IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0131200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitative Evaluation of the Environmental Impact Quotient (EIQ) for Comparing Herbicides

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew R Kniss
  • Carl W Coburn

Abstract

Various indicators of pesticide environmental risk have been proposed, and one of the most widely known and used is the environmental impact quotient (EIQ). The EIQ has been criticized by others in the past, but it continues to be used regularly in the weed science literature. The EIQ is typically considered an improvement over simply comparing the amount of herbicides applied by weight. Herbicides are treated differently compared to other pesticide groups when calculating the EIQ, and therefore, it is important to understand how different risk factors affect the EIQ for herbicides. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the suitability of the EIQ as an environmental indicator for herbicides. Simulation analysis was conducted to quantify relative sensitivity of the EIQ to changes in risk factors, and actual herbicide EIQ values were used to quantify the impact of herbicide application rate on the EIQ Field Use Rating. Herbicide use rate was highly correlated with the EIQ Field Use Rating (Spearman’s rho >0.96, P-value

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew R Kniss & Carl W Coburn, 2015. "Quantitative Evaluation of the Environmental Impact Quotient (EIQ) for Comparing Herbicides," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0131200
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131200
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131200
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131200&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0131200?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Frits K. Van Evert & Daniel Gaitán-Cremaschi & Spyros Fountas & Corné Kempenaar, 2017. "Can Precision Agriculture Increase the Profitability and Sustainability of the Production of Potatoes and Olives?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, October.
    2. Lee, Seungki & Moschini, GianCarlo & Perry, Edward D., 2023. "Genetically engineered varieties and applied pesticide toxicity in U.S. maize and soybeans: Heterogeneous and evolving impacts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    3. Kassie, Menale & Abro, Zewdu & Kimathi, Emily & De Groote, Hugo & Tefera, Tadele & Subramanian, Sevgan & Wossen, Tesfamichael & Ekesi, Sunday & Ekesi, Sunday, 2021. "The Economic, Food Security, and Health Effects of Fall Armyworm in Ethiopia," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315887, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. David Zilberman & Tim G. Holland & Itai Trilnick, 2018. "Agricultural GMOs—What We Know and Where Scientists Disagree," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    5. Akhter U. Ahmed & John Hoddinott & Naveen Abedin & Nusrat Hossain, 2021. "The Impacts of GM Foods: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial of Bt Eggplant in Bangladesh," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(4), pages 1186-1206, August.
    6. Sellare, Jorge & Meemken, Eva-Marie & Qaim, Matin, 2020. "Fairtrade, Agrochemical Input Use, and Effects on Human Health and the Environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. repec:ags:aaea22:335933 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0131200. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.