposure to captan, using whole body dosimetry, in small vegetable production units in Argentina. Pest Manag Sci 62, 811–818.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen JK (1984) The assumptions used for exposure assessment. In Determination and Assessment of Pesticide Exposure. Siewierski M (ed.), pp. 147–152. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krieger RI, Ross JH, and Thongsinthusak T (1992) Assessing human exposures to pesticides Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 128, 1–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lee HR, Riu MJ, Park HW, Na YR, Song HH, Keum YS, and Kim JH (2009) Establishment of Analytical Method for Fenhexamid Residue in Korean Cabbage, Apple, Mandarin and Green Pepper. Korean J Pesti Sci 13, 223–231.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Machado-Neto JG, Matuo T, and Matuo YK (1998) Efficiency of safety measures applied to a manual knapsack sprayer for paraquat application to maize (Zea mays L.). Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 35, 698–701.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Machera K, Tsakirakis A, Charistou A, Anastasiadou P, and Glass CR (2009) Dermal exposure of pesticide applicators as a measure of coverall performance under field conditions. Ann Occup Hyg 53, 573–584.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ramos LM, Querejeta GA, Flores AP, Hughes EA, Zalts A, and Montserrat JM (2010) Potential Dermal Exposure in greenhouses for manual sprayers: Analysis of the mix/load, application and re-entry stages. Sci Total Environ 408, 4062–4068.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Renwick AG (2000) The use of safety or uncertainty factors in the setting of acute reference doses. Food Addit Contam Part A-Chem 17, 627–635.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Terry RR and David HH (1999) Metabolic Pathway of Agrochemicals, Part 2: Insecticides and Fungicides. In The Royal Society of Chemistry. pp.557–560. Royal Society of Chemistry, Burlington House, Piccadilly, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlin C (2006) In The Pesticide Manual: A World Compendium, (15 nd ed.), British Crop Production Council, Alton, Hampshire, UK.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeong-Han Kim.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found online at

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, E., Moon, JK., Choi, H. et al. Exposure and risk assessment of insecticide methomyl for applicator during treatment on apple orchard. J Korean Soc Appl Biol Chem 55, 95–100 (2012).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: