Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Fumigation

Fumigation is the process of releasing and dispersing a toxic chemical that reaches targeted in the gaseous state, enabling penetration into enclosed spaces, commodities, and hard-to-access areas where liquid or solid pesticides cannot effectively act. This method is essential for controlling infestations that other techniques fail to address, such as embedded in bulk or structural wood. Primarily applied in for against nematodes, fungi, and weeds; in stored product protection for grains and shipping containers; and in structural settings for and , fumigation ensures comprehensive pest elimination by filling the treatment area with vaporized agents. Common fumigants include aluminum or magnesium phosphide, which generate gas, and , selected for their volatility and lethality to target organisms while requiring sealed enclosures to maintain concentration and exposure duration. Historically, methyl bromide was a staple for and agricultural uses due to its broad-spectrum efficacy, but its phase-out under the reflects causal links to stratospheric , underscoring trade-offs between benefits and environmental persistence. Despite its precision in and high kill rates, fumigation poses significant risks, as fumigants are acutely toxic to humans, potentially causing , neurological damage, or upon exposure, necessitating rigorous regulatory oversight, evacuation protocols, and post-treatment. Empirical data from incident reports highlight preventable fatalities during residential and agricultural applications, emphasizing the primacy of over reliance on alone. Originating in the late to combat pests like in vineyards, fumigation evolved from rudimentary burning to modern formulations, remaining a cornerstone of where efficacy demands outweigh alternatives' limitations.

History

Origins and Early Applications

The earliest known applications of fumigation trace back to ancient around 2500 BCE, when Sumerians burned elemental —referred to as ""—to generate toxic fumes that killed and mites infesting crops. This method relied on the release of gas, which acted as a broad-spectrum lethal agent against arthropods by disrupting and cellular functions. In and , fumigation practices evolved for both agricultural and structural . The poet , circa 8th century BCE, described sulfur fumigation to purify spaces and eliminate pests, a technique echoed by later farmers who applied it to homes and granaries. Romans systematized its use, burning in public baths, private dwellings, and storage facilities to combat , , and microbial contaminants, often combining it with physical barriers like sealed enclosures to contain the gases. By the , fumigation incorporated herbal smokes and aromatic resins for disinfection during epidemics, such as the , where authorities in Europe mandated burning juniper or in streets and buildings to dispel "miasmas" believed to carry disease—though empirical efficacy was limited to incidental pest mortality from asphyxiation. In the , refined candles emerged as a portable fumigant for barns and homes, targeting stored pests like weevils through controlled combustion, prefiguring modern enclosed applications.

20th Century Advancements

In the early , (HCN) fumigation techniques were refined for large-scale applications, including tented treatments for citrus scale and quarantine of ships and buildings, enabling penetration into enclosed spaces to eradicate pests like and without residue concerns. These methods, building on late-19th-century practices, incorporated improved generators and ventilation protocols to mitigate toxicity risks during application and , with widespread adoption in regions like for agricultural exports by the 1910s. Concurrently, (trichloronitromethane) was patented in 1908 as a broad-spectrum fumigant effective against fungi, nematodes, and , initially at high rates of 18 pounds per , and later integrated into agricultural preparation for crops vulnerable to pathogens. Mid-century innovations introduced methyl bromide (CH3Br) as a versatile gas fumigant, first applied commercially in in 1932 for warehouse pests and gaining U.S. agricultural validation in 1941 through USDA experiments demonstrating its efficacy for soil and commodity treatments against nematodes and fungi. This colorless, odorless agent allowed deep penetration in tarpaulin-covered fields and structures, revolutionizing post-harvest for fruits, grains, and timber, with U.S. registration in 1961 formalizing its use despite later concerns. By the 1940s and 1950s, (PH3) emerged from metal formulations like aluminum phosphide, patented for solid-release fumigation of stored grains, offering low-residue control of beetles and moths in silos and ships where HCN posed flammability risks. These chemical advancements were complemented by procedural improvements, such as standardized times—typically 24-72 hours for HCN and —and the development of agents like additives to detect leaks, reducing accidental exposures in structural fumigations of homes and mills. fumigation became routine by the mid-20th century for high-value crops like strawberries and , with combinations of fumigants enhancing against soil-borne pests, though efficacy varied by and , necessitating empirical trials. Overall, these developments increased fumigation's and specificity, driven by agricultural demands and , while highlighting trade-offs in operator safety and environmental persistence.

Recent Developments and Innovations

In 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved eFUME®, a pre-mixed -based fumigant, for post-harvest treatment of food commodities in enclosed spaces, providing a high-efficacy alternative to with reduced environmental persistence and no ozone-depleting potential. This approval addresses ongoing needs for and commodity fumigation, where targets pests like stored-product moths and beetles while qualifying for tolerance exemptions on treated residues. Structural fumigation has seen safety-focused innovations, including EPA-mandated enhancements in July 2024 for applications in residential settings, such as improved warning labels, re-entry protocols, and ventilation verification to mitigate accidental exposures. Emerging monitoring systems, utilizing sensors for continuous gas detection, enable precise concentration tracking during tenting, reducing overexposure risks and application variability compared to traditional manual methods. Agricultural fumigation innovations emphasize efficiency and sustainability, with controlled-release formulations that prolong fumigant action while minimizing dosage and emissions; these have lowered operational costs by up to 30% in some applications since 2020. Automated dispensing systems integrated with allow for targeted soil and commodity treatments, optimizing penetration in dense substrates. Biofumigation, leveraging natural volatile compounds like isothiocyanates from cover crops, has expanded as a low-residue method, with market growth driven by regulatory preferences for reduced synthetic inputs.

Scientific Principles

Mechanisms of Action

Fumigants exert their lethal effects primarily through their gaseous or vaporous state, which enables deep into structural voids, commodity bulks, and pest habitats inaccessible to pesticides. This occurs via molecular movement driven by concentration gradients, allowing the gas to permeate cracks, crevices, and porous materials such as or particles. Penetration rates are influenced by factors like , , and the sorptive capacity of surrounding materials, where adsorption—physical binding of gas molecules to surfaces—can temporarily reduce free concentrations but may lead to prolonged exposure via desorption. At the cellular level, most fumigants act as multi-site toxicants, disrupting vital biochemical processes in target organisms, including , , and microbes. Common modes include enzyme inhibition, where fumigants bind to active sites of proteins like , halting aerobic respiration and inducing depletion and . Neurotoxic effects predominate in compounds like , which interferes with function and metabolism, leading to and death. , generated from aluminum or magnesium phosphide, similarly targets mitochondrial respiration while also causing and DNA damage. Some fumigants, such as hydrogen cyanide or carbon disulfide, additionally react chemically with cellular components, forming toxic adducts or displacing oxygen to induce asphyxiation. Biofilm disruption occurs in microbial targets, where fumigants compromise structural integrity, facilitating intoxication. Efficacy depends on exposure duration and concentration, often quantified by the lethal accumulated dose (LAD) metric, which integrates time and gas levels to overcome pest resistance thresholds. Resistance mechanisms, including enhanced detoxification enzymes, can mitigate these actions, necessitating integrated pest management strategies.

Physical and Chemical Processes

Fumigants are chemical compounds, often volatile liquids or solids, that transition to gaseous states under typical environmental conditions, enabling their dispersion as vapors or aerosols throughout enclosed spaces or porous substrates. This volatilization is a key physical process, driven by the compound's , which determines the rate at which it evaporates and achieves lethal concentrations; for instance, gas, generated from metal phosphides reacting with moisture, diffuses rapidly due to its low molecular weight and high diffusivity in air. The distribution of fumigant gases follows principles of and convection, adhering to , where molecules migrate from regions of higher concentration to lower ones, penetrating cracks, crevices, and material pores without requiring direct contact. Penetration efficacy is influenced by environmental factors such as , which accelerates molecular and thus diffusion rates—for every 10°C increase, diffusion can roughly double—and humidity, which may enhance or retard onto substrates like , potentially reducing free gas availability. In structural applications, forced circulation via fans promotes uniform distribution, while in soil fumigation, gas movement through pore spaces is limited by compaction and moisture content, necessitating prior to optimize . post-treatment relies on the same diffusive reversal, expelling gases as concentrations equilibrate with ambient air. Chemically, fumigants induce lethality through diverse modes of action targeting cellular respiration, enzyme function, or nucleic acid integrity, often entering organisms via spiracles, cuticle permeation, or ingestion due to their lipophilic nature. Phosphine, for example, acts as a metabolic poison by binding to the heme moiety of cytochrome c oxidase in mitochondria, halting electron transport and ATP synthesis, with toxicity manifesting as rapid paralysis and death at concentrations as low as 1-3 mg/L over 24-72 hours. Alkylating agents like methyl bromide (now largely phased out) react with sulfhydryl groups in proteins and DNA, causing denaturation and replication errors, while irritants such as chloropicrin disrupt nerve function through lachrymatory effects and secondary pulmonary edema. Sulfuryl fluoride inhibits glycolysis enzymes like enolase, leading to energy depletion, particularly in wood-boring insects. These reactions are concentration-time (CT) product dependent, with empirical thresholds established for pests; for drywood termites, a CT of 25,000 ppm-hours for sulfuryl fluoride ensures mortality. Variability in pest life stages—e.g., eggs requiring higher CT due to impermeable chorions—necessitates tailored exposures informed by bioassays rather than assuming uniform susceptibility.

Methods and Procedures

General Fumigation Process

Fumigation entails the release and dispersion of a toxic gaseous chemical within an enclosed space to target pests in their gaseous state, penetrating cracks, voids, and commodities where pests reside. The process begins with thorough preparation, including site inspection to identify layout, potential leaks, and absorbent materials; sealing the enclosure using tarpaulins, tapes, or existing structures to minimize gas escape; and evacuation of all humans, animals, plants, and sensitive items like food or medications, which must be double-bagged or removed. Warning signs and placards are posted, ignition sources eliminated, and certified applicators ensure compliance with regulatory requirements, such as EPA registration for fumigants. During application, the fumigant—such as generated from metal phosphides or other EPA-approved gases—is introduced after calculating the enclosure volume (length × width × height, excluding occupied space) to determine dosage, typically expressed in grams per or meter. Methods include surface application, subsurface injection, or recirculation with fans for even distribution, often performed from outside the sealed area using protective equipment like respirators. follows, maintaining target concentrations (e.g., 300 ppm ) for a specified duration—ranging from hours to days depending on pest life stages, , and commodity depth—to ensure lethality across eggs, larvae, pupae, and adults. Continuous monitoring with gas detectors verifies concentration levels and detects leaks throughout this phase. Aeration concludes the active treatment by systematically ventilating the space, opening seals remotely, and employing fans to disperse the gas, often requiring multiple cycles for sorptive materials. Clearance testing with detection devices confirms residues below safe thresholds (e.g., 0.3 for ) before re-entry, with residues disposed per environmental guidelines. Safety protocols, including and emergency response plans, underpin each step to mitigate risks from highly toxic fumigants.

Structural Fumigation Techniques

Structural fumigation techniques involve sealing an entire building or to introduce a gaseous fumigant that penetrates cracks, voids, and hidden areas to eliminate pests such as drywood , bed bugs, and wood-boring . The primary method utilizes , a restricted-use applied as a compressed gas, which diffuses rapidly to achieve lethal concentrations throughout the enclosed space. This approach is particularly effective for widespread infestations where spot treatments fail, as the gas targets all life stages of pests without leaving residues. The process begins with a thorough to confirm presence and assess structural suitability, followed by preparation that includes removing or sealing food, medicines, , and sensitive items to prevent contamination or . Sealing techniques employ two main variants: enclosure, or "tenting," which drapes heavy-duty vinyl tarps over the structure secured with ropes, clamps, and sandbags to create an airtight barrier; or site-specific sealing using sheeting, , and for smaller or inaccessible areas without full . Tenting is for residential and commercial buildings, ensuring containment of the fumigant while minimizing leakage, with seals tested via pressure or monitors prior to application. Fumigant introduction occurs via specialized equipment, such as cylinders connected to distribution lines that release into the structure's , achieving concentrations of 1,000 to 3,000 parts per million depending on temperature and pest species. Exposure duration typically lasts 24 to 72 hours, monitored continuously with electronic gas detectors to verify lethal levels and prevent under- or over-exposure, influenced by factors like ambient temperature above 50°F (10°C) for optimal efficacy. Post-exposure aeration ventilates the structure using fans and open seals to reduce gas levels below 5 parts per million, confirmed by clearance readings before re-entry. These techniques require certified applicators adhering to state and federal regulations, including on-site and , to mitigate risks from the fumigant's neurotoxic properties. While effective for comprehensive eradication, structural fumigation demands evacuation of occupants and pets, with re-entry prohibited until verified safe, distinguishing it from localized treatments.

Soil and Agricultural Fumigation

Soil fumigation involves the pre-plant application of volatile pesticides to agricultural fields, nurseries, greenhouses, and turf areas to soil-borne pests including nematodes, fungi, , , weed seeds, and that can hinder crop growth and yield. These fumigants are introduced as liquids or solids that volatilize into gases, through pores to target organisms at depths typically up to 1-2 feet, depending on type and application rate. Effective requires optimal conditions, such as moisture levels of 50-80% of to facilitate gas without excessive binding, and temperatures above 50°F (10°C) to enhance volatility. The process begins with site preparation, including tillage to achieve a uniform seedbed free of large clods, which can impede gas distribution, followed by disking or chiseling to loosen soil and incorporate organic matter if needed. Fumigants are then applied via shank injection, chisel injection, or drip irrigation systems, often at rates of 200-400 pounds per acre for products like 1,3-dichloropropene, with shanks spaced 8-12 inches apart to ensure coverage. Immediately after injection, soil is sealed using low-density polyethylene tarps, plastic mulch, or water seals to minimize emissions and maximize pest exposure, with tarp retention times varying from 3-7 days based on fumigant label instructions. Aeration follows, typically by tilling or waiting 7-14 days until residue levels drop below safe thresholds (e.g., <0.3 ppm for chloropicrin), before planting to prevent phytotoxicity. Monitoring with soil probes or gas detectors ensures efficacy and compliance during the process. Commonly used soil fumigants include 1,3-dichloropropene (e.g., Telone II) for nematodes and soil insects, chloropicrin for fungal pathogens and nematodes, and metam sodium or dazomet for broad-spectrum control of weeds and diseases, often applied in mixtures like Pic-Clor 60 (chloropicrin + 1,3-dichloropropene) at ratios of 60:40. Methyl bromide, once widely used since the 1950s for its broad efficacy, was phased out in U.S. agriculture by 2005 under the Montreal Protocol due to its ozone-depleting properties, leading to yield reductions of 10-20% in some crops without adequate alternatives. Application must adhere to EPA regulations established in 2011, requiring certified applicators, site-specific fumigant management plans, buffer zones (e.g., 100-300 feet based on acreage and wind speed), emergency response procedures, and worker training to mitigate inhalation risks from off-gassing. These measures reduced incident reports by enhancing good agricultural practices like tarp integrity and soil compaction. While fumigation boosts yields—e.g., chloropicrin treatments increasing strawberry production by suppressing soilborne diseases—it can temporarily disrupt beneficial microbes, necessitating post-treatment amendments for soil health recovery.

Quarantine and Commodity Treatment

Quarantine fumigation applies gaseous pesticides to imported commodities, vehicles, ships, and wood packaging materials at ports of entry to eradicate quarantine pests, thereby preventing their establishment in importing countries. In the United States, the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) mandates these treatments under the Plant Protection Act to mitigate risks from pests like fruit flies, beetles, and nematodes intercepted in shipments. Treatments must achieve 100% mortality of target pests, often verified through bioassays or scheduled exposure times, with methyl bromide remaining a primary fumigant for quarantine and pre-shipment uses despite its phaseout for other applications under the due to concerns. For instance, APHIS approved methyl bromide fumigation schedules in 2023 for interstate movement of citrus fruit to control pests like the Mexican fruit fly. Procedures typically involve sealing commodities under tarpaulins, in chambers, or within containers, followed by gas introduction and a minimum exposure period—such as 16-24 hours for methyl bromide at concentrations of 30-48 grams per cubic meter, depending on and commodity type. In-transit fumigation allows vessels to depart before full verification if initial conditions meet Federal Grain Inspection Service standards, particularly for grain shipments infested with live insects. follows to remove residues, with monitoring for gas levels below safe thresholds before unloading; non-compliance can result in re-treatment or destruction of goods. Alternatives like or are increasingly used where methyl bromide exemptions do not apply, though efficacy varies by and commodity permeability. Commodity treatment fumigation targets post-harvest pests in bulk-stored agricultural products, such as grains, nuts, and milled , to prevent quality degradation and economic losses estimated at billions annually worldwide. , generated from aluminum or magnesium phosphide formulations, penetrates deep into storage structures like or railcars, requiring 5-10 days of exposure at 1-3 grams per cubic meter for complete . This method suits large volumes, with fumigants applied as solids that release gas in moist conditions, ensuring uniform distribution without residue on treated commodities when properly aerated. Sulfuryl fluoride, marketed as ProFume, serves as a broad-spectrum alternative for durable commodities like cocoa beans or timber, effective against resistant pests in 24-72 hours at 1,000-2,000 ppm, though it requires specialized equipment for recycling and monitoring to avoid under-dosing. Treatments for bagged or processed goods avoid direct contact with solid fumigants to prevent , instead using space fumigation in sealed facilities; California regulations, updated in 2025, emphasize buffer zones and real-time gas detection for environmental compliance during such operations. Emerging options, like ethyl formate registration proposed by EPA in 2025 for fruits such as and grapes, offer faster but limited penetration for dense commodities. Efficacy relies on commodity-specific schedules from APHIS's , with failures often traced to leaks or inadequate sealing rather than fumigant choice.

Applications

Building and Structural Pest Control

Structural fumigation applies gaseous pesticides to enclosed buildings and structures to eradicate hidden or widespread infestations of pests such as drywood termites, bed bugs, and woodboring beetles that inhabit framing, walls, or voids. This method penetrates cracks, crevices, and inaccessible areas where liquid or bait treatments may fail, targeting all life stages of pests within the treated space. It is particularly prevalent in regions like and for drywood termite control, where tenting seals entire residences to contain the fumigant. The primary fumigant employed is , a colorless, odorless gas registered for structural use that disrupts insect respiration and nervous systems, achieving near-total mortality when concentrations reach 1,000 to 3,000 parts per million for 16 to 24 hours depending on temperature and structure size. serves as a warning agent due to sulfuryl fluoride's lack of detectable odor, irritating eyes and respiratory tracts to alert occupants to potential exposure. Methyl bromide, once common, has been phased out for most structural applications under the due to its ozone-depleting properties, though limited uses persist under strict . The process begins with thorough preparation: occupants evacuate, food and medicines are removed or double-bagged, and pets relocated, and the structure inspected for seal integrity using tarps or vinyl sheeting secured with ropes and sandbags for tenting. Fumigant cylinders release gas via fans for even distribution, monitored by probes to maintain lethal levels; exposure duration typically spans 24 to 72 hours total, including where tarps are removed and fans ventilate until clearance devices confirm concentrations below 5 parts per million, often calibrated to detect 1 ppm reliably per EPA standards. Effectiveness is high for comprehensive elimination, with studies indicating sulfuryl fluoride fumigation eradicates drywood and similar structural pests from treated buildings when properly executed, though reinfestation risks remain from external sources without preventive measures. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency mandates site-specific logs and enhanced labeling to mitigate re-entry risks, following incidents of from premature access, emphasizing that fumigation kills pests but requires certified applicators to prevent human harm. Limitations include unsuitability for subterranean , which favor soil barriers, and environmental concerns over fumigant persistence, prompting alternatives where feasible.

Agricultural and Crop Protection

Fumigation serves as a critical pre-plant treatment in to eliminate soil-borne pests, pathogens, nematodes, and weeds that threaten yields. Soil fumigants, applied as liquids or gases, volatilize into vapors that penetrate pores, targeting organisms disrupting development and health. This method has been routinely employed since the mid-20th century for high-value annual crops such as strawberries, tomatoes, and , where soil pests can cause significant economic losses. Common fumigants include , , metam sodium, and dazomet, which provide broad-spectrum control against fungi, , , and weed seeds. Application typically involves injection or shank delivery into prepared , often followed by plastic tarps to contain the gas and enhance efficacy, as seen in strawberry production where fumigation boosts yields by suppressing diseases like . In 2024, applications accounted for 75.1% of the agricultural fumigants market revenue, underscoring their dominance in crop protection strategies. While fumigation enhances productivity by reducing pest pressure—contributing to consistent global crop yields—its benefits must be weighed against risks such as volatilization leading to off-site drift and impacts on non-target microbes. Peer-reviewed studies indicate that proper application minimizes these issues, with zones and tarps mandated by regulations like those from the EPA to protect applicators and nearby communities. Integrated with cultural practices, fumigation supports sustainable intensification in pest-prone regions, though alternatives like biofumigation with mustard cover crops are emerging for lower-risk suppression.

Medical and Sterilization Contexts

Fumigation in medical contexts utilizes gaseous or vaporized agents to achieve sterilization of heat- and moisture-sensitive equipment, surgical suites, and biological safety cabinets, targeting microorganisms including , viruses, fungi, and spores. These methods penetrate complex surfaces and lumens where liquid disinfectants may fail, but they require controlled environments to mitigate human exposure risks. (EtO), a flammable gas, remains a primary fumigant for sterilizing approximately 50% of U.S. medical devices annually, including single-use items like syringes, catheters, heart valves, and pacemakers, due to its compatibility with diverse materials and efficacy at low temperatures around 30–60°C. The process involves preconditioning devices, exposure to EtO under vacuum for penetration, aeration to remove residuals, and biological indicators to verify sterility, with cycle times often exceeding 12 hours. However, EtO's classification as a by agencies like the EPA has prompted stricter emission controls, with facilities required to monitor ambient levels below 1 ppm. Formaldehyde fumigation, typically generated from formalin (37–40% solution) or , has been employed for decontaminating operation theaters, laboratories, and enclosed spaces in hospitals, achieving surface and air disinfection at concentrations of 1–2% vapor. Protocols involve heating to vaporize the agent above 15°C , followed by neutralization with , with exposure times of 2–4 hours; it inactivates a broad microbial but lacks robust evidence for reducing hospital-acquired infections compared to routine . Risks include respiratory irritation and potential carcinogenicity, leading to recommendations against routine use in patient areas, favoring targeted applications like biosafety cabinet per European standards. Vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) represents a safer, residue-free alternative for both device and room sterilization, operating at low temperatures (40–60°C) with cycles as short as 30–75 minutes, effective against resistant spores via oxidation mechanisms. The FDA has recognized VHP as an established method since 2024, suitable for reusable endoscopes, surgical tools, and isolator systems, with plasma variants enhancing sporicidal action through free radicals. Chlorine dioxide gas, used at parts-per-million levels, offers non-toxic fumigation for delicate devices, penetrating packaging without material degradation, though less common due to generator requirements. These methods prioritize material compatibility testing and validation with biological indicators like Geobacillus stearothermophilus spores to ensure a 10⁻⁶ sterility assurance level. Overall, while effective, fumigants like EtO and formaldehyde face scrutiny for toxicity, driving shifts toward VHP amid regulatory pressures from bodies like the FDA and CDC.

Fumigants and Agents

Currently Used Chemicals

Sulfuryl fluoride is the principal chemical fumigant employed for structural pest control in enclosed buildings, targeting drywood termites, wood-boring beetles, and bed bugs. Registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a restricted-use pesticide, it is the only fumigant approved for residential fumigation in the United States, applied under tarpaulins or tenting to ensure penetration into wood and voids. Due to its colorless and odorless nature, chloropicrin must be co-applied as a tear gas warning agent in structural treatments to alert occupants to potential exposure. In 2024, the EPA initiated reviews to assess risks from post-fumigation residues, particularly fluoride accumulation in homes, prompting enhanced aeration protocols. Phosphine gas, generated from or tablets, dominates commodity and stored-product fumigation for grains, seeds, and shipping containers to eradicate like weevils and moths. Widely used globally, including in the U.S. for agricultural , it penetrates bulk commodities effectively at concentrations of 200-500 over 3-7 days, depending on and life stages. As a restricted-use , requires certified applicators due to its high toxicity, with EPA labels mandating monitoring for levels below 0.3 before re-entry. in populations, such as the , has been documented in over 100 species, necessitating integrated management. Chloropicrin functions primarily as a fumigant for nematodes, fungi, and weeds in crops like strawberries and tomatoes, injected pre-planting under , but also serves as a standalone or additive fumigant in structural and commodity applications. In the U.S., its use exceeds 10 million pounds annually in alone for agricultural fields, volatilizing to gas for broad-spectrum control. EPA regulations classify it as a restricted-use with buffer zones and posting requirements to mitigate drift and acute respiratory risks from its irritant properties. Methyl bromide persists in limited quarantine and pre-shipment treatments for commodities like logs and fruits, despite phase-out under the since 2005 for most uses due to . Exemptions allow U.S. applications totaling about 1,000 metric tons yearly as of 2023, primarily for export compliance, with EPA oversight ensuring no viable alternatives exist. Co-application with enhances efficacy and warning.
ChemicalPrimary ApplicationsKey Regulatory Notes
Sulfuryl fluorideStructural (, bed bugs)Restricted-use; requires warning; EPA residential-only fumigant
PhosphineStored grains, commoditiesGenerated from phosphides; certified applicators; resistance monitoring required
ChloropicrinSoil, structural warningDrift buffers; irritant; high-volume ag use
Methyl bromide, pre-shipmentMontreal exemptions; limited tons annually

Phased-Out or Restricted Fumigants

Methyl bromide (CH₃Br), a broad-spectrum fumigant used for treatment, commodity disinfestation, and structural since the early 20th century, was phased out in developed countries by January 1, 2005, under the on Substances that Deplete the , due to its high ozone-depleting potential and contribution to stratospheric loss. The protocol, signed in 1987 and amended in 1997 to accelerate the timeline, required a 100% reduction in production and consumption for non-exempt uses, with atmospheric concentrations declining over 30% post-phaseout as a result. Limited exemptions persist for and pre-shipment (QPS) applications, such as treating exports to prevent introduction, accounting for residual global use estimated at 10-20% of prior levels. Ethylene dibromide (EDB, or ), employed as a soil fumigant for nematodes and insects on crops like , , and grains, as well as a post-harvest treatment, faced an emergency suspension by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on September 30, 1983, for applications, followed by a comprehensive on most agricultural uses by 1984 due to its classification as a probable human carcinogen and detection in at levels exceeding safe standards. EDB's persistence in and volatility led to widespread , prompting the EPA to halt registrations for fumigant purposes, though trace legacy residues continue to necessitate in affected aquifers. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), a fumigant applied to for crops such as soybeans, pineapples, and grapes, was phased out after manufacturer cancellations in 1977 triggered by epidemiological evidence of male sterility and reduced sperm counts among exposed workers, with full discontinuation of U.S. registrations by 1985 owing to its mutagenic, reproductive toxicant, and carcinogenic properties confirmed in . DBCP's groundwater mobility resulted in long-term contamination sites, leading to a maximum contaminant level of 0.0002 mg/L under the , and its export for use was restricted under international agreements. Chloropicrin (CCl₃NO₂), historically used alone or in mixtures for soil fumigation against fungi, nematodes, and weeds, remains available but faces stringent restrictions as a restricted-use under EPA classification, mandating certified applicator supervision, buffer zones (e.g., 25-100 feet near occupied structures), and mandatory safety training due to its acute irritant effects on eyes, skin, and respiratory systems. In , post-2015 regulations limit daily applications to 40-60 acres, prohibit use within 1/4 mile of schools without exemptions, and require tarping for larger fields to minimize off-site drift and exposure, reflecting concerns over non-target human health risks despite its efficacy as a warning agent in other fumigants.

Safety and Risk Management

Human Health Hazards

Fumigants pose significant acute risks to human health primarily through , as these volatile gases penetrate deeply into the and can cause immediate irritation, , and systemic toxicity. gas, generated from aluminum phosphide, is highly toxic and can lead to severe respiratory distress, cardiovascular collapse, and death even at low concentrations; for instance, acute exposures have resulted in symptoms such as , , , , and . , commonly used in structural fumigation, hydrolyzes in the body to produce ions that disrupt enzymatic functions, leading to neurological effects including , , seizures, and in severe cases, fatalities; a 2016 incident in involved a family of five exposed post-fumigation, exhibiting symptoms like , tremors, and elevated levels. Methyl bromide, though phased out in many applications, causes , visual disturbances, and pulmonary injury upon exposure. Chronic or repeated low-level exposures to fumigants are associated with neurological impairments, respiratory disorders, and potential carcinogenic effects. Occupational studies of fumigation workers have documented , impaired gait, behavioral changes, and mental confusion linked to methyl bromide, alongside increased risks of neurodegenerative diseases from broader exposure including fumigants. exposures correlate with long-term neurological deficits, as evidenced by epidemiological data showing persistent effects in applicators. Reproductive health impacts, including hormonal disruptions, reduced , and increased miscarriage rates, have been observed in human studies of -exposed populations, with fumigants contributing due to their systemic absorption. Incidents underscore re-entry risks, such as multiple fatalities from unauthorized entry into fumigated structures or off-gassing materials, highlighting the need for strict clearance protocols. Skin and ocular exposures, while less common due to the gaseous nature of fumigants, can occur via direct contact with or condensed vapors, resulting in , burns, or leading to systemic effects. Overall, the high and odorless properties of many fumigants exacerbate hazards, as undetected exposures can reach lethal levels before symptoms manifest. Empirical data from poison centers and regulatory incident reports confirm that fumigation-related poisonings disproportionately affect applicators, residents, and , with and implicated in the majority of severe cases.

Mitigation and Safety Protocols

Mitigation and safety protocols for fumigation prioritize minimizing human exposure to toxic gases through a combination of , administrative procedures, (PPE), and post-treatment monitoring. Engineering controls include sealing structures with or tents to contain the fumigant, as seen in tarpaulin fumigation methods that retain gas for effective while limiting external release. Administrative measures require certified applicators to develop fumigation plans outlining application restrictions, zones to protect bystanders, and response procedures. Evacuation is mandatory prior to fumigation; all occupants, pets, and removable items like must be removed from the treated area, with indoor appliances such as pilot lights extinguished to prevent ignition risks. detailing hazards, precautions, and emergency treatments must be posted at entry points to deter unauthorized access during application and aeration phases. Handlers receive training on fumigant-specific risks, with documentation maintained for at least two years, ensuring awareness of symptoms like respiratory distress from or from methyl bromide. PPE for designated personnel includes full-face respirators, supplied-air systems, and protective suits when entering hazardous atmospheres, with standby observers similarly equipped. Employees must be removed from spaces upon detection of hazardous concentrations, defined as exceeding permissible exposure limits (e.g., per OSHA Table Z-1 or manufacturer thresholds). Post-fumigation involves with fans until gas levels fall below safe thresholds, such as 1 ppm for in structural treatments or 5 ppm for methyl bromide before unprotected entry. Re-entry intervals (REIs) restrict access until monitoring confirms safe conditions; for example, requires aeration and gas detection to ensure residues do not exceed occupational limits before worker return. In grain storage, fumigated commodities like demand 48 to 72 hours of aeration prior to handling. These protocols, enforced by agencies like the EPA and OSHA, reduce acute poisoning incidents, though compliance varies by jurisdiction and fumigant type.

Environmental Impact

Effects on Ecosystems and Non-Target Organisms

Fumigants, particularly those applied to in agricultural settings, exert significant pressure on non-target soil microorganisms, including beneficial , fungi, and nematodes that contribute to , decomposition, and symbiosis. Studies indicate that broad-spectrum fumigants like methyl bromide and combinations can drastically reduce microbial and , with effects persisting for weeks to months post-application, potentially disrupting services such as and suppression. For instance, a comprehensive review documented that these fumigants inhibit activities and alter microbial community structures, leading to slower recovery rates in treated fields compared to untreated controls. Similarly, , commonly used in grain storage fumigation, demonstrates selective survival among soil microbes at arthropod-lethal concentrations, though repeated exposures may indirectly favor resistant strains, altering long-term microbial dynamics. Non-target , such as , predatory arthropods, and pollinators like honeybees, face acute risks from fumigant volatility and drift during application, especially in open-field or structural treatments. , a structural fumigant, exhibits moderate to honeybees, with exposures causing mortality at concentrations relevant to accidental releases, while broader fumigation practices have been linked to declines in beneficial insect populations through direct contact or residue uptake. In ecosystems, while fumigants' gaseous nature limits persistence, runoff from applications can introduce residues into waterways, adversely affecting and invertebrates; empirical data from pesticide monitoring show heightened sensitivity in non-target species to fumigant-related contaminants, though specific is minimal due to rapid volatilization. populations, critical for , often experience reduced burrowing and following soil fumigation, as evidenced by field trials measuring losses exceeding 50% in treated plots. Wildlife impacts, including on and mammals, arise primarily from inadvertent exposure during fumigation of outdoor or semi-enclosed areas, where and demonstrate across taxa. formulations are explicitly noted for lethality to and mammals at pest-control doses, posing risks to species near treated storage sites, with documented cases of secondary via contaminated prey. Methyl bromide, prior to its 2015 global phase-out under the , contributed indirectly to ecosystem disruption via stratospheric , elevating UV radiation levels that harmed and amphibian larvae in exposed aquatic systems. Overall, while containment protocols mitigate widespread dispersal, ecological assessments highlight vulnerabilities in hotspots, with recovery dependent on fumigant type, dosage, and environmental factors; for example, fumigant evaluations underscore ongoing concerns for non-target in diverse habitats. remains low for most fumigants owing to their non-persistent, volatile profiles, contrasting with more lipophilic pesticides.

Regulatory Frameworks and Compliance

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classifies most fumigants, particularly soil fumigants, as restricted use pesticides (RUPs), necessitating by state regulatory agencies for applicators prior to purchase or application. This framework, governed by 40 CFR Part 171, mandates training on safe handling, application techniques, and emergency response to mitigate risks from volatile gases. Compliance includes site-specific fumigant management plans, buffer zones to protect nearby residents and workers, posting of , and adherence to good agricultural practices, as outlined in EPA's reregistration eligibility decisions updated through 2024. Violations can result in fines or license revocation, with states enforcing these via inspections and record-keeping requirements. Internationally, the (FAO) and (WHO) provide the International Code of Conduct on Pesticide Management, a voluntary framework emphasizing , labeling, and post-registration surveillance for fumigants to ensure safe trade and use. For phytosanitary purposes, the International Protection Convention's ISPM 43 standard, adopted in 2025, guides national plant protection organizations on fumigation protocols, including dosage verification, gas-tight enclosures, and residue monitoring to prevent spread without unnecessary environmental release. These guidelines prioritize evidence-based data and causal links between application methods and outcomes, while addressing biases in self-reported industry data by recommending independent audits. In the , Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 on plant protection products governs fumigant authorization, requiring demonstration of low risk to human health and ecosystems through peer-reviewed and exposure studies before approval. Methyl bromide, for instance, was phased out by 2010 under the , with alternatives like subject to maximum residue limits and derogations limited to emergencies. Compliance demands certified operators, detailed application records, and conformity with for wood packaging fumigation, involving heat treatment or approved gases with official marking to facilitate border inspections. National authorities enforce these via residue testing and audits, reflecting a precautionary approach that has restricted several fumigants due to persistent risks documented in data.

Alternatives

Non-Chemical Approaches

Heat treatment involves raising the temperature of infested structures or commodities to lethal levels for pests, typically 48–55°C (120–131°F) sustained for several hours, which kills all life stages of without chemical residues. This method penetrates materials via conduction, similar to fumigants, and has been applied to buildings for bed bugs and since the early 2000s, with rates exceeding 99% when core temperatures are monitored. For wooden pallets and export goods, international standards like require heating to 56°C for 30 minutes in the core, providing a phytosanitary to methyl bromide. Cold treatment, or freezing, exposes pests to sub-zero temperatures, such as -18°C (0°F) for 72 hours or -20°C (-4°F) for 24 hours, targeting eggs and larvae in commodities like fruits or grains. This physical method avoids chemical penetration issues but requires insulated chambers and validation for uniform cooling, limiting its use to smaller-scale or applications rather than large structures. Steam sterilization applies high-temperature , often aerated mixtures at 50–60°C for 30 minutes, to or enclosed spaces, selectively eliminating pathogens and nematodes while preserving beneficial microbes in some cases. Developed as a methyl bromide alternative for , it has been tested in strawberry fields and nurseries, achieving comparable disinfestation with energy-efficient applicators that reduce use by optimizing steam distribution. Irradiation employs , such as gamma rays or electron beams at doses of 150–400 , to disrupt pest reproduction and cause mortality without altering commodity quality or leaving residues. Approved for phytosanitary treatment in over 60 countries for fruits, , and grains, it prevents exotic pest establishment in , with facilities ensuring no in treated goods. Economic analyses indicate viability for high-value exports, though costs restrict broader adoption compared to fumigation.

Emerging Chemical and Biological Options

Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) represents a relatively recent chemical fumigant introduced as a broad-spectrum alternative to for , targeting nematodes, fungi, and through volatilization and disruption of cellular processes. Approved for agricultural use in various crops, DMDS is applied via shank or and has demonstrated efficacy in reducing root-knot nematodes in field trials, with residue dissipation influenced by factors like content. However, its deployment requires careful management due to reported acute incidents during application, prompting enhanced safety protocols. Ethyl formate (EF), a naturally occurring , has seen renewed development as a low-toxicity fumigant for post-harvest treatments and structural applications, killing rapidly via asphyxiation and metabolic interference without leaving harmful residues. Recent evaluations confirm its effectiveness against pests like in transport vessels and fruit flies in , with U.S. EPA exemptions granted in 2025 for residues up to specified limits. Optimized protocols, including vapor phase delivery, have expanded its use in cucurbits, achieving over 99% mortality at concentrations of 20-50 g/m³ for 4-6 hours. Carbonyl sulfide (COS) is under active evaluation as a grain fumigant, penetrating commodities to control stored-product through inhibition and , with profiles indicating lower than phased-out options. Market projections forecast growth in its agricultural adoption, driven by efficacy against resistant pests and compatibility with existing fumigation infrastructure, though hydrolysis kinetics in limit its standalone soil use. Biological approaches center on biofumigation via cover crops (e.g., , canola), which upon incorporation release glucosinolate-derived isothiocyanates as natural volatiles to suppress soilborne pathogens, , and . Recent advances include refined incorporation techniques and monitoring for timing, enhancing suppression rates by 50-80% in trials while improving microbial and over chemical methods. Derivatives like seed cakes and pellets offer scalable options, with field studies in 2024-2025 demonstrating sustained reductions and weed biomass decreases without synthetic inputs. Limitations persist in volatile release , dependent on crushing and environmental conditions, but integration with solarization boosts efficacy against resilient pathogens.

Controversies

Debates Over Chemical Phase-Outs

The phase-out of methyl bromide, a broad-spectrum fumigant widely used in soil treatment for crops such as strawberries, tomatoes, and peppers, has been the most prominent debate in fumigation chemical restrictions, driven by its role in stratospheric under the 1987 . International agreements mandated its global elimination by 2005 for developed nations, with critical use exemptions extended for due to the absence of equally effective substitutes. Proponents of the phase-out, including environmental agencies, emphasized of ozone loss—methyl bromide contributes about 5-10% to anthropogenic —and potential human health risks from prolonged exposure, such as neurological effects documented in occupational studies. However, agricultural stakeholders argued that the ban overlooked causal links to reduced yields, estimating 10-20% production losses in fumigation-dependent crops without viable alternatives, potentially threatening and export competitiveness. Alternatives like (1,3-D) combined with have been adopted, but debates persist over their efficacy and safety profiles. These substitutes often fail to fully control soil-borne pathogens, nematodes, and weeds as comprehensively as methyl bromide, requiring adjustments that increase costs by 20-50% per in some cases. A 2024 analysis of U.S. farming regions post-phase-out found persistent challenges, including higher incidence in non-fumigated fields and the need for tarping or injection methods that raise labor and expenses. Critics of ongoing use, such as advocates, cite incidents of respiratory irritation and contamination from chloropicrin volatilization, pushing for further restrictions, while farmers highlight peer-reviewed trials showing no equivalent broad-spectrum control from non-chemical options like biofumigation or solarization, which yield 15-30% lower efficacy in humid climates. Economic analyses underscore the tension, with U.S. Department of Agriculture reports projecting billions in annual losses from unmitigated phase-outs, including nursery stock declines and post-harvest commodity risks without methyl bromide's efficacy. Congressional hearings in the early revealed testimony that without exemptions—granted annually until at least 2015 for over 100 crops—U.S. producers faced competitive disadvantages against nations with laxer , as seen in documented illegal imports in developing markets like as of 2025. Emerging options, such as or for structural and commodity fumigation, show promise in trials but continues over their effects and scalability, with no on replacing methyl bromide's versatility without trade-offs in resistance or application timing. These disputes reflect broader causal realism in : while recovery data post-2005 validates environmental gains, agricultural metrics indicate incomplete substitution, informing calls for targeted over blanket bans.

Public Health Incidents and Efficacy Concerns

In April 2023, three workers became ill after applying to fumigate a in ; two died, with autopsy confirming acute pesticide poisoning as the cause of death for 64-year-old Leon Johnson due to elevated levels from gas exposure. Similar structural fumigations using this gas have led to multiple fatalities and severe injuries in from 2003 onward, often from inadequate aeration or re-entry protocols, prompting EPA recommendations for enhanced monitoring and training. Methyl bromide exposures have caused acute poisonings in residential and resort settings. In July 2015, four family members vacationing at a U.S. condominium suffered severe methyl bromide toxicity after unauthorized application under a nearby tent, resulting in neurological symptoms like seizures, ataxia, and developmental delays in children persisting months later. A 1996 incident in involved a newborn's 12-13 hours after structural fumigation, attributed to gas leakage into adjacent living areas. gas from aluminum phosphide tablets has triggered shipboard and storage exposures, such as the 1978 incident on a grain freighter where 29 of 31 crew members and two children required hospitalization for respiratory distress and . Efficacy concerns arise primarily from pest resistance, particularly to in stored-product insects like Tribolium castaneum and Rhyzopertha dominica, where global surveys since the 1990s show widespread weak-to-strong resistance, reducing mortality rates and requiring dosage escalations that heighten human exposure risks during application. Sublethal fumigant doses in grain fumigation exacerbate resistance selection, as documented in field trials where survival rates exceeded 10% in resistant populations, potentially prolonging pest infestations and necessitating repeated treatments with associated health hazards. Methyl bromide alternatives like face similar scrutiny, with incomplete penetration in dense commodities leading to survivor pockets and re-infestation, indirectly amplifying vector-borne disease risks in untreated areas.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Fumigation Handbook - Agricultural Marketing Service - USDA
    Fumigation is defined as the process of releasing and dispersing a toxic chemical that reaches a targeted pest in the gaseous state. An ideal fumigant ...
  2. [2]
    [PDF] study guide for fumigation/ stored commodities pest control
    Fumigation is needed when no other pesticide or control method can reach the insect infestation. If the insects are already inside the grain mass, no spray or ...
  3. [3]
    What are Soil Fumigants? | US EPA
    May 1, 2025 · Soil fumigants are pesticides that, when applied to soil, form a gas to control pests that live in the soil and can disrupt plant growth and crop production.
  4. [4]
    [PDF] Fumigation - Utah Department of Agriculture and Food
    Today, we use fumigants to control insects, rodents and other pests. We rely on these chemicals to treat grain bins, boxcars and other railcars, and other ...
  5. [5]
    Structural and Rodent Fumigation in Montana Agricultural Systems
    Fumigants are used to manage insect and rodent pests in hard-to-control agricultural areas including grain storage structures and burrows.
  6. [6]
    Methyl Bromide | US EPA
    Mar 13, 2025 · Methyl bromide is a fumigant used to control pests in agriculture and shipping. Methyl bromide also depletes the ozone layer.<|separator|>
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Fumigation faq - Structural Pest Control Board
    What is fumigation? Fumigation is a method of using a lethal gas to exterminate pests within an enclosed space. There are two.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  8. [8]
    Fumigant - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    The only common characteristic is that all have a relatively high vapor pressure, and, as a rule, they are highly toxic to both pests and humans.
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Additional Measures Can Be Taken to Prevent Deaths and Serious ...
    Dec 12, 2016 · Residential Fumigation Process. The residential fumigation process includes three phases: pre-fumigation, fumigation and post-fumigation (Table ...<|separator|>
  10. [10]
    Soil fumigant history - Farm Progress
    Soil fumigation was first used in the late 1880s when the grape root aphid Phylloxera was exported from the eastern United States to Europe, with devastating ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Pest Management and Pesticides: A Historical Perspective1
    12000 BC: First records of insects in human society. 2000 BC: First reported use of sulfur as a pesticide by pre-Roman civilizations. 1200 BC: First reports of ...
  12. [12]
    The Evolution of Pest Control
    Oct 13, 2016 · Ancient Sumerians used sulfur, or “brimstone,” compounds to kill the insects and mites that would feed on their crops.
  13. [13]
    Brief History of Integrated Pest Management
    Homer refers to the use of sulfur in fumigation and other forms of pest control. 470 B.C., Democritus, cited by Pliny, controls a blight by sprinkling plants ...
  14. [14]
    Pest Control History: Ancient to Modern - JP Pest Services
    Dec 21, 2015 · Around 1200 BCE, the Chinese discovered the use of botanical insecticides and fungicides for seed treatment, and began using mercury and arsenic ...
  15. [15]
    Pest Control Through the Ages: Ancient Roman Innovations
    Apr 27, 2024 · Purpose and Process: Romans used burning sulfur for fumigation to combat pests in public baths and private homes. Sulfur fumes were known to be ...
  16. [16]
    Fumigating for Health - Early Modern Medicine
    Apr 2, 2015 · Fumigating for Health · Smells were very important in understandings of early modern health. · Smells, in addition to being present in an ...
  17. [17]
    The Use of Sulfur Candles in the 18th Century - Paragon Pest Control
    Jun 15, 2024 · These candles were a common solution for fumigating homes and barns, helping to keep pests at bay. The Role of Sulfur Candles in the 18th Century
  18. [18]
    Manual of fumigation for insect control - Hydrogen cyanide (HCN)
    Hydrogen cyanide was one of the first fumigants to be used extensively under modern conditions. Its use for treating trees under tents against scale insects ...
  19. [19]
    053. Hydrogen cyanide (FAO Meeting Report PL/1965/10/2) - INCHEM
    Hydrogen cyanide has been widely employed for fumigating dry foodstuffs including cereals and milled cereal products, seeds, pulses, nuts and dried fruit and ...
  20. [20]
    [PDF] CHLOROPICRIN RISK CHARACTERIZATION DOCUMENT
    Nov 14, 2012 · Chloropicrin (trichloronitromethane) was first patented for use as an insecticide in 1908. Chloropicrin is a broad-spectrum fumigant with ...
  21. [21]
    Chloropicrin - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    It was patented as an insecticide in 1908 and has been extensively used since then as a soil fumigant at high application rates of 18 lb acre−1.
  22. [22]
    [PDF] HISTORY OF METHYL BROMIDE FUMIGANT, METHODS OF USE ...
    History of methyl bromide Methyl bromide was first synthesized by Perkinson in 1884. It was used as a fumigant to combat warehouse pests in France in 1932 ...
  23. [23]
    [PDF] Methyl Bromide - National Pesticide Information Center
    Introduced as a pesticide in 1932, methyl bromide was first registered in the United States in 1961 (1, 2).
  24. [24]
    Phosphine - an overview of a unique 80 year fumigant - Informit
    Phosphine was patented 80 years ago as a solid formulation for crop protection and continues to be widely used to this day in many new forms for fumigation.
  25. [25]
    Resistance to the Fumigant Phosphine and Its Management in ...
    Oct 14, 2019 · Phosphine has had a nearly 100-year of history of use as a fumigant ... development of improved phosphine fumigation protocols, and use of ...<|separator|>
  26. [26]
    The ventilation of houses after fumigation with hydrogen cyanide
    IN June 1935, certain problems arose concerning the fumigation of houses with hydrogen cyanide for the destruction of bedbugs. Workmen recon- ditioning houses ...
  27. [27]
    EPA approves methyl bromide alternative fumigation treatment
    Sep 19, 2025 · The EPA has approved a methyl bromide alternative fumigation treatment. Read how the crop protectant benefits fruit and vegetable growers.
  28. [28]
    Ethyl Formate; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance
    Aug 6, 2025 · EPA is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the fumigant ethyl formate in or on the commodities in ...
  29. [29]
    EPA Announces Next Steps to Protect People from Sulfuryl Fluoride ...
    Jul 30, 2024 · EPA is announcing that it has approved additional safety measures to prevent deaths and serious injuries when people re-enter homes fumigated with sulfuryl ...
  30. [30]
  31. [31]
    Agricultural Fumigant Market Update; Opportunity Of The Decade
    Rating 4.5 (11) Aug 19, 2024 · Innovations such as controlled-release formulations and automated fumigation systems improve operational efficiency and reduce labor costs, ...<|separator|>
  32. [32]
  33. [33]
    Strategic Trends in agricultural fumigants Market 2025-2033
    Rating 4.8 (1,980) May 28, 2025 · Innovations focused on biofumigation and other sustainable pest management strategies are gaining traction. The rising awareness of soil ...
  34. [34]
    Biofumigation Market Analysis,Trends, Innovations, and
    May 15, 2025 · Biofumigation Market Overview And Outlook 2025-2034 · Agriculture: The core user segment, driven by the need for eco-friendly pest control.<|control11|><|separator|>
  35. [35]
    Fumigation Operations - University of Kentucky
    Nov 30, 2018 · The penetration rate of gas into the material to be fumigated is often an important factor, and is related to the material's sorptive capacity.
  36. [36]
    Manual of fumigation for insect control
    Adsorption is the most important physical factor modifying the penetration of fumigants. The amount of gas physically adsorbed increases as the temperature ...
  37. [37]
    [PDF] Fumigation - Nevada Department of Agriculture
    Being a gas, the fumigant penetrates all spaces, including pores in wooden members or structures, and reaches other inaccessible areas where liquids and ...
  38. [38]
    A review on the mechanisms of fumigant action - Yan - 2025
    Feb 24, 2025 · Fumigants can impede cellular function by binding to the active sites of various enzymes which alters their conformation or directly inhibits ...FUMIGANTS · IMPACT OF FUMIGANTS ON... · PATHWAYS OF FUMIGANTS...
  39. [39]
    Pesticidal Toxicity of Phosphine and Its Interaction with Other Pest ...
    Mar 17, 2023 · The mechanisms of action in phosphine vary from disrupting metabolism and oxidative stress to neurotoxicity. Phosphine resistance is genetically ...
  40. [40]
    Insecticides Used in the Urban Environment: Mode of Action
    The parent chemical is converted to toxic metabolites by enzymes in the body. Finally, the fumigant sulfluryl fluoride inhibits energy production.
  41. [41]
    [PDF] florida fumigation manual
    Jan 23, 2025 · Fumigants follow all the physical laws of gases; therefore, their molecules diffuse freely through air and infiltrate the minutest of spaces ...
  42. [42]
    [PDF] Fumigation Training Guide - Arizona Department of Agriculture
    Compacted soil limits the amount of diffusion and penetration. Cultivation of soil prior to fumigation is essential. Cultivate the soil to the level where ...
  43. [43]
    A review on the mechanisms of fumigant action - ResearchGate
    Aug 19, 2025 · Because of their unique physical and chemical properties, fumigants demonstrate excellent efficacy in pest control through robust diffusion, ...
  44. [44]
    Fumigant Mode of Action, Drywood Termite Metabolism of Vikane ...
    The mode of action of fumigants. Journal of Stored Products Research 1985, 21 (4) , 157-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-474X(85)90010-4. I. Outram. Factors ...<|separator|>
  45. [45]
    Fumigation (General Practices) - Kentucky Pesticide Safety Education
    Nov 30, 2018 · Planning & Preparation. Become fully acquainted with site and commodity to be fumigated, including: 1. General layout of the structure, ...Missing: process | Show results with:process
  46. [46]
    Manual of fumigation for insect control
    The structure to be fumigated should be carefully inspected at the outset so that unusual features or potential problems can be taken into consideration.
  47. [47]
    Sulfuryl Fluoride Site-Specific Structural Fumigation Site Log | US EPA
    Jun 25, 2025 · Sulfuryl fluoride is a structural and commodity fumigant used to control a wide variety of pests, including termites, powder post beetles, ...
  48. [48]
    [PDF] florida fumigation manual
    Sep 10, 2021 · This manual is a guide for Florida state fumigation exams, covering target pests, safety, and standard procedures, but not all regulations.
  49. [49]
    Fumigating and Tenting a Home for Drywood Termites - Orkin
    From preparation to treatment to aeration, the entire fumigation process can take about 24 to 72 hours, depending on the size of the house and the outdoor ...
  50. [50]
    Sulfuryl Fluoride Poisonings in Structural Fumigation, a Highly ...
    Jun 6, 2019 · Sulfuryl fluoride is an odorless gas that targets the nervous system and can cause respiratory irritation, pulmonary edema, nausea, vomiting, seizures, and ...
  51. [51]
    Soil Fumigation - CTAHR
    Soil fumigants can effectively control soil-borne organisms, such as nematodes, fungi, bacteria, insects, weed seeds, and weeds.
  52. [52]
    How Soil Fumigation Works - TriCal, Inc.
    Fumigants are injected as liquids into the soil to control harmful insects, nematodes, weeds, bacteria, fungi, and diseases that have invaded a field.
  53. [53]
    [PDF] National Soil Fumigation Manual - EPA
    Soil fumigants play an important role in agriculture, nursery and greenhouse production, and turfgrass management. Yet the chemical properties that make.
  54. [54]
    Proper Soil Fumigant Selection and Application
    Nov 8, 2019 · Soil fumigants are volatile pesticides that are applied to the soil before planting as liquids and subsequently volatilize to gas and move ...
  55. [55]
    Soil Fumigation And Pepper Production - Vegetables by Bayer
    SOIL FUMIGANTS · Chloropicrin (Pic-Clor 60 and others) is effective against several soilborne, fungal plant pathogens. · 1,3-dichloropropene (Telone® II, Telone® ...
  56. [56]
    Fumigating Soils for Nematode Control
    After sealing, leave the soil undisturbed as long as the manufacturer specifies; then aerate with a disk or harrow to help the last of the fumigant escape.
  57. [57]
    [PDF] Soil fumigants provide multiple benefits; alternatives give mixed results
    Since the 1950s growers have routinely used soil fumigants such as methyl bromide (MBr) and. 1,3-dichloropropene (1,3-D) before.
  58. [58]
    Impacts of the Ban on the Soil-Applied Fumigant Methyl Bromide
    Jun 19, 2024 · Expected yield losses ranged from 10 to 20% depending on crop and production area, and total production losses would eliminate multiple crops ...
  59. [59]
    Soil Fumigant Toolbox | US EPA
    Aug 25, 2025 · Training, fumigant management plans, buffer zones, and other safety measures to ensure protections for agricultural workers and bystanders.
  60. [60]
    Soil Fumigation - New Mexico Department of Agriculture
    Soil Fumigants – including chloropicrin, dazomet, metam sodium/potassium, and methyl bromide – have new safety requirements as of December, 2012. Affected soil ...
  61. [61]
    Mechanisms by which chloropicrin fumigation promotes soil ...
    Jul 13, 2023 · Fumigation with chloropicrin enhanced the contribution of soil potassium to tomato growth and reduced the contribution of bacterial communities.
  62. [62]
    Soil Microbiome Post-Fumigation: Building Soil Microbe Populations ...
    Jun 11, 2024 · Fumigation provides a myriad of economic benefits for growers, including pest control, improved food safety and increased yields.
  63. [63]
    Agricultural Quarantine and Inspection Program - usda aphis
    Jul 30, 2025 · The Agricultural Quarantine and Inspection (AQI) program uses a system of safeguards to facilitate the safe trade of agricultural commodities.Learn more about AQI user fees · Commercial Aircraft Fee
  64. [64]
    APHIS Provides an Additional Methyl Bromide Fumigation ...
    APHIS Provides an Additional Methyl Bromide Fumigation Treatment ... Treatment Manual retained in its Agricultural Commodity Import Requirements (ACIR) database.
  65. [65]
    Treatments Procedure - Methyl Bromide - Tarpaulin Fumigation
    If you must fumigate on a porous surface, require the fumigator to cover the surface with plastic tarpaulins. For large fumigations, covering the surface is not ...
  66. [66]
    [PDF] Focus on Fumigation newsletter 2024 - SGS
    Nov 12, 2024 · Phosphine gas is an effective and economical fumigant, widely used in the stored products industry due to its ease of use and diverse.<|separator|>
  67. [67]
    Applications - ProFume
    ProFume fumigant provides label options to meet a wide range of uses in terms of sites, pests, commodities and fumigation techniques.
  68. [68]
    [PDF] Chapter 5: Commodity Fumigation Use Monitoring Inspection Report ...
    Apr 1, 2025 · A Commodity Fumigation Use Monitoring Inspection is performed to monitor treatment of post- harvest agricultural commodities, stored ...
  69. [69]
    [PDF] EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0590 - Regulations.gov
    Aug 15, 2025 · Environmental Risk Assessment in Support of the FIFRA Section 3 Registration of eFUME Fumigant (Manufacturing-Use Product), eFUME Pre-mixed ...Missing: details approval
  70. [70]
    [PDF] Treatment Manual - Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
    ... Quarantine. (USDA-APHIS-PPQ). The treatment of listed commodities prevents the movement of agricultural pests into or within the United States. An officer ...
  71. [71]
    Types of Structures Fumigated for Pest Control
    Mar 9, 2024 · Structural fumigation involves filling the airspace within a structure with a toxic gas, effectively targeting pests like drywood termites and ...
  72. [72]
    Structural Fumigation - National Pesticide Information Center
    Aug 5, 2025 · A tarp, or tent, is used over the structure to trap the gas inside. The gas penetrates cracks, crevices, and pores in the wood to eliminate ...Missing: adsorption | Show results with:adsorption
  73. [73]
    [PDF] Structural Pest Control Board
    For many years, the standard treatment for elimination of drywood termite infestations was fumigation with either methyl bromide or sulfuryl fluoride. The use ...
  74. [74]
    How to prepare your home for fumigation - Terminix
    When a structure is fumigated, tarps or other sealing methods are required to contain the gas within the structure so the gas reaches every area and deeply ...Missing: techniques | Show results with:techniques<|separator|>
  75. [75]
    Sulfuryl Fluoride Clearance Devices | US EPA
    Mar 3, 2025 · A device is considered effective if the device detects sulfuryl fluoride at 1 part per million (ppm) reliably and accurately.
  76. [76]
    What to Know About Termite Fumigation - WebMD
    Jan 21, 2025 · The basic steps to this technique are to erect a tent around the structure and then flood the space with pesticides for a certain period of time ...
  77. [77]
    Termites: How to Identify and Control Them | US EPA
    Diflubenzuron - inhibits insect development. Hexaflumuron- first active ingredient registered as a reduced-risk pesticide. It is used as part of a termite ...
  78. [78]
    Soil Fumigation - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    Soil fumigation is defined as a method used to eliminate diseases and pests in the soil before planting, utilizing chemical compounds that are toxic to a wide ...<|separator|>
  79. [79]
    Agricultural Fumigants Market Size | Industry Report, 2030
    The soil segment held the largest revenue share of 75.1% in 2024. Soil fumigation is a technique of pre-plant treatment of soil using chemicals to control crop ...
  80. [80]
    [PDF] Fumigant Use in California and an Assessment of Available ...
    Jan 27, 2025 · the advancement of alternative methods of pathogen and pest control. Fumigants and their alternatives are studied worldwide, with a ...
  81. [81]
    Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their benefits and hazards
    Pesticide contamination poses significant risks to the environment and non-target organisms ranging from beneficial soil microorganisms, to insects, plants, ...
  82. [82]
    Biofumigation cover crops: Enhancing soil health and combating pests
    Fumigation and soil health​​ Agricultural practices can positively or negatively impact soil health by modifying the physical, chemical and biological processes ...
  83. [83]
    Ethylene Oxide "Gas" Sterilization | Infection Control - CDC
    Nov 28, 2023 · Ethylene oxide (ETO) is a colorless, flammable gas used to sterilize heat/moisture-sensitive medical devices, especially critical items, in ...
  84. [84]
    Ethylene Oxide Gas Sterilization of Medical Devices - PubMed
    Ethylene oxide gas is an agent in the sterilization of medical devices due to its effectiveness and compatibility with most materials.
  85. [85]
    Sterilization for Medical Devices - FDA
    Ethylene oxide sterilization is an important sterilization method that manufacturers widely use to keep medical devices safe. Learn more about sterilization ...
  86. [86]
    Sterilization of 20 billion medical devices by ethylene oxide (ETO)
    Currently, ETO accounts for approximately 50% of medical device sterilization due to its ability to be used on medical products that cannot withstand radiation ...
  87. [87]
    Ethylene Oxide & Sterilization - AdvaMed®
    Medical devices that require EtO sterilization include heart valves, pacemakers, surgical kits, gowns, drapes, ventilators, syringes, and catheters. Learn more ...
  88. [88]
    Disinfection, decontamination, fumigation, incineration - NCBI - NIH
    For formaldehyde fumigation, room temperature should be > 15 °C. (Caution: vaporization of formalin or paraformaldehyde should not be done with gas or other ...
  89. [89]
    The risks and benefits of chemical fumigation in the health ... - PubMed
    This article reviews the effectiveness of fumigation as a method of inactivating microbes on environmental surfaces and in reducing patient infection rates.Missing: procedure | Show results with:procedure
  90. [90]
    Cabinet Decontamination Using Formaldehyde | Applied Biosafety
    The current European standard for biosafety cabinets (BS EN 12469:2000) describes a method of formaldehyde fumigation using liquid formalin (40% w/v) and water.
  91. [91]
    Hydrogen Peroxide Sterilization for Medical Devices - STERIS
    Jun 23, 2017 · A hydrogen peroxide sterilization process involves H2O2 vapor filling the sterilizer chamber, contacting and sterilizing exposed device surfaces ...
  92. [92]
    FDA Facilitates Broader Adoption of Vaporized Hydrogen Peroxide ...
    Jan 8, 2024 · Today, the FDA is announcing that it considers vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) to be an established method of sterilization for medical ...
  93. [93]
    Hydrogen Peroxide Gas Plasma | Infection Control - CDC
    Nov 28, 2023 · This process has the ability to inactivate a broad range of microorganisms, including resistant bacterial spores.
  94. [94]
    Medical Device Sterilization with Chlorine Dioxide Fumigation
    Chlorine dioxide (ClO₂) fumigation is efficient, non-toxic, and preserves delicate medical devices for sterilization.
  95. [95]
    Advances in Vaporized Hydrogen Peroxide Reusable Medical ... - NIH
    Oct 15, 2023 · In general, VHP sterilization is effective, safe, compatible, fast, and energy-efficient, particularly when compared to other sterilization ...
  96. [96]
    Sulfuryl Fluoride | US EPA
    Jul 29, 2025 · Since sulfuryl fluoride is odorless and colorless, chloropicrin is required to be used in residential structural fumigations as a warning agent ...
  97. [97]
    [PDF] Restricted Use Product Summary Report (3/6/2025) | EPA
    Mar 6, 2025 · U-PHOS® PHOSPHINE FUMIGANT. 40285. DEGESCH AMERICA, INC. Phosphine. 99.35. 40285-22. OLYMPIC POLY-ALGAECIDE 30. 42177. ALLIANCE TRADING, INC.
  98. [98]
    Regulatory Status of Fumigants | US EPA
    Dec 31, 2024 · This Web page provides the current regulatory status of the fumigant chemicals, both soil fumigants and fumigants with other uses, such as commodity fumigation.
  99. [99]
    Fumigant Pesticide Market Report | Global Forecast From 2025 To ...
    The fumigant pesticide market is segmented by product type into Methyl Bromide, Phosphine, Chloropicrin, Metam Sodium, and others. Methyl Bromide has been one ...Product Type Analysis · Application Analysis · Competitor Outlook
  100. [100]
    Article 2H: Methyl bromide - Ozone Secretariat - UNEP
    This phase-out plan includes both the production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances. The landmark agreement was signed in 1987 and entered into force ...
  101. [101]
    Methyl Bromide and the Montreal Protocol - DAFF
    Mar 9, 2023 · The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer requires a phase out of methyl bromide for applications other than quarantine and pre-shipment ...
  102. [102]
    Methyl bromide - UNEP
    ... Protocol. The phasing out of MB under the Montreal Protocol (Annex E) has contributed to over 30% of the decline in ozone-depleting chemical concentrations ...
  103. [103]
    Methyl Bromide | Phaseout of Ozone-Depleting Substances - US EPA
    Mar 18, 2016 · A separate exemption under the Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act allows the production and consumption of methyl bromide for quarantine ...
  104. [104]
    A Post‐Phaseout Retrospective Reassessment of the Global Methyl ...
    Jan 26, 2022 · As a result of the Montreal Protocol phase-out, atmospheric methyl bromide declined over the past two decades and has recently stabilized · The ...
  105. [105]
    EPA Acts to Ban EDB Pesticide
    Aug 5, 2016 · The US Environmental Protection Agency has ordered the immediate emergency suspension of ethylene dibromide (EDB) as a soil fumigant for agricultural crops.
  106. [106]
    [PDF] Ethylene Dibromide (Dibromoethane) - EPA
    is now banned, it is no longer used for this purpose. (1) ... vegetable, and grain crops, and as a fumigant for turf, particularly on golf courses.
  107. [107]
    Agricultural Uses of Ethylene Dibromide Halted | C&EN Global ...
    The agricultural use of the compound ethylene dibromide, or 1,2-dibromoethane, has come to an abrupt halt in the U.S. Beginning with emergency actions taken ...
  108. [108]
    Environmental chemistry of ethylene dibromide in soil and ground ...
    Its use as a soil fumigant was banned in the US in 1983 because of its carcinogenicity. Concern over gasoline as a source should diminish as leaded fuels ...
  109. [109]
    [PDF] 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (DBCP) - EPA
    1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) was used in the past as a soil fumigant and nematocide on crops; it is no longer used except as an intermediate in chemical ...Missing: restriction | Show results with:restriction
  110. [110]
    [PDF] RoC Profile: 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane
    However, its use as a soil fumigant was discontinued in 1985, and it is likely that only small amounts are used for chemical synthesis and research purposes. In ...Missing: restriction | Show results with:restriction<|separator|>
  111. [111]
    [PDF] Groundwater Fact Sheet Dibromochloropropane (DBCP)
    Summary. 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) is a regulated chemical with an established Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 0.2 micrograms per liter (µg/L).Missing: restriction | Show results with:restriction
  112. [112]
    1,3-Dichloropropene and Chloropicrin Combination Products ... - EPA
    Sep 22, 2025 · These soil fumigant pesticide products' labels require safety training according to the Worker Protection Standard WPS.
  113. [113]
    [PDF] Appendix K Chloropicrin and Chloropicrin in Combination with Other ...
    Sep 13, 2023 · For fumigations of potting soil with chloropicrin, follow conditions in Appendix G: Commodity Fumigation. Combination applications. Any ...
  114. [114]
    CCST Report Assesses the Use of Fumigants 1,3-D and ...
    Mar 13, 2025 · The fumigants 1,3-D and chloropicrin are classified as restricted materials both at the federal level and in California, with strict ...
  115. [115]
    Pesticides: California limits use of chloropicrin as a soil fumigant
    They also limit applications of chloropicrin to 40 acres per day, or 60 acres per day if a tarp is used.
  116. [116]
    Medical Case Profile: Inhalation Risks from Phosphide Fumigants
    A 48 year old male acutely develops symptoms of chest pain, shortness of breath, dizziness, and nausea with an episode of vomiting.
  117. [117]
    [PDF] Phosphine, Risk Characterization Document
    Jun 13, 2014 · The following section reviews what is known of phosphine's acute toxicity to humans ... Phosphine, along with methyl bromide and sulfuryl fluoride ...
  118. [118]
    Acute Sulfuryl Fluoride Poisoning in a Family — Florida, August 2015
    Jul 15, 2016 · A family of five (a grandmother, mother, father, son, and daughter) exposed to sulfuryl fluoride after their house was fumigated.
  119. [119]
    Health effects associated with sulfuryl fluoride and methyl bromide ...
    This study assessed the health effects associated with occupational exposure to methyl bromide and sulfuryl fluoride among structural fumigation workers.Missing: common phosphine
  120. [120]
    Targeted medical examinations for workers exposed to fumigants
    Oct 28, 2022 · Chronic exposure to MeBr may result in neurological effects such as peripheral neuropathy, impaired gait, behavioural changes, mental confusion, ...
  121. [121]
    A systematic review of pesticide exposure, associated risks, and ...
    This review identified consistent associations between chronic pesticide exposure and non-communicable diseases, including cancer, neurological disorders, and ...
  122. [122]
    About Pesticides and Reproductive Health - CDC
    Dec 15, 2023 · Some pesticides have been linked in human studies with problems including: Hormonal changes. Reduced fertility. Miscarriages. Birth defects.
  123. [123]
    [PDF] Sulfuryl Fluoride: Tier I Review of Human Incidents for Draft Risk ...
    Eleven fatal incidents occurred due to an individual being accidentally exposed to the product following breaking into a structure that had been fumigated and ...<|separator|>
  124. [124]
    Deaths Associated with Exposure to Fumigants in Railroad Cars
    Multiple incidents of illness and death following exposure to fumigated agricultural products in railroad cars have been reported by several states along ...
  125. [125]
    Fumigation Safety - University of Kentucky
    Nov 30, 2018 · Liquid and solid pesticides are most often the cause of skin exposure. However, some fumigant gases can injure the skin. Clothing or jewelry ...
  126. [126]
    [PDF] 2013: Chapter 17 Fumigants - EPA
    Metam sodium, metam potassium and dazomet, when used as fumigants, all rely on conversion to methyl isothiocyanate.Missing: pest | Show results with:pest
  127. [127]
    Pesticide Poisoning Symptoms and First Aid - MU Extension
    Sep 27, 2017 · Such effects include asthma, skin irritation and eye and nose irritation. Not all people develop allergies; however, certain people seem to be ...Effects of pesticide exposure · Principles for treating acute... · Insecticides
  128. [128]
    Implementing Safety Measures | US EPA
    Jul 18, 2025 · Tarp Perforation and Removal: Fumigant gases become trapped under tarps and can be released when the tarp is perforated (i.e., cut, punched, ...
  129. [129]
    Risk Mitigation Measures for Soil Fumigant Pesticides
    Risk mitigation includes worker protection, good practices, application restrictions, a management plan, buffer zones, and emergency response measures.
  130. [130]
  131. [131]
    Oregon Occupational Safety and Health : Fumigants and fumigation
    Agriculture employers are required to document each pesticide handler's training and maintain that documentation for two years from the date of the training.
  132. [132]
    Steps to Prevent Stored Grain Infestations - SDSU Extension
    Aug 25, 2020 · Corn must be aerated after fumigation. Do not enter the bin if methyl bromide levels are above 5 ppm unless protected by a full-face supplied- ...
  133. [133]
    [PDF] Non-Soil Agricultural Fumigation Manual for Private Applicators
    Phosphine gas levels must be monitored periodically during the entire fumigation process to ensure effective pest control and the safety of applicators.<|control11|><|separator|>
  134. [134]
    Restrictions to Protect Workers After Pesticide Applications | US EPA
    Aug 6, 2025 · The restricted-entry interval (REI) is the time immediately after a pesticide application when entry into the treated area is restricted.
  135. [135]
    Fact Sheet on Measures Required to Protect Workers from Fumigant ...
    Sep 22, 2025 · EPA requires safety measures for soil fumigant pesticides to increase protections for agricultural workers and bystanders -- people who live ...<|separator|>
  136. [136]
    Impact of fumigants on non-target soil microorganisms: a review
    Apr 5, 2022 · Benefits of pre-plant soil fumigation include reduced incidence of plant disease, increased crop yields, and improved food safety, all of which ...
  137. [137]
    [PDF] Bioresponse of Nontarget Organisms Resulting from the Use of ...
    Most research has concentrated on the effects of combinations of methyl bromide and chloropicrin fumigants on disease-causing organisms. Little.
  138. [138]
    Phosphine and selected metal phosphides (EHC 73, 1988) - INCHEM
    Many microorganisms survive fumigation at exposures (concentration x time) that are effective against arthropods. The few studies available indicate that ...
  139. [139]
    Sulfuryl fluoride - AERU - University of Hertfordshire
    It is moderately toxic to honeybees, aquatic fauna and flora. Hazard alerts. The following alerts are based on the data in the tables below.
  140. [140]
    Impact of pesticides on non-target invertebrates in agricultural ...
    This review article examines the negative effects of pesticides on non-target invertebrates including earthworms, honeybees, predators, and parasitoids.Missing: fumigation | Show results with:fumigation
  141. [141]
    Current status of pesticide effects on environment, human health ...
    By using pesticides on crops, humans come in direct contact with them and they affect the skin, eyes, mouth, and respiratory tract, and cause acute reactions ...
  142. [142]
    [PDF] PHOSPHINE FUMIGATION: TRAINING MANUAL
    Fumigants with high boiling points (e.g. methyl bromide) tend to be sorbed more and remain as residues for longer times than fumigants with low boiling points ( ...
  143. [143]
    A Case Study of Soil Fumigation in Florida Tomato Production - PMC
    Dec 14, 2011 · Despite widespread use of methyl bromide, this fumigant has been found to cause stratospheric ozone layer depletion and to be associated with ...
  144. [144]
    Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED): Sulfuryl Fluoride
    After fumigation and aeration of treated structures, there is little likelihood that nontarget organisms would be exposed to residues of sulfuryl fluoride, or ...
  145. [145]
    40 CFR Part 171 -- Certification of Pesticide Applicators - eCFR
    This part establishes Federal standards for the certification and recertification of applicators of restricted use pesticides.
  146. [146]
    The International Code of Conduct on Pesticide Management
    These guidelines, developed by the FAO/WHO Joint Meeting on Pesticide Management (JMPM), provide a framework to establish or strengthen national legislation, ...
  147. [147]
    Requirements for the use of fumigation as a phytosanitary measure
    Jul 29, 2025 · This standard provides technical guidance for national plant protection organizations (NPPOs) on the application of fumigation as a ...
  148. [148]
    ISPM 43. Requirements for the use of fumigation as a phytosanitary ...
    This standard provides technical guidance for national plant protection organizations (NPPOs) on the application of fumigation as a phytosanitary measure, ...
  149. [149]
    Pesticides - European Commission's Food Safety
    Evaluation of the EU legislation on plant protection products and pesticides residues. Legislation on Plant Protection Products (PPPs). View legislation ...
  150. [150]
    Fumigation Regulations in the European Union: An Overview
    Nov 5, 2020 · In this article, we introduce EU regulations and international pest control standards, such as ISPM 15, for wooden products, such as wood packaging materials.
  151. [151]
    Requirements for wood packaging & dunnage - Food Safety
    All wood packaging material and dunnage from non-EU countries must be: either heat treated or fumigated in line with ISPM15 procedures;. officially marked with ...
  152. [152]
    Full article: Fumigant Use for Strawberry Production in Europe
    Jul 29, 2016 · These EU fumigant regulations emphasized the greater importance of human health and environmental protection compared to the needs of crop ...
  153. [153]
    Heat Treatment vs Fumigation - Expert Pest Control
    Jun 16, 2022 · Heat treatment is 100% chemical free, proven to kill termites. Heat treatments kill all living stages of termites and require one treatment.Missing: physical | Show results with:physical
  154. [154]
    What You Need to Know About Heat Treatments - IFC
    It is the process of gradually heating a structure or equipment to temperatures high enough to kill all life stages of insect pests.
  155. [155]
    [Pest Management] Treating with Heat
    Apr 22, 2008 · FUMIGATION ALTERNATIVE. Thermal remediation, or more simply heat treatment, is the process of gradually heating a structure or equipment to ...
  156. [156]
    [PDF] Heat treatments - BPCA
    The crucial element of heat treatment is its ability (along with fumigation but by different means) to penetrate materials by conduction. (as opposed to ...<|separator|>
  157. [157]
    Pallet fumigation methods for pest control - Ferrier Industrial
    Heat Treatment: An eco-friendly alternative to chemical fumigants, heat treatment involves heating the pallets to a specific temperature to kill pests. This ...
  158. [158]
    [PDF] Treatment Manual - The American Seed Trade Association
    Jun 4, 2018 · The use of any patented invention in the performance of the processes described in this manual is solely the responsibility of the user. APHIS.
  159. [159]
    Methodologies and documents for biosecurity treatments - DAFF
    Oct 7, 2025 · The Guide to performing QPS fumigation with methyl bromide provides information on the various methods and techniques that can be used to ...
  160. [160]
    [PDF] Options to Methyl Bromide for the Control of Soil-Borne Diseases ...
    Aerated steam (air-steam mixture) selectively kills plant pathogens at 50 - 60 °C in 30 minutes and could be used in nurseries as an alternative to soil ...
  161. [161]
    Energy efficient steam soil disinfestation systems for flower and ...
    The project developed a design for a steam applicator capable of treating field soil in strawberry fields as an alternative to methyl bromide fumigation.
  162. [162]
    Optimizing Operating Parameters of High-Temperature Steam for ...
    Jul 13, 2020 · The efficiency of steam sterilization, an alternative to chemical methods, has improved as technology has advanced, and the Agricultural ...
  163. [163]
    Irradiation Can Be an Alternative to Fumigation - Entomology Today
    Sep 3, 2015 · More environmentally benign than methyl bromide, irradiation has been endorsed by a range of medical organizations as an effective and safe tool ...Missing: non- | Show results with:non-
  164. [164]
    Phytosanitary Irradiation - PMC - NIH
    Jan 20, 2016 · Ionizing radiation is used as a phytosanitary treatment in a growing number of countries for an increasing number of fruits and vegetables ...
  165. [165]
  166. [166]
  167. [167]
    Effects of soil factors on dimethyl disulfide desorption and the risk of ...
    Sep 1, 2023 · Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) is a relatively new soil fumigant used in agro-industrial crop production to control soil-borne pests that damage ...Missing: emerging | Show results with:emerging
  168. [168]
    Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) as an effective soil fumigant against ...
    Oct 28, 2019 · DMDS is an excellent soil fumigant that can be used for controlling root-knot nematode and can be an potential novel alternative to MB in China.Missing: emerging | Show results with:emerging
  169. [169]
    Acute Illness Associated with Exposure to a New Soil Fumigant ...
    Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) is a new soil fumigant that is considered a replacement for methyl bromide. In 2014, the Florida Department of Health (FDOH) received ...Missing: emerging | Show results with:emerging
  170. [170]
    Ethyl formate: A comprehensive review on its Function as a fumigant ...
    Ethyl formate is a well-known fumigant since 1927, that has regained popularity lately due to the phase out of methyl bromide and the escalating resistance to ...
  171. [171]
    Optimizing ethyl formate fumigation in greenhouse cucurbit crops for ...
    Oct 13, 2023 · Ethyl formate (EF) is naturally occurring volatile compound used as quarantine fumigant for pest control. Recently, conversion of uses of EF was ...
  172. [172]
    Review of the toxicology of carbonyl sulfide, a new grain fumigant
    Aug 7, 2025 · Carbonyl sulfide (COS) is a new grain fumigant which has been developed to replace methyl bromide, being phased out due to its ozone ...
  173. [173]
    Carbonyl Sulfide Fumigant Market Research Report 2033
    According to our latest research, the Global Carbonyl Sulfide Fumigant market size was valued at $185 million in 2024 and is projected to reach $312 million ...<|separator|>
  174. [174]
    Integrating biofumigation and phyto-spectral monitoring: Advancing ...
    This study advances the understanding of biofumigant crop management by incorporating spectral technologies to enhance efficiency and decision-making, aligning ...
  175. [175]
    Biofumigation with Brassica Species and Their Derivatives - MDPI
    Recent advancements have also introduced innovative biofumigation products, such as Brassica seed cakes, liquid formulations, pellets, and oils, further ...
  176. [176]
    A review of biofumigation effects with plant materials - Ji - 2024
    Dec 12, 2024 · It reviews recent advancements in controlling harmful soil pathogens and nematodes, enhancing soil fertility, improving microbial community ...
  177. [177]
    [PDF] Methyl Bromide: The Problem, the Phase Out, and the Alternatives
    Methyl bromide's history is similar to that of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane ... methyl bromide soil fumigation. 171. In studies conducted in Florida, the EPA ...
  178. [178]
    Background on Methyl Bromide phase out
    Jun 12, 2020 · In addition, the United States has joined 140 other nations in signing the Montreal Protocol, which in 1994 froze production and importation of ...
  179. [179]
    Deaths from Building Fumigation Raise Long-standing Health ...
    Jun 28, 2023 · There are many viable alternatives to sulfuryl fluoride and methyl bromide fumigation. These alternatives include temperature manipulation, ...
  180. [180]
    [PDF] Alternatives to Methyl Bromide - EPA
    The general methyl bromide end uses are. (1) soil fumigation (80%), (2) commodity fumigation (8%), and (3) structural fumigation (11%). Methyl bromide is also ...
  181. [181]
    [PDF] Economic Implicatoins of the Methyl Bromide Phaseout
    It is used for soil fumigation before planting many fruits, vegetables, ornamentals, and agricultural nurseries; for post-harvest fumigation of commodities in.
  182. [182]
    Review the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide - House.gov
    Methyl bromide is a highly-effective fumigant used to control a broad spectrum of pests on more than 100 crops in the United States. Methyl bromide is also used ...
  183. [183]
    The Banned Gas: Methyl bromide is still flooding Egypt's farmland
    Sep 11, 2025 · In Egypt, methyl bromide has been banned for soil fumigation due to its environmental and health hazards. The gas damages the ozone layer and ...
  184. [184]
    The Future of Methyl Bromide - Western Fumigation
    Jun 1, 2022 · Methyl bromide is being phased out due to ozone depletion. Efume, a non-residual alternative, is being trialed, with trials in April 2022 being ...
  185. [185]
    Worker died from pesticide exposure after fumigation, Broward ...
    Jun 9, 2023 · At least one of two pest control workers found dead in April after conducting a fumigation at a Pompano Beach warehouse died of pesticide exposure.
  186. [186]
    Cause of death released for 1 of 2 pest control workers who died ...
    Jun 14, 2023 · Leon Johnson, 64, was one of three pest control workers who became sick after fumigating the Baer's Furniture warehouse on April 22.
  187. [187]
    Severe Illness from Methyl Bromide Exposure at a Condominium ...
    Jul 24, 2015 · Four cases of suspected acute methyl bromide toxicity among family members vacationing at a condominium resort in the US Virgin Islands.
  188. [188]
    New details on family poisoned by pesticide: Sons can't eat or walk ...
    Sep 10, 2015 · Two Delaware teens recovering from pesticide poisoning struggle to eat, walk and sit up on their own, an investigation into what went wrong highlights failures ...
  189. [189]
    Fatal Accident Resulting from Methyl Bromide Poisoning after ...
    An intoxication after using methyl bromide (CH3Br) in fumigation is reported. The accident resulted in the death of a newborn infant within 12–13 h after ...
  190. [190]
    Phosphine and Eight Metal Phosphides Acute Exposure Guideline ...
    Aluminum phosphide fumigation aboard a grain freighter on September 24, 1978, resulted in acute illness in two female children and 29 of 31 crew members (Wilson ...
  191. [191]
    Resistance to the Fumigant Phosphine and Its Management in ...
    Jan 7, 2020 · Development of resistance in major grain insect pest species to the key fumigant phosphine (hydrogen phosphide) across the globe has put the viability and ...<|separator|>
  192. [192]
    Deciding to Fumigate - University of Kentucky
    Nov 30, 2018 · Frequent fumigation at dosages too low to kill all insects promotes problems with resistance. Fumigant labels give dosages needed for ...