Scientific Opinion on the science behind the development of a risk assessment of Plant Protection Products on bees (Apis mellifera,Bombusspp. and solitary bees)

Workshop on Pesticide Exposure Assessment Paradigm for Non-Apis Bees: Foundation and Summaries

Current pesticide risk assessment practices use the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., as a surrogate to characterize the likelihood of chemical exposure of a candidate pesticide for all bee species. Bees make up a diverse insect group that provides critical pollination services to both managed and wild ecosystems. Accordingly, they display a diversity of behaviors and vary greatly in their lifestyles and phenologies, such as their timing of emergence, degree of sociality, and foraging and nesting behaviors. Some of these factors may lead to disparate or variable routes of exposure when compared to honey bees. For those that possess life histories that are distinct from A. mellifera, further risk assessments may be warranted. In January 2017, 40 bee researchers, representative of regulatory agencies, academia, and agrochemical industries, gathered to discuss the current state of science on pesticide exposure to non-Apis bees and to determine how well honey bee exposure estimates, implemented by different regulatory agencies, may be protective for non-Apis bees. Workshop participants determined that although current risk assessment procedures for honey bees are largely conservative, several routes of exposure are unique to non-Apis bees and warranted further investigation. In this forum article, we discuss these key routes of exposure relevant to non-Apis bees and identify important research gaps that can help inform future bee risk assessment decisions.

Potential surrogate plants for use in semi-field pesticide risk assessment with Megachile rotundata

BACKGROUND

Current regulatory pesticide risk assessments for bees are based primarily on the honey bee (Apis mellifera) and may not always be protective of solitary bees. To incorporate solitary bees into the risk assessment process, standardized methods to assess the hazard of pesticides under semi-field (Tier II) conditions will be needed. We conducted a series of experiments over 2 years to assess potential surrogate plants and adult release rates for use in semi-field experiments with the alfalfa leafcutting bee (ALB, Megachile rotundata).

METHODS

We compared ALB foraging activity and reproduction on 12 m2 plots of flowering alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum) at low (10♀/20♂) and high (20♀/40♂) adult release rates. The following year, we assessed the same endpoints on plots of purple tansy (Phacelia tanacetifolia) at a release rate of 10♀/15♂.

RESULTS

Although ALB foraging activity was high on buckwheat plots, fewer adults were produced compared to alfalfa plots. On alfalfa, there were no differences in foraging activity, nesting, or reproduction between the low and high release rates. ALB readily foraged from purple tansy flowers, but females avoided purple tansy leaves for leaf cell construction.

DISCUSSION

Our study suggests that buckwheat alone cannot support ALB during semi-field studies on small plots. For alfalfa, we recommend a maximum release rate of 10♀/20♂ in 12 m2 plots. Further study of higher ALB release rates on purple tansy is warranted. A mixed planting of purple tansy and a plant suitable for leaf piece collection (e.g., buckwheat) may provide favorable conditions for ALB activity and reproduction during semi-field testing.

Two-year field data on neonicotinoid concentrations in guttation drops of seed treated maize (Zea mays)

We present neonicotinoid concentrations in guttation drops of commonly used maize (Zea mays) cultivars, germinated from seeds coated with active substances (a.s.): i) imidacloprid (IMD), ii) clothianidin (CTN) and iii) thiamethoxam (THM) over two growing seasons. In one variant clothianidin was applied as seed granule. The trial took place at the experimental fields of the Julius Kühn-Institut in Berlin in 2010 and 2011. Data from 2010 are related to a presentation of "Pesticides in guttation droplets following seed treatment - field studies" (Schenke et al., 2011) [1] presented at the SETAC North America conference and only some figures were used in the "Scientific opinion on the science behind the development of a risk assessement of plant protection products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees)" (EFSA, 2012) [2]. Only parts of the data from 2011 was presented in relation to the "Exposure of Coccinellidae to guttation droplets on maize seedlings with seed or granule treatment of neonicotinoids" (Schenke and Heimbach, 2014) [3]. The article describes the study sites, the variants of treated maize seeds, sample collection and the analytical methods used to quantify the neonicotinoids and relevant metabolites of IMD (5-OH-IMD and IMD-olefine) and of THM (CTN) in guttation drop samples. The complete field data set is publicly available at the OpenAgrar repository under https://doi.org/10.5073/20180907-142020 (Schenke et al., 2018) [4].

Linking pesticide marketing authorisations with environmental impact assessments through realistic landscape risk assessment paradigms

Each year, the European Food Safety Authority, supported by a network of experts in the EU Member States, assesses and publishes the environmental risks of 30-40 pesticides active substances. The assessments support hundreds of national risk evaluations for marketing (re-)authorisations of Plant Protection Products. These prospective regulatory evaluations are based on worst-case scenarios in order to provide the high level of protection required by the EU legislations, and establishes the conditions for a correct use of the products including risk mitigations options. However, recent publications suggest that the desired high level of protection may not be achieved with the current risk assessment paradigm. The consideration of larger spatial scales and multiple stressors, including different pesticide uses, could improve the risk assessment process. A next step is the use of these larger spatial scales for evidence-based assessments, evaluating the overall impact of pesticide use on the European environment and biodiversity. Reaching this level would provide science-based support to the National Plans on sustainable use of pesticides and to the broader EU policies defined in the EU Environmental Action Programmes. Recent technological developments, as well as policy efforts, have solved two of the key issues blocking this progress in the past. Data availability and technical capacity for handling Big Data are no longer an unaffordable obstacle. The current proposal presents an alternative environmental risk assessment paradigm, integrating use patterns and pesticides properties with landscape ecotypes and eco-regions, covering the variability of the European agro-environmental conditions. The paradigm is suggested to be implemented in a spatially explicit conceptual model, using the ecosystem services approach and vulnerable key driver species to represent the service providing units. This approach would allow mapping the likelihood and magnitude of the impact of pesticide use on ecosystems functions, environmental resources, and biodiversity at the EU scale.

A long-term field study on the effects of dietary exposure of clothianidin to varroosis-weakened honey bee colonies

Clothianidin is a commonly used systemic insecticide in seed treatments. Residues of clothianidin can occur in nectar and pollen as a result of within-plant-translocation. Foraging bees can collect contaminated nectar or pollen. Concerns have been brought forward that exposure to pesticide residues might affect colonies especially if they are weakened by varroosis. However, there are few scientific studies investigating such multiple-stressor scenarios in the context of the entire colony. To close this gapa field trial with 24 colonies was set up. The study design comprised four groups of six colonies each fed with uncontaminated sugar syrup ('C0'), or syrup spiked with 10 μg L-1 clothianidin ('C10'), 50 μg L-1 clothianidin ('C50') or 200 μg L-1 clothianidin ('C200'). C10 represented a residue concentration that may exceptionally occur and therefore a worst-case scenario, the higher dietary concentrations exceed and do not reflect fieldrealistic levels. A substantial load of 8 mites of Varroa destructor per ten gram bees in autumn was adjusted. The colonies were followed up for 328 days. The amount of brood and the strength of each colony were regularly assessed. Colony health, bee mortality, overwintering success, hive weights, and levels of in-hive residues were determined. Varroosis turned out to be the significant key factor for the endpoint colony strength. Clothianidin did not have a statistically significant impact on C0, C10 and C50 colonies. No statistical evidence was found for an interaction between varroosis andexposure to clothianidin.

Classification models for identifying substances exhibiting acute contact toxicity in honeybees (Apis mellifera)$

Nowadays, environmental and biological endpoints can be predicted with in silico approaches if sufficient experimental data of good quality are available. Since the experimental evaluation of acute contact toxicity towards honeybees (Apis mellifera) is a complex and expensive assay, the computational models that follow OECD principles for this endpoint prediction represent important alternatives for safety prioritisation of chemicals, especially pesticides. We developed and validated counter-propagation artificial neural network (CPANN) models for in silico evaluation of toxicity of pesticides towards honeybees by using new in-house software. The data set included 254 pesticides with their toxicological experimental values (acute contact toxicity after 48 h of exposure - LD₅₀ [μg/bee]). The 2D structures of compounds were mathematically represented with 56 Dragon molecular descriptors (MDs). The two-category models were developed to separate compounds as toxic or non-toxic for two different thresholds: (i) toxic when LD₅₀ < 1 μg/bee and (ii) toxic when LD₅₀ < 100 μg/bee. The models give reliable predictions in an external validation set and cover a large structural space. They were applied to a structurally diverse data set of 395 experimentally untested pesticides; 19% of them were predicted as highly toxic towards bees.

Combined exposure to sublethal concentrations of an insecticide and a fungicide affect feeding, ovary development and longevity in a solitary bee

Pollinators in agroecosystems are often exposed to pesticide mixtures. Even at low concentrations, the effects of these mixtures on bee populations are difficult to predict due to potential synergistic interactions. In this paper, we orally exposed newly emerged females of the solitary bee Osmia bicornis to environmentally realistic levels of clothianidin (neonicotinoid insecticide) and propiconazole (fungicide), singly and in combination. The amount of feeding solution consumed was highest in bees exposed to the neonicotinoid, and lowest in bees exposed to the pesticide mixture. Ovary maturation and longevity of bees of the neonicotinoid and the fungicide treatments did not differ from those of control bees. By contrast, bees exposed to the pesticide mixture showed slow ovary maturation and decreased longevity. We found a synergistic interaction between the neonicotinoid and the fungicide on survival probability. We also found an interaction between treatment and emergence time (an indicator of physiological condition) on longevity. Longevity was negatively correlated to physiological condition only in the fungicide and the mixture treatments. Delayed ovary maturation and premature death imply a shortened nesting period (highly correlated to fecundity in Osmia). Our findings provide a mechanism to explain the observed dynamics of solitary bee populations exposed to multiple chemical residues in agricultural environments.

Scientific Opinion on the state of the science on pesticide risk assessment for amphibians and reptiles

Following a request from EFSA, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues developed an opinion on the science to support the potential development of a risk assessment scheme of plant protection products for amphibians and reptiles. The coverage of the risk to amphibians and reptiles by current risk assessments for other vertebrate groups was investigated. Available test methods and exposure models were reviewed with regard to their applicability to amphibians and reptiles. Proposals were made for specific protection goals aiming to protect important ecosystem services and taking into consideration the regulatory framework and existing protection goals for other vertebrates. Uncertainties, knowledge gaps and research needs were highlighted.

Scientific Opinion on the state of the science on pesticide risk assessment for amphibians and reptiles

Following a request from EFSA, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues developed an opinion on the science to support the potential development of a risk assessment scheme of plant protection products for amphibians and reptiles. The coverage of the risk to amphibians and reptiles by current risk assessments for other vertebrate groups was investigated. Available test methods and exposure models were reviewed with regard to their applicability to amphibians and reptiles. Proposals were made for specific protection goals aiming to protect important ecosystem services and taking into consideration the regulatory framework and existing protection goals for other vertebrates. Uncertainties, knowledge gaps and research needs were highlighted.

Effects of sublethal doses of thiacloprid and its formulation Calypso® on the learning and memory performance of honey bees

Learning and memory play a central role in the behavior and communication of foraging bees. We have previously shown that chronic uptake of the neonicotinoid thiacloprid affects the behavior of honey bees in the field. Foraging behavior, homing success, navigation performance and social communication were impaired. Thiacloprid collected at a feeding site at low doses accumulates in foragers over time. Here, we applied a laboratory standard procedure (the proboscis-extension response conditioning) in order to assess which processes, acquisition, memory consolidation and/or memory retrieval were compromised after bees were fed either with thiacloprid or the formulation of thiacloprid named Calypso^® at different sublethal doses. Extinction and generalization tests allowed us to investigate whether bees respond to a learned stimulus, and how selectively. We showed that thiacloprid, as active substance and as formulation, poses a substantial risk to honey bees by disrupting learning and memory functions. These data support and specify the data collected in the field.

Characteristics of dust particles abraded from pesticide treated seeds: 1. Size distribution using different measuring techniques

BACKGROUND

Particle size is one of the most important properties affecting the driftability and behaviour of dust particles abraded from pesticide dressed seeds during sowing. Three particle sizing techniques were used determine the particle size distribution of dust abraded from seeds from six different species.

RESULTS

Important differences in dust particle size distribution between species were observed with the finest dust for rapeseed and the coarsest dust for barley. Wet laser diffraction and sonic sieving particle size results correlated well while micro-CT is able to deliver three-dimensional information and additional physical particle properties (shape, porosity).

CONCLUSION

All particle sizing techniques have their (dis)advantages and none of them is able to perfectly describe the real size distribution of non-spherical particles. The particle size information gathered can be used in dust drift prediction models, risk assessment tools and will help to better understand the dust drift phenomenon. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry.

Risk assessment of pesticides and other stressors in bees: Principles, data gaps and perspectives from the European Food Safety Authority

Current approaches to risk assessment in bees do not take into account co-exposures from multiple stressors. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is deploying resources and efforts to move towards a holistic risk assessment approach of multiple stressors in bees. This paper describes the general principles of pesticide risk assessment in bees, including recent developments at EFSA dealing with risk assessment of single and multiple pesticide residues and biological hazards. The EFSA Guidance Document on the risk assessment of plant protection products in bees highlights the need for the inclusion of an uncertainty analysis, other routes of exposures and multiple stressors such as chemical mixtures and biological agents. The EFSA risk assessment on the survival, spread and establishment of the small hive beetle, Aethina tumida, an invasive alien species, is provided with potential insights for other bee pests such as the Asian hornet, Vespa velutina. Furthermore, data gaps are identified at each step of the risk assessment, and recommendations are made for future research that could be supported under the framework of Horizon 2020. Finally, the recent work conducted at EFSA is presented, under the overarching MUST-B project ("EU efforts towards the development of a holistic approach for the risk assessment on MUltiple STressors in Bees") comprising a toolbox for harmonised data collection under field conditions and a mechanistic model to assess effects from pesticides and other stressors such as biological agents and beekeeping management practices, at the colony level and in a spatially complex landscape. Future perspectives at EFSA include the development of a data model to collate high quality data to calibrate and validate the model to be used as a regulatory tool. Finally, the evidence collected within the framework of MUST-B will support EFSA's activities on the development of a holistic approach to the risk assessment of multiple stressors in bees. In conclusion, EFSA calls for collaborative action at the EU level to establish a common and open access database to serve multiple purposes and different stakeholders.

The exposure of honey bees (Apis mellifera; Hymenoptera: Apidae) to pesticides: Room for improvement in research

Losses of honey bees have been repeatedly reported from many places worldwide. The widespread use of synthetic pesticides has led to concerns regarding their environmental fate and their effects on pollinators. Based on a standardised review, we report the use of a wide variety of honey bee matrices and sampling methods in the scientific papers studying pesticide exposure. Matrices such as beeswax and beebread were very little analysed despite their capacities for long-term pesticide storage. Moreover, bioavailability and transfer between in-hive matrices were poorly understood and explored. Many pesticides were studied but interactions between molecules or with other stressors were lacking. Sampling methods, targeted matrices and units of measure should have been, to some extent, standardised between publications to ease comparison and cross checking. Data on honey bee exposure to pesticides would have also benefit from the use of commercial formulations in experiments instead of active ingredients, with a special assessment of co-formulants (quantitative exposure and effects). Finally, the air matrix within the colony must be explored in order to complete current knowledge on honey bee pesticide exposure.

Bee Community of Commercial Potato Fields in Michigan and Bombus impatiens Visitation to Neonicotinoid-Treated Potato Plants

We conducted a bee survey in neonicotinoid-treated commercial potato fields using bowl and vane traps in the 2016 growing season. Traps were placed outside the fields, at the field edges, and 10 and 30 m into the fields. We collected 756 bees representing 58 species, with Lasioglossum spp. comprising 73% of all captured bees. We found seven Bombus spp., of which B. impatiens was the only known visitor of potato flowers in our region. The majority of the bees (68%) were collected at the field edges and in the field margins. Blue vane traps caught almost four-times as many bees and collected 30% more species compared to bowl traps. Bee communities did not differ across trap locations but they were different among trap types. We tested B. impatiens visitation to neonicotinoid treated and untreated potato flowers in field enclosures. The amount of time bees spent at flowers and the duration of visits were not significantly different between the two treatments. Our results demonstrate that a diverse assemblage of bees is associated with an agroecosystem dominated by potatoes despite the apparent lack of pollinator resources provided by the crop. We found no difference in B. impatiens foraging behavior on neonicotinoid-treated compared to untreated plants.

Combined ecotoxicological risk assessment in the frame of European authorization of pesticides

Organisms are frequently exposed to mixtures of chemical contaminants in the environment, causing a potential "cocktail effect", or combined effect. The joint action of different molecules with similar or different modes of action could result in a potentially unlimited number of additives, synergistic or antagonistic combinations. Since the large number of contaminants makes it impossible to perform ecotoxicity tests for each potential mixture, a robust approach for prospective environmental risk assessment of chemical mixtures is needed. A number of recent publications by the European Commission and the authorities in charge prove the increasing interest that is spreading in the European community towards the topic of the assessment of chemical mixtures. The current EU regulation for Plant Protection Products authorization (Reg. 1107/2009 EC) explicitly requires the evaluation of the potential combined effects of active substances. We reviewed current methods and limitations of mixture assessment of pesticides (7 fungicides and 4 herbicides) through the analysis of the approaches adopted to investigate possible risks for different non-target organisms. The Concentration Addition (CA) approach was the most used approach to predict multiple toxicity to non-target organisms. The guidance for birds and mammals first introduced standard procedures to assess the multiple toxicity based on on CA concept. The recent aquatic EFSA guidance introduced some requirements to evaluate potential mixture toxicity, while the current guidance requirements for terrestrial organisms still lack clear indications on how to conduct the assessment. Moreover, new indications come from the draft guidance for the assessment of terrestrial plants and in-soil organisms. However, the approval and implementation of these new guidelines are still at a developmental stage. Some final considerations are drawn on the future possibilities to improve risk assessment procedures so as to identify harmful effects of pesticides mixtures on non-target organisms.

Comparative toxicity of pesticides and environmental contaminants in bees: Are honey bees a useful proxy for wild bee species?

Threats to wild and managed insect pollinators in Europe are cause for both ecological and socio-economic concern. Multiple anthropogenic pressures may be exacerbating pollinator declines. One key pressure is exposure to chemicals including pesticides and other contaminants. Historically the honey bee (Apis mellifera spp.) has been used as an 'indicator' species for 'standard' ecotoxicological testing but it has been suggested that it is not always a good proxy for other types of eusocial and solitary bees because of species differences in autecology and sensitivity to various stressors. We developed a common toxicity test system to conduct acute and chronic exposures of up to 240h of similar doses of seven chemicals, targeting different metabolic pathways, on three bee species (Apis mellifera spp., Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis). We compared the relative sensitivity between species in terms of potency between the chemicals and the influence of exposure time on toxicity. While there were significant interspecific differences that varied through time, overall the magnitude of these differences (in terms of treatment effect ratios) was generally comparable (<2 fold) although there were some large divergences from this pattern. Our results suggest that A. mellifera spp. could be used as a proxy for other bee species provided a reasonable assessment factor is used to cover interspecific variation. Perhaps more importantly our results show significant and large time dependency of toxicity across all three tested species that greatly exceeds species differences (>25 fold within test). These are rarely considered in standard regulatory testing but may have severe environmental consequences, especially when coupled with the likelihood of differential species exposures in the wild. These insights indicate that further work is required to understand how differences in toxicokinetics vary between species and mixtures of chemicals.

Neonicotinoid concentrations in UK honey from 2013

BACKGROUND

Concentrations of the neonicotinoid insecticides clothianidin, thiamethoxam and imidacloprid were determined in honey collected in Spring 2013 from a variety of locations in England. The honey was produced before the moratorium in the EU on the use of neonicotinoids in pollinator-attractive crops became effective.

RESULTS

Neither imidacloprid nor its metabolites were detected in any honey samples. Concentrations of clothianidin ranged from <0.02 to 0.82 µg kg(-1) , and thiamethoxam concentrations were between <0.01 and 0.79 µg kg(-1) .

CONCLUSION

Neonicotinoid concentrations were below those likely to cause any chronic mortality. The concentrations detected should provide a useful baseline against which the effectiveness of the moratorium in reducing exposure of honeybees can be measured. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry.

Assessment of the abrasion potential of pesticide-treated seeds using the Heubach test

During sowing of pesticide-treated seeds, pesticide-laden dust and abraded seed particles may be emitted to the environment, possibly leading to environmental contamination and posing health risks. In many countries there is currently no legislation concerning the acceptable amount of dust of treated seeds. This study aimed to gain insight in the abrasion potential of available pesticide-treated seeds and its associated factors. The abrasion potential of 45 seed samples of 7 different species (viz. sugar beet, oat, barley, wheat, spelt, pea, and maize) was determined using the Heubach test and amounts of dust were expressed as g 100 kgseeds-1, g 100,000 seeds-1, and g ha-1. The abrasion potential fell generally within the boundaries of maximum permissible values adopted by different countries. Species, seed treatment company, number of active ingredient (AIs) and combination of AIs had significant effects on the abrasion potential, whereas little or no effect of agitation and conservation was found. However, species were situated differently with respect to each other depending on the unit in which the abrasion potential was expressed. A standard unit that takes into account the species' seed rate is suggested to give the fairest assessment of dust drift risk and would allow international comparison.

Drone exposure to the systemic insecticide Fipronil indirectly impairs queen reproductive potential

A species that requires sexual reproduction but cannot reproduce is doomed to extinction. The important increasing loss of species emphasizes the ecological significance of elucidating the effects of environmental stressors, such as pesticides, on reproduction. Despite its special reproductive behavior, the honey bee was selected as a relevant and integrative environmental model because of its constant and diverse exposure to many stressors due to foraging activity. The widely used insecticide Fipronil, the use of which is controversial because of its adverse effects on honey bees, was chosen to expose captive drones in hives via syrup contaminated at 0.1 μg/L and gathered by foragers. Such environmental exposure led to decreased spermatozoa concentration and sperm viability coupled with an increased sperm metabolic rate, resulting in drone fertility impairment. Subsequently, unexposed queens inseminated with such sperm exhibited fewer spermatozoa with lower viability in their spermatheca, leaving no doubt about the detrimental consequences for the reproductive potential of queens, which are key for colony sustainability. These findings suggest that pesticides could contribute to declining honey bee populations through fertility impairment, as exemplified by Fipronil. More broadly, reproductive disorders should be taken into consideration when investigating the decline of other species.

Honey Bees' Behavior Is Impaired by Chronic Exposure to the Neonicotinoid Thiacloprid in the Field

The decline of pollinators worldwide is of growing concern and has been related to the use of plant-protecting chemicals. Most studies have focused on three neonicotinoid insecticides (clothianidin, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam) currently subject to a moratorium in the EU. Here, we focus on thiacloprid, a widely used cyano-substituted neonicotinoid thought to be less toxic to honey bees and of which use has increased in the last years. Honey bees (Apis mellifera carnica) were exposed chronically to thiacloprid in the field for several weeks at a sublethal concentration. Foraging behavior, homing success, navigation performance, and social communication were impaired, and thiacloprid residue levels increased both in the foragers and the nest mates over time. The effects observed in the field were not due to a repellent taste of the substance. For the first time, we present the necessary data for the risk evaluation of thiacloprid taken up chronically by honey bees in field conditions.

Biopesticide-induced behavioral and morphological alterations in the stingless bee Melipona quadrifasciata

Because of their natural origin, biopesticides are assumed to be less harmful to beneficial insects, including bees, and therefore their use has been widely encouraged for crop protection. There is little evidence, however, to support this ingrained notion of biopesticide safety to pollinators. Because larval exposure is still largely unexplored in ecotoxicology and risk assessment on bees, an investigation was performed on the lethal and sublethal effects of a diet treated with 2 bioinsecticides, azadirachtin and spinosad, on the stingless bee, Melipona quadrifasciata, which is one of the most important pollinators in the Neotropics. Survival of stingless bee larvae was significantly compromised at doses above 210 ng a.i./bee for azadirachtin and 114 ng a.i./bee for spinosad. No sublethal effect was observed on larvae developmental time, but doses of both compounds negatively affected pupal body mass. Azadirachtin produced deformed pupae and adults as a result of its insect growth regulator properties, but spinosad was more harmful and produced greater numbers of deformed individuals. Only spinosad compromised walking activity of the adult workers at doses as low as 2.29 ng a.i./bee, which is 1/5000 of the maximum field recommended rate. In conclusion, the results demonstrated that bioinsecticides can pose significant risks to native pollinators with lethal and sublethal effects; future investigations are needed on the likelihood of such effects under field conditions.

Lethal and sublethal effects of azadirachtin on the bumblebee Bombus terrestris (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Azadirachtin is a biorational insecticide commonly reported as selective to a range of beneficial insects. Nonetheless, only few studies have been carried out with pollinators, usually emphasizing the honeybee Apis mellifera and neglecting other important pollinator species such as the bumblebee Bombus terrestris. Here, lethal and sublethal effects of azadirachtin were studied on B. terrestris via oral exposure in the laboratory to bring out the potential risks of the compound to this important pollinator. The compound was tested at different concentrations above and below the maximum concentration that is used in the field (32 mg L(-1)). As most important results, azadirachtin repelled bumblebee workers in a concentration-dependent manner. The median repellence concentration (RC50) was estimated as 504 mg L(-1). Microcolonies chronically exposed to azadirachtin via treated sugar water during 11 weeks in the laboratory exhibited a high mortality ranging from 32 to 100 % with a range of concentrations between 3.2 and 320 mg L(-1). Moreover, no reproduction was scored when concentrations were higher than 3.2 mg L(-1). At 3.2 mg L(-1), azadirachtin significantly inhibited the egg-laying and, consequently, the production of drones during 6 weeks. Ovarian length decreased with the increase of the azadirachtin concentration. When azadirachtin was tested under an experimental setup in the laboratory where bumblebees need to forage for food, the sublethal effects were stronger as the numbers of drones were reduced already with a concentration of 0.64 mg L(-1). Besides, a negative correlation was found between the body mass of male offspring and azadirachtin concentration. In conclusion, our results as performed in the laboratory demonstrated that azadirachtin can affect B. terrestris with a range of sublethal effects. Taking into account that sublethal effects are as important as lethal effects for the development and survival of the colonies of B. terrestris, this study confirms the need to test compounds on their safety, especially when they have to perform complex tasks such as foraging. The latter agrees with the recent European Food Safety Authority guidelines to assess 'potentially deleterious' compounds for sublethal effects on behavior.

Environmental fate and exposure; neonicotinoids and fipronil

Systemic insecticides are applied to plants using a wide variety of methods, ranging from foliar sprays to seed treatments and soil drenches. Neonicotinoids and fipronil are among the most widely used pesticides in the world. Their popularity is largely due to their high toxicity to invertebrates, the ease and flexibility with which they can be applied, their long persistence, and their systemic nature, which ensures that they spread to all parts of the target crop. However, these properties also increase the probability of environmental contamination and exposure of nontarget organisms. Environmental contamination occurs via a number of routes including dust generated during drilling of dressed seeds, contamination and accumulation in arable soils and soil water, runoff into waterways, and uptake of pesticides by nontarget plants via their roots or dust deposition on leaves. Persistence in soils, waterways, and nontarget plants is variable but can be prolonged; for example, the half-lives of neonicotinoids in soils can exceed 1,000 days, so they can accumulate when used repeatedly. Similarly, they can persist in woody plants for periods exceeding 1 year. Breakdown results in toxic metabolites, though concentrations of these in the environment are rarely measured. Overall, there is strong evidence that soils, waterways, and plants in agricultural environments and neighboring areas are contaminated with variable levels of neonicotinoids or fipronil mixtures and their metabolites (soil, parts per billion (ppb)-parts per million (ppm) range; water, parts per trillion (ppt)-ppb range; and plants, ppb-ppm range). This provides multiple routes for chronic (and acute in some cases) exposure of nontarget animals. For example, pollinators are exposed through direct contact with dust during drilling; consumption of pollen, nectar, or guttation drops from seed-treated crops, water, and consumption of contaminated pollen and nectar from wild flowers and trees growing near-treated crops. Studies of food stores in honeybee colonies from across the globe demonstrate that colonies are routinely and chronically exposed to neonicotinoids, fipronil, and their metabolites (generally in the 1-100 ppb range), mixed with other pesticides some of which are known to act synergistically with neonicotinoids. Other nontarget organisms, particularly those inhabiting soils, aquatic habitats, or herbivorous insects feeding on noncrop plants in farmland, will also inevitably receive exposure, although data are generally lacking for these groups. We summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the environmental fate of these compounds by outlining what is known about the chemical properties of these compounds, and placing these properties in the context of modern agricultural practices.

A large-scale field study examining effects of exposure to clothianidin seed-treated canola on honey bee colony health, development, and overwintering success

In summer 2012, we initiated a large-scale field experiment in southern Ontario, Canada, to determine whether exposure to clothianidin seed-treated canola (oil seed rape) has any adverse impacts on honey bees. Colonies were placed in clothianidin seed-treated or control canola fields during bloom, and thereafter were moved to an apiary with no surrounding crops grown from seeds treated with neonicotinoids. Colony weight gain, honey production, pest incidence, bee mortality, number of adults, and amount of sealed brood were assessed in each colony throughout summer and autumn. Samples of honey, beeswax, pollen, and nectar were regularly collected, and samples were analyzed for clothianidin residues. Several of these endpoints were also measured in spring 2013. Overall, colonies were vigorous during and after the exposure period, and we found no effects of exposure to clothianidin seed-treated canola on any endpoint measures. Bees foraged heavily on the test fields during peak bloom and residue analysis indicated that honey bees were exposed to low levels (0.5-2 ppb) of clothianidin in pollen. Low levels of clothianidin were detected in a few pollen samples collected toward the end of the bloom from control hives, illustrating the difficulty of conducting a perfectly controlled field study with free-ranging honey bees in agricultural landscapes. Overwintering success did not differ significantly between treatment and control hives, and was similar to overwintering colony loss rates reported for the winter of 2012-2013 for beekeepers in Ontario and Canada. Our results suggest that exposure to canola grown from seed treated with clothianidin poses low risk to honey bees.

A meta-analysis comparing the sensitivity of bees to pesticides

The honey bee Apis mellifera, the test species used in the current environmental risk assessment procedure, is generally considered as extremely sensitive to pesticides when compared to other bee species, although a quantitative approach for comparing the difference in sensitivity among bees has not yet been reported. A systematic review of the relevant literature on the topic followed by a meta-analysis has been performed. Both the contact and oral acute LD50 and the chronic LC50 reported in laboratory studies for as many substances as possible have been extracted from the papers in order to compare the sensitivity to pesticides of honey bees and other bee species (Apiformes). The sensitivity ratio R between the endpoint for the species a (A. mellifera) and the species s (bees other than A. mellifera) was calculated for a total of 150 case studies including 19 bee species. A ratio higher than 1 indicated that the species s was more sensitive to pesticides than honey bees. The meta-analysis showed a high variability of sensitivity among bee species (R from 0.001 to 2085.7), however, in approximately 95 % of the cases the sensitivity ratio was below 10. The effect of pesticides in domestic and wild bees is dependent on the intrinsic sensitivity of single bee species as well as their specific life cycle, nesting activity and foraging behaviour. Current data indicates a need for more comparative information between honey bees and non-Apis bees as well as separate pesticide risk assessment procedures for non-Apis bees.

Risk to pollinators from the use of chlorpyrifos in the United States

CPY is an organophosphorus insecticide that is widely used in North American agriculture. It is non-systemic, comes in several sprayable and granular formulations,and is used on a number of high-acreage crops on which pollinators can forage,including tree fruits, alfalfa, corn, sunflower, and almonds. Bees (Apoidea) are the most important pollinators of agricultural crops in North America and were the main pollinators of interest in this risk assessment.The conceptual model identified a number of potential exposure pathways for pollinators, some more significant than others. CPY is classified as being highly toxic to honey bees by direct contact exposure. However, label precautions and good agricultural practices prohibit application of CPY when bees are flying and/or when flowering crops or weeds are present in the treatment area. Therefore, the risk of CPY to pollinators through direct contact exposure should be small. The main hazards for primary exposure for honey bees are dietary and contact exposure from flowers that were sprayed during application and remain available to bees after application. The main pathways for potential secondary exposure to CPY is through pollen and nectar brought to the hive by forager bees and the sublethal body burden of CPY carried on forager bees. Foraging for other materials, including water or propolis, does not appear to be an important exposure route. Since adult forager honey bees are most exposed, their protection from exposure via pollen, honey, and contact with plant surfaces is expected to be protective of other life stages and castes of honey bees.Tier- I approaches to estimate oral exposure to CPY through pollen and nectar/honey, the principle food sources for honey bees, suggested that CPY poses a risk to honey bees through consumption of pollen and nectar. However, a Tier-2 assessment of concentrations reported in pollen and honey from monitoring work in North America indicated there is little risk of acute toxicity from CPY through consumption of these food sources.Several models were also used to estimate upper-limit exposure of honey bees to CPY through consumption of water from puddles or dew. All models suggest that the risk of CPY is below the LOC for this pathway. Laboratory experiments with field-treated foliage, and semi-field and field tests with honey bees, bumble bees,and alfalfa leaf cutting bees indicate that exposure to foliage, pollen and/or nectar is hazardous to bees up to 3 d after application of CPY to a crop. Pollinators exposed to foliage, pollen or nectar after this time should be minimally affected.Several data gaps and areas of uncertainty were identified, which apply to CPYand other foliar insecticides. These primarily concern the lack of exposure and toxicological data on non-Apis pollinators. Overall, the rarity of reported bee kill incidents involving CPY indicates that compliance with the label precautions and good agricultural practice with the product is the norm in North American agriculture.Overall, we concluded that, provided label directions and good agricultural practices are followed, the use of CPY in agriculture in North America does not present an unacceptable risk to honeybees.

Towards a systems approach for understanding honeybee decline: a stocktaking and synthesis of existing models

The health of managed and wild honeybee colonies appears to have declined substantially in Europe and the United States over the last decade. Sustainability of honeybee colonies is important not only for honey production, but also for pollination of crops and wild plants alongside other insect pollinators. A combination of causal factors, including parasites, pathogens, land use changes and pesticide usage, are cited as responsible for the increased colony mortality.However, despite detailed knowledge of the behaviour of honeybees and their colonies, there are no suitable tools to explore the resilience mechanisms of this complex system under stress. Empirically testing all combinations of stressors in a systematic fashion is not feasible. We therefore suggest a cross-level systems approach, based on mechanistic modelling, to investigate the impacts of (and interactions between) colony and land management.We review existing honeybee models that are relevant to examining the effects of different stressors on colony growth and survival. Most of these models describe honeybee colony dynamics, foraging behaviour or honeybee - varroa mite - virus interactions.We found that many, but not all, processes within honeybee colonies, epidemiology and foraging are well understood and described in the models, but there is no model that couples in-hive dynamics and pathology with foraging dynamics in realistic landscapes.Synthesis and applications. We describe how a new integrated model could be built to simulate multifactorial impacts on the honeybee colony system, using building blocks from the reviewed models. The development of such a tool would not only highlight empirical research priorities but also provide an important forecasting tool for policy makers and beekeepers, and we list examples of relevant applications to bee disease and landscape management decisions.

Dietary chlorantraniliprole suppresses reproduction in worker bumblebees

BACKGROUND

Pollinators such as the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris, fulfil a crucial role in agriculture. In this context, tests were conducted with the insecticide chlorantraniliprole (Coragen®) as a model compound active on the ryanodine receptor of insects.

RESULTS

Chronic oral exposure via pollen induced lethargic behaviour in B. terrestris workers and their offspring (drones). Indeed, in nests exposed to 0.4 mg L(-1) , representing 1/100 of the concentration recommended for use in the field, workers and drones did not take their defensive position upon stimulation and they were less active than non-exposed insects. The different risk assessment tests used here demonstrated that contact and pollen exposure had no effect on bumblebee worker survival, whereas oral exposure via sugar water caused both acute (72 h LC50  = 13 mg L(-1) ) and chronic (7 week LC50  = 7 mg L(-1) ) toxicity. Severe sublethal effects on reproduction were recorded in nests orally exposed to pollen treated with chlorantraniliprole.

CONCLUSION

The present study identified an important physiological endpoint of sublethal effects on reproduction, as this is associated with lethargic behaviour after oral intake. As such, this is a factor that should now be incorporated into future risk assessments. Secondly, it confirmed that the assessment of sublethal effects on behaviour is needed for adequate risk assessment of 'potentially deleterious' compounds with a neurogenic target, as is also pointed out in the recent European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) guidelines.