Investigator Conclusions:  In the available record no significant conclusions were provided the investigators regarding the trends in their data other than to indicate hand exposure was typically higher than sampling for other regions of the body.  This is consistent with other data of this type, particularly for harvesting activities.

Study 9:  An Assessment of Exposure of Cucumber Harvesters to Azinphos Methyl (MRID 479289-04)

This study was conducted by the Texas Tech University (March 1986) on a cucumber farm in Hidalgo County Texas which is in the Lower Rio Grande Valley.  A single monitoring event was conducted in which cucumbers were harvested after the application of azinphos methyl.  Application was made aerially at an application rate of 1 pint Guthion 2L formulation per acre on May 2, 1983.  Monitoring of cucumber harvesters was completed 2 days after application.  A total of 28 individuals were monitored during this study, six were women and 22 were men.  Only two were less than 18 years old, one female and one male.  Cotton gloves and gauze patches worn on the forearm and legs were used as monitors.  Dislodgeable foliar residue, soil, and urine samples were also collected.  Data tab (9).47928904AZMCucum contains the results of this study (Appendix B).  The monitors for the 17 year old male contained no detectable residues of azinphos methyl so only a single data point existed for child workers in this study.  Additionally, reported residues in the adult workers were also sporadic.  For these reasons no statistical analysis was attempted using these data.   Also, in the available record no significant conclusions were provided the investigators regarding the trends in the data.

Study 10:  An Assessment of Exposure of Cucumber Harvesters to Methomyl (MRID 479289-04)

This study was conducted by the Texas Tech University (March 1986) on a cucumber farm in the Lower Rio Grande Valley.  Two monitoring events (5/4 and 5/19/82) were conducted in which cucumbers were harvested after the application of methomyl.  Two aerial applications were made to the same 20 acre field (5/3 & 5/18/82) at an application rate of 2 pints per acre of the Lannate L formulation of methomyl.  As indicated by the dates, cucumber harvest was monitored 1 day after each application.  A total of 33 individuals were monitored during the first sampling day of this study, 10 were women and 23 were men.  Three workers, all male, were less than 18 years old.  Two were 15 and one was 14 years old. A total of 36 workers were monitored on the second day of sampling, 9 were women and 27 were men.  Three workers, all male, were less than 18 years old.  Two were 15 and one was 14 years old.  In some cases, the same workers could have been monitored on each sampling day.  Cotton gloves and gauze patches worn on the forearm and legs were used as monitors.  Dislodgeable foliar residue, soil, and urine samples were also collected.  Data tab (10).MethomCucum47928909 contains the results of this study (Appendix B).  Monitoring results were sporadic in this study and the number of children who were monitored were limited (N=3 in both days).  For these reasons no statistical analysis was attempted using these data.

It should also be noted that the investigators themselves reached the following conclusions:

      "Residue concentrations detected on the sampling devices were found to be independent of the amount harvested, as well as the age, sex, height, and weight of the workers on both study dates."

Study 11:  Dermal and Respiratory Exposure Studies of Adult and Juvenile Vegetable Harvesters and Fieldworkers (MRID 479289-06)

This study was conducted by the Mississippi State University in the summer of 1982.  It was conducted on multiple farms in the following locations:  Hermanville Mississippi (Study Site E-1); McCool Mississippi (Study Sites E-2 through E-4); Louisville Mississippi (Study Sites E-5 and E-6); Noxapater Mississippi (Study Site E-7); Fayette Mississippi (Study Sites E-8 and E-9); and Fayette Mississippi (Study Site E-10).  The fields where monitored workers conducted harvesting activities had been treated previously with several pesticides including carbaryl, toxaphene, aldicarb, and methyl parathion.  Four of the test sites were treated only once and the remaining 6 were treated on multiple occasions up to four times prior to worker exposure monitoring.  A total of 46 individuals were monitored during this study and most were involved in multiple exposure testing days (Table 54).  Pesticide applications across all the fields used in this research occurred between May 15 and August 31, 1982 which equated to harvesting being monitored from 1 to 131 days after the last application.  Cotton gloves and gauze patches worn on the forearm and knee were used as monitors.  Hands were also rinsed with ethanol and urine samples were also collected.  Soil and dislodgeable foliar residues were also collected.  Table 54 below summarizes the sampling completed at each study site.  Table 54 also contains the names of the data tabs where the specific results for each field reside (Appendix B).

Table 54:  Study Site Summary For Field Study 11, Cucumber, Pea, and Peanut Harvest in Mississippi
                                Study Site/Day
                  Pesticide & Appl. Rate        (lb ai/A)
                             Days After Last Appl.
                                  Appendix B
                                   Data Tab
                            Worker Characteristics

                                     Min.
                                      Age
                                     Max.
                                      Age
                              N <18 years old
                               N>= 18 years old
                             Total Monitoring unit
                                      E-1
                                Carbaryl (0.5)
                                      16
                            (11).CarbCuc47928906E-1
                                       9
                                      69
                                       4
                                       6
                                      10
                                      E-2
                                Carbaryl (0.25)
                                       1
                            (11).CarbCuc47928906E-2
                                      13
                                      55
                                       4
                                       6
                                      10
                                      E-3
                                Carbaryl (0.25)
                                       1
                            (11).CarbCuc47928906E-3
                                      13
                                      55
                                       4
                                       6
                                      10
                                      E-4
                                Carbaryl (0.25)
                                       1
                            (11).CarbCuc47928906E-4
                                      13
                                      55
                                       4
                                       6
                                      10
                                      E-5
                               Toxaphene (0.44)
                                       5
                            (11).ToxaPea47928906E-5
                                      12
                                      63
                                       5
                                       5
                                      10
                                      E-6
                               Toxaphene (0.44)
                                       4
                            (11).ToxaPea47928906E-6
                                      12
                                      63
                                       5
                                       5
                                      10
                                      E-7
                               Toxaphene (0.59)
                                       1
                            (11).ToxaPea47928906E-7
                                      10
                                      47
                                       3
                                       7
                                      10
                                      E-8
                                 Aldicarb (15)
                                      110
                           Not included  -  see note
                                      13
                                      77
                                       5
                                       5
                                      10
                                      E-9
                                 Aldicarb (15)
                                      117
                           Not included  -  see note
                                      13
                                      77
                                       5
                                       5
                                      10
                                     E-10
                             Methyl Parathion (4)
                                      131
                           (11).MePaPean47928906E-10
                                      13
                                      77
                                       5
                                       5
                                      10
Notes:
E-1:  Carbaryl was applied twice on 5/22 & 6/2/82.  Harvest occurred on 6/18/82.
E-2:  Carbaryl was applied twice on 6/17 & 6/22/82.  Harvest occurred on 6/23/82. Many of the same workers were monitored in the E-3 and E-4 study days.
E-3:  Carbaryl was applied three times on 6/17, 6/22 & 6/27/82.  Harvest occurred on 6/28/82. . Many of the same workers were monitored in the E-2 and E-4 study days.
E-4:  Carbaryl was applied four times on 6/17, 6/22 & 6/27/82 and 7/6/82.  Harvest occurred on 7/7/82.  Many of the same workers were monitored in the E-3 and E-4 study days.
E-5:  Toxaphene was applied two times on 7/22 & 7/31/82.  Harvest occurred on 8/4/82.  The same workers were monitored in the E-6 study day.
E-6:  Toxaphene was applied three times on 7/22 & 7/31/82 and on 8/7/82.  Harvest occurred on 8/11/82.  The same workers were monitored in the E-6 study day.
E-7:  Toxaphene was applied once on 8/31/82.  Harvest occurred on 9/1/82.  Workers were monitored only at site E-7.
E-8:  Aldicarb was applied once on 5/15/82.  Harvest occurred on 9/2/82.  Workers were monitored also at sites E-9 & E-10.  No data tab is reported since all dosimetry samples were reported as ND (contains no detectable residue).
E-9:  Aldicarb was applied once on 5/15/82.  Harvest occurred on 9/9/82.  Workers were monitored also at sites E-8 & E-10.  No data tab is reported since all dosimetry samples were reported as ND (contains no detectable residue).
E-10: Methyl parathion was applied once on 5/15/82.  Harvest occurred on 9/23/82.  Workers were monitored also at sites E-8 & E-9.

A total of 10 exposure conditions are represented in these data since exposures were monitored at multiple sites, for different pesticides, and differing days after application.  For each exposure condition where quantifiable results were reported the data have been plotted and a Rank Sum analysis has been completed.  Results for each exposure condition where viable data were obtained are presented below.

E-1 Results For Carbaryl on Cucumbers:  The available data for the E-1 site for carbaryl on cucumbers have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand/glove exposure rates (Figure 43) and total exposure rates which represents hand and all patch exposure locations in this case (Figure 44).  Additionally, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum analysis has also been performed (Tables 55 and 56).  The conclusions associated with carbaryl exposure at the E-1 site are there is no statistically significant difference in hand or total exposure rates between adults and children (p value > 0.05).
Figure 43: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Hand/glove Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-1, Hermanville MS 1982

Figure 44: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-1, Hermanville MS 1982

Table 58: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-1, Hermanville MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.17

Table 57: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, Carbaryl Hand Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-1, Hermanville MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.17

E-2 Results For Carbaryl on Cucumbers:  The available data for the E-2 site for carbaryl on cucumbers have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand/glove exposure rates (Figure 45) and total exposure rates, represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 46).  Additionally, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum test has also been performed (Tables 57 and 58).  The conclusions associated with carbaryl exposure at the E-2 site are that children had statistically significantly higher hand exposure rates than adults.  In terms of total exposure rates, there is no statistically significant difference between children and adults.  A parametric test was not conducted due to small sample size.
Figure 45: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Hand/Glove Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-2, McCool MS 1982

Table 57: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test on Carbaryl Hand Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-2, McCool MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.04

Table 58: Wilcoxon Rank sum test on Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-2, McCool MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.76

Figure 46: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-2, McCool MS 1982

Table 59: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, Carbaryl Hand Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-3, McCool MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.91

E-3 Results For Carbaryl on Cucumbers:  The available data for the E-3 site for carbaryl on cucumbers have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand/glove exposure rates (Figure 47) and total exposure rates, represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 48).  Additionally, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test has also been performed (Tables 59 and 60).  The conclusions associated with carbaryl exposure at the E-3 site are there is no statistically significant for both glove and total exposure rates between adults and children. A parametric test was not conducted due to small sample size.Figure 47: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Hand/Glove Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-3, McCool MS 1982

Figure 48: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-3, McCool MS 1982

Table 60: Wilcoxon Rank sum test on Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-3, McCool MS, 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.61

E-4 Results For Carbaryl on Cucumbers:  The available data for the E-4 site for carbaryl on cucumbers have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand/glove exposure rates (Figure 49) and total exposure rates, represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 50).  Additionally, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test has also been performed (Tables 61 and 62).  The conclusions associated with carbaryl exposure at the E-4 site are there is no statistically significant difference for both hand and total exposure rates between adults and children.  A parametric test was not conducted due to small sample size.
Figure 49: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Hand/glove Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-4, McCool MS 1982

Table 61: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, Carbaryl Hand Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-4, McCool MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.76

Table 62: Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-4, McCool MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.48

Figure 50: Box and Whisker Plot, Carbaryl Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Cucumber Harvesters at Site E-4, McCool MS 1982

E-5 & E-6 Combined Results For Toxaphene on Peas:  The available data for the E-5 and E-6 sites for toxaphene on peas have been combined and statistically analyzed.  This was done because the exposure conditions were similar and the same individuals were monitored in each sampling event.  Hand (Glove) and total exposure rate values were log transformed and a repeated measure analysis of variance using mixed modeling approach was utilized taking account of the correlation of the same workers for multiple days.  Gender, age, and day were covariates in the model.  The data were summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand exposure (Figure 51) and total exposure represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 52).  Additionally, differences of least squares means between adults and children from the fitted mixed model are also presented (Tables 63 and 64).  The conclusions associated with toxaphene exposure at the combined E-5 and E-6 sites in that there is no statistically significant difference both hand and total exposure rates between adults and children.

Figure 51: Box and Whisker Plot, Toxaphene Hand/Glove Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters, Sites E-5 and E-6 Combined, Louisville MS 1982

Table 63: Difference of Least Squares Means, and Least Squares Means, Toxaphene Hand Exposure Rates For Pea Harvesters, Sites E-5 and E-6 Combined, Louisville MS 1982
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    -0.1059
                                    0.1860
                                       7
                                     -0.57
                                    0.5869
                                     0.05
                                    -0.5457
                                    0.3339
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -6.0642
                                    0.1302
                                       7
                                    -46.58
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.3721
                                    -5.7563
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -5.9583
                                    0.1302
                                       7
                                    -45.76
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.2662
                                    -5.6504
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit

Figure 52: Box and Whisker Plot, Toxaphene Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters, Sites E-5 and E-6 Combined, Louisville MS 1982

Table 64: Difference of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means, Toxaphene Total Exposure Rates For Pea Harvesters, Sites E-5 and E-6 Combined, Louisville MS 1982
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.02980
                                    0.1431
                                       7
                                     0.21
                                    0.8410
                                     0.05
                                    -0.3086
                                    0.3682
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -5.5368
                                    0.1002
                                       7
                                    -55.26
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -5.7737
                                    -5.2999
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -5.5666
                                    0.1002
                                       7
                                    -55.56
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -5.8035
                                    -5.3297
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit
E-7 Results For Toxaphene on Peas:  The available data for the E-7 site for toxaphene on peas were analyzed using the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test (Figure 53 and 54, and Tables 65 and 66).  The conclusions associated with toxaphene exposure at the E-7 site is that there is no statistically significant difference for both hand and total exposure rates between adults and children.  A parametric test was not conducted due to small sample size in the child age group.

Table 65: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, Toxaphene Hand Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site E-7, Louisville MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.27

Figure 53: Box and Whisker Plot, Toxaphene Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters, Site E-7 Louisville MS 1982

Figure 54: Box and Whisker Plot, Toxaphene Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters, Site E-7 Louisville MS 1982

Table 66: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Analysis, Toxaphene Total Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site E-7, Louisville MS 1982

               P value from exact Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test is 0.38

E-8 and E-9 Results For Aldicarb on Peanuts:  The available data for sites E-8 and E-9 for aldicarb have not been statistically analyzed because the monitors contained no detectable residues.  [Note:  A tab in Appendix B was not created for these field situations since no data appropriate for such an analysis were developed at this site.]

E-10 Results For Methyl Parathion on Peanuts:  The available data for the E-10 site for methyl parathion on peanuts have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand exposure (Figure 55) and total exposure represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 56).  Additionally, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum test and a two sample t test were performed for the log of hand exposure and log of total exposure (Tables 67 through 72).  The conclusions associated with methyl parathion exposure at the E-10 site are that there are statistically significant differences in exposure rates between the adults and children; children had statistically significant higher hand and total exposure rates than those for adults.
Figure 55: Box and Whisker Plot, Methyl Parathion Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Peanut Harvesters at Site E-10, Fayette MS 1982

Table 67: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test of Methyl Parathion Hand Exposure Rates for Peanut Harvesters at Site E-10, Fayette MS 1982
Wilcoxon Scores (Rank Sums) for Variable log glove
Classified by Variable Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                       N
                                Sum of
Scores
                              Expected
Under H0
                              Std Dev
Under H0
                                  Mean
Score
                                    Adults
                                       5
                                     17.0
                                     27.50
                                   4.787136
                                     3.40
                                   Children
                                       5
                                     38.0
                                     27.50
                                   4.787136
                                     7.60

Table 68: Wilcoxon Two-Sample Test of Methyl Parathion Hand Exposure Rates for Peanut Harvesters at Site E-10, Fayette MS 1982*
                                 Statistic (S)
                                    17.0000
                             Normal Approximation
                                       Z
                                    -2.0889
                             One-Sided Pr <  Z
                                    0.0184
                             Two-Sided Pr > |Z|
                                    0.0367
                  * P value from exact Wilcoxon test is 0.03.

Table 69: Two sample T Test of  Methyl Parathion Hand Exposure Rates for Peanut Harvesters at Site E-10, Fayette MS 1982
                                   Age Group
                                    Method
                                     Mean
                                  95% CL Mean
                                   Std Dev
                                95% CL Std Dev
                                    Adults
                                      N/A
                                   -15.8261
                                   -17.8894
                                   -13.7628
                                    1.6617
                                    0.9956
                                    4.7751
                                   Children

                                   -12.5025
                                   -15.1696
                                    -9.8353
                                    2.1481
                                    1.2870
                                    6.1726
`Difference of Means between Adults and Children' in two sample t test tables
                                    Pooled
                                    -3.3237
                                    -6.1244
                                    -0.5229
                                    1.9204
                                    1.2971
                                    3.6790

                                   Variances
                                      DF
                                    t Value
                                 Pr > |t|

                                     Equal
                                       8
                                     -2.74
                                    0.0256

Figure 56: Box and Whisker Plot, Methyl Parathion Total Exposure Rates for Peanut Harvesters at Site E-10, Fayette MS 1982

Table 70: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Analysis, Methyl Parathion Total Exposure Rates for Peanut Harvesters at Site E-10, Fayette MS 1982
Wilcoxon Scores (Rank Sums) for Variable log_total
Classified by Variable Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                       N
                                Sum of
Scores
                              Expected
Under H0
                              Std Dev
Under H0
                                  Mean
Score
                                    Adults
                                       5
                                     17.0
                                     27.50
                                   4.787136
                                     3.40
                                   Children
                                       5
                                     38.0
                                     27.50
                                   4.787136
                                     7.60

                      Table 71: Wilcoxon Two-Sample Test*
                                 Statistic (S)
                                    17.0000
                             Normal Approximation
                                       Z
                                    -2.0889
                             One-Sided Pr <  Z
                                    0.0184
                             Two-Sided Pr > |Z|
                                    0.0367
                           *P value from Exact Wilcoxon test is 0.03

Table 72 : Two Sample T Test  of  Methyl Parathion  total Exposure Rates for Peanut Harvesters at Site E-10, Fayette MS 1982
                                   Age Group
                                    Method
                                     Mean
                                  95% CL Mean
                                   Std Dev
                                95% CL Std Dev
                                    Adults
                                      N/A
                                   -12.5156
                                   -13.3331
                                   -11.6981
                                    0.6584
                                    0.3945
                                    1.8919
                                   Children

                                   -10.3209
                                   -12.1883
                                    -8.4535
                                    1.5039
                                    0.9011
                                    4.3217
`Difference of Means between Adults and Children' in two sample t test tables
                                    Pooled
                                    -2.1947
                                    -3.8878
                                    -0.5016
                                    1.1609
                                    0.7841
                                    2.2240

                                   Variances
                                      DF
                                   t Value
                                 Pr > |t|

                                     Equal
                                       8
                                     -2.99
                                    0.0174

Investigator Conclusions:  The investigators themselves provided little comment or conclusions regarding this study except to note dermal exposure was the primary route of exposure and that inhalation exposure was not significant.

Study 12:  Dermal and Respiratory Exposure Studies of Adult and Juvenile Fieldworkers (MRID 49716102)

This study was conducted by the Mississippi State University in the summers of 1983 and 1984.  It was conducted on multiple farms in the following locations:  Louisville Mississippi (Sites I-83 through V-83 and Sites I-84 through V-84) and Starkville Mississippi (Sites VI-83 and VI-84).  The fields where monitored workers conducted harvesting activities had been treated previously with several pesticides including endosulfan, benomyl, carbaryl, captan, folpet, mancozeb, and zolone.  The crops which were monitored included corn, grapes, and peas.  Each of the test sites were treated on multiple applications of pesticides prior to worker exposure monitoring.  Endosulfan only was used to treat peas and corn which were monitored at sites I through V in both 1983 and 1984.  The remaining pesticides were used to treat grapes at site VI in various combinations in 1983 and 1984.

A total of 38 individuals were monitored during this study and most were involved in multiple exposure testing days (Table 73).  Pesticide applications across all the fields used in this research occurred between May 6 and August 1, 1983 for that year of monitoring and between May 14 and July 22, 19843 for that year.  This equated to harvesting being monitored from 3 to 104 days after the last application in 1983 and from 2 to 86 days after application in 1984.  Cotton gloves and gauze patches worn on the forearm and knee were used as monitors.  Hands were also rinsed with ethanol and urine samples were collected.  Soil and dislodgeable foliar residues were also collected.  Table 73 below summarizes the sampling completed at each study site.  Table 73 also contains the names of the data tabs where the specific results for each field reside (Appendix B).

Table 73:  Study Site Summary for Field Study 12 Cucumber, Pea, and Grape Harvest in Mississippi
                                Study Site/Day
                               Pesticide &
                              Appl. Rate
                                   (lb ai/A)
                           Harvest Days After Appl.
                                  Appendix B
                                   Data Tab
                            Worker Characteristics

                                     Min.
                                      Age
                                     Max.
                                      Age
                              N <18 years old
                               N>= 18 years old
                             Total Monitoring Unit
                                  Louisville
                                     I-83
                                  Endosulfan
                                 (0.03, 0.03)
                                    13, 11
                             (12)EndosulPeas1983-I
                                       9
                                      50
                                       5
                                       5
30 (Same workers used at each site except worker I-83(MU-9) who did not participate at II-83 & III-83 (MU-9) which ended up being the same person for those sites)
                                  Louisville
                                     II-83
                                  Endosulfan
                              (0.03, 0.03, 0.03)
                                   16, 14, 3
                            (12)EndosulPeas1983-II
                                       9
                                      50
                                       5
                                       5

                                  Louisville
                                    III-83
                                  Endosulfan
                           (0.03, 0.03, 0.03, 0.03)
                                 20, 17, 7, 4
                            (12)EndosulPeas1983-III
                                       9
                                      50
                                       5
                                       5

                                  Louisville
                                     VI-83
                                  Endosulfan
                           (0.03, 0.03, 0.03, 0.03)
                                42, 28, 21, 15
                              (12)EndosCorn1983IV
                                       9
                                      50
                                       2
                                       2
8 (Same workers used at each site, also participated in 1983 pea harvest studies)
                                  Louisville
                                     V-83
                                  Endosulfan
                           (0.03, 0.03, 0.03, 0.03)
                                45, 31, 21, 18
                              (12)EndosCorn1983V
                                       9
                                      50
                                       2
                                       2

                                  Starkville
                                     VI-83
                                Benomyl (0.75)
                                      104
                           Not included  -  see note
                                      12
                                      51
                                       3
                                       3
                                      24

                                Mancozeb (2.0)
                                      104

                                Carbaryl (2.0)
                                      104

                                 Folpet (5.0)
                                      55

                                  Louisville
                                     I-84
                                  Endosulfan
                                (0.095, 0.095)
                                     16, 2
                              (12)EndosCorn1984I
                                      10
                                      52
                                       4
                                       6
40 (Same workers used at each site, also participated in 1984 pea harvest study)
                                  Louisville
                                     II-84
                                  Endosulfan
                                 (0.19, 0.19)
                                     11, 3
                              (12)EndosCorn1984II
                                      10
                                      52
                                       4
                                       6

                                  Louisville
                                    III-84
                                  Endosulfan
                              (0.19, 0.19, 0.19)
                                   15, 7, 2
                             (12)EndosCorn1984III
                                      10
                                      52
                                       4
                                       6

                                  Louisville
                                     VI-84
                                  Endosulfan
                             (0.095, 0.19, 0.095)
                                   15, 9, 2
                              (12)EndosCorn1984IV
                                      10
                                      52
                                       4
                                       6

                                  Louisville
                                     V-84
                                  Endosulfan
                             (0.095, 0.095, 0.095)
                                   17, 14. 3
                              (12)EndosPeas1984V
                                      10
                                      52
                                       6
                                       6
12 (Same workers used as each corn 1984 harvesting  site, also participated in 1984 pea harvest study,)
                                  Starkville
                                     VI-84
                             Benomyl (0.50, 0.75)
                                    86, 38
                           Not included  -  see note
                                      13
                                      52
                                       4
                                       5
                                      27

                                 Zolone (0.19)
                                      38

                                Carbaryl (2.0)
                                      38

Notes:
Louisville I-83, II-83 & III-83:  Endosulfan was applied multiple times to peas at these sites but monitoring was completed only after last application. Endosulfan species were added together to examine total residues. Glove and patch data were considered in the statistical analysis for this site.

Louisville VI-83 & V-83:  Endosulfan was applied multiple times to corn at these sites but monitoring was completed only after last application. Endosulfan species were added together to examine total residues. The number of monitoring units were insufficient to complete a statistical analysis at both sites.

Starkville VI-83:  Single benomyl, mancozeb, carbaryl, and folpet applications occurred at this site on grapes but worker media were only analyzed for benomyl and its degradate MBC.  No benomyl or MBC residues were detected in any worker media so a data tab has not been included in Appendix B.

Louisville I-84, II-84, III-84 & IV-84:  Endosulfan was applied multiple times to corn at these sites but monitoring was completed only after last application. Endosulfan species were added together to examine total residues. Glove and patch data were considered in the statistical analysis for this site.

Louisville V-84:  Endosulfan was applied multiple times to peas at this site but monitoring was completed only after last application. Endosulfan species were added together to examine total residues.

Starkville VI-84:  Two benomyl and single zolone and captan applications occurred at this site on grapes but worker media were only analyzed for benomyl and its degradate MBC.  No benomyl or MBC residues were detected in any worker media so a data tab has not been included in Appendix B.

A total of 17 exposure conditions are represented in these data since exposures were monitored at multiple sites, for different pesticides, and differing days after application.  For each exposure condition where quantifiable results were reported the data have been statistically analyzed.  Results for each exposure condition where viable data were obtained are presented below.
I-83, II-83 , III-83  Results For Endosulfan on Peas:  The available data for the I-83, II-83, III-83  sites for endosulfan on peas have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand exposure rate (Figure 57) and total exposure rate represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 58).  In the plot, day-1, day -2 and day-3 indicated data from study I-83, II-83 and III-83 respectively.  Here same workers were monitored at these three sites on three separate days.  Hand and total exposure values were log transformed and a repeated measure analysis of variance using a mixed modeling approach was utilized taking account of the correlation for the same workers for multiple days.  Gender, age, and day were used as covariates in the model.  Adults had statistically significant higher hand exposure rates than children (one sided p value = 0.096/2 < 0.05).  However, for the total exposure there was no significant difference between these two age groups (Tables 74 and 75, respectively).
Figure 57: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters at Sites I-83, II-83, and III-83, Louisville MS 1983

Figure 57: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters at Sites I-83, II-83, and III-83, Louisville MS 1983

Table 74: Difference of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means between Adults and Children, Endosulfan Hand Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site I-83 , II-83, and III-83, Louisville MS 1983
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.4434
                                    0.2567
                                      24
                                     1.73
                                    0.0970
                                     0.05
                                   -0.08639
                                    0.9732
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   -10.9078
                                    0.1793
                                      24
                                    -60.82
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                   -11.2779
                                   -10.5376
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                   -11.3512
                                    0.1961
                                      24
                                    -57.90
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                   -11.7558
                                   -10.9465
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit

Figure 58: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) For Pea Harvesters at Sites I-83, II-83, and III-83, Louisville MS 1983

Table 75: Difference of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means Between Adults and Children, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site I-83, II-83, III-83, Louisville MS 1983
                                    Effect
                                   Figure 36
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                   0.002633
                                    0.1938
                                      24
                                     0.01
                                    0.9893
                                     0.05
                                    -0.3973
                                    0.4026
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   -10.0892
                                    0.1354
                                      24
                                    -74.52
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                   -10.3687
                                    -9.8098
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                   -10.0919
                                    0.1480
                                      24
                                    -68.18
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                   -10.3974
                                    -9.7864
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit
IV-83 & V-83 Results For Endosulfan on Corn:  The available data for these sites for endosulfan on peas were not analyzed using the same approaches as described above because an insufficient number of individuals were monitored.

VI-83 Results For Benomyl On Grapes:  The available data for site VI-83 have not been statistically analyzed because the monitors contained no detectable residues of benomyl.

V-84 Results For Endosulfan on Peas:  The available data for the V-84 site for endosulfan on peas have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand exposure (Figure 59) and total exposure represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 60).  Additionally, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test and a Two Sample t Test have also been completed (Tables 76 - 79).  For both tests, glove and total exposure rate have been log transformed.  The findings indicate that there is no statistically significant difference between adults and children whether hand only or total exposure rate is considered.
Figure 59: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters at Site V-84, Louisville MS 1984

Table 76: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Analysis, Endosulfan Hand Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site V-84, Louisville MS 1984

Table 77: Two Sample T Test between Adults and Children, Endosulfan Hand Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site V-84, Louisville MS 1984
                                   Age Group
                                    Method
                                     Mean
                                  95% CL Mean
                                   Std Dev
                                95% CL Std Dev
                                    Adults
                                      N/A
                                   -10.3860
                                   -10.9182
                                    -9.8538
                                    0.5072
                                    0.3166
                                    1.2438
                                   Children

                                    -9.9554
                                   -10.8012
                                    -9.1097
                                    0.8059
                                    0.5031
                                    1.9766
`Difference of Means between Adults and Children' in two sample t test tables
                                    Pooled
                                    -0.4305
                                    -1.2967
                                    0.4356
                                    0.6733
                                    0.4705
                                    1.1816

                                   Variances
                                      DF
                                   t Value
                                 Pr > |t|

                                     Equal
                                      10
                                     -1.11
                                    0.2940

Table 78: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Analysis, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site V-84, Louisville MS 1984

Figure 60: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Pea Harvesters at Site V-84, Louisville MS 1984

Table 79: Two Sample T Test Between Adults and Children, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates for Pea Harvesters at Site V-84, Louisville MS 1984
                                   Age Group
                                    Method
                                     Mean
                                  95% CL Mean
                                   Std Dev
                                95% CL Std Dev
                                    Adults
                                      N/A
                                    -9.6421
                                   -10.1827
                                    -9.1014
                                    0.5152
                                    0.3216
                                    1.2636
                                   Children

                                    -9.0829
                                    -9.9580
                                    -8.2078
                                    0.8339
                                    0.5205
                                    2.0452
`Difference of Means between Adults and Children' in two sample t test tables
                                    Pooled
                                    -0.5592
                                    -1.4508
                                    0.3324
                                    0.6931
                                    0.4843
                                    1.2163

                                   Variances
                                      DF
                                   t Value
                                 Pr > |t|

                                     Equal
                                      10
                                     -1.40
                                    0.1925

On Grapes:  The available data for site VI-84 have not been statistically analyzed because the monitors contained no detectable residues of benomyl.

Figure 61: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Hand (Glove) Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Corn Harvesters at All Sites, Louisville MS 1984

Combined Results For Endosulfan on Corn From Sites I-, II-, III-, and IV-84:  The available data for Sites I-, II-, III-, and IV-84 for endosulfan on corn have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand/glove exposure rates (Figure 61) and total exposure rates, represented by hand and all patch exposure locations (Figure 62).  Total exposure was not calculated for day1/site I.  The same workers were monitored in Site I, II, III, and IV.  Repeated measure analysis of variance was used to examine the log of exposures between adult and child age groups accounting for the correlation between the exposures of same worker for multiple days using a mixed model.  Age group, gender, and day were used as fixed effects in the model.  The difference of least squares means between the child and adult age groups has been estimated from repeated measure analysis of variance (Tables 80 and 81).  The findings indicate that there is no statistically significant difference between adults and working children age group whether hand only or total exposure rates are considered.
Table 80: Differences of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means Analysis, Endosulfan Hand Exposure Rates for Corn Harvesters at All Sites, Louisville MS 1984
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.1443
                                    0.1595
                                      34
                                     0.90
                                    0.3719
                                     0.05
                                    -0.1798
                                    0.4683
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -8.8381
                                    0.08523
                                      34
                                    -103.69
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -9.0113
                                    -8.6649
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -8.9824
                                    0.1348
                                      34
                                    -66.65
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -9.2563
                                    -8.7085
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit

           Figure 62: Box & Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Corn Harvesters at All Sites, Louisville MS 1984

Table 81: Differences of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates for Corn Harvesters at All Sites, Louisville MS 1984
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                   -0.06940
                                    0.2362
                                      24
                                     -0.29
                                    0.7715
                                     0.05
                                    -0.5570
                                    0.4182
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -8.3755
                                    0.1263
                                      24
                                    -66.33
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -8.6362
                                    -8.1149
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -8.3061
                                    0.1997
                                      24
                                    -41.60
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -8.7182
                                    -7.8941
  DF = Degrees of Freedom
  T Value = Test Statistic
  Pr > t =  p value
  Alpha =  Significance level
  Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
  Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit
Investigator Conclusions:  The investigators themselves provided little comment or conclusions regarding this study except to note dermal exposure was the primary route of exposure and that inhalation exposure was not significant.  They also indicated "worker exposure to endosulfan and benomyl was low and, in most cases, juvenile exposure was less than adults."

Study 13:  Dermal Exposure to Vinclozolin By Strawberry Harvesters 1982 (MRID 47923401)

This study was conducted by the University of California (December 1983).  Dermal exposure to vinclozolin of 18 workers who harvested strawberries was measured on three consecutive days in Corvallis, Oregon (June 22-24, 1982).  Three vinclozolin applications (all 1 lb/A) were made on May 5, 15, and 22.  Harvesting occurred 38 through 40 days after the last application.  Cotton gloves and gauze patches worn on the forearms and ankles were used as monitors.  No results for the ankle samples were reported.  Five participants (1 male and 4 females) in the study were adults aged 18 to 40 years old.  The thirteen working children (4 males and 9 females) ranged in age from 12 to 16 years old.  The data used are included in Appendix B/Tab (13) VinclozolinStrawberry.  All totaled, 3 exposure conditions are represented by these data since exposures were monitored on 3 different days after application.  Dislodgeable foliar samples and productivity measures were also collected in this study.

The available data have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand exposure (Figure 63) and total exposure (Figure 64).  A linear mixed model was used to examine the log (exposure) between adults and children accounting for the correlation between the exposures of same worker for multiple days.  Age group and day were used as fixed effects in the model.  The difference of least squares means between adults and children was estimated from fitted mixed model in SAS (Table 82 for hand exposure and Table 83 for total exposure).  The findings indicate that there is a statistically significant difference in total and hand exposure rates between adults and children; adults had statistically significantly higher exposure rates than children for both hand and total exposure rates.

Figure 63: Box and Whisker Plot, Vinclozolin Hand (Glove) Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Strawberry Harvesters On All Study Days, Corvallis OR 1983

Table 82: Differences of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means, Vinclozolin Hand Exposure Rates for Strawberry Harvesters On All Study Days, Corvallis OR 1983
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.3943
                                    0.1941
                                      16
                                     2.03
                                    0.0591
                                     0.05
                                   -0.01708
                                    0.8057
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -6.0239
                                    0.1649
                                      16
                                    -36.53
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.3735
                                    -5.6743
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -6.4182
                                    0.1023
                                      16
                                    -62.75
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.6350
                                    -6.2014
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit
Figure 64: Box and Whisker Plot, Vinclozolin Total Exposure Rates for Strawberry Harvesters On All Study Days, Corvallis OR 1983

Table 83: Differences of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means Analysis, Vinclozolin Total Exposure Rates for Strawberry Harvesters On All Study Days, Corvallis OR 1983
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.4134
                                    0.1935
                                      16
                                     2.14
                                    0.0485
                                     0.05
                                   0.003088
                                    0.8236
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -5.9002
                                    0.1645
                                      16
                                    -35.87
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.2489
                                    -5.5515
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -6.3135
                                    0.1020
                                      16
                                    -61.90
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.5298
                                    -6.0973
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit

It should be noted that the investigators themselves reached similar conclusions:

      "The study was designed to provide correlations among dermal exposure, age of workers, body size or weight of workers and productivity.  Statistical analyses of the data showed a significant correlation between exposure rate and age and productivity.  Also age appeared to correlate positively with productivity, e.g., older workers seemed to receive higher dermal exposures than younger ones in the same occupational setting."

Study 14:  Simultaneous Dermal Exposure to Captan and Benomyl by Strawberry Harvesters (MRID 479289-10/15)

This study was conducted by the University of California in 1983 on a strawberry farm near Salinas California in the Pajaro Valley.  Ten adult workers were monitored on May 19, 1982.  Application of a tank mix of dicofol, benomyl and captan was conducted on May 15, 1982.  This study was not considered further in this analysis as no children were monitored and this analysis is focused on determining if children receive different levels of exposures than adults in similar exposure conditions.  No further mention of this study is included in this document.

Study 15:  Assessment of Dermal and Respiratory Exposure of Adult and Juvenile Tobacco Harvesters to Acephate, Duplin County North Carolina (MRID 479289-02)

This study was conducted by the Medical University of South Carolina (April 1984).  Dermal exposure to acephate, and its environmental degradate methamidophos, of 17 workers who harvested flue-cured tobacco was measured on two consecutive days in Duplin County North Carolina (July 13&14, 1982).  Two acephate applications (both 0.75 lb/A) were made on June 20 and July 12, 1982.  Harvesting occurred on 2 consecutive days which were 1 and 2 days after the last application.  Cotton gloves and gauze patches worn on the forearms, shoulders, chest, and back.  Nine participants (6 males and 3 females) in the study were adults aged 19 to 71 years old.  The eight working children (7 males and 1 female) ranged in age from 10 to 17 years old.  The data used are included in Appendix B/Tab (15)AcephateTobac47928902.  All totaled, 4 exposure conditions are represented by these data since exposures were monitored on 2 different days after application and exposure to both acephate and its degradate, methamidophos, were quantified.  Dislodgeable foliar residue and urine samples as well as productivity measures were also collected in this study.

The available data have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand exposure (Figure 65) and total exposure (Figure 66).  The same workers were monitored for multiple days.  A linear mixed model was used to examine the log (hand exposure) and log (total exposure) between adults and children, considering the correlation between the exposures of same worker for multiple days.  Age group and day were used as fixed effects in the model.  The difference of least squares means between adults and children has been estimated from a fitted mixed model in SAS (Table 84 for hand exposure and Table 85 for total exposure).  The findings indicate that there is statistically significant difference in hand exposure between children and adults.  Adults had statistically significantly higher exposure than children for hand exposure rates (one sided p value 0.0135) and marginally significantly higher exposure than children for total exposure rates (one sided p value 0.058).

Figure 65: Box and Whisker Plot, Acephate Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Tobacco Harvesters On All Study Days, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982

Table 84: Differences of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means, Acephate Hand Exposure Rates for Tobacco Harvesters On All Study Days, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.8699
                                    0.3552
                                      15
                                     2.45
                                    0.0271
                                     0.05
                                    0.1128
                                    1.6269
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -5.9039
                                    0.2436
                                      15
                                    -24.23
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.4232
                                    -5.3846
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -6.7738
                                    0.2584
                                      15
                                    -26.21
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -7.3246
                                    -6.2230
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit

Figure 66: Box and Whisker Plot, Acephate Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Tobacco Harvesters On All Study Days, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982

	Table 85: Differences of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means, Acephate  Total  Exposure Rates for Tobacco Harvesters On All Study Days, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.3148
                                    0.1891
                                      15
                                     1.66
                                    0.1167
                                     0.05
                                   -0.08825
                                    0.7179
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -3.9838
                                    0.1297
                                      15
                                    -30.71
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -4.2603
                                    -3.7073
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -4.2986
                                    0.1376
                                      15
                                    -31.24
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -4.5919
                                    -4.0053
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit
The available data for methamidophos have been summarized using box and whisker plots based on hand exposure rates (Figure 67) and total exposure rates (Figure 68).  Additionally, a non-parametric Wilcoxon Rank Sum test and a parametric two sample t test also were performed (Tables 86, 87, and 88) for log of hand exposure and log of total exposure.  The findings indicate that adults have statistically significant higher exposures than the working children monitored in this study whether hand only or total exposure rates are considered.

Table 86: Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, Methamidophos Hand Exposure Rates for Tobacco Harvesters On Study Day 1, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982

Figure 67: Box and Whisker Plot of Methamidophos Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Tobacco Harvesters On Study Day 1, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982

Table 87:  Two Sample T Test , Methamidophos Hand Exposure Rates for Tobacco Harvesters On Study Day 1, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982
                                   Age Group
                                    Method
                                     Mean
                                  95% CL Mean
                                   Std Dev
                                95% CL Std Dev
                                    Adults
                                      N/A
                                    -7.6413
                                    -8.6081
                                    -6.6745
                                    1.2578
                                    0.8496
                                    2.4096
                                   Children

                                    -9.4891
                                   -10.7210
                                    -8.2572
                                    1.4736
                                    0.9743
                                    2.9991
`Difference of Means between Adults and Children' in two sample t test tables
                                    Pooled
                                    1.8478
                                    0.4365
                                    3.2592
                                    1.3627
                                    1.0067
                                    2.1091

                                   Variances
                                      DF
                                   t Value
                                 Pr > |t|

                                     Equal
                                      15
                                     2.79
                                    0.0137

Figure 68: Box and Whisker Plot, Methamidophos Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Tobacco Harvesters On Study Day 1, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982

              Table 88:  Two Sample T Test, Methamidophos Total Exposure Rates for Tobacco Harvesters On Study Day 1, Duplin County North Carolina, 1982
                                   Age Group
                                    Method
                                     Mean
                                  95% CL Mean
                                   Std Dev
                                95% CL Std Dev
                                    Adults
                                      N/A
                                    -6.5554
                                    -7.1116
                                    -5.9992
                                    0.7236
                                    0.4887
                                    1.3862
                                   Children

                                    -7.1863
                                    -7.5412
                                    -6.8314
                                    0.4245
                                    0.2807
                                    0.8639
`Difference of Means between Adults and Children' in two sample t test tables
                                    Pooled
                                    0.6309
                                    0.00663
                                    1.2552
                                    0.6028
                                    0.4453
                                    0.9329

                                   Variances
                                      DF
                                   t Value
                                 Pr > |t|

                                     Equal
                                      15
                                     2.15
                                    0.0479

It should also be noted that the investigators themselves reached similar conclusions.  They indicated:

      "Seven juvenile and ten adult tobacco harvesters were monitored on two consecutive days for their dermal and respiratory exposure to acephate and its metabolite methamidophos.  The objective of the study was to determine if there were any differences between the exposures of these two groups.....Statistical analysis of acephate and methamidophos residues recovered from the sampling media found only one significant difference between the adults and juveniles.  This was the methamidophos residues observed in the first day's chest gauze squaressamples and the adults were observed to have higher residues."

Study 16:  An Assessment of Exposure of Tomato Harvesters to Chlorothalonil (MRID 479289-03)

This study was conducted by the Texas Tech University (November 1985).  Dermal exposure to chlorothalonil was measured for 65 workers who harvested tomatoes at two independent sites in the lower Rio Grande Valley in Hidalgo County Texas.  At the first site 25 workers were monitored and at the second site 39 workers were monitored.  At both sites, 1.5 pints of the Bravo 500 formulation (4.17 lb chlorothalonil per gallon) were applied by aircraft which equates to an application rate of 0.78 pounds chlorothalonil per acre.  Each site was treated once with chlorothalonil.  The first site was treated on May 12, 1982 and harvesting occurred 5 days later on May 17, 1982.  The second site was treated on May 26, 1982 and harvesting occurred 9 days later on June 4, 1982.  Monitoring was completed using cotton gloves, hand wipes (towels with alcohol/water mixture) and gauze patches worn on the forearms and lower legs.  At the first site 22 participants (16 males and 6 females) in the study were adults aged 20 to 52 years old.  The 3 working children (all males) ranged in age from 15 to 16 years old.  The data used are included in Appendix B/Tab (16).47928903ChlorTomS-1.  At the second site 26 participants (16 males and 10 females) in the study were adults aged 19 to 70 years old.  The 13 working children (8 males and 5 females) ranged in age from 10 to 17 years old.  The data used are included in Appendix B/Tab (16).47928903ChlorTomS-2.  A total of 2 exposure conditions are represented in these data since exposures were monitored on 2 different days.  Urine samples as well as productivity measures were also collected in this study.

The available data from the first monitoring site of this study contained inadequate results to conduct a statistical analysis of the data (e.g., no hand exposure results were presented for working children).  As such, the statistical analysis of the data for this study focused solely on the results for the second study site.  The results have been summarized using a box and whisker plot based only on hand exposure (Figure 69).  Additionally, a Wilcoxon Rank Sum analysis has also been completed (Table 89).  The findings indicate that there is no statistically significant difference between the hand exposures rates of the children and adults which were monitored.
Figure 69: Box and Whisker Plot, Chlorothalonil Hand Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Tomato Harvesters At Site 2, Hidalgo County Texas, 1982

Table 89: Wilcoxon Rank Sum Analysis, Chlorothalonil Hand Exposure Rates for Tomato Harvesters at Site 2, Hidalgo County Texas 1982

It should also be noted that the investigators themselves reached similar conclusions.  They indicated:

      "Contact with residues of the fungicide chlorothalonil was examined in youth (age <= 17 years) and adult (age > 17 years) farmworkers during the harvest of tomatoes at two independent sites.....results indicated that youths employed in the harvest of tomatoes may be expected to contact residues of the fungicide chlorothalonil at equal rates to adults."

Study 17:  Youth in Agriculture:  Dermal and Respiratory Exposure Assessment of Adult and Juvenile Tomato Harvesters to Endosulfan, Charleston County, South Carolina (MRID 479289-10)

This study was conducted by the Medical University of South Carolina (1981).  Dermal exposure to endosulfan was measured for 10 workers who harvested tomatoes on two different days in two different fields on the same farm located in Charleston County, South Carolina.  At both sites applications (June 8 & 9, 1981) were completed 1 day prior to monitoring (June 9 & 10, 1981).  Applications were completed using groundboom equipment and in each case multiple pesticides were applied in a tank mix but monitoring evaluated only endosulfan residues.  In each application, endosulfan was applied at 0.4 pounds active ingredient per acre.  Tank mixes also included methomyl, bacillus thuringiensis, and maneb.  Monitoring was completed using cotton gloves and gauze patches worn on the forearms, chest, shoulder, and back.  The same workers were monitored on each of the study days.  Five adults (1 male and 4 female) were monitored and ranged in age from 20 to 63 years old.  Five children (all male) were also monitored and ranged in age from 13 to 17 years old.  The data used are included in Appendix B/Tab (17).TomatEndo.  All totaled, 2 exposure conditions are represented in these data since exposures were monitored on 2 different days.  Urine, foliar and soil samples as well as productivity measures were also collected in this study.

The results have been summarized using a box and whisker plot based only hand/glove exposure (Figure 70) as well as for total exposure (Figure 71).  Same workers were monitored for two separate days.  Linear mixed model was used to examine the difference between adults and children taking account of the correlation between the exposures of same worker for multiple days.  Age group and day were used as fixed effects in the model. The dependent variables are log of glove exposure rate and log of total exposure rate.  The difference of least squares means between adults and children has been estimated from a fitted mixed model in SAS (Table 90 for hand exposure rate and Table 91 for total exposure rate). The findings indicate that there are statistically significant differences between adults and children for both hand (glove) and total exposure rates.  Children had statistically significantly higher exposure rates than adults for hand (glove) exposure.  However for total exposure, the adult age group has statistically significantly higher exposure rates than children (one sided p value < 0.05).
Figure 70: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Hand (Glove) Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Tomato Harvesters, Charleston County South Carolina 1981

Table 90: Difference of Least SquaresMeans and Least SquaresMeans, Endosulfan Hand/Glove Exposure Rates for Tomato Harvesters, Charleston County South Carolina 1981
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    -0.5535
                                    0.2124
                                       8
                                     -2.61
                                    0.0313
                                     0.05
                                    -1.0433
                                   -0.06365
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -6.3751
                                    0.1547
                                       8
                                    -41.20
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.7319
                                    -6.0183
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -5.8216
                                    0.1455
                                       8
                                    -40.00
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -6.1572
                                    -5.4860
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit

Figure 71: Box and Whisker Plot, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates (mg/kg/hr) for Tomato Harvesters, Charleston County South Carolina 1981

Table 91: Difference of Least Squares Means and Least Squares Means, Endosulfan Total Exposure Rates for Tomato Harvesters, Charleston County South Carolina 1981
                                    Effect
                                   Age Group
                                   Age Group
                                   Estimate
                                Standard Error
                                     DF[1]
                                  t Value[2]
                                Pr > |t|[3]
                                   Alpha[4]
                                   Lower[5]
                                   Upper[6]
                      Differences of Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                   Children
                                    0.7650
                                    0.3161
                                       8
                                     2.42
                                    0.0419
                                     0.05
                                    0.03600
                                    1.4940
                              Least Squares Means
                                   Age Group
                                    Adults
                                    -3.7320
                                    0.2235
                                       8
                                    -16.70
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -4.2475
                                    -3.2166
                                   Age Group
                                   Children
                                    -4.4970
                                    0.2235
                                       8
                                    -20.12
                                   <.0001
                                     0.05
                                    -5.0125
                                    -3.9815
 DF = Degrees of Freedom
 T Value = Test Statistic
 Pr > t =  p value
 Alpha =  Significance level
 Lower = Lower 95% Confidence Limit
 Upper =  Upper 95% Confidence Limit