Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 432

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pesticides have negative effects on non-target organisms

Open access
Wan, Nian-Feng, Fu, Liwan, Dainese, Matteo, Kiær, Lars Pødenphant, Hu, Yue-Qing, Xin, Fengfei, Goulson, Dave, Woodcock, Ben A., Vanbergen, Adam J., Spurgeon, David J., Shen, Siyuan, Scherber, Christoph·2025·Nature Communications

Abstract

Abstract Although intended to control pests, pesticides affect a phylogenetically diverse range of non-target species contributing to global biodiversity declines1–7. However, the magnitude of this risk is only partly understood. Here, we show that pesticides negatively affect non-target organisms across the tree of life. We analyzed 26,096 effect sizes from 1,705 studies reporting effects of insecticides, fungicides and herbicides on growth, reproduction, behaviour, and other biomarkers of non-target terrestrial and aquatic taxa. Pesticides negatively affected invertebrate and vertebrate animals, seed and spore-producing plants, as well as bacteria and fungi. Pesticides formulated to target a particular taxon negatively affected phylogenetically distant groups, e.g. insecticidal neonicotinoids impacted amphibians, fish, mammals and monocotyledonous plants. The effects were evident for field-realistic exposures, were more pronounced in temperate than tropical regions, and were consistent in magnitude for exposure in aquatic and terrestrial environments. The detection of strong detrimental effects of pesticides across a wide range of non-target organisms questions current regulatory practices. Adoption of sustainable management practices (e.g. agricultural ecological intensification, integrated pest management, and non-pesticide control) may help balance food security alongside reducing dependencies on pesticide with their associated risks to nature.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-025-56732-x

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 47 references

Metadata

Authors
Wan, N.-F., Fu, L., Dainese, M., Kiær, L. P., Hu, Y.-Q., Xin, F., Goulson, D., Woodcock, B. A., Vanbergen, A. J., Spurgeon, D. J., Shen, S., & Scherber, C.
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2025-02-13
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
1360-1360
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4407549707
Cited by
432
References
47
FWCI
171.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pesticides have negative effects on non-target organisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41467-025-56732-x
The paper
Wan, N.-F., Fu, L., Dainese, M., Kiær, L. P., Hu, Y.-Q., Xin, F., Goulson, D., Woodcock, B. A., Vanbergen, A. J., Spurgeon, D. J., Shen, S., & Scherber, C. (2025). Pesticides have negative effects on non-target organisms. Nature Communications. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-56732-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.