Pesticides give rise to considerable concern due to their impact on biodiversity. Amongst the vast range of compounds used as herbicides, glyphosate (GLY) is the most widely applied one at global scale and its transformation product, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA) is also ubiquitous. However, the toxicity of these chemicals on non-target organisms, including mammals, is somewhat overlooked (Kissane et al., 2017). Beside these two chemicals, Fritsch et al. (2024) also considered another organophosphorus herbicide, i.e. glufosinate (GLUF). Their study examined exposure levels in rodents and shrews living in contrasted cropped and semi-natural habitats in France – i.e., conventional farmland, organic fields, and hedgerows – through the analysis of herbicide residues in their hair. The hypothesis that herbicide residues in hair reflect the exposure to multiple pesticides in wildlife is supported by several papers (i.e. Krief et al. 2017; Fritsch et al. 2022).

Results obtained by Fritsch et al. (2024) indicated that the target compounds were widespread in the investigated environments, i.e. GLY, AMPA, and GLUF were detected in 64%, 51%, and 44% of samples, respectively. Diet appeared as a major driver of contamination, as herbivorous and omnivorous voles exhibited higher contamination levels than insectivorous or omnivorous species such as shrews and wild mice. In addition, habitat was also a significant factor: GLY concentrations were particularly high in individuals collected from hedgerows, surpassing those found in crop fields. This unexpected result highlights the contamination of areas considered as ecological refuges for the investigated species. Exposure levels did not show clear differences across sites, based on farming practices or pesticide application intensity.

In addition, the measured concentrations of GLY (median 2.7 pg/mg), AMPA (median 1.4 pg/mg), and GLUF (median 3.5 pg/mg) frequently reached thresholds associated with toxic effects on small mammals. In worst case scenarios, exceedance percentages attained values as high as 94 %.

Altogether, these results definitely raise concerns about the potential impact of GLY, AMPA and GLUF on non-target wildlife species and populations. These findings by Fritsch et al. (2024) therefore emphasize the widespread presence of these chemicals in agricultural landscapes and question the safety of herbicide use, even in habitats meant to protect biodiversity. This study underscores the need for more comprehensive evaluation of the ecological effects of herbicides to guide policy and conservation efforts.

References

Kissane Z, Shephard JM (2017) The rise of glyphosate and new opportunities for biosentinel early-1068 warning studies. Conservation Biology 31: 1293–1300; https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12955

Krief S, Berny P, Gumisiriza F, Gross R, Demeneix B, Fini JB, et al. (2017) Agricultural expansion as risk to endangered wildlife: Pesticide exposure in wild chimpanzees and baboons displaying facial dysplasia. Science of the Total Environment 598:647–656; 1072; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.04.113

Fritsch C, Appenzeller BM, Burkart L, Coeurdassier M, Scheifler R, Raoul F, et al. (2022) Pervasive exposure 1041 of wild small mammals to legacy and currently used pesticide mixtures in arable landscapes. 1042 Sci Rep 12:15904; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-19959-y

Fritsch C, Appenzeller BM, Bertrand C, Coeurdassier M, Driget V, Hardy EM, Palazzi P, et al. (2024) Exposure of wild mammals to glyphosate, AMPA, and glufosinate: a case for “emerging organic contaminants”?. HAL, ver.3 peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Ecotoxicology and Environmental Chemistry https://hal.science/hal-04485797