Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner

CCD/Neonicotinoid Data (Studies, Articles, Links)

88K views 214 replies 40 participants last post by  Litsinger 
#1 ·
Use this thread to post Articles, Studies or Links that apply to the topic of CCD.
This will allow members to have all supporting data in one place.

This thread is NOT for discussion.
Post supporting data only. Discuss data in other threads.
 
#5 ·
J Econ Entomol. 2010 Oct;103(5):1517-23.

Weighing risk factors associated with bee colony collapse disorder by classification and regression tree analysis.

VanEngelsdorp D, Speybroeck N, Evans JD, Nguyen BK, Mullin C, Frazier M, Frazier J, Cox-Foster D, Chen Y, Tarpy DR, Haubruge E, Pettis JS, Saegerman C.
Source

Bureau of Plant Industry, Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, 2301 North Cameron St., Harrisburg PA 17110, USA.
Abstract

Colony collapse disorder (CCD), a syndrome whose defining trait is the rapid loss of adult worker honey bees, Apis mellifera L., is thought to be responsible for a minority of the large overwintering losses experienced by U.S. beekeepers since the winter 2006-2007. Using the same data set developed to perform a monofactorial analysis (PloS ONE 4: e6481, 2009), we conducted a classification and regression tree (CART) analysis in an attempt to better understand the relative importance and interrelations among different risk variables in explaining CCD. Fifty-five exploratory variables were used to construct two CART models: one model with and one model without a cost of misclassifying a CCD-diagnosed colony as a non-CCD colony. The resulting model tree that permitted for misclassification had a sensitivity and specificity of 85 and 74%, respectively. Although factors measuring colony stress (e.g., adult bee physiological measures, such as fluctuating asymmetry or mass of head) were important discriminating values, six of the 19 variables having the greatest discriminatory value were pesticide levels in different hive matrices. Notably, coumaphos levels in brood (a miticide commonly used by beekeepers) had the highest discriminatory value and were highest in control (healthy) colonies. Our CART analysis provides evidence that CCD is probably the result of several factors acting in concert, making afflicted colonies more susceptible to disease. This analysis highlights several areas that warrant further attention, including the effect of sublethal pesticide exposure on pathogen prevalence and the role of variability in bee tolerance to pesticides on colony survivorship.

PMID:
21061948
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 
#8 ·
J Invertebr Pathol. 2012 Oct;111(2):106-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jip.2012.06.008. Epub 2012 Jul 20.

Asymptomatic presence of Nosema spp. in Spanish commercial apiaries.
Fernández JM, Puerta F, Cousinou M, Dios-Palomares R, Campano F, Redondo L.
Source

Apicultural Reference Center in Andalusia (CERA), Spain. zo3fepej@gmail.com
Abstract

Nosemosis is caused by intracellular parasites (Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae) that infect the midgut epithelial cells in adult honey bees. Recent studies relate N. ceranae to Colony Collapse Disorder and there is some suggestion that Nosema spp., especially N. ceranae, induces high mortality in honey bees, a fact that is considered as a serious threat for colony survival. 604 samples of adult honey bees for Nosema spp. analysis were collected from beekeeping colonies across Spain and were analysed using PCR with capillary electrophoresis. We also monitored 77 Andalusian apiaries for 2 years; the sampled hives were standard healthy colonies, without any special disease symptoms. We found 100% presence of Nosema spp. in some locations, indicating that this parasite was widespread throughout the country. The two year monitoring indicated that 87% of the hives with Nosema spp. remained viable, with normal honey production and biological development during this period of time. The results of these trials indicated that both N. ceranae and N. apis could be present in these beehives without causing disease symptom and that there is no evidence for the replacement of N. apis by N. ceranae, supporting the hypothesis that nosemosis is not the main reason of the collapse and death of beehives.

Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PMID:
22820066
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 
#9 ·
Pretty interesting paper on bees on sunflowers and soybeans in Uruguay. Really explains why bees do poorly on sunflowers treated with neonics. This is the one study I've found that really proves neonics hurt bees. But these hives were also hurt by organophosphates.

Detection of Pesticides in Active and Depopulated Beehives in Uruguay
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3210585/
 
#11 ·
here is a definition of ccd from the usda/ars:

"The defining characteristic of CCD is the disappearance of most, if not all, of the adult honey bees in a colony, leaving behind honey and brood but no dead bee bodies. This definition has recently been revised to include low levels of Varroa mite and other pathogens, such as Nosema, as probable contributing factors. "

from "Colony Collapse Disorder: An Incomplete Puzzle" updated july 2012

http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/AR/archive/jul12/colony0712.htm
 
#12 ·
here's a good one:

http://www.nature.com/news/bees-lies-and-evidence-based-policy-1.12443

from the letter:

"As a scientist involved in this debate, I find this misinformation deeply frustrating. Yet I also see that lies and exaggeration on both sides are a necessary part of the democratic process to trigger rapid policy change. It is simply impossible to interest millions of members of the public, or the farming press, with carefully reasoned explanations. And politicians respond to public opinion much more readily than they respond to science."
 
#13 ·
Will banning neonicotinoids save pollinators?

Comments:

Lynn Dicks provides some background information and references to support her World View article, published this week in Nature.


On 25 February 2013, the European Union (EU)’s Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health votes on a proposal to ban the use of three widely used agricultural insecticides on crops attractive to bees. They are neonicotinoids - clothianidin, thiamethoxam and imidacloprid. They’ve been around since the mid-1980s. Often, they’re applied as seed treatments and remain in crop plant tissues throughout the plant’s life. This means their use is what you might call prophylactic, rather than being in response to pest attack.

The underlying driver for the sudden policy change is the emergence of new evidence showing substantial sublethal effects of neonicotinoids on honey bee Apis mellifera and bumblebee Bombus terrestris colonies at field-realistic doses [1,2,3]. These experiments imply particularly serious implications for wild bumblebee colonies, such as an 85% reduction in new queen production, if they are exposed in the wider environment at the levels tested [3].

Such effects are not considered acceptable risks by the European Food Safety Authority [4]. Even more importantly, they would not have been picked up by the existing regulatory system in Europe, which focuses entirely on honey bees, although new guidance to be published this spring is expected to extend the risk assessment to cover bumblebees and solitary bees.

We know that where measured, wild flower-visiting insects (bees, hoverflies, butterflies and moths) are declining in diversity and many are declining in abundance [5]. We know managed honey bees have suffered serious unexplained health problems leading to substantial colony losses in the US and parts of Europe [5]. And there is clear evidence that honey bees are exposed to neonicotinoids at levels similar to those tested, via crop plants, dust from seed planters and even weeds growing near treated fields, which seem to pick up residues from the soil [6].

The key question is, to what extent are the sublethal effects demonstrated in laboratories responsible for observed declines? This is where the scientific evidence flounders. Proving causal links between pesticide use and either bee declines or honey bee health problems is difficult. We still have no data on the actual exposure of wild pollinators to neonicotinoids, or to multiple pesticides including neonicotinoids, in their natural environment. The foraging behaviour and life histories of flower-feeding insects mean that reported levels of pesticide residue in crop plant nectar and pollen do not equate to actual exposure [7]. Most flower-feeding insects are generalists and opportunists. They feed on a range of available resources, including wild plants and crop plants. Landscape-scale field trials are needed, with treatment and control plots substantially larger than the standard 1 ha (100 m x 100 m), separated by a greater distance than the foraging range of bee colonies, which can be several kilometres. Such research is starting to happen. I know of at least one study recently commissioned in Sweden, but it will take years to come up with results. And so it should.

Current scientific opinion is that pollinator declines are caused by multiple interacting pressures rather than any single threat [5,8,9,10]. Habitat loss, disappearance of floral resources, climate change and disease may all play a part. Pesticides are one of these multiple, interacting pressures. There is no reason to believe that simply removing one group of insecticides, without addressing the other pressures, will solve the problem. It’s one step in the right direction.

Lynn Dicks is a Knowledge Exchange Fellow at the University of Cambridge, funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council

Follow @LynnDicks on Twitter
1 Gill, R. J., Ramos-Rodriguez, O. & Raine, N. E. Combined pesticide exposure severely affects individual- and colony-level traits in bees. Nature 491, 105-108 (2012).
2 Henry, M. et al. A common pesticide decreases foraging success and survival in honey bees. Science 336, 348-350, doi:DOI 10.1126/science.1215039 (2012).
3 Whitehorn, P. R., O'Connor, S., Wackers, F. L. & Goulson, D. Neonicotinoid pesticide reduces bumble bee colony growth and queen production. Science 336, 351-352, doi:10.1126/science.1215025 (2012).
4 European Food Safety Authority. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment for bees for the active substance clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam. EFSA Journal 11, 3066-3068 (2013).
5 Potts, S. G. et al. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25, 345-353, doi:DOI 10.1016/j.tree.2010.01.007 (2010).
6 Krupke, C. H., Hunt, G. J., Eitzer, B. D., Andino, G. & Given, K. Multiple Routes of Pesticide Exposure for Honey Bees Living Near Agricultural Fields. PLoS ONE 7, e29268 (2012).
7 Brittain, C. & Potts, S. G. The potential impacts of insecticides on the life-history traits of bees and the consequences for pollination. Basic Appl. Ecol. 12, 321-331, doi:DOI 10.1016/j.baae.2010.12.004 (2011).
8 Brown, M. J. F. & Paxton, R. J. The conservation of bees: a global perspective. Apidologie 40, 410-416, doi:DOI 10.1051/apido/2009019 (2009).
9 Szabo, N. D., Colla, S. R., Wagner, D. L., Gall, L. F. & Kerr, J. T. Do pathogen spillover, pesticide use, or habitat loss explain recent North American bumblebee declines? Conserv. Lett. 5, 232-239, doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00234.x (2012).
10 Vanbergen, A. J. & Insect Pollinators Initiative. Threats to an ecosystem service: pressures on pollinators. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment doi: 10.1890/120126 (In press).
 
#14 ·
Effects of neonicotinoid dust from maize seed-dressing on honey bees

Fabio S GOLASTRA 1, Teresa RENZI1, Stefano DRAGHETTI1, Piotr MEZYCKI2, Marco LODESANI, Stefano MAINI, Claudio PORRINI1
Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie - Entomologia, Università di Bologna, Italy
http://www.bulletinofinsectology.org/pdfarticles/vol65-2012-273-280sgolastra.pdf

Abstract


In Northern Italy from 2000 to 2008, many spring bee mortalities were clearly linked to sowing of maize seeds dressed with insecticides. In the present study, we investigated the effects on honey bees of clothianidin derived from maize seed-dressing (Poncho®) in laboratory (test by indirect contact) and in semi-field conditions. Despite the reduction of dust dispersion due to the application of the best available sowing techniques (pneumatic seeder equipped with deflector, improvement of seed-dressing quality) our results showed negative effect s on honey bees at individual level. In semi-field study, no effect was observed at the colony level despite the high bee mortality rate for 2-3 days after dust application. However, we can expect a colony decline and low honey production if this high forager mortality rate lasts for longer than 10 days. Such a situation is possible if the sowing period lasts several days as in the Po Valley, where the landscape is characterized by extended maize cultivation. Specific methodologies to assess the effects of dust have never been included in the official guidelines for the evaluation of side-effects of plant protection products on honey bees. For this reason, suitable and standardized methods for testing in laboratory and in semi-field conditions the effects on honey bees of contaminated dust dispersed during sowing were evaluated.


... This study is one of those that triggered the call for a ban of neonics in the EU.
 
#15 ·
DAFNE Project Nr. 100472
MELISSA

Investigations in the incidence of bee losses in corn and oilseed rape growing areas of Austria and possible correlations with bee diseases and the use of insecticidal plant protection products

Projektstart 01.03.2009
Projektende 15.03.2012

AuftragnehmerIn Österreichische Agentur für Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit GmbH
WissenschaftlicheR ProjektleiterIn Hofrat Dipl.-Ing. Leopold Girsch


Summing up, the results of the MELISSA-project give evidence that in Austria regional clustered bee damages had occurred in the years 2009 – 2011, which were frequently associated with the use of maize and oilseed pumpkin seeds coated with insecticides, as proved by residue analysis. The strong local component and the accumulation in areas with small-scale structured agriculture indicated special environmental conditions resulting in an increased exposition of honey bees to the identified insecticidal plant protection substances in the affected areas.
Regulatory measures to prevent honey bee losses due to the exposure of bees to insecticidal seed dressing substances have significantly improved the situation. However, repeatedly observed incidences of honey bee mortality in defined regions suggest their systematic correlation with local factors contributing to increased exposure of bees. In addition to considering environmental factors, all measures to mitigate risks have to be implemented invariably and with discipline.

http://www.dafne.at/dafne_plus_home...plus&content=result&come_from=&&search_fields[title_ger]=&search_fields[projektleiter]=&search_fields[antragsteller]=&search_fields[research_objective]=&search_fields[beauftragungsjahr]=&search_fields[offer_number]=100472&search_fields[keywords]=&search_fields[antragsteller_2]=&project_id=2909

Please enter the full title to your search engine to find this document, of go to www.dafne.at and search for document Nr.100472

English version half way down the page.
 
#16 · (Edited)
In situ replication of honey bee colony collapse disorder

Chensheng LU 1, Kenneth M. W
ARCHOL 2, Richard A. CALLAHAN 3

Department of Environmental Health, Harvard School of
Public Health, Landmark Center West, Boston, MA, USA

Worcester County Beekeepers Association, Northbridge, MA, USA
Worcester County Beekeepers Association, Holden, MA, USA


Abstract

The concern of persistent loss of honey bee (Apis melliferaL.) colonies worldwide since 2006, a phenomenon referred to as colony collapse disorder (CCD), has led us to investigate the role of imidacloprid, one of the neonicotinoid insecticides, in the emergence of CCD. CCD is commonly characterized by the sudden disappearance of honey bees (specifically worker bees) from hives containing adequate food and various stages of brood in abandoned colonies that are not occupied by honey bees from other colonies. This in situ study was designed to replicate CCD based on a plausible mechanistic hypothesis in which the occurrence of CCD since 2006 was resulted from the presence of imidacloprid, one of the neonicotinoid insecticides, in high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), fed to honey bees as an alternative to sucrose-based food. We used a replicated split-plot design consisting of 4 independent apiary sites. Each apiary consisted of 4 different imidacloprid-treated hives and a control hive. The dosages used in this study were determined to reflect imidacloprid residue levels reported in the environment previously. All hives had no diseases of symptoms of parasitism during the 13-week dosing regime, and were alive 12 weeks afterward. However, 15 of 16 imidacloprid treated hives (94%) were dead across 4 apiaries 23 weeks post imidacloprid dosing. Dead hives were remarkably empty except for stores of food and some pollen left, a resemblance of CCD. Data from this in situ study provide convincing evidence that exposure to sub-lethal levels of imidacloprid in HFCS causes honey bees to exhibit symptoms consistent to CCD 23 weeks post imidacloprid dosing. The survival of the control hives managed alongside with the pesticide-treated hives unequivocally augments this conclusion. The observed delayed mortality in honey bees caused by imidacloprid in HFCS is a novel and plausible mechanism for CCD, and should be validated in future studies.

http://stream.loe.org/images/120406/Lu final proof.pdf
 
#18 ·
Multiple Routes of Pesticide Exposure for Honey Bees Living Near Agricultural Fields

Christian H. Krupke,1,* Greg J. Hunt,1 Brian D. Eitzer,2 Gladys Andino,1 and Krispn Given1

Abstract

Populations of honey bees and other pollinators have declined worldwide in recent years. A variety of stressors have been implicated as potential causes, including agricultural pesticides. Neonicotinoid insecticides, which are widely used and highly toxic to honey bees, have been found in previous analyses of honey bee pollen and comb material. However, the routes of exposure have remained largely undefined. We used LC/MS-MS to analyze samples of honey bees, pollen stored in the hive and several potential exposure routes associated with plantings of neonicotinoid treated maize. Our results demonstrate that bees are exposed to these compounds and several other agricultural pesticides in several ways throughout the foraging period. During spring, extremely high levels of clothianidin and thiamethoxam were found in planter exhaust material produced during the planting of treated maize seed. We also found neonicotinoids in the soil of each field we sampled, including unplanted fields. Plants visited by foraging bees (dandelions) growing near these fields were found to contain neonicotinoids as well. This indicates deposition of neonicotinoids on the flowers, uptake by the root system, or both. Dead bees collected near hive entrances during the spring sampling period were found to contain clothianidin as well, although whether exposure was oral (consuming pollen) or by contact (soil/planter dust) is unclear. We also detected the insecticide clothianidin in pollen collected by bees and stored in the hive. When maize plants in our field reached anthesis, maize pollen from treated seed was found to contain clothianidin and other pesticides; and honey bees in our study readily collected maize pollen. These findings clarify some of the mechanisms by which honey bees may be exposed to agricultural pesticides throughout the growing season. These results have implications for a wide range of large-scale annual cropping systems that utilize neonicotinoid seed treatments.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3250423/
 
#19 ·
You forgot this one on the same page:
Exposure to clothianidin seed-treated canola has no long-term impact on honey bees.

Cutler GC, Scott-Dupree CD.
Source

Department of Environmental Biology, Ontario Agricultural College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1. gccutler@interchange.ubc.ca
Abstract

We conducted a long-term investigation to ascertain effects on honey bee, Apis mellifera L., colonies during and after exposure to flowering canola, Brassica napus variety Hyola 420, grown from clothianidin-treated seed. Colonies were placed in the middle of 1-ha clothianidin seed-treated or control canola fields for 3 wk during bloom, and thereafter they were moved to a fall apiary. There were four treated and four control fields, and four colonies per field, giving 32 colonies total. Bee mortality, worker longevity, and brood development were regularly assessed in each colony for 130 d from initial exposure to canola. Samples of honey, beeswax, pollen, and nectar were regularly collected for 130 d, and the samples were analyzed for clothianidin residues by using high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry detection. Overall, no differences in bee mortality, worker longevity, or brood development occurred between control and treatment groups throughout the study. Weight gains of and honey yields from colonies in treated fields were not significantly different from those in control fields. Although clothianidin residues were detected in honey, nectar, and pollen from colonies in clothianidin-treated fields, maximum concentrations detected were 8- to 22-fold below the reported no observable adverse effects concentration. Clothianidin residues were not detected in any beeswax sample. Assessment of overwintered colonies in spring found no differences in those originally exposed to treated or control canola. The results show that honey bee colonies will, in the long-term, be unaffected by exposure to clothianidin seed-treated canola.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17598537/
 
#23 ·
Honey bee survival rate better in west of Scotland
...
A further study led by Dr Connolly analysed colony failures over winter across the country. Of 89 colonies that had fed on oilseed rape, 27 failed, a death rate of 30 per cent. By contrast, 13 out of 82 colonies which had not fed on oilseed rape died – a smaller failure rate of 16 per cent.

Dr Connolly believes nicotine-based pesticides, neonicotinoids, may be contributing to the deaths of bees feeding on the crop, which is more commonly grown in the east.

He said: “All oilseed rape is treated with neonicotinoids, you can’t buy it without it being pre-treated with neonicotinoids.”
...
http://www.scotsman.com/news/enviro...val-rate-better-in-west-of-scotland-1-2807966
 
#24 ·
Comparative Sublethal Toxicity of Nine Pesticides on Olfactory Learning Performances of the Honeybee Apis mellifera

A. Decourtye, 1J. Devillers,2E. Genecque,3K. Le Menach,4H. Budzinski,4S. Cluzeau,1M. H. Pham-Del(gue3

Abstract.

Using a conditioned proboscis extension response (PER) assay, honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) can be trained to associate an odor stimulus with a sucrose reward. Previous studies have shown that observations of conditioned PER were of interest for assessing the behavioral effects of pesticides on the honeybee. In the present study, the effects of sublethal concentrations of nine pesticides on learning performances of worker bees subjectedto the PER assay were estimatedand compared. Pesticides were tested at three concentrations. The highest concentration of each pesticide corresponded to the median lethal dose value (48-h oral LD50), received per bee and per day, divided by 20. Reduced learning performances were observedfor bees surviving treatment with fipronil, deltamethrin, endosulfan, and prochloraz. A lack of behavioral effects after treatment with k-cyalothrin, cypermethrin, s-fluvalinate, triazamate, and dimethoate was recorded. No-ob-served-effect concentrations (NOECs) for the conditioned PER were derived for the studied pesticides. Our study shows that the PER assay can be usedfor estimating sublethal effects of pesticides on bees. Furthermore, comparisons of sensitivity as well as the estimation of NOECs, useful for regulatory purposes, are possible.

http://www.environmentalexpert.com/Files\6063\articles\4909\QM245Q254G1T6X0R.pdf
 
#26 ·
Quantification of Imidacloprid Uptake in Maize Crops

J. M. Bonmatin ,*† P. A. Marchand ,† R. Charvet ,† I. Moineau ,† E. R. Bengsch ,† and M. E. Colin ‡
Centre de biophysique moléculaire, CNRS (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique) & Université d'Orléans, 45071 Orléans Cedex 02, France, and Laboratoire de Pathologie Comparée des Invertébrés, Université de Montpellier II, 34095 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
J. Agric. Food Chem., 2005, 53 (13), pp 5336–5341
DOI: 10.1021/jf0479362

Publication Date (Web): June 2, 2005

Abstract

The systemic imidacloprid is one of the most used insecticides in the world for field and horticultural crops. This neurotoxicant is often used as seed-dressing, especially for maize, sunflower, and rape. Using a LC/MS/MS technique (LOQ = 1 μg/kg and LOD = 0.1 μg/kg), the presence of imidacloprid has been measured in maize from field samples at the time of pollen shed, from less than 0.1 μg/kg up to 33.6 μg/kg. Numerous random samples were collected throughout France from 2000 to 2003. The average levels of imidacloprid measured are 4.1 μg/kg in stems and leaves, 6.6 μg/kg in male flowers (panicles), and 2.1 μg/kg in pollen. These values are similar to those found previously in sunflower and rape. These results permit evaluation of the risk to honeybees by using the PEC/PNEC ratios (probable exposition concentrations/predicted no effect concentration). PEC/PNEC risk ratios were determined and ranged between 500 and 600 for honeybees foraging on maize treated with imidacloprid by seed dressing. Such a high risk factor can be related to one of the main causes of honeybee colony losses.

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf0479362
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top