Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Chembox validation/VerifiedDataSandbox and Sodium fluoroacetate: Difference between pages

{{cs1 config|name-list-style=vanc}}

| Watchedfields = changed

| verifiedrevid = 477002654

| ImageFile = Sodium-fluoroacetate-2D-skeletal.svg

| ImageFile1 = Sodium-fluoroacetate-xtal-3D-SF.png

| ImageCaption1 = Multiple sodium fluoroacetate molecules arranged in a crystal.{{legend|rgb(128, 76, 192)|[[Sodium]], Na}}{{legend|black|[[Carbon]]}}{{legend|white|[[Hydrogen]], H}}{{legend|red|[[Oxygen]]}}{{legend|rgb(153, 172, 45)|[[Fluorine]], F}}

| IUPACName = Sodium 2-fluoroacetate

| OtherNames = {{ubl|1080|Compound 1080|SFA|Sodium monofluoroacetate}}

|Section1={{Chembox Identifiers

| CASNo_Ref = {{cascite|correct|CAS}}

| CASNo = 62-74-8

| Beilstein = 3915223

| ChemSpiderID_Ref = {{chemspidercite|correct|chemspider}}

| ChEBI_Ref = {{ebicite|correct|EBI}}

| ChEBI = 38699

| EINECS = 200-548-2

| Gmelin = 470376

| KEGG_Ref = {{keggcite|correct|kegg}}

| KEGG = C18588

| PubChem = 16212360

| RTECS = AH9100000

| UNNumber = 2629

| UNII_Ref = {{fdacite|correct|FDA}}

| UNII = 166WTM3843

| InChI = 1/C2H3FO2.Na/c3-1-2(4)5;/h1H2,(H,4,5);/q;+1/p-1

| InChIKey = JGFYQVQAXANWJU-REWHXWOFAP

}}

|Section2={{Chembox Properties

| Formula = {{chem2|FCH2CO2Na}}

| F=1|H=2|Na=1|O=2|C=2

| Appearance = Fluffy colorless to white powder or crystals

| Odor = odorless<ref name=PGCH />

| Solubility = soluble

| MeltingPtC = 200

| MeltingPt_notes =

| BoilingPt = Decomposes

}}

|Section3={{Chembox Structure

| MolShape =

| Coordination =

| CrystalStruct =

| Dipole =

}}

|Section7={{Chembox Hazards

| ExternalSDS =

| MainHazards = Toxic, Flammable

| FlashPt = ?

| GHSPictograms = {{GHS06}}{{GHS09}}

| GHSSignalWord = Danger

| HPhrases = {{H-phrases|300|310|330|400}}

| PPhrases = {{P-phrases|260|262|264|270|271|273|280|284|301+310|302+350|304+340|310|320|321|322|330|361|363|391|403+233|405|501}}

| LD50 = 1.7 mg/kg (rat, oral)<br />0.34 mg/kg (rabbit, oral)<br />0.1 mg/kg (rat, oral)<br />0.3 mg/kg (guinea pig, oral)<br />0.1 mg/kg (mouse, oral)<ref>{{IDLH|62748|Sodium fluoroacetate}}</ref>

| IDLH = 2.5 mg/m³<ref name=PGCH>{{PGCH|0564}}</ref>

| REL = TWA 0.05 mg/m³ ST 0.15 mg/m³ [skin]<ref name=PGCH />

| PEL = TWA 0.05 mg/m³ [skin]<ref name=PGCH />

}}

|Section8={{Chembox Related

| OtherAnions =

| OtherCations =

| OtherCompounds =

'''Sodium fluoroacetate''', also known as '''compound 1080''', is an [[organofluorine chemistry|organofluorine]] [[chemical compound]] with the [[chemical formula]] {{chem2|FCH2CO2Na|auto=1}}. It is the [[sodium]] [[salt (chemistry)|salt]] of [[fluoroacetic acid]]. It contains sodium [[cations]] {{chem2|Na+}} and fluoroacetate [[anions]] {{chem2|FCH2CO2−}}. This colourless salt has a taste similar to that of table salt ([[sodium chloride]]) and is used as a [[rodenticide]].

== History and production ==

The effectiveness of sodium fluoroacetate as a rodenticide was reported in 1942.<ref name=kalmbach>{{cite journal |author= Kalmbach, E. R. |title= Ten-Eighty, a War-Produced Rodenticide |journal= Science |year= 1945 |volume= 102 |issue= 2644 |pages= 232–233 |doi= 10.1126/science.102.2644.232 |pmid= 17778513|bibcode= 1945Sci...102..232K}}</ref> The name "1080" refers to the catalogue number of the poison, which became its brand name.<ref name="Proudfoot">{{cite journal |author1=Proudfoot, A. T. |author2=Bradberry, S. M. |author3=Vale, J. A. |title= Sodium fluoroacetate poisoning |journal= Toxicological Reviews|year= 2006 |volume= 25 |issue= 4 |pages= 213–219 |doi= 10.2165/00139709-200625040-00002 |pmid= 17288493|s2cid=29189551}}</ref>

The salt is synthesized by treating [[sodium chloroacetate]] with [[potassium fluoride]].<ref name=Aigueperse>{{Ullmann |vauthors= Aigueperse J, Mollard P, Devilliers D, Chemla M, Faron R, Romano R, Cuer JP |title= Fluorine Compounds, Inorganic |doi= 10.1002/14356007.a11_307}}</ref>

Both sodium and [[Potassium fluoroacetate|potassium salt]]s are derivatives of [[fluoroacetic acid]].

==Natural occurrence==

Fluoroacetate occurs [[Plant defence against herbivores|naturally]] in at least 40 plants in [[Australia]], [[Brazil]], and [[Africa]]. It is one of only five known [[organofluorine]]-containing natural products.<ref>{{cite book |first1= K. K. Jason| last1= Chan |first2= David| last2= O'Hagan|title= Natural Product Biosynthesis by Microorganisms and Plants, Part B|chapter= The Rare Fluorinated Natural Products and Biotechnological Prospects for Fluorine Enzymology|series=Methods in Enzymology |year=2012 |volume=516 |pages=219–235|doi= 10.1016/B978-0-12-394291-3.00003-4|pmid= 23034231|isbn= 9780123942913}}</ref>

===Fluoroacetate occurrence in ''Gastrolobium'' species===

''[[Gastrolobium]]'' is a genus of flowering plants in the family [[Fabaceae]]. This genus consists of over 100 species, and all but two are native to the southwest region of [[Western Australia]], where they are known as "poison peas". ''Gastrolobium'' growing in southwestern Australia concentrate fluoroacetate from low-[[fluoride]] [[soil]]s.<ref>{{cite journal |author= Lee, J. |title= Deadly plants face threat of extinction |journal= ANU Reporter |year= 1998 |volume= 29 |issue= 6 |publisher= Australian National University |url= http://info.anu.edu.au/mac/Newsletters_and_Journals/ANU_Reporter/_pdf/vol_29_no_06/extinction.html |access-date= 2012-08-07 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120326080255/http://info.anu.edu.au/mac/Newsletters_and_Journals/ANU_Reporter/_pdf/vol_29_no_06/extinction.html |archive-date=2012-03-26}}</ref> [[Brushtail possum]]s, [[bush rat]]s, and [[western grey kangaroo]]s native to this region are capable of safely eating plants containing fluoroacetate, but [[livestock]] and introduced species from elsewhere in Australia are highly susceptible to the [[poison]],<ref>{{cite web |author= McKenzie, R. |title= Australian Native Poisonous Plants |publisher= Australian Native Plants Society |work= Australian Plants Online |year= 1997 |url=http://anpsa.org.au/APOL7/sep97-4.html |access-date= 2012-08-07}}</ref> as are species introduced from outside Australia, such as the [[red fox]]. The fact that many ''Gastrolobium'' species also have high [[Secondary poisoning|secondary toxicity]] to non-native [[carnivore]]s is thought to have limited the ability of [[cats]] to establish populations in locations where the plants form a major part of the [[Understory|understorey vegetation]].<ref>{{cite book |author1=Short, J. |author2=Atkins, L. |author3=Turner, B. |year= 2005 |title= Diagnosis of Mammal Decline in Western Australia, with Particular Emphasis on the Possible Role of Feral Cats and Poison Peas |url=http://www.wildliferesearchmanagement.com.au/Report_NGS.pdf |publisher= Wildlife Research and Management Pty |location= Australia |access-date= 2011-09-26}}</ref>

The presence of ''Gastrolobium'' species in Western Australia has often forced farmers to 'scalp' their land, that is, remove the top soil and any poison pea seed which it may contain, and replace it with a new poison pea-free top soil sourced from elsewhere in which to sow crops. Similarly, after bushfires in north-western [[Queensland]], cattlemen have to move livestock before the poisonous ''[[Gastrolobium grandiflorum]]'' emerges from the ashes.<ref name="Noble">{{cite web | title=Death Lurks in the Ashes on Western Farms | work= Townsville Bulletin| publisher= republished by [[Noble Group]] | date=2011-09-22 | url=http://www.thisisnoble.com/in-the-press/2213-death-lurks-in-the-ashes-on-western-farms.html | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151119234631/http://www.thisisnoble.com/in-the-press/2213-death-lurks-in-the-ashes-on-western-farms.html | archive-date=2015-11-19 | url-status=dead | access-date=2022-03-20}}</ref>

[[File:Gifblaar.jpg|thumb|240px|left|''[[Dichapetalum cymosum]]'']] The related compound {{visible anchor|Potassium fluoroacetate|text=potassium fluoroacetate}} occurs naturally [[plant defense against herbivory|as a defensive compound]] in at least 40 plant species in [[Australia]], [[New Zealand]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ogilvie |first1=S.C. |last2=Miller |first2=A |date=May 2009 |title=Uptake of 1080 by Watercress and Puha - Culturally-Important Plants Used for Food |journal=Lincoln University Management Report |location=New Zealand |publisher=[[Lincoln University (New Zealand)|Lincoln University]] |volume=49 |s2cid=55749453 |hdl-access=free |hdl=10182/1389}}</ref><ref name="Eason-et-al-2011">{{cite journal | title=An updated review of the toxicology and ecotoxicology of sodium fluoroacetate (1080) in relation to its use as a pest control tool in New Zealand | url=http://newzealandecology.org/nzje/2968 | s2cid=42138511 | journal=[[New Zealand Journal of Ecology]] | date=2011 | volume=35 | issue=1 | pages=1–20 | jstor=24060627| last1=Eason | first1=Charles | last2=Miller | first2=Aroha | last3=Ogilvie | first3=Shaun | last4=Fairweather | first4=Alastair}}</ref> [[Brazil]], and [[Africa]]. It was first identified in ''[[Dichapetalum cymosum]]'', commonly known as gifblaar or poison leaf, by Marais in 1944.<ref name="maraisa">{{Cite journal |last1=Marais |first1=J.C.S. |last2=Du Toit |first2=P.J. |year=1943 |title=The isolation of the toxic principle "K cymonate" from "Gifblaar" ''Dichapetalum cymosum'' |journal=Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Industry |volume=18 |pages=203 |hdl-access=free |hdl=2263/59331}}</ref><ref name="maraisb">{{Cite journal |last1=Marais |first1=J.C.S. |last2=Du Toit |first2=P.J. |year=1944 |title=Monofluoroacetic acid, the toxic principle of "gifblaar" ''Dichapetalum cymosum'' |journal=Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Industry |volume=20 |pages=67 |hdl-access=free |hdl=2263/59620}}</ref> As early as 1904, colonists in [[Sierra Leone]] used extracts of ''[[Chailletia toxicaria]]'', which also contains fluoroacetic acid or its salts, to poison rats.<ref name="renner">{{Cite journal |last=Renner |first=W. |date=October 1904 |title=Native Poison, West Africa |journal=Journal of the African Society |volume=4 |issue=XIII |pages=109–111 |doi=10.1093/oxfordjournals.afraf.a093857 |jstor=714934}}</ref><ref name="power">{{cite journal |author1=Power, F. B. |author2=Tutin, F. |title= Chemical and Physiological Examination of the Fruit of ''Chailletia toxicaria'' |journal= [[Journal of the American Chemical Society]] |year= 1906 |volume= 28 |issue= 9 |pages= 1170–1183 |doi= 10.1021/ja01975a007|url=https://zenodo.org/record/1428878}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author1=Vartiainen, T. |author2=Kauranen, P. |title= The determination of traces of fluoroacetic acid by extractive alkylation, pentafluorobenzylation and capillary gas chromatography-mass spectrometry |journal= Analytica Chimica Acta |year= 1984 |volume= 157 |issue= 1 |pages= 91–97 |doi= 10.1016/S0003-2670(00)83609-0|bibcode=1984AcAC..157...91V}}</ref> Several native Australian plant genera contain the toxin, including ''[[Gastrolobium]]'', ''[[Gompholobium]]'', ''[[Oxylobium]]'', ''[[Nemcia]]'', and ''[[Acacia]]''. New Zealand's native [[Sonchus|Puha]] contains 1080 in very low concentrations.<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.ecoresearch.co.nz/uploads/2/1/0/8/21081912/puha_1080_research_report.pdf |title=Sodium fluoroacetate (compound 1080) uptake by Puha, a culturally-important food plant| journal= Lincoln University Wildlife Management Report| first1= A. | last1= Miller | first2= S.C. | last2= Ogilvie | first3= J.M. | last3= Atarla | first4= J. | last4= Walwai | first5= J. | last5= Doherty| volume= | number= 48| publisher= Lincoln University| location= New Zealand | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180121223004/http://www.ecoresearch.co.nz/uploads/2/1/0/8/21081912/puha_1080_research_report.pdf|archive-date=21 January 2018 |access-date= February 21, 2024}}</ref>

== Toxicology ==

Sodium fluoroacetate is toxic to most [[obligate aerobic]] organisms, and highly toxic to mammals and insects.<ref name="Proudfoot" /> The oral dose of sodium fluoroacetate sufficient to be lethal in humans is 2–10&nbsp;mg/kg.<ref name="Beasley">{{cite web |last= Beasley |first= Michael |title= Guidelines for the Safe Use of Sodium Fluoroacetate (1080) |publisher= New Zealand Occupational Safety & Health Service |date= August 2002 |url=http://www.business.govt.nz/worksafe/information-guidance/all-guidance-items/sodium-fluoroacetate-1080-guidelines-for-the-safe-use-of |format= PDF |access-date= 2015-10-31 |url-status= dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151017012513/http://www.business.govt.nz/worksafe/information-guidance/all-guidance-items/sodium-fluoroacetate-1080-guidelines-for-the-safe-use-of |archive-date= 2015-10-17}}</ref>

The toxicity varies with species. The [[New Zealand Food Safety Authority]] established lethal doses for a number of species. Dogs, cats, and pigs appear to be most susceptible to poisoning.<ref name="ACVM">{{cite web |title= Controlled Pesticides: Sodium Fluoroacetate (1080) in Pest Control |publisher= Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Group |url=http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/acvm/publications/notes/1080-study-notes.pdf |access-date= 2007-12-17}}</ref>

The [[enzyme]] [[fluoroacetate dehalogenase]] has been discovered in a soil [[bacterium]], which can detoxify fluoroacetate in the surrounding medium.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Leong|first1=Lex Ee Xiang|last2=Khan|first2=Shahjalal|last3=Davis|first3=Carl K.|last4=Denman|first4=Stuart E.|last5=McSweeney|first5=Chris S.|date=December 2017|title=Fluoroacetate in plants - a review of its distribution, toxicity to livestock and microbial detoxification|journal=Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology|language=en|volume=8|issue=1|pages=55|doi=10.1186/s40104-017-0180-6|issn=2049-1891|pmc=5485738|pmid=28674607 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Mechanism of action ===

Fluoroacetate is structurally similar to [[acetate]], which has a pivotal role in cellular metabolism. This similarity is the basis of the toxicity of fluoroacetate. Two related mechanisms for its toxicity have been discussed, with both beginning with the conversion of fluoroacetate to 2-fluorocitrate. 2-Fluorocitrate arises by condensation with oxaloacetate with fluoroacetyl [[coenzyme A]], catalyzed by [[citrate synthase]]. [[Fluorocitric acid|Fluorocitrate]] binds very tightly to [[aconitase]], thereby halting the [[citric acid cycle]]. This inhibition results in an accumulation of citrate in the blood. Citrate and fluorocitrate are allosteric inhibitors of [[phosphofructokinase-1]] (PFK-1), a key enzyme in [[glycolysis]]. When PFK-1 is inhibited, cells are no longer able to metabolize carbohydrates, depriving them of energy.<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Proudfoot, A. T. |author2=Bradberry, S. M. |author3=Vale, J. A. |title= Sodium fluoroacetate poisoning |journal= Toxicological Reviews|year= 2006 |volume= 25 |issue= 4 |pages= 213–219 |doi= 10.2165/00139709-200625040-00002 |pmid= 17288493|s2cid=29189551}}</ref> Alternatively, fluorocitrate interferes with citrate transport in the mitochondria.<ref name=Timp>{{cite book |doi=10.1016/B978-008043405-6/50040-2|chapter=Highly-toxic fluorine compounds|title=Fluorine Chemistry at the Millennium|year=2000|last1=Timperley|first1=Christopher M.|pages=499–538|isbn=9780080434056}}</ref>

=== Symptoms ===

In humans, the symptoms of poisoning normally appear between 30 minutes and three hours after exposure. Initial symptoms typically include nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain; sweating, confusion, and agitation follow. In significant poisoning, cardiac abnormalities including [[tachycardia]] or [[bradycardia]], [[hypotension]], and [[ECG]] changes develop. Neurological effects include muscle twitching and seizures; [[consciousness]] becomes progressively impaired after a few hours leading to [[coma]]. Death is normally due to [[ventricular arrhythmia]]s, progressive hypotension unresponsive to treatment, and [[aspiration pneumonia]].<ref name="Proudfoot" />

Symptoms in domestic animals vary: dogs tend to show nervous system signs such as convulsions, vocalization, and uncontrollable running, while large herbivores such as cattle and sheep more predominantly show cardiac signs.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NgMX__L3q40C&pg=PA556 |author= Gupta, R. |title= Veterinary Toxicology: Basic and Clinical Principles |publisher= Elsevier |location= Amsterdam |year= 2007 |page= [https://archive.org/details/veterinarytoxico0000unse_d2r9/page/556 556] |isbn= 978-0-12-370467-2 |access-date= 2012-08-08}}</ref>

Sub-lethal doses of sodium fluoroacetate may cause damage to tissues with high energy needs, especially the [[brain]], [[gonad]]s, [[heart]], [[lungs]]. [[Fetus]]es are also highly susceptible. Sub-lethal doses are typically completely metabolised and excreted within four days.<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Eason, C. T. |author2=Frampton, C. M. |author3= Henderson, R. |author4=Thomas, M. D. |author5=Morgan, D. R. |title= Sodium monofluoroacetate and alternative toxins for possum control |journal= [[New Zealand Journal of Zoology]] |year= 1993 |volume= 20 |issue= 3 |pages= 329–334 |issn= 0301-4223 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ACI4AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA330 |quote= Sodium monofluoroacetate was readily absorbed and rapidly eliminated in all species: only traces were detectable in sheep muscle after 72-96 h |doi=10.1080/03014223.1993.10420354 |access-date= 2010-07-02 |doi-access= free| via= Google Books}}</ref>

=== Treatment ===

Effective [[antidote]]s are unknown. [[Animal testing|Research]] in [[monkey]]s has shown that the use of [[glyceryl monoacetate]] can prevent problems if given after ingestion of sodium fluoroacetate, and this therapy has been tested in domestic animals with some positive results. In theory, glyceryl monoacetate supplies acetate ions to allow continuation of cellular respiration which the sodium fluoroacetate had disrupted.<ref>{{cite book |author= Brent, J. |title= Critical Care Toxicology |publisher= Mosby |location= St. Louis |year= 2005 |page= 970 |isbn= 978-0-8151-4387-1 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WuA4LsWXXWEC&pg=PA970 |quote= Glycerol monoacetate, 0.1 to 0.5&nbsp;mL/kg/h, as a Krebs cycle substrate replacement, has prolonged survival in a primate model, but it also may aggravate toxicity and seems to be effective only early in the course. |access-date= 2010-07-28}}</ref>

Experiments of N. V. Goncharov and co-workers resulted in development of two varieties of potentially successful{{quantify|date=June 2022}} treatments. One combines a [[phenothiazine]] compound and a [[dioic acid]] compound.{{vague|date=June 2022}} The other includes a phenothiazine compound, a [[nitroester]] compound,{{vague|date=June 2022}} and [[ethanol]].<ref>{{cite patent|invent1=Goncharov N.V.|invent2=Kuznetsov A.V.|invent3=Glashkina L.M.|invent4=Radilov A.S. |title=Compositions and Methods for Treating Intoxications|country=US |status=application |number=2010249116A1|pubdate=2010-09-30}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Goncharov |first1=Nikolay V. |last2=Jenkins |first2=Richard O. |last3=Radilov |first3=Andrey S. |date=2006 |title=Toxicology of fluoroacetate: a review, with possible directions for therapy research |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7515021 |journal=Journal of Applied Toxicology |volume=26 |issue=2 |pages=148–161 |doi=10.1002/jat.1118 |issn=0260-437X |pmid=16252258}}</ref>

In clinical cases, use of [[muscle relaxant]]s, [[anti-convulsant]]s, [[mechanical ventilation]], and other supportive measures may all be required. Few animals or people have been treated successfully after significant sodium fluoroacetate ingestions.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Rippe, J. M. |author2=Irwin, R. S. |title= Irwin and Rippe's Intensive Care Medicine |publisher= Wolters Kluwer Health / Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |location= Philadelphia |year= 2008 |pages= 1666–1667 |isbn= 978-0-7817-9153-3 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ooH1nH81_h4C&pg=PA1666 |quote= General supportive measures are paramount and aimed at maintaining the airway, breathing, and circulation. [[Activated charcoal]] should be administered in all suspected ingestions presenting within 1 to 2 hours after ingestion. Seizures should be treated with benzodiazepines or barbiturates. Hypocalcemia and prolonged QTc intervals may require calcium and magnesium supplementation. Various treatments have been tested in animals [149,161-163]. The most useful agent appears to be glyceryl monoacetate, which provides excess acetate as a substrate for the TCA cycle. The clinical use of glyceryl monoacetate remains unproven, however. |access-date= 2010-07-28}}</ref>

=== Tolerance ===

Animals can tolerate varying amounts of fluoroacetate. Mammalian carnivores and rodents tend to be the least tolerant, followed by mammalian herbivores, reptiles and amphibians, and finally fish. A lower [[metabolic rate]] seems to help with poison tolerance in general.<ref name=Leong/>

Many animals native to Australia seem to have developed additional tolerance to fluoroacetate beyond what general trends predict. Herbivore, seed-eating birds are exposed to very high amounts of natural fluoroacetate with no ill effect. Emus living in areas where fluoroacetate-producing plants grow can tolerate 150 times the concentration compared to emus living outside. Some native insects tolerate fluoroacetate and repurpose it as a defense chemical against carnivores.<ref name=Leong/>

Fluoacetate tolerance can be acquired in animals, though it is not fully clear how.<ref name=Leong/> In one study, sheep gut bacteria were [[genetic engineering|genetically engineered]] to contain the fluoroacetate dehalogenase enzyme that inactivates sodium fluoroacetate. The bacteria were administered to sheep, who then showed reduced signs of toxicity after sodium fluoroacetate ingestion.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gregg|first1=Keith|last2=Hamdorf|first2=Brenton|last3=Henderson|first3=Kerrin|last4=Kopecny|first4=Jan|last5=Wong|first5=Cheryl|title=Genetically Modified Ruminal Bacteria Protect Sheep from Fluoroacetate Poisoning|journal=Applied and Environmental Microbiology|date=September 1998|volume=64|issue=9|pages=3496–3498|issn=1098-5336 |pmid=9726903|pmc=106753|doi=10.1128/AEM.64.9.3496-3498.1998|bibcode=1998ApEnM..64.3496G}}</ref> A strain of natural bacterium that does the same was isolated from cattle [[rumen]] in 2012.<ref name=Leong>{{cite journal |last1=Leong |first1=Lex Ee Xiang |last2=Khan |first2=Shahjalal |last3=Davis |first3=Carl K. |last4=Denman |first4=Stuart E. |last5=McSweeney |first5=Chris S. |title=Fluoroacetate in plants - a review of its distribution, toxicity to livestock and microbial detoxification |journal=Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology |date=December 2017 |volume=8 |issue=1 |page=55 |doi=10.1186/s40104-017-0180-6 |doi-access=free |pmid=28674607 |pmc=5485738}}</ref>

== Pesticide use ==

[[File:Brushtail possum.jpg|thumb|right|Common brushtail possum, an invasive pest in New Zealand whose population is controlled with sodium fluoroacetate]]

Sodium fluoroacetate is used as a [[pesticide]], especially for [[mammal]]ian [[pest (organism)|pest]] species. [[Farmer]]s and [[Pastoral farming|grazier]]s use the poison to protect pastures and crops from various herbivorous mammals. In New Zealand and Australia it is also used to control [[invasive species in Australia|invasive non-native mammals]] that prey on or compete with native wildlife and vegetation.

=== Australia ===

In Australia, sodium fluoroacetate was first used in rabbit control programmes in the early 1950s, where it is regarded as having "a long history of proven effectiveness and safety".<ref>{{cite journal |year= 2002 |title= 1080 Summary information |journal= Miscellaneous Publication No. 011/2002}}</ref> It is seen as a critical component of the integrated pest-control programmes for [[rabbit]]s, [[fox]]es, wild dogs, and feral pigs. Since 1994, broad-scale fox control using 1080 meat baits in [[Western Australia]] has significantly improved the population numbers of several native species and led, for the first time, to three species of mammals being taken off the state's endangered species list. In Australia, minor direct mortality of native animal populations from 1080 baits is regarded as acceptable by the regulatory bodies, compared to the predatory and competitive effects of those introduced species being managed using 1080.<ref>{{cite web |title= The use of 1080 for pest control – 4.1 Key facts |publisher= NZ Department of Conservation |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/the-use-of-1080-for-pest-control/4-information-about-1080/4_1-key-facts/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130630141939/http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/the-use-of-1080-for-pest-control/4-information-about-1080/4_1-key-facts/ |archive-date=2013-06-30}}</ref> 1080 is also used by the agricultural industry to destroy populations of [[Dingo]]s, Australia's only pre-colonial mammalian apex predator, a practice condemned by numerous conservation groups and wildlife experts around the continent due to its far-reaching destabilisation of the natural balance of the ecosystem.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.australiangeographic.com.au/news/2021/02/the-impact-of-eradicating-dingoes-from-the-landscape-are-visible-from-space/ |title=The impact of eradicating dingoes from the landscape are visible from space |date=26 February 2021}}</ref>

[[Western Shield]] is a project to boost populations of endangered mammals in south-west Australia conducted by the [[Department of Environment and Conservation (Western Australia)|Department of Environment and Conservation of Western Australia]]. The project entails distributing fluoroacetate-baited meat from the air to kill [[predator]]s. Wild [[dog]]s and [[fox]]es will readily eat the baited meat. [[Cat]]s pose a greater difficulty as they are generally not interested in scavenging. However, an Australian [[RSPCA]]-commissioned study criticized 1080, calling it an inhumane killer.<ref>{{cite web |last= Speechley |first= Jane |title= 1080 is not a humane poison: International journal publishes RSPCA paper |publisher= RSPCA |date= 15 November 2007 |url=http://www.rspca.org.au/mediareleases/MRShow.asp?ID=131 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071118014551/http://www.rspca.org.au/mediareleases/MRShow.asp?ID=131 |archive-date= 2007-11-18 |access-date= 2007-12-17 |url-status= dead}}</ref> Some Western Australian herbivores (notably, the local [[subspecies]] of the [[tammar wallaby]], ''Macropus eugenii derbianus'', but not the subspecies ''M. e. eugenii'' of southern Australia and ''M. e. decres'' on [[Kangaroo Island]]) have, by [[natural selection]], developed partial [[immunity (medical)|immunity]] to the effects of fluoroacetate,<ref name="Twigg-King-1991">{{cite journal | last1=Twigg | first1=Laurie E. | last2=King | first2=Dennis R. | title=The Impact of Fluoroacetate-Bearing Vegetation on Native Australian Fauna: A Review | journal=[[Oikos (journal)|Oikos]] | publisher=[[Nordic Society Oikos]] ([[Wiley Publishing]]) | volume=61 | issue=3 | year=1991 | issn=0030-1299 | jstor=3545249 | pages=412–430| doi=10.2307/3545249 | bibcode=1991Oikos..61..412T}} {{issn|1600-0706}}.</ref> so that its use as a poison may reduce collateral damage to some native herbivores specific to that area.

In 2011, over 3,750 toxic baits containing 3&nbsp;ml of 1080 were laid across 520 properties over {{convert|48,000|ha}} between the Tasmanian settlements of [[Southport, Tasmania|Southport]] and [[Hobart]] as part of an ongoing attempt at the world's biggest invasive animal eradication operation – the eradication of [[red fox]]es<ref>{{cite web |last= Townsend |first= Ian |title= The great Tasmanian fox hunt |publisher= Australian Broadcasting Commission |date= 4 May 2014 |url=http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-05-04/5418860 |access-date= 2016-04-06}}</ref> from the island state. The baits were spread at the rate of one per 10 hectares and were buried, to mitigate the risk to non-target wildlife species like [[Tasmanian devil]]s.<ref>{{cite web |title= Full-on blitz for foxes |publisher= The Mercury (Tasmania) |date= 23 September 2011 |url= http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2011/09/23/263721_tasmania-news.html |access-date= 2011-08-26 |archive-date= 2012-10-08 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20121008050629/http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2011/09/23/263721_tasmania-news.html |url-status= dead}}</ref> Native animals are also targeted with 1080.<ref name=TAS1080>{{cite book | last=Paull | first=John | title=Island Futures | chapter=Environmental Management in Tasmania: Better off Dead? | series=Global Environmental Studies | publisher=[[Springer Japan]] | publication-place=[[Tokyo]] | year=2011 | isbn=978-4-431-53988-9 | issn=2192-6336 | doi=10.1007/978-4-431-53989-6_12 | pages=153–168 | s2cid=128342829 | editor-first1=Godfrey | editor-last1=Baldacchino | editor-first2=Daniel | editor-last2=Niles | url=http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:fa780987-846c-4ab3-bc66-513ce8069f8c}}</ref> During May 2005 up to 200,000 [[Bennett's wallaby|Bennett's wallabies]] on [[King Island (Tasmania)|King Island]] were intentionally killed in one of the largest coordinated 1080 poisonings seen in Tasmania.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.kangaroo-protection-coalition.com/wallaby-poison.html |title=How a wallaby and 1080 poison don't mix! |access-date=2011-10-06 |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120425051039/http://www.kangaroo-protection-coalition.com/wallaby-poison.html |archive-date=2012-04-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1438832.htm|title=The World Today – Animal welfare groups angered by King Island wallaby cull|work=abc.net.au|date=25 August 2023}}</ref>

In 2016, [[PAPP]] (para-amino propiophenone) became available for use, which the RSPCA has endorsed as an alternative to 1080, due in part to its ability to kill faster and cause less suffering, as well as having an antidote, which 1080 does not.<ref>{{cite web |author=Landline By Prue Adams |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-11/papp-bait-released-to-tackle-wild-dog-scourge/7499206 |title=Wild dogs: First new bait released in 50 years to tackle Australia's rural pest |publisher=[[ABC News (Australia)|ABC News]] (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) |date=2016-06-11 |access-date=2017-04-16}}</ref> However, {{as of|2023|June|lc=y}}, 1080 was still being used in attempts to reduce feral cat populations.<ref>{{cite news |last=Perpitch |first=Nicolas |date=2023-06-28 |title=Deadly tool that sprays feral cats with toxic gel unveiled as part of Australia-first strategy to save wildlife |language=en-AU |work=ABC News |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-28/deadly-tool-unveiled-as-part-of-crackdown-in-australia-first/102535300 |access-date=2023-06-28 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230628092912/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-28/deadly-tool-unveiled-as-part-of-crackdown-in-australia-first/102535300 |archive-date=2023-06-28}}</ref>

=== New Zealand ===

[[File:1080PoisonWarning gobeirne.png|thumb|Sign warning of poisonous sodium fluoroacetate baits on the West Coast of New Zealand]]

{{Main|1080 usage in New Zealand}}

Worldwide, New Zealand is the largest user of sodium fluoroacetate.<ref name="Beasley" /> This high usage is attributable to the fact that, apart from two species of bat,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/bats-pekapeka/ |title=Bats/pekapeka |publisher=Department of Conservation |access-date=23 February 2016}}</ref> New Zealand has no native land mammals, and some of those that have been introduced have had devastating effects on vegetation and native species.

1080 is used to control [[common brushtail possum|possums]], [[rat]]s, [[stoat]]s, [[deer]], and [[rabbit]]s.<ref>{{cite web |title= The use of 1080 for pest control |author= Green, W. |publisher= The Animal Health Board and The Department of Conservation |date= July 2004 |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/use-of-1080-04.pdf |access-date= 2008-12-16}}</ref> The largest users, despite some vehement opposition,<ref>{{cite news|last1=Harper|first1=Paul|last2=Neems|first2=Jeff|title=Protesters stop Coromandel 1080 drop|url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/2881440/Protesters-stop-Coromandel-1080-drop |agency=Waikato Times|publisher=Fairfax New Zealand Ltd|date=2009-09-19 |access-date= 12 February 2015}}</ref> are [[Animal Health Board (New Zealand)|OSPRI New Zealand]] and the [[Department of Conservation (New Zealand)|Department of Conservation]].<ref name=tny20141223>{{cite news |last1=Kolbert |first1=Elizabeth |title=The Big Kill: New Zealand's crusade to rid itself of mammals |url=http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/big-kill |magazine=The New Yorker |date=23 December 2014 |access-date= 23 December 2014}}</ref>

=== United States ===

Sodium fluoroacetate is used in the United States to kill [[coyote]]s.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/wildlife_damage/content/printable_version/fs_livestock_protection_collar.pdf |title= Wildlife Services Factsheet May 2010: The Livestock Protection Collar |publisher= U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) |quote= Coyotes are the leading cause of predation losses for sheep and goat producers. … The LPC is registered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a restricted use product. |access-date= 2010-07-30 |archive-date= 2017-02-06 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170206211602/https://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/wildlife_damage/content/printable_version/fs_livestock_protection_collar.pdf |url-status= dead}}</ref> Prior to 1972 when the EPA cancelled all uses, sodium fluoroacetate was used much more widely as a cheap<ref>{{cite book |author= Leydet, F. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7KIfDNJLyuwC&pg=PA110 |title= The coyote: defiant songdog of the West |publisher= University of Oklahoma Press |location= Norman |year= 1988 |page= 110 |isbn= 978-0-8061-2123-9 |quote= So it was not humaneness that convinced PARC that Compound 1080 was the ideal tool for coyote control. Sodium fluoroacetate had other attractions. It was cheap, and tiny amounts were effective: all you needed was sixteen grams, costing twenty-eight cents, to treat 1000 pounds of horsemeat, or enough, theoretically, to kill 11,428 coyotes at 1.4 ounces of bait meat per lethal dose. |access-date= 2010-07-30}}</ref> predacide and [[rodenticide]]; in 1985, the restricted-use "toxic collar" approval was finalized.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/3073fact.pdf |title= Sodium Fluoroacetate: Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) Fact Sheet |publisher= Environmental Protection Agency |quote= Sodium fluoroacetate is an acute toxicant predacide which is used against coyotes which prey on sheep and goats. … Sodium fluoroacetate is a restricted use pesticide which may be used only by trained, certified applicators and which is only registered for use in livestock protection collars. Sodium fluoroacetate will retain the restricted use classification imposed by the Agency in 1978 due to its high acute toxicity and the need for highly specialized applicator training. … Development and use of sodium fluoroacetate as a predacide and rodenticide in the U.S. began in the 1940s prior to the 1947 enactment of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act by which requirements for federal registration of pesticide products were instituted. In 1964 and again in 1971, the use of poisons to control predatory mammals were reviewed by selected committees. In 1972, EPA cancelled all registered predator control uses of sodium fluoroacetate, sodium cyanide, and strychnine. In 1977, the US Department of the Interior (USDI) applied for an Experimental Use Permit (EUP) to investigate the potential risks and benefits associated with the use of sodium fluoroacetate in "toxic collars" which would be placed on the necks of sheep and goats. … In 1981, EPA was petitioned by the USDI and livestock interests to revisit the 1972 predacide cancellation decision with respect to sodium fluoroacetate. … In 1985, EPA granted a registration to USDI for a toxic collar product which was transferred in 1986 to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). … The rodenticide uses of sodium fluoroacetate were cancelled due to lack of supporting data. In 1989, all "special local needs" registrations issued under §&nbsp;24(c) of FIFRA were cancelled, and all pending applications for Federal registration were denied by August 1990. |access-date= 2010-07-30}}</ref>

=== Other countries ===

1080 is used as a rodenticide in Mexico, Japan, Korea, and Israel.<ref name="Proudfoot" /><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/methods-of-control/1080-poison-for-pest-control/#othercountries |title=Methods of pest control: Animal pests |website=Doc.govt.nz |date=2006-08-01 |access-date=2017-04-18 |archive-date=2015-03-15 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150315024655/http://doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/methods-of-control/1080-poison-for-pest-control/#othercountries |url-status=dead}}</ref> In Israel 0.05% sodium fluoroacetate whole wheat grain baits are used to prevent heavy crop loss to field crops during mass outbreaks of the field rodents ''[[Microtus guentheri]], [[Meriones tristrami]]'' and ''[[Mus musculus]]'' populations.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Moran |first=S. |date=1991 |title=Toxicity of sodium fluoroacetate and zinc phosphide wheat grain baits to ''Microtus guentheri'' and ''Meriones tristrami'' |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2338.1991.tb00456.x |journal=EPPO Bulletin |volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=73–80 |doi=10.1111/j.1365-2338.1991.tb00456.x |issn=0250-8052}}</ref>

== Environmental impacts ==

=== Water ===

Because 1080 is highly water-soluble, it will be dispersed and diluted in the environment by rain, stream water, and ground water. Sodium fluoroacetate at the concentrations found in the environment after standard baiting operations will break down in natural water containing living organisms, such as aquatic plants or micro-organisms. Water-monitoring surveys, conducted during the 1990s, have confirmed that significant contamination of waterways following aerial application of 1080 bait is possible, but unlikely.<ref>{{cite book |last1= Eason |first1= C. T. |year= 2002 |title= Technical Review of Sodium Monofluoroacetate (1080) Toxicology |publisher= Animal Health Board |isbn= 978-0-478-09346-9 |url=http://www.ahb.org.nz/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=BUUHSpPIJ5s%3D&tabid=316 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111008044806/http://www.ahb.org.nz/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=BUUHSpPIJ5s=&tabid=316 |url-status= dead |archive-date= 2011-10-08 |access-date= 2011-09-30}}</ref> Research by [[National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research|NIWA]] showed that 1080 deliberately placed in small streams for testing was undetectable at the placement site after 8 hours, as it washed downstream. Testing was not done downstream.<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Suren |first1= A. |last2= Lambert |first2= P. |title= Do toxic baits containing sodium fluroacetate (1080) affect fish and invertebrate communities when they fall into streams? |journal= New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research |year= 2006 |volume= 40 |issue= 4 |pages= 531–546 |url=http://www.mendeley.com/research/toxic-baits-containing-sodium-fluroacetate-1080-affect-fish-invertebrate-communities-fall-streams/ |doi=10.1080/00288330.2006.9517443 |bibcode= 2006NZJMF..40..531S |s2cid= 85244853}}</ref>

In New Zealand, surface water is routinely monitored after aerial application of 1080, and water samples are collected immediately after application, when there is the highest possibility of detecting contamination.<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Eason |first1= C. T. |last2= Temple |first2= W. |journal= The NZWWA Journal |year= 2002 |volume= 32 |issue= 36 |title= Water sampling for sodium fluoroacetate (1080) – how much is enough? |isbn= 978-0-478-09346-9 |url=http://www.1080facts.co.nz/upload/download_files/water%20sampling.pdf |access-date= 2011-09-30 |url-status= dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120402144948/http://www.1080facts.co.nz/upload/download_files/water%20sampling.pdf |archive-date= 2012-04-02}}</ref> Of 2442 water samples tested in New Zealand between 1990 and 2010, following aerial 1080 operations: 96.5% had no detectable 1080 at all and, of all the samples, only six were equal to, or above the [[Ministry of Health (New Zealand)|Ministry of Health]] level for drinking water, and none of these came from drinking water supplies.<ref>Unpublished data, Landcare Research New Zealand Ltd</ref> Of 592 samples taken from human or stock drinking supplies, only four contained detectable 1080 residues at 0.1ppb (1 sample) and 0.2 ppb (3 samples) – all well below the Ministry of Health level of 2 ppb.

In an experiment funded by the Animal Health Board and conducted by NIWA simulating the effects of rainfall on 1080 on a steep soil-covered hillside a few meters from a stream, it was found that 99.9% of the water containing 1080 leached straight into the soil (See 4.3 of<ref name="tbfree.org.nz">{{cite web |url=http://www.tbfree.org.nz/Portals/0/NIWA's%20Suren%20report%20into%201080%20leaching%20into%20soil%20and%20water%20.pdf |title=Investigations of 1080 leaching and transport in the environment |website=Tbfree.org.nz |access-date=2017-04-18 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150127200622/http://www.tbfree.org.nz/Portals/0/NIWA%27s%20Suren%20report%20into%201080%20leaching%20into%20soil%20and%20water%20.pdf |archive-date=2015-01-27}}</ref>) and did not flow over the ground to the stream as had been expected. The experiment also measured contamination of soil water, which was described as the water carried through the soil underground at short horizontal distances (0.5-3m), downhill toward the stream. The experiment did not measure contamination of deeper soil and ground water immediately beneath the site of application.<ref name="tbfree.org.nz"/>

=== Soil ===

The fate of 1080 in the soil has been established by research defining the degradation of naturally occurring fluoroacetate (Oliver, 1977). Sodium fluoroacetate is water-soluble, and residues from uneaten baits leach into the soil where they are degraded to non-toxic metabolites by soil microorganisms, including bacteria (''[[Pseudomonas]]'') and the common soil fungus (''[[Fusarium solani]]'') (David and Gardiner, 1966; Bong, Cole and Walker, 1979; Walker and Bong, 1981).<ref>{{cite journal |author1= Eason, C. T. |author2= Wright, G. R. |author3= Fitzgerald, H. |title= Sodium Monofluoroacetate (1080) Water-Residue Analysis after Large-Scale Possum Control |journal= New Zealand Journal of Ecology |year= 1992 |volume= 16 |issue= 1 |pages= 47–49 |url= http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7105/4066_Easonetal_s13395.pdf |access-date= 2011-09-30 |archive-date= 2016-03-04 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160304060140/http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7105/4066_Easonetal_s13395.pdf |url-status= dead}}</ref>

=== Birds ===

Although it is now infrequent, individual aerial 1080 operations can still sometimes affect local [[bird]] populations if not carried out with sufficient care. In New Zealand, individuals from 19 species of native birds and 13 species of introduced birds have been found dead after aerial 1080 drops. Most of these recorded bird deaths were associated with only four operations in the 1970s that used poor-quality carrot baits with many small fragments.<ref>{{cite web |title= Evaluating the use of 1080 – Predators, poisons, and silent forests |year= 2011 |publisher= Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment |location= New Zealand |url= http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-1080.pdf |access-date= 2011-08-23 |archive-date= 2011-10-09 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20111009001535/http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-1080.pdf |url-status= dead}}</ref> On the other hand, many native New Zealand bird populations have been successfully protected by reducing predator numbers through aerial 1080 operations. [[Kokako]], [[blue duck]],<ref>{{cite web |title= Tongariro Forest whio |url= http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/native-animals/birds/wetland-birds/blue-duck-whio/docs-work/tongariro-forest-whio/ |publisher= Department of Conservation |location= New Zealand |access-date= 2011-08-23 |archive-date= 2013-05-03 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130503221239/http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/native-animals/birds/wetland-birds/blue-duck-whio/docs-work/tongariro-forest-whio/ |url-status= dead}}</ref> [[New Zealand pigeon]],<ref>{{cite journal |author1= Innes, J. |author2= Nugent, G. |author3= Prime, K. |author4= Spurr, E. B. |title= Responses of kukupa (''Hemiphaga novaeseelandiae'') and other birds to mammal pest control at Motatau, Northland |journal= New Zealand Journal of Ecology |year= 2004 |volume= 28 |issue= 1 |pages= 73–81 |url= http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7074/3460_Innesetal2004ku_s10649.pdf |access-date= 2011-08-23 |archive-date= 2016-03-04 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160304092344/http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7074/3460_Innesetal2004ku_s10649.pdf |url-status= dead}}</ref> [[Kiwi (bird)|kiwi]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/native-animals/birds/birds-a-z/kiwi/ |title=Kiwi: New Zealand native land birds |website=Doc.govt.nz |date=2012-05-03 |access-date=2017-04-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150228054858/http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/native-animals/birds/birds-a-z/kiwi/ |archive-date=2015-02-28 |url-status=dead}}</ref> [[New Zealand kaka|kaka]],<ref name="Stuff.co.nz_4930340">{{cite news |url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/4930340/1080-drop-boosts-Waitutu-kaka-DOC |title=1080 drop boosts Waitutu kaka: DOC |author=MacKay, Scot |date=27 April 2011 |work=[[The Southland Times]] |access-date= 12 November 2011}}</ref> [[New Zealand falcon]],<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Seaton, R. |author2=Holland, J. D. |author3=Minot, E. O. |author4=Springett, B. P. |title= Breeding Success of New Zealand Falcons (''Falco novaeseelandiae'') in a Pine Plantation |journal= New Zealand Journal of Ecology |year= 2009 |volume= 33 |issue= 1 |pages= 32–39 |url=http://www.nzes.org.nz/nzje/new_issues/NZJEcol33_1_32.pdf}}</ref> [[tomtit]],<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Powlesland, R. G. |author2=Knegtmans, J. W. |author3=Styche, A. |title= Mortality of North Island tomtits (''Petroica macrocephala toitoi'') caused by aerial 1080 possum control operations, 1997–98, Pureora Forest Park |journal= New Zealand Journal of Ecology |year= 2000 |volume= 24 |issue= 2 |pages= 161–168 |url=http://www.nzes.org.nz/nzje/free_issues/NZJEcol24_2_161.pdf}}</ref> [[South Island robin]],<ref>{{cite web |author1=Schadewinkel, R. B. |author2=Jamieson, I. G. |title=The effect of aerial application of 1080 cereal baits for possum control on South Island Robin (''Petroica australis'') in the Silver Peaks, Dunedin |url=http://tbfree.org.nz/Portals/0/Research/1080%20-%20robin%20report_final-revised.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202225238/http://www.tbfree.org.nz/Portals/0/Research/1080%20-%20robin%20report_final-revised.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=2013-12-02 |publisher=TBFree |location=New Zealand}}</ref> [[North Island robin]],<ref>{{cite journal |author1= Powlesland, R. G. |author2= Knegtmans, J. W. |author3= Marshall, I. S. J. |title= Costs and Benefits of Aerial 1080 Possum Control Operation Using Carrot Baits to North Island Robins (''Petroica australis longipes''), Pureora Forest Park |journal= New Zealand Journal of Ecology |year= 1999 |volume= 23 |issue= 2 |pages= 149–159 |url= http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7074/3474_Powleslandetal__s10663.pdf |access-date= 2011-08-23 |archive-date= 2012-06-20 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120620145103/http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7074/3474_Powleslandetal__s10663.pdf |url-status= dead}}</ref> New Zealand parakeets ([[kākāriki]]), and [[yellowhead (bird)|yellowhead]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/land-and-freshwater/land/operation-ark/ |title=Land conservation publications |website=Doc.govt.nz |date=2006-08-15 |access-date=2017-04-18 |archive-date=2013-05-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130503113711/http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/land-and-freshwater/land/operation-ark/ |url-status=dead}}</ref> have all responded well to pest control programmes using aerial 1080 operations, with increased chick and adult survival, and increases in population size. In contrast, seven of 38 tagged [[kea]], the endemic alpine parrot, were killed<ref name="ODT_177187">{{cite news |url=http://www.odt.co.nz/regions/west-coast/177187/seven-keas-dead-wake-1080-work |title=Seven keas dead in wake of 1080 work |date=12 September 2011 |work=[[Otago Daily Times]] |access-date= 12 November 2011}}</ref> during an aerial possum control operation on the [[West Coast Region|West Coast]] in August 2011. Because of their omnivorous feeding habits and inquisitive behaviour, kea are known to be particularly susceptible to 1080 poison baits, as well as other environmental poisons like the zinc and lead used in the flashings of backcountry huts and farm buildings.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/wildlife-health/nz-wildlife-diseases/#lead |title=Wildlife health: Our work |website=Doc.govt.nz |date=2009-09-14 |access-date=2017-04-18 |archive-date=2015-01-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150126170049/http://doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/wildlife-health/nz-wildlife-diseases/#lead |url-status=dead}}</ref> Recent research found that proximity to human-occupied sites where kea scrounge human food is inversely related to survival; the odds of survival increased by a factor of 6.9 for remote kea compared to those that lived near scrounging sites. High survival in remote areas is explained by innate neophobia and a short field-life of prefeed baits, which together preclude acceptance of poison baits as familiar food.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Kemp|first=Joshua R.|date=2019|title=Kea survival during aerial poisoning for rat and possum control|url=https://newzealandecology.org/nzje/3351|journal=New Zealand Journal of Ecology|volume=43|doi=10.20417/nzjecol.43.2|doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Reptiles and amphibians ===

[[Reptile]]s and [[amphibian]]s are susceptible to 1080, although much less sensitive than [[mammal]]s.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-1080.pdf |title=Evaluating the use of 1080 : Predators, poisons and silent forests |website=Pce.parliament.nz |access-date=2017-04-18 |archive-date=2011-10-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111009001535/http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-1080.pdf |url-status=dead}}</ref> Amphibian and reptile species that have been tested in Australia are generally more tolerant to 1080 poison than are most other animals.<ref>{{cite journal |title=The Sensitivity of Australian Animals to 1080 Poison VIII. Amphibians and Reptiles |author1=JC Mcilroy |author2=DR King |author3=AJ Oliver |journal=Wildlife Research |volume=12 |pages=113 |doi=10.1071/wr9850113 |year=1985}}</ref> McIlroy (1992) calculated that even if lizards fed entirely on insects or other animals poisoned with 1080, they could never ingest enough poison to receive a lethal dose.<ref>McIlroy, J.C. 1992: Secondary poisoning hazards associated with 1080-treated carrot baiting campaigns against rabbits, 1992</ref> Laboratory trials in New Zealand simulating worst-case scenarios indicate that both ''Leiopelma archeyi'' ([[Archey's frog]]) and ''L. hochstetteri'' ([[Hochstetter's frog]]) can absorb 1080 from contaminated water, substrate, or prey. The chance of this occurring in the wild is ameliorated by a variety of factors, including frog ecology. Captive maintenance and contamination problems rendered parts of this study inconclusive. Further population monitoring is recommended to provide more conclusive evidence than provided by this single study.<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Perfect, A. J. |author2=Bell, B. D. |title= Assessment of the impact of 1080 on the native frogs ''Leiopelma archeyi'' and ''L. hochstetteri'' |journal= DOC Research & Development Series |year= 2005 |volume= 209 |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/science-and-technical/drds209.pdf}}</ref> In New Zealand, the secondary poisoning of feral cats and stoats following 1080 operations is likely to have a positive effect on the recovery of native skink and gecko populations.<ref>{{cite thesis |hdl=10523/126 |title=Predation of lizards by feral house cats (''Felis catus'') and ferrets (''Mustela furo'') in the tussock grassland of Otago |website=[[University of Otago]] |date= October 1995 |type=Masters |s2cid=83730007 |last=Middlemiss |first=Anita}} Accessed 2017-04-18.</ref><ref name="Gillies-2001">{{cite journal | last=Gillies | first=Craig | title=Advances in New Zealand mammalogy 1990–2000: House cat | journal=[[Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand]] | publisher=[[Royal Society of New Zealand]] ([[Taylor & Francis|T&F]]) | volume=31 | issue=1 | year=2001 | issn=0303-6758 | doi=10.1080/03014223.2001.9517648 | pages=205–218 | bibcode=2001JRSNZ..31..205G | s2cid=128571359}}</ref><ref name="Allen-Lee-2006">{{cite book | editor-last1=Allen | editor-first1=Robert B. | editor-last2=Lee | editor-first2=William G. | editor-first3=M.M. | editor-last3=Caldwell | editor-first4=G. | editor-last4=Heldmaier | editor-first5=R.B. | editor-last5=Jackson | editor-first6=O.L. | editor-last6=Lange | editor-first7=H.A. | editor-last7=Mooney | editor-first8=E.-D. | editor-last8=Schulze | editor-first9=U. | editor-last9=Sommer | title=Biological invasions in New Zealand | publisher=[[Springer Berlin|Springer]] | publication-place=Berlin New York | year=2006 | isbn=978-3-540-30022-9 | oclc=262692884 | pages=XXIV+459+38fig.+28t | series=Ecological Studies | issn=0070-8356 | volume=86}} {{isbn|978-3-540-30023-6}}.</ref>{{rp|257}} Killing rabbits<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Norbury |first1=Grant |title=Conserving Dryland Lizards by Reducing Predator-Mediated Apparent Competition and Direct Competition with Introduced Rabbits |journal=Journal of Applied Ecology |date=2001 |volume=38 |issue=6 |pages=1350–1361 |doi=10.1046/j.0021-8901.2001.00685.x |jstor=827304 |bibcode=2001JApEc..38.1350N}}</ref> and possums,<ref>Possums and possum control; effects on lowland forest ecosystems – Atkinson et al, 1995: http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/science-and-technical/sfc001.pdf</ref> which compete for food with skinks and geckos, may also have benefits.

=== Fish ===

Fish generally have very low sensitivity to 1080. Toxicity tests have been conducted in the US on [[bluegill]] sunfish, [[rainbow trout]], and the freshwater invertebrate ''[[Daphnia magna]]''. Tests at different 1080 concentrations on sunfish (for four days) and ''Daphnia'' (two days) showed that 1080 is "practically non-toxic" (a US EPA classification) to both these species. Rainbow trout were also tested over four days at four concentrations ranging from 39 to 170&nbsp;mg 1080 per litre. From these results an [[LC50]] (the concentration of 1080 per litre of water which theoretically kills 50% of the test fish) can be calculated. The LC50 for rainbow trout was calculated to be 54&nbsp;mg 1080/litre – far in excess of any known concentration of 1080 found in water samples following 1080 aerial operations. Thus 1080 is unlikely to cause mortality in freshwater fish.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/the-use-of-1080-for-pest-control/4-information-about-1080/4_1-key-facts/ |title=Conservation publications: Science publications |website=Doc.govt.nz |date=2006-08-03 |access-date=2017-04-18 |archive-date=2013-06-30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130630141939/http://www.doc.govt.nz/publications/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/the-use-of-1080-for-pest-control/4-information-about-1080/4_1-key-facts/ |url-status=dead}}</ref>

=== Invertebrates ===

Insects are susceptible to 1080 poisoning. Some field trials in New Zealand have shown that insect numbers can be temporarily reduced within 20&nbsp;cm of toxic baits, but numbers return to normal levels within six days of the bait being removed.<ref>{{cite web |title= Impacts of 1080-poisoning for possum control on non-target invertebrates |author= Spurr, E. B. |publisher= Department of Conservation |location= New Zealand |year= 1996 |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/upload/documents/science-and-technical/sfc021.pdf}}</ref> Other trials have found no evidence that insect communities are negatively affected.<ref>{{cite journal |author1= Booth, L. H. |author2= Wickstrom, M. L. |title= The Toxicity of Sodium Monofluoroacetate (1080) to ''Huneria striata'', a New Zealand Native Ant |journal= New Zealand Journal of Ecology |year= 1999 |volume= 23 |issue= 2 |pages= 161–165 |url= http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7099/3451_BoothWickstrom__s10640.pdf |access-date= 2011-08-24 |archive-date= 2016-03-04 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160304092353/http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/PageFiles/7099/3451_BoothWickstrom__s10640.pdf |url-status= dead}}</ref> Another New Zealand study showed that [[wētā]], native ants, and [[Paranephrops|freshwater crayfish]] excrete 1080 within one to two weeks.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Eason, C. T. |author2=Gooneratne, R. |author3=Wright, G. |author4=Pierce, R. |author5=Frampton, C. M. |year= 1993 |chapter= The fate of sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) in water, mammals, and invertebrates |title= Proceedings of 46th New Zealand Plant Protection Society Conference |pages= 297–301}}</ref> There is also evidence that 1080 aerial operations in New Zealand can benefit invertebrate species.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/methods-of-control/1080-poison-for-pest-control/videos-about-1080/1080-poison-helps-native-snails/ |title=Methods of pest control: Animal pests |website=Doc.govt.nz |date=2006-08-01 |access-date=2017-04-18 |archive-date=2015-01-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150126170621/http://doc.govt.nz/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/methods-of-control/1080-poison-for-pest-control/videos-about-1080/1080-poison-helps-native-snails/ |url-status=dead}}</ref> Both possums and rats are a serious threat to [[endemism|endemic]] invertebrates in New Zealand, where around 90 per cent of spiders and insects are endemic and have evolved without predatory mammals.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/education/insects_spiders/ |title=Insects and Spiders of New Zealand/Aotearoa |access-date=2011-08-24 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110810032820/http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/education/insects_spiders/ |archive-date=2011-08-10}}</ref> In a study on the diet of brushtail possums, 47.5 per cent of possum faeces examined between January 1979 and June 1983 contained invertebrates, mostly insects.<ref name="Zealand1987">{{cite journal |author1=Cowan, P. E. |author2=Moeed, A. |title= Invertebrates in the diet of brushtail possums, ''Trichosurus vulpecula'', in lowland podocarp/broadleaf forest, Orongorongo Valley, Wellington, New Zealand |journal= New Zealand Journal of Zoology |year= 1987 |volume= 14 |issue= 2 |pages= 163–177 |issn= 0301-4223 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0Hh_dgF8cTAC&pg=PA163 |doi=10.1080/03014223.1987.10422987 |doi-access=}}</ref> One possum can eat up to 60 endangered native land snails (''[[Powelliphanta]]'' spp.) in one night.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/possums/page-4 |title=4. – Possums – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand |website=Teara.govt.nz |access-date=2017-04-18}}</ref>

==See also==

*[[Fluoroacetic acid]]

*[[Fluoroacetamide]]

*[[Methyl fluoroacetate]]

*[[Fluoroethyl fluoroacetate]]

*[[Fluoroaspirin]]

== References ==

{{Reflist|30em}}

== Further reading ==

* {{cite journal |author= Klingensmith CW |title= The Natural Occurrence of Fluoroacetic Acid, the Acid of the New Rodenticide 1080 |journal=Science |volume=102 |year=1945 |pages=622–623 |doi= 10.1126/science.102.2659.622 |pmid= 17818201 |issue= 2659}}

== External links ==

{{Commons category}}

* [https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0564.html Sodium fluoroacetate], CDC – NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20070831123332/http://www.naturebase.net/content/view/139/471/ A report on the Western Shield project] of the [[Department of Environment and Conservation (Western Australia)]], NatureBase (archived)

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20110615024310/http://www.wilderness.org.au/campaigns/forests/protect_forest_make-jobs Press release demanding the ban of 1080 use in Tasmanian forests (2004)] wilderness.org.au (archived 2011)

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20041120014836/http://www.fund.org/library/documentViewer.asp?ID=445&table=documents Notes on 1080 use for controlling predators in Idaho] (archived)

* [https://www.flicks.co.nz/movie/poisoning-paradise-ecocide-new-zealand/ A review of the documentary Poisoning Paradise: Ecocide New Zealand] (2009)

*{{YouTube|AQ9ZOquYmfI|Poisoning Paradise: Ecocide New Zealand}}

*{{YouTube|ySdYnM0Tf1Y|1080 Science: How and why 1080 poison is used in New Zealand}}, TBfree New Zealand and Hawke's Bay Regional Council

* [http://www.1080facts.co.nz/ 1080:The Facts] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160616091820/http://www.1080facts.co.nz/ |date=2016-06-16}} – a joint [[Federated Farmers]] and [[Forest and Bird]] initiative

{{Rodenticides}}

{{Sodium compounds}}

{{Fluoroacetates}}

[[Category:Aconitase inhibitors]]

[[Category:Fluorine-containing natural products]]

[[Category:Fluoroacetates]]

[[Category:Lyase inhibitors]]

[[Category:Organic sodium salts]]

[[Category:Pesticides]]

[[Category:Respiratory toxins]]

[[Category:Rodenticides]]

[[Category:Toxicology]]