78
N. W. MOORE
trial. The ecological aspects of the problem have been studied mainly
by those working for agricultural advisory organizations and for conservation organizations. The former have been concerned largely with
arthropods, the latter with vertebrates. Therefore we have a situation
in which there are links between scientific discipline, taxonomic groups
and organization;
toxicological effects on vertebrates - chemical firms
effects on arthropods in the field -
chemical firms and agricultural advisory organizations
effects on vertebrates in the field - conservation organizations.
Both specialization and group interest has helped to prevent a unified
approach to the subject of pesticide effects.
Pesticide research involves chemistry, biochemistry, physiology, ecology and related disciplines. Few workers are trained in more than two
of these disciplines, and therefore it is not surprising that the divisions
of science have divided the study of pesticides. For example, those
trained in chemistry do not easily see the pesticide problem as one of
population ecology. It is more surprising that the subdivisions of biology
erect barriers to understanding. For example, work on the effects of
pesticides on avian predators rarely takes into account the extensive
literature on the effects of pesticides on invertebrate preylpredator
relationships in crops. Since the pesticide problem involves several
scientific disciplines and is very complicated, it is one in which it is
extremely easy to miss seeing the wood for the trees. The aim of this
review is to describe the nature of the wood. The picture given is a
crude one; but I hope that the great need for a logical and total view
of the pesticide problem will be accepted as an excuse for the detailed
errors of commission and omission which it inevitably contains. In
particular I hope that this review will help to clarify the problem to
pesticide specialists who are not ecologists, and at the same time provide a rational introduction to the subject for ecologists who know
little about pesticides. Accordingly the effects of pesticides will be
classified and described in ecological terms.
Mr. R. Crompton, who acted as Information Officer of the Toxic
Chemical and Wildlife Division of the Nature Conservancy from 196165, estimated that about 300 papers relevant to the study of pesticides
in the environment were published every month. I must emphasize that
I have only read a small fraction of the vast literature on this subject
and am in no position to attempt to assess it. Therefore this pa.per is
not a review of the subject but of its nature. My only qualification for
attempting the task is that over the last six years my work has given
me an unusual opportunity to see it as a whole. In this paper references
to some important works are given but many others are omitted. I have
N. W. MOORE
trial. The ecological aspects of the problem have been studied mainly
by those working for agricultural advisory organizations and for conservation organizations. The former have been concerned largely with
arthropods, the latter with vertebrates. Therefore we have a situation
in which there are links between scientific discipline, taxonomic groups
and organization;
toxicological effects on vertebrates - chemical firms
effects on arthropods in the field -
chemical firms and agricultural advisory organizations
effects on vertebrates in the field - conservation organizations.
Both specialization and group interest has helped to prevent a unified
approach to the subject of pesticide effects.
Pesticide research involves chemistry, biochemistry, physiology, ecology and related disciplines. Few workers are trained in more than two
of these disciplines, and therefore it is not surprising that the divisions
of science have divided the study of pesticides. For example, those
trained in chemistry do not easily see the pesticide problem as one of
population ecology. It is more surprising that the subdivisions of biology
erect barriers to understanding. For example, work on the effects of
pesticides on avian predators rarely takes into account the extensive
literature on the effects of pesticides on invertebrate preylpredator
relationships in crops. Since the pesticide problem involves several
scientific disciplines and is very complicated, it is one in which it is
extremely easy to miss seeing the wood for the trees. The aim of this
review is to describe the nature of the wood. The picture given is a
crude one; but I hope that the great need for a logical and total view
of the pesticide problem will be accepted as an excuse for the detailed
errors of commission and omission which it inevitably contains. In
particular I hope that this review will help to clarify the problem to
pesticide specialists who are not ecologists, and at the same time provide a rational introduction to the subject for ecologists who know
little about pesticides. Accordingly the effects of pesticides will be
classified and described in ecological terms.
Mr. R. Crompton, who acted as Information Officer of the Toxic
Chemical and Wildlife Division of the Nature Conservancy from 196165, estimated that about 300 papers relevant to the study of pesticides
in the environment were published every month. I must emphasize that
I have only read a small fraction of the vast literature on this subject
and am in no position to attempt to assess it. Therefore this pa.per is
not a review of the subject but of its nature. My only qualification for
attempting the task is that over the last six years my work has given
me an unusual opportunity to see it as a whole. In this paper references
to some important works are given but many others are omitted. I have