DONATE
DONATE

Neonics Use on Feed Crops

So-called “conventional” insecticides are generally sprayed on plants or soil. Their use on corn and soybeans has decreased largely because of the increase in genetically engineered (GE) crops and the use of seed treatments known as neonicotinoids.

Much of the decrease in conventional insecticides is attributable to the widespread use of GE corn.[1-3] Crops that are genetically engineered to be insect-resistant “contain a gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) that produces a protein which is toxic to certain insects, protecting the plant over its entire life.”[4]

Additionally, a newer type of insecticide commonly called neonics (neonicotinoids) has mostly eliminated the need for conventional products, particularly on corn and soybeans.[5] Because neonicotinoids are the most widely used and most toxic insecticides, we focus on them in the rest of this page.[6,7]

 

  1. Richard Coupe & Paul Capel (2016). Trends in pesticide use on soybean, corn and cotton since the introduction of major genetically modified crops in the United States. Pest Management Science, 72(5), 1013–1022, p. 1020. [“…there has been a substantial decrease in the mass of insecticides applied since the introduction of Bt corn and cotton.”]
  2. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., et al., (2014). Genetically engineered crops in the United States. USDA-ERS Economic Research Report, (162), p. iv. [“Farmers generally use less insecticide when they plant Bt corn and Bt cotton.”]
  3. USDA Economic Research Service (2024) Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-u-s/ [Corn is 94% GE, with 86% Bt (insect-resistant). Soybean crops are not genetically engineered to be insect-resistant.]
  4. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., et al., (2014), p. 1.
  5. Coupe & Capel (2016), p. 1021. [“the widespread use of the neonicotinoids as seed treatments, starting in the mid-2000s, has changed the dynamics of insecticide use in the United States.”]
  6. DiBartolomeis, M. et al., (2019). An assessment of acute insecticide toxicity loading (AITL) of chemical pesticides used on agricultural land in the United States. PloS one, 14(8), e0220029, p. 1. [Neonicotinoids  “are considerably more toxic to insects and generally persist longer in the environment.” “Neonicotinoids are primarily responsible for this increase (in measured acute toxicity), representing between 61 to nearly 99 percent of the total toxicity loading in 2014.” ]
  7. Douglas, M. R., et al., (2020). County-level analysis reveals a rapidly shifting landscape of insecticide hazard to honey bees (Apis mellifera) on US farmland. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 797, p. 6. [“Neonicotinoids accounted for the overwhelming majority of oral toxic load by 2012.” And see Figure 5c for comparisons of “overall toxic load” showing neonics contribute the great majority in all agricultural regions of the U.S.]

The costs to society of neonic usage are significant. It’s important to understand that the vast and persistent effects of neonics are, to a large degree, in the service of animal ag and the industry’s supply of cheap and plentiful animal-source foods. The wide-ranging damages, especially to biodiversity, can be added to the long list of negative externalities of animal ag.[1]

 

  1. See, Insecticides Overview [question: “What are the effects of neonics on non-target animals?”]

Despite the growing use of neonic-treated seeds, little is known about when, where, and what kind of treated seeds are planted.[1,2] Prior to 2015, the USGS included seed treatment pesticides in its estimates of agricultural pesticide use, but this was discontinued “because of complexity and uncertainty.”[3]

In many cases, farmers do not know if they are buying treated seeds or what specific kind they are buying, so surveying them for usage is challenging.[4,5] The EPA has acknowledged that the lack of data on seed treatment hampers its ability to analyze the effects of pesticides on endangered species.[6] This lack of data also limits the work of scientists and researchers.[7]

 

  1. Hitaj, C. et al., (2020). Sowing Uncertainty: What We Do and Don’t Know about the Planting of Pesticide-Treated Seed. Bioscience, 70(5), 390–403, pp., 390-391. [“The publicly available pesticide use data in the United States do not currently account for pesticides applied as seed treatments.” Researchers include USDA scientists.]
  2. Douglas, M. R., & Tooker, J. F. (2015). Large-Scale Deployment of Seed Treatments Has Driven Rapid Increase in Use of Neonicotinoid Insecticides and Preemptive Pest Management in U.S. Field Crops. Environmental Science & Technology, 49(8), 5088–5097, p. 5088. [“Neonicotinoids are the most widely used class of insecticides worldwide, but patterns of their use in the U.S. are poorly documented, constraining attempts to understand their role in pest management and potential nontarget effects.”]
  3. USGS Pesticide National Syntheses Project for year 2015. https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/usage/maps/show_map.php?year=2015&map=GLYPHOSATE&hilo=L&disp=Glyphosate# [“Beginning 2015, the provider of the surveyed pesticide data used to derive the county-level use estimates discontinued making estimates for seed treatment application of pesticides because of complexity and uncertainty.”]
  4. Tooker, J. F., et al., (2017). Neonicotinoid seed treatments: limitations and compatibility with integrated pest management. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 2(1), ael2017-08, p. 4. [“… many growers seem not to know they are using NST, probably because these insecticides are usually part of larger, standard packages of products applied by seed suppliers.”]
  5. Hitaj, C. et al., (2020), p. 391. [“…collecting accurate seed treatment data from farmer surveys is a challenge because of difficulties farmers may have in accurately knowing or recalling the seed treatment products they used.”]
  6. U.S. EPA (2020) Response to Public Comments Received on Proposed Revised Method for National Level Endangered Species Risk Assessments for Biological Evaluations of Conventional Pesticides. https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/nas/revised/response-to-public-comments.pdf, p. 9. [“EPA agrees with Xerces Society that seed treatment usage data are currently very limited in scope and scale. The BEs (biological evaluations assessing listed species) developed for pesticidal active ingredients that have registered seed treatment uses will need to account for this data gap or new information will need to be identified and the quality of those data verified before use.”]
  7. Douglas, Krupke & Tooker (February 9, 2024) Comments re: Requirements Applicable to Treated Seed (EPA–HQ–OPP–2023–0420) [These 3 experienced researchers comment: “Given their significance in the landscape, it is remarkable that EPA notes in the federal register that it ‘does not have current and reliable information quantifying the total pounds of active ingredient used to treat seed or the location and the number of acres planted with treated seed.’ This also describes the situation of academic scientists and agricultural extension personnel, who lack high-quality data on seed treatment usage since 2014.”]

More than 90% of corn acres and half or more of soybean acres are treated with neonics.[1-3]

There’s no government agency that tracks usage, so these are broad estimates.[4,5]

 

  1. Tooker, J. F. et al., (2017). Neonicotinoid seed treatments: limitations and compatibility with integrated pest management. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 2(1), ael2017-08, p. 4. [“Current use of NST (neonic seed treatment) —on nearly 100% of corn acres and >50% of soybean acres—far exceeds historic benchmarks for insecticide use in these crops.”]
  2. Hitaj, C. et al., (2020). Sowing Uncertainty: What We Do and Don’t Know about the Planting of Pesticide-Treated Seed. Bioscience, 70(5), 390–403, p. 390. [“Over the 2012–2014 period, approximately 90% of corn, 76% of soybean, 62% of cotton, and 56% of winter wheat acres in the United States were planted with treated seed (Kynetec 2019).”]
  3. John F. Tooker (2022) Farmers are overusing insecticide on seeds, with mounting harmful effects on nature, Louisiana Illuminator. https://lailluminator.com/2022/02/22/farmers-are-overusing-insecticide-on-seeds-with-mounting-harmful-effects-on-nature/ [“Almost every field corn seed planted this year [2022] in the United States will be coated with neonicotinoids, the most widely used class of insecticides in the world. So will seeds for about half of U.S. soybeans and nearly all cotton, along with other crops.”]
  4. Hitaj, C. et al., (2020), pp. 390-391.[“The publicly available pesticide use data in the United States do not currently account for pesticides applied as seed treatments.” Researchers include USDA scientists.]
  5. Douglas, M. R., & Tooker, J. F. (2015). Large-Scale Deployment of Seed Treatments Has Driven Rapid Increase in Use of Neonicotinoid Insecticides and Preemptive Pest Management in U.S. Field Crops. Environmental Science & Technology, 49(8), 5088–5097, p. 5088. [“Neonicotinoids are the most widely used class of insecticides worldwide, but patterns of their use in the U.S. are poorly documented, constraining attempts to understand their role in pest management and potential nontarget effects.”]

As a broad estimate based on credible but dated information (due to the cessation of tracking by USGS), ~75% of all neonic usage is for corn and soybeans.[1]

The enormous increases in overall insecticide toxicity levels are mostly driven by neonic applications to these two crops.[2,3]

 

  1. Chart from Tooker, J. F. et al., (2017). Neonicotinoid seed treatments: limitations and compatibility with integrated pest management. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 2(1), ael2017-08, p. 3 Figure 1. [We broadly estimate ~75% usage based on a close evaluation of this chart: ~53% to corn and ~22% to soybeans]
  2. DiBartolomeis, M., et al., (2019). An assessment of acute insecticide toxicity loading (AITL) of chemical pesticides used on agricultural land in the United States. PloS one, 14(8), e0220029, p. 1. [“We found a 48- and 4-fold increase in AITL (acute insecticide toxicity loading) from 1992 to 2014 for oral and contact toxicity, respectively. Neonicotinoids are primarily responsible for this increase, representing between 61 to nearly 99 percent of the total toxicity loading in 2014.” “The crops most responsible for the increase in AITL are corn and soybeans, with particularly large increases in relative soybean contributions to AITL between 2010 and 2014.”]
  3. Douglas, M. R. et al., (2020). County-level analysis reveals a rapidly shifting landscape of insecticide hazard to honey bees (Apis mellifera) on US farmland. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 797–11, p. 6. [“We found that the increase in oral toxic load was particularly acute in the Heartland and Northern Great Plains regions, which showed a 121-fold and 53-fold increase, respectively. We attribute this pattern to the increasing use of neonicotinoid seed treatments in corn and soybean.”]

As a broad estimate, about half of all neonics is applied to crop production going specifically to animal feed.[1]

Corn and soy are the 2 largest U.S. crops and by far the largest users of neonics. Both corn and soy are mostly used for animal feed. A substantial portion of crops such as sorghum, wheat, and canola also go to animal feed and are routinely treated with neonics.[2,3]

 

  1. Due to the lack of data from federal agencies, this is necessarily a broad estimate based on dated information. The assumptions are: a) About 75% of neonics are used on corn and soy (see previous question). b) Corn is ~53% of total neonic applications. c) Soybeans are ~22% of total applications. d) Corn for animal feed is ~64% of total corn disappearance. Soybeans for animal feed is ~58% of total soybean disappearance. (See Total Feed Crops Share.) Then (.64 * .53) + (.58 * .22) = 33.9% + 12.8% = 46.7% of all neonic usage is on corn and soy specifically used for animal feed. Adding the many other neonic usages on crops partially used for animal feed including sorghum, wheat, cotton, and hay among others – likely brings usage to ~50% for animal feed. This is a broad estimate that includes overall corn and soybean neonic usage based on 2014 USGS data as analyzed by: Tooker, J. F., et al., (2017). Neonicotinoid seed treatments: limitations and compatibility with integrated pest management. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 2(1), ael2017-08. (Corn and soy usage based on a close evaluation of Fig. 1 and per lead author’s communication, this is likely the best available information.)]
  2. U.S. EPA (August 30, 2018) Memorandum: Benefits and Impacts of Potential Mitigation for Neonicotinoid Seed Treatments on Small Grains, Vegetables, and Sugarbeet Crops, p. 6. [Additionally, at a national level, 44% of total sorghum acres, 27% of total spring wheat acres, and 20% of total winter wheat acres were treated with neonicotinoids as a seed treatment.”]
  3. U.S. EPA (December 23, 2019) Memorandum: Biological and Economic Analysis Division’s (BEAD) Response to Comments on the Preliminary Risk Assessments and Benefit Assessments for Citrus, Cotton, Soybean Seed Treatment, and Other Crops Not Assessed for Neonicotinoid Insecticides, p. 9.

Many reports have found neonics provide little to no benefits. They particularly question the blanket usage despite the documented environmental costs and the availability of less damaging and more targeted alternatives.[1-5]

The top seed and pesticide producers sponsored a report that aims to document the efficacy of neonics.[6] The EPA, however, concluded in 2014 that the most commonly used neonics “provide negligible overall benefits to soybean production in most situations.”[7]

 

  1. Tooker, J. F. et al., (2017). Neonicotinoid seed treatments: limitations and compatibility with integrated pest management. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 2(1), ael2017-08, p. 3. [“Although some studies have identified benefits, evidence for their value has proven elusive in many, if not most, cases.”]
  2. Mourtzinis, S. et al., (2019). Neonicotinoid seed treatments of soybean provide negligible benefits to US farmers. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 11207–7, p. 5. [“Our analysis, spanning 12 years and 14 soybean-producing states, provides no empirical support for continuing the current approach of blanket NST use in soybeans. On the contrary, our data suggest that this approach provides little to zero net benefit in most cases…”]
  3. Alford, A. M. & Krupke, C. H. (2018). A Meta-analysis and economic evaluation of neonicotinoid seed treatments and other prophylactic insecticides in Indiana maize from 2000–2015 with IPM recommendations. Journal of economic entomology, 111(2), 689-699, p. 697. [“Our data analyses do not justify the widespread application and use of NSTs in maize…”]
  4. Krupke, C. H., et al., (2017). Planting of neonicotinoid‐treated maize poses risks for honey bees and other non‐target organisms over a wide area without consistent crop yield benefit. Journal of Applied Ecology, 54(5), 1449-1458, Summary. [“We documented no benefit of the insecticidal seed treatments for crop yield during the study.”]
  5. Stevens, S. & Jenkins, P. (2014) Heavy Costs: Weighing the Value of Neonicotinoid Insecticides in Agriculture, Center for Food Safety.  See also, Jenkins, P. (2016) Net Loss – Economic Efficacy and Costs of Neonicotinoid Insecticides Used as Seed Coatings: Updates from the United States and Europe, Center for Food Safety. 
  6. AgInfomatics (2015) The Value of Neonicotinoids in North American Agriculture, Executive Summary.
  7. U.S. EPA (2014) Memorandum – Benefits of Neonicotinoid Seed Treatments to Soybean Production, p. 1. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2014-10/documents/benefits_of_neonicotinoid_seed_treatments_to_soybean_production_2.pdf 

Many farmers are relatively powerless in choosing seeds and their treatments and, in many cases, do not know what types of seed treatments they are purchasing.[1,2] As the EPA notes, “some growers currently have some difficulty obtaining untreated seed.”[3]

Profit-making decisions from the dominant seed companies are likely the determining factor behind the expansion of this technology.[4] Although neonics increase seed costs, there are some labor savings and possible health benefits for farmers in eliminating or reducing the need for spraying insecticides.[5]

 

  1. Hitaj, C. et al., (2020). Sowing Uncertainty: What We Do and Don’t Know about the Planting of Pesticide-Treated Seed. Bioscience, 70(5), 390–403, p. 391. [“…collecting accurate seed treatment data from farmer surveys is a challenge because of difficulties farmers may have in accurately knowing or recalling the seed treatment products they used.” These researchers include USDA scientists.]
  2. Tooker, J. F. et al., (2017). Neonicotinoid seed treatments: limitations and compatibility with integrated pest management. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 2(1), ael2017-08, p. 4. [“… many growers seem not to know they are using NST, probably because these insecticides are usually part of larger, standard packages of products applied by seed suppliers.”]
  3. U.S. EPA (2014) Memorandum – Benefits of Neonicotinoid Seed Treatments to Soybean Production, p. 11.
  4. Tooker, J. F. et al., (2017) p. 4. [“…farmer choice is restricted; corn seeds, and increasingly seeds of other field crops, are simply not widely available without NST. Growers effectively receive a mandate to use (and pay for) products that many of them will not need, or benefit from.”]
  5. Grout, T. A., et al., (2020). Neonicotinoid Insecticides in New York State. Cornell University, p. 49.

Not currently. But after decades of inaction and several lawsuits, the EPA is again reviewing neonics.[1,2] Their “planned completion” is expected sometime in 2025.[3]

In 2018, the European Union almost completely banned the use of the 3 most common neonics.[4] 

 

  1. Center for Food Safety et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. Northern Dist. Of CA (filed 5/31/2023) Case 3:2023cv02714. https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/files/2023-05-31-complaint_85005.pdf [This lawsuit offers an excellent overview of neonic usage, threats, regulatory history, and the arguments for restrictions.]
  2. Natural Resources Defense Council v Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Dist Ct. District of Columbia, 17-cv-2034. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/complaint-neonic-20171003.pdf
  3. U.S. EPA (2024) Schedule for Review of Neonicotinoid Pesticides. https://www.epa.gov/pollinator-protection/schedule-review-neonicotinoid-pesticides
  4. European Commission on Food Safety (n.d.) Some facts about neonicotinoids. [“the conditions of approval of the active substances imidacloprid, clothianidin and thiamethoxam have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 30 May 2018. As a result, all outdoor uses of the three substances are banned and only the use in permanent greenhouses remains possible.”]

Fertilizers & Pesticide