POMAIS ofrece una gama completa de productos pesticidas, dedicados a ayudar al desarrollo de marcas y mejorar el estilo de vida de los agricultores.
Tebuconazole is a triazole fungicide widely used to manage a range of fungal diseases across many crops. In resistance-management language, it sits in the DMI (demethylation inhibitor) / sterol biosynthesis inhibitor class (commonly referenced as FRAC Group 3), which matters because its biochemical target is specific to fungi—not insects—yet exposure and interaction effects can still be relevant for pollinators.
As a DMI fungicide, tebuconazole inhibits a key step in fungal sterol biosynthesis. Without normal sterols, fungal cell membranes don’t develop properly, and infection pressure is reduced. This targeted mode of action explains why tebuconazole often shows lower acute lethality to bees compared with insecticides—but “lower hazard” is not the same thing as “no risk.”
| If your program includes… | Practical bee-risk posture |
|---|---|
| No bloom exposure (no flowering weeds/crops in the treated area; minimal drift potential) | Typically lower risk profile |
| Bloom/foraging overlap (treated area or adjacent forage is flowering) | Treat as heightened risk (exposure drives outcomes) |
| Tank mixes / sequential sprays with insecticides/acaricides | Treat as elevated risk (interaction potential) |
| Known nearby apiaries / pollinator-sensitive zones | Treat as high governance: label + local restrictions + documentation |
The operational takeaway: Risk = Hazard × Exposure. Tebuconazole’s hazard to adult honey bees may be relatively low in acute tests, but exposure conditions can turn a “low concern” active ingredient into a real-world problem—especially in bloom and in mixtures.
Even when acute lethality is low, fungicides can matter because:
Direct exposure still happens (spray contact, drift, contaminated water sources).
Residues can enter hive matrices (pollen/nectar → beebread/honey/wax), creating repeated low-level contact.
Non-lethal endpoints matter commercially (navigation, metabolism, immunity, brood/queen performance)—these can affect colony resilience even without visible “bee kill” events.
The public scientific literature on tebuconazole includes studies reporting physiological stress signals (e.g., oxidative stress pathways) under sublethal exposure conditions, and broader reviews conclude that fungicides—while often not acutely lethal—can pose chronic or colony-relevant risks depending on exposure routes and co-stressors.
For decision-makers, the point isn’t to over-interpret any single lab study; it’s to recognize that “not an insecticide” does not equal “irrelevant to bees.” If your market is pollinator-sensitive, you manage this like a governance topic: exposure control, label compliance, and mixture discipline.
One of the most controllable drivers is what tebuconazole is used with. Multiple reviews and experimental work show that some fungicides—particularly certain sterol-biosynthesis inhibitors—can increase the toxicity of certain insecticides/acaricides by interfering with detoxification pathways in bees.
Practical procurement implication:
If your end-users commonly run fungicide + insecticide programs, don’t evaluate tebuconazole in isolation. Evaluate the program (actives + timing + exposure conditions) and document the rationale.
Because pollinator protection is both regulatory and reputational, a buyer-side review typically includes:
Label language in the destination market (pollinator statements, drift restrictions, bloom-related limitations).
Local rules (some jurisdictions impose additional constraints beyond the label, especially near protected areas or water).
Formulation and co-formulants (formulated products can behave differently than technical active ingredient alone).
Intended use pattern (crop/turf scenario, bloom adjacency, typical spray programs).
If you’re importing or private-labeling, the commercial standard is: the label is your legal operating system—and your supplier should be able to support it with a clean documentation pack.
Tebuconazole is not typically classified with the high acute bee toxicity seen in many insecticides, but toxicity and risk depend on exposure and formulation. Risk increases when bees are exposed directly or via residues and when tebuconazole is used in certain mixtures.
Yes. Research on fungicides—including tebuconazole—discusses sublethal endpoints (physiological stress, metabolism impacts) that may matter at colony scale depending on exposure conditions.
Not necessarily. Many regulatory datasets are honey-bee-heavy, while wild bee sensitivity and exposure can differ. If your market is sensitive, treat “data gaps” as a governance item, not an assumption.
Often it is lower-risk in acute lethality terms, but “bee-friendly” is not a compliance category. A responsible answer still requires label scope, use pattern, and mixture context.
Use a label-first approach, confirm local pollinator rules, and evaluate the full spray program (including mixtures), not just one active ingredient.
If you’re evaluating tebuconazole for a pollinator-sensitive market, request a label-ready documentation pack (COA, SDS, TDS, formulation options, and compliance notes) so your registration and stewardship teams can sign off with confidence.