Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 245

Thread: CCD Research

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sacramento, Calif. USA
    Posts
    272

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDawg View Post
    Really the issue isn't whether neonics are causing harm to bees or not--there's pretty clear data that shows they are--the issue is why some beeks are affected and others are not. Maybe the solution is as simple as reducing the level of pesticide in the seed coatings.
    It's already been explained to you that rates of CCD and winter loss do not correlate well with heavy neonic seed coating areas vs light or non-neonic seed coating areas. And it's already been explained that Jim Lyon's hives "were negative for all pesticides and miticides including Clothianidin" even though his hives (east-central South Dakota area) are surrounded by 1000's of square miles worth of monocultures grown from neonic treated seed. Therefore even if neonic seed coatings were banned altogether there's no field evidence available that would suggest CCD and winter loss rates would improve.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDawg View Post
    You'd think that Bayer, Monsanto, and Syngenta would be conducting some LONG TERM studies into the impacts on honeybees to neonics exposure,
    There's no significant exposure to neonics from seed treatments begin with as explained above (save for some planter dust exposure incidents which will be resolved within a year or two).

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Worcester County, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,679

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    There is no data to back up that claim
    ...I haven't looked at the references provided:
    Schmuck et al. 2001 (Pest Manag Sci 57:225-238) and Maus et al. 2003 (Bulletin of
    Insectology 56:51-58)

    There is no data in those papers wrt:
    "Some residues can remain in the soil beyond harvest and may be present when a succeeding crop is planted. But here's the key thing to keep in mind. Most of this residue is not bioavailable to plants because it becomes tightly bound to soil particles. The bottom line is the residues in plants won't be appreciably greater after 7 or even 70 years of continuous use than they were the first year."

    I haven't looked, but if you are claiming that there is no data, I assume you have read (or at least looked over) the studies? ...otherwise, how would you know?

    deknow
    Last edited by Barry; 07-05-2013 at 07:59 AM.
    The perils of benefactors; The blessings of parasites; Blindness blindness and sight -Joni Mitchell 'Shadows and Light'

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    havana fl
    Posts
    1,358

    Cool Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by deknow View Post
    ...I haven't looked at the references provided:
    Schmuck et al. 2001 (Pest Manag Sci 57:225-238) and Maus et al. 2003 (Bulletin of
    Insectology 56:51-58)

    There is no data in those papers wrt:
    "Some residues can remain in the soil beyond harvest and may be present when a succeeding crop is planted. But here's the key thing to keep in mind. Most of this residue is not bioavailable to plants because it becomes tightly bound to soil particles. The bottom line is the residues in plants won't be appreciably greater after 7 or even 70 years of continuous use than they were the first year."

    I haven't looked, but if you are claiming that there is no data, I assume you have read (or at least looked over) the studies? ...otherwise, how would you know?

    deknow
    The toxicity of neonicotinoids may, however, increase by synergistic effects with other compounds as was demonstrated by Iwasa et al. (2004)for mixtures containing a cyano-group neonicotinoid. Therefore, screening for safer compounds should also include gathering more information on potential synergistic effects of mixtures containing neonicotinoids as this is currently lacking.
    Iím really not that serious

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Herrick, SD USA
    Posts
    4,454

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    corn rows are planted on like 36 inch centers I think bees can fly down a 36 inch row without much trouble but I have no field studies to back up that claim
    30" rows have been the norm for some time and yes corn canopy has been a big factor in weed control for as long as farmers have grown corn. You need to get out into corn country and have a little fun, look whats right over in Milton
    http://www.themaize.com/map/usa/florida
    Last edited by Barry; 07-05-2013 at 08:02 AM.
    "People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."- Andy Rooney

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Worcester County, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,679

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    The toxicity of neonicotinoids may, however, increase by synergistic effects with other compounds as was demonstrated by Iwasa et al. (2004)for mixtures containing a cyano-group neonicotinoid. Therefore, screening for safer compounds should also include gathering more information on potential synergistic effects of mixtures containing neonicotinoids as this is currently lacking.
    Yes, this is an excertpt from the conclusions form this paper:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3338325/

    ...and if you look at another paragraph in the conclusion, you see:
    Many lethal and sublethal effects of neonicotinoid insecticides on bees have been described in laboratory studies, however, no effects were observed in field studies with field-realistic dosages.
    ...note that the above is a paragraph in its entirety....not taken out of context.

    The passage (from the same paper) that you quote (above), is from a paragraph that begins with:
    The risk assessment scheme for soil-applied systemic pesticides proposed by Alix et al.2010) seems adequate for assessing the risks of side-effects by neonicotinoids as it takes into account the effect on different stages (adult versus larvae) and on different levels of biological organization (organism versus colony)
    It certainly is conceivable that the statements you object to are garbage, and/or based on garbage data....I haven't given them a good look. Do you still claim that there is no data?

    deknow
    The perils of benefactors; The blessings of parasites; Blindness blindness and sight -Joni Mitchell 'Shadows and Light'

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    havana fl
    Posts
    1,358

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by jim lyon View Post
    30" rows have been the norm for some time and yes corn canopy has been a big factor in weed control for as long as farmers have grown corn.
    well than no need for round up
    Quote Originally Posted by jim lyon View Post
    You need to get out into corn country and have a little fun, look whats right over in Milton
    http://www.themaize.com/map/usa/florida
    My relatives grow corn as do my neighbors no need to drive to milton but thanks for the heads up. Lots of agg here ya might even get some water melons from this area they are shipped nation wide
    Iím really not that serious

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    havana fl
    Posts
    1,358

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by deknow View Post
    Yes, this is an excertpt from the conclusions form this paper:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3338325/

    ...and if you look at another paragraph in the conclusion, you see:

    ...note that the above is a paragraph in its entirety....not taken out of context.

    The passage (from the same paper) that you quote (above), is from a paragraph that begins with:


    It certainly is conceivable that the statements you object to are garbage, and/or based on garbage data....I haven't given them a good look. Do you still claim that there is no data?

    deknow
    Therefore, screening for safer compounds should also include gathering more information on potential synergistic effects of mixtures containing neonicotinoids as this is currently LACKING
    Iím really not that serious

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    havana fl
    Posts
    1,358

    Default Re: CCD Research

    I wonder why lab testing data is no longer Relevant
    Iím really not that serious

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Worcester County, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,679

    Default Re: CCD Research

    of course data is relevent....

    ...but what you claimed (and what I called you on) was that there was no data to support the claims made about the bioavailability of imidacloprid in soil buildup. I'm asking you if you reviewed the sources given in order to make that determination, or is your claim just a fantasy based upon reading the title?

    deknow
    The perils of benefactors; The blessings of parasites; Blindness blindness and sight -Joni Mitchell 'Shadows and Light'

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Worcester County, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,679

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Therefore, screening for safer compounds should also include gathering more information on potential synergistic effects of mixtures containing neonicotinoids as this is currently LACKING
    ...you do understand that this quote is talking about a concern in going forward in developing new pesticides ("safer compunds"...safer than what is currently available...safer than imidacloprid, not imidacloprid).
    I absolutely think we need more studies on the synergisic effects of our currently used pesticides....I think we can agree on that. The quote you are providing, however, speaks nothing of this.

    deknow
    The perils of benefactors; The blessings of parasites; Blindness blindness and sight -Joni Mitchell 'Shadows and Light'

  11. #211
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Neonic contaminated talc dust has been shown to kill bees outright.

    Pollen from wildflowers on the margins of neonic fields have been shown to have unusually high levels of neonics.

    The 1/2 life of neonics in soil is far longer than that stated on 'the label'.

    I'll agree that we need to examine the effects of entire formulations, and synergistic interactions between formulations, for their effects on Honeybee colonies.

    The environmental pollution from neonics via translocation is as serious as the 'bee kill' issue.

  12. #212
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Worcester County, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,679

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Another issue that comes up is buildup in tree injections. When the USDA came in because of the Asian longhorn beetle with a plan to inject hundreds of thousands of trees with imidacloprid once a year for 3 years they made some curious claims:

    1. That the dose would be effective in the tree tissue for at least a year.
    2. That they would dose each tree 3 years in a row.
    3. All of this was backed up by data on sunflowers and corn...which aren't trees.

    I asked how they could think it would be effective for a year, and not be concerned about the levels of imidacloprid in the tree (completely unknown) after 3 treatments wrt to pollinators, soil, etc. I pushed really hard to get them to collect data.
    They hired Jeff Pettis to do a study...he did a study on how much imidacloprid made it into the hives in the spring when (some) red maples in the area were injected according to the protocol. Unfortunately, it seems that flowers and leaves from the trees were tested for levels of imidacloprid, but not the bark layer that is responsible for killing the ALB....the one data point that would have been helpful in determining what a reasonable protocol would be was not collected. The one data point that could have reassured all involved that a lesser number of treatments would do the job just fine is lost.

    Fortunately, they seem to be short on $$$ and having trouble following their own protocol. Nothing could be better for the program.

    deknow

    deknow
    The perils of benefactors; The blessings of parasites; Blindness blindness and sight -Joni Mitchell 'Shadows and Light'

  13. #213
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    deknow:

    You do not want to have colonies anywhere near conservation efforts to eradicate an invasive.

    They're known to use very large amounts of insecticides/pesticides.

    I'm reminded of those Italian beekeepers who went on a 'hunger strike' to protest pesticide use in an EU quarantine zone for the American Grapevine Leafhopper (a carrier of vine yellow disease).

    You can't safely keep bees there.

  14. #214
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    27,640

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Then that excludes any rural setting where Emerald Ashbore Beetle infestation is being addressed.

    So where is it safe to keep bees?
    Mark Berninghausen To combat Ebola, please consider supporting http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org


  15. #215
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Herrick, SD USA
    Posts
    4,454

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    deknow:

    You do not want to have colonies anywhere near conservation efforts to eradicate an invasive.

    They're known to use very large amounts of insecticides/pesticides.
    An invasive what? All weeds and unwanted insects in crops are invasive. Thats why they are sprayed. Whats the distinction between conservation and food production?
    "People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."- Andy Rooney

  16. #216
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    It's probably alot safer to keep bees near neonic coated seed crops (after planting) than near an invasive eradication site.

    Farmers are alot better at controlling the amounts of pesticides applied because of costs (they'll go broke otherwise), and they're producing food or feed.

    Eradication programs use massive amounts of pesticides, they're very expensive, and they don't want to miss anything. For example, nobody eats trees, last I heard.
    Last edited by WLC; 07-05-2013 at 09:56 AM.

  17. #217
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    27,640

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Quote Originally Posted by jim lyon View Post
    An invasive what? All weeds and unwanted insects in crops are invasive. Thats why they are sprayed. Whats the distinction between conservation and food production?
    I can only imagine he is refering to invasive insects or weeds, such as Emerald Ashbore or purpleloostrife.

    Programs I question the feasibility of. (a different Thread)
    Mark Berninghausen To combat Ebola, please consider supporting http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org


  18. #218
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    They use beetles on purple loosestrife.

  19. #219
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    27,640

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Naturally occuring beetles or imports? Chasing one invasive w/ another.

    I believe that Emerald Ashbore and Longhorn beetles are treated for by IV like feeding of the trees being infested by these beetles w/ pesticides. WLC probably knows what kind.
    Mark Berninghausen To combat Ebola, please consider supporting http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org


  20. #220
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: CCD Research

    Yes I do. It's an interesting story when it comes to how they developed biocontrol agents (which are themselves 'exotics') for Purple Loosestrife and wetlands restoration.

    However, my point is still the same: it's how neonics pollute the environment, and how that can account for winter colony losses that the Harvard study is actually addressing (IMNSHO).

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads