Lethal and sublethal effects of toxicants on bumble bee populations: a modelling approach

Pesticide impacts on insect pollinators: Current knowledge and future research challenges

With the need to intensify agriculture to meet growing food demand, there has been significant rise in pesticide use to protect crops, but at different rates in different world regions. In 2016, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) global assessment on pollinators, pollination and food production identified pesticides as one of the major drivers of pollinator decline. This assessment highlighted that studies on the effects of pesticides on pollinating insects have been limited to only a few species, primarily from developed countries. Given the worldwide variation in the scale of intensive agricultural practices, pesticide application intensities are likely to vary regionally and consequently the associated risks for insect pollinators. We provide the first long-term, global analysis of inter-regional trends in the use of different classes of pesticide between 1995 and 2020 (FAOSTAT) and a review of literature since the IPBES pollination assessment (2016). All three pesticide classes use rates varied greatly with some countries seeing increased use by 3000 to 4000 % between 1995 and 2020, while for most countries, growth roughly doubled. We present forecast models to predict regional trends of different pesticides up to 2030. Use of all three pesticide classes is to increase in Africa and South America. Herbicide use is to increase in North America and Central Asia. Fungicide use is to increase across all Asian regions. In each of the respective regions, we also examined the number of studies since 2016 in relation to pesticide use trends over the past twenty-five years. Additionally, we present a comprehensive update on the status of knowledge on pesticide impacts on different pollinating insects from literature published during 2016-2022. Finally, we outline several research challenges and knowledge gaps with respect to pesticides and highlight some regional and international conservation efforts and initiatives that address pesticide reduction and/or elimination.

Pesticide Exposure and Effects on Non-Apis Bees

Bees are essential pollinators of many crops and wild plants, and pesticide exposure is one of the key environmental stressors affecting their health in anthropogenically modified landscapes. Until recently, almost all information on routes and impacts of pesticide exposure came from honey bees, at least partially because they were the only model species required for environmental risk assessments (ERAs) for insect pollinators. Recently, there has been a surge in research activity focusing on pesticide exposure and effects for non-Apis bees, including other social bees (bumble bees and stingless bees) and solitary bees. These taxa vary substantially from honey bees and one another in several important ecological traits, including spatial and temporal activity patterns, foraging and nesting requirements, and degree of sociality. In this article, we review the current evidence base about pesticide exposure pathways and the consequences of exposure for non-Apis bees. We find that the insights into non-Apis bee pesticide exposure and resulting impacts across biological organizations, landscapes, mixtures, and multiple stressors are still in their infancy. The good news is that there are many promising approaches that could be used to advance our understanding, with priority given to informing exposure pathways, extrapolating effects, and determining how well our current insights (limited to very few species and mostly neonicotinoid insecticides under unrealistic conditions) can be generalized to the diversity of species and lifestyles in the global bee community. We conclude that future research to expand our knowledge would also be beneficial for ERAs and wider policy decisions concerning pollinator conservation and pesticide regulation.

Application of 3D-printed pollen traps as a useful tool for exposure and risk assessment of pesticide residues on bumblebees

The study was designed to test the feasibility of using 3D-printed pollen traps for long-term monitoring of Bombus terrestris colonies' exposure to pesticide residues in pollen loads collected by them, along with an assessment of the resulting risks to the bumblebee's adults, larvae, and queens. Bumblebee colonies were placed in the vicinity of flowering orchards, winter oilseed rape, allotments, or home gardens for 6 weeks of the experiment. Pollen traps printed in 3D technology were installed in the hive inlets. The weight of bumblebee pollen loads obtained using pollen traps was in the range of 0.036-5.83 g. Pollen load samples were analyzed for residues of up to 261 pesticides and their metabolites by liquid and gas chromatography techniques coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS). Residues of 18 fungicides, 12 herbicides, 6 insecticides, and an acaricide were detected. Herbicide - pendimethalin, fungicide - thiophanate-methyl, and insecticide - chlorpyrifos-ethyl were the most commonly detected pesticides. Chlorpyrifos and thiacloprid residues were detected in pollen load samples in the next year after their ban from use as plant protection products in the European Union. The risk of acute or chronic effects was assessed as negligible or low, although the chronic risk of bumblebee queens to insecticide chlorpyrifos and the acute risk of larvae exposed to acaricide fenpyroximate could be interpreted as moderate. The risk of sublethal effects related to chronic exposure of adult bumblebees and queens to pollen loads contaminated by chlorpyrifos-ethyl and cypermethrin cannot be excluded. The risk of chronic toxicity or sublethal effects may be particularly relevant for bumblebee queens, especially during their foraging in the initial period of establishing a new colony.

Comparison of the Biological Potential and Chemical Composition of Brazilian and Mexican Propolis

Propolis is a resinous substance collected by bees from plants and its natural product is available as a safe therapeutic option easily administered orally and readily available as a natural supplement and functional food. In this work, we review the most recent scientific evidence involving propolis from two countries (Brazil and Mexico) located in different hemispheres and with varied biomes. Brazil has a scientifically well documented classification of different types of propolis. Although propolis from Brazil and Mexico present varied compositions, they share compounds with recognized biological activities in different extraction processes. Gram-negative bacteria growth is inhibited with lower concentrations of different types of propolis extracts, regardless of origin. Prominent biological activities against cancer cells and fungi were verified in the different types of extracts evaluated. Antiprotozoal activity needs to be further evaluated for propolis of both origins. Regarding the contamination of propolis (e.g., pesticides, toxic metals), few studies have been carried out. However, there is evidence of chemical contamination in propolis by anthropological action. Studies demonstrate the versatility of using propolis in its different forms (extracts, products, etc.), but several potential applications that might improve the value of Brazilian and Mexican propolis should still be investigated.