Field cross-fostering and in vitro rearing demonstrate negative effects of both larval and adult exposure to a widely used fungicide in honey bees (Apis mellifera)

Nurse honey bees filter fungicide residues to maintain larval health

Residues of plant protection products (PPPs) are frequently detected in bee matrices1,2,3,4,5,6 due to foraging bees collecting contaminated nectar and pollen, which they bring back to their hive. The collected material is further used by nurse bees to produce glandular secretions for feeding their larvae.7 Potential exposure to PPPs occurs through direct oral ingestion, contact during foraging, or interaction with contaminated hive material.8,9 Contaminants can pose health risks to adult worker bees,10,11 queens,12,13 drones (males),14 or larvae,15,16 potentially impacting colony health and productivity. However, residue concentrations can vary significantly between analyzed matrices, and potential accumulation or dilution steps have not been widely investigated. Although research has provided valuable insights into contamination risks, there remain gaps in our understanding of the entire pathway from field, via foragers, stored products, nurse bees, and finally to food jelly, i.e., royal, worker, and drone jelly, and the larvae, including all possible processing steps.17 We collected samples of bee-relevant matrices following the in-field spray application of the product Pictor Active, containing the fungicides boscalid and pyraclostrobin. The samples were analyzed for residues along this entire pathway. Fungicide residues were reduced by a factor of 8-80 from stored product to nurse bees' heads, suggesting a filtering function of nurse bees. Furthermore, detected residues in larval food jelly resulted from added pollen and not from nurse bee secretions. Calculated risk quotients were at least twice as low as the threshold values, suggesting a low risk to honey bee colonies from these fungicides at the tested application rate.

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.

Early exposure to glyphosate during larval development induces late behavioural effects on adult honey bees

As the most abundant pollinator insect in crops, Apis mellifera is a sentinel species of the pollinator communities. In these ecosystems, honey bees of different ages and developmental stages are exposed to diverse agrochemicals. However, most toxicological studies analyse the immediate effects during exposure. Late effects during adulthood after early exposure to pollutants during larval development are poorly studied in bees. The herbicide glyphosate (GLY) is the most applied pesticide worldwide. GLY has been detected in honey and beebread from hives near treated crops. Alterations in growth, morphogenesis or organogenesis during pre-imaginal development could induce late adverse effects after the emergence. Previous studies have demonstrated that GLY alters honey bee development, immediately affecting survival, growth and metabolism, followed by late teratogenic effects. The present study aims to determine the late impact on the behaviour and physiology of adult bees after pre-imaginal exposure to GLY. For that, we reared brood in vitro or in the hive with sub-chronic exposure to the herbicide with the average detected concentration in hives. Then, all newly emerged bees were reared in an incubator until maturity and tested when they became nurse-aged bees. Three behavioural responses were assessed as markers of cognitive and physiological impairment. Our results show i) decreased sensitivity to sucrose regardless of the rearing procedure, ii) increased choice latency and locomotor alterations during chemotaxis and iii) impaired associative learning. These late toxicity signs could indicate adverse effects on task performance and colony efficiency.

Honey bee colonies can buffer short-term stressor effects of pollen restriction and fungicide exposure on colony development and the microbiome

Honey bees (Apis mellifera) have to withstand various environmental stressors alone or in combination in agriculture settings. Plant protection products are applied to achieve high crop yield, but residues of their active substances are frequently detected in bee matrices and could affect honey bee colonies. In addition, intensified agriculture could lead to resource limitation for honey bees. This study aimed to compare the response of full-sized and nucleus colonies to the combined stressors of fungicide exposure and resource limitation. A large-scale field study was conducted simultaneously at five different locations across Germany, starting in spring 2022 and continuing through spring 2023. The fungicide formulation Pictor® Active (active ingredients boscalid and pyraclostrobin) was applied according to label instructions at the maximum recommended rate on oil seed rape crops. Resource limitation was ensured by pollen restriction using a pollen trap and stressor responses were evaluated by assessing colony development, brood development, and core gut microbiome alterations. Furthermore, effects on the plant nectar microbiome were assessed since nectar inhabiting yeast are beneficial for pollination. We showed, that honey bee colonies were able to compensate for the combined stressor effects within six weeks. Nucleus colonies exposed to the combined stressors showed a short-term response with a less favorable brood to bee ratio and reduced colony development in May. No further impacts were observed in either the nucleus colonies or the full-sized colonies from July until the following spring. In addition, no fungicide-dependent differences were found in core gut and nectar microbiomes, and these differences were not distinguishable from local or environmental effects. Therefore, the provision of sufficient resources is important to increase the resilience of honey bees to a combination of stressors.

Acute exposure to fungicide fluazinam induces cell death in the midgut, oxidative stress and alters behavior of the stingless bee Partamona helleri (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Stingless bees (Hymenoptera: Meliponini) are pollinators of both cultivated and wild crop plants in the Neotropical region. However, they are susceptible to pesticide exposure during foraging activities. The fungicide fluazinam is commonly applied in bean and sunflower cultivation during the flowering period, posing a potential risk to the stingless bee Partamona helleri, which serves as a pollinator for these crops. In this study, we investigated the impact of acute oral exposure (24 h) fluazinam on the survival, morphology and cell death signaling pathways in the midgut, oxidative stress and behavior of P. helleri worker bees. Worker bees were exposed for 24 h to fluazinam (field concentrations 0.5, 1.5 and 2.5 mg a.i. mL-1), diluted in 50 % honey aqueous solution. After oral exposure, fluazinam did not harm the survival of worker bees. However, sublethal effects were revealed using the highest concentration of fluazinam (2.5 mg a.i. mL-1), particularly a reduction in food consumption, damage in the midgut epithelium, characterized by degeneration of the brush border, an increase in the number and size of cytoplasm vacuoles, condensation of nuclear chromatin, and an increase in the release of cell fragments into the gut lumen. Bees exposed to fluazinam exhibited an increase in cells undergoing autophagy and apoptosis, indicating cell death in the midgut epithelium. Furthermore, the fungicide induced oxidative stress as evidenced by an increase in total antioxidant and catalase enzyme activities, along with a decrease in glutathione S-transferase activity. And finally, fluazinam altered the walking behavior of bees, which could potentially impede their foraging activities. In conclusion, our findings indicate that fluazinam at field concentrations is not lethal for workers P. helleri. Nevertheless, it has side effects on midgut integrity, oxidative stress and worker bee behavior, pointing to potential risks for this pollinator.

Experimental Ecotoxicology Procedures Interfere with Honey Bee Life History

Apis mellifera was used as a model species for ecotoxicological testing. In the present study, we tested the effects of acetone (0.1% in feed), a solvent commonly used to dissolve pesticides, on bees exposed at different developmental stages (larval and/or adult). Moreover, we explored the potential effect of in vitro larval rearing, a commonly used technique for accurately monitoring worker exposure at the larval stage, by combining acetone exposure and treatment conditions (in vitro larval rearing vs. in vivo larval rearing). We then analyzed the life-history traits of the experimental bees using radio frequency identification technology over three sessions (May, June, and August) to assess the potential seasonal dependence of the solvent effects. Our results highlight the substantial influence of in vitro larval rearing on the life cycle of bees, with a 47.7% decrease in life span, a decrease of 0.9 days in the age at first exit, an increase of 57.3% in the loss rate at first exit, and a decrease of 40.6% in foraging tenure. We did not observe any effect of exposure to acetone at the larval stage on the capacities of bees reared in vitro. Conversely, acetone exposure at the adult stage reduced the bee life span by 21.8% to 60%, decreased the age at first exit by 1.12 to 4.34 days, and reduced the foraging tenure by 30% to 37.7%. Interestingly, we found a significant effect of season on acetone exposure, suggesting that interference with the life-history traits of honey bees is dependent on season. These findings suggest improved integration of long-term monitoring for assessing sublethal responses in bees following exposure to chemicals during both the larval and adult stages. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;43:1320-1331. © 2024 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

A systemic study of cyenopyrafen in strawberry cultivation system: Efficacy, residue behavior, and impact on honeybees (Apis mellifera L.)

The pesticide application method is one of the important factors affecting its effectiveness and residues, and the risk of pesticides to non-target organisms. To elucidate the effect of application methods on the efficacy and residue of cyenopyrafen, and the toxic effects on pollinators honeybees in strawberry cultivation, the efficacy and residual behavior of cyenopyrafen were investigated using foliar spray and backward leaf spray in field trials. The results showed that the initial deposition of cyenopyrafen using backward leaf spray on target leaves reached 5.06-9.81 mg/kg at the dose of 67.5-101.25 g a.i./ha, which was higher than that using foliar spray (2.62-3.71 mg/kg). The half-lives of cyenopyrafen in leaves for foliar and backward leaf spray was 2.3-3.3 and 5.3-5.9 d, respectively. The residues (10 d) of cyenopyrafen in leaves after backward leaf spray was 1.41-3.02 mg/kg, which was higher than that after foliar spraying (0.25-0.37 mg/kg). It is the main reason for the better efficacy after backward leaf spray. However, the residues (10 d) in strawberry after backward leaf spray and foliar spray was 0.04-0.10 and < 0.01 mg/kg, which were well below the established maximum residue levels of cyenopyrafen in Japan and South Korea for food safety. To further investigate the effects of cyenopyrafen residues after backward leaf spray application on pollinator honeybees, sublethal effects of cyenopyrafen on honeybees were studied. The results indicated a significant inhibition in the detoxification metabolic enzymes of honeybees under continuous exposure of cyenopyrafen (0.54 and 5.4 mg/L) over 8 d. The cyenopyrafen exposure also alters the composition of honeybee gut microbiota, such as increasing the relative abundance of Rhizobiales and decreasing the relative abundance of Acetobacterales. The comprehensive data on cyenopyrafen provide basic theoretical for environmental and ecological risk assessment, while backward leaf spray proved to be effective and safe for strawberry cultivation.

'Inert' co-formulants of a fungicide mediate acute effects on honey bee learning performance

Managed honey bees have experienced high rates of colony loss recently, with pesticide exposure as a major cause. While pesticides can be lethal at high doses, lower doses can produce sublethal effects, which may substantially weaken colonies. Impaired learning performance is a behavioral sublethal effect, and is often present in bees exposed to insecticides. However, the effects of other pesticides (such as fungicides) on honey bee learning are understudied, as are the effects of pesticide formulations versus active ingredients. Here, we investigated the effects of acute exposure to the fungicide formulation Pristine (active ingredients: 25.2% boscalid, 12.8% pyraclostrobin) on honey bee olfactory learning performance in the proboscis extension reflex (PER) assay. We also exposed a subset of bees to only the active ingredients to test which formulation component(s) were driving the learning effects. We found that the formulation produced negative effects on memory, but this effect was not present in bees fed only boscalid and pyraclostrobin. This suggests that the trade secret "other ingredients" in the formulation mediated the learning effects, either through exerting their own toxic effects or by increasing the toxicities of the active ingredients. These results show that pesticide co-formulants should not be assumed inert and should instead be included when assessing pesticide risks.

Honeybee queen exposure to a widely used fungicide disrupts reproduction and colony dynamic

Pollinators have to cope with a wide range of stressful, not necessarily lethal factors limiting their performance and the ecological services they provide. Among these stressors are pesticides, chemicals that are originally designed to target crop-harming organisms but that also disrupt various functions in pollinators, including flight, communication, orientation and memory. Although all these functions are crucial for reproductive individuals when searching for mates or nesting places, it remains poorly understood how pesticides affect reproduction in pollinators. In this study, we investigated how a widely used fungicide, boscalid, affects reproduction in honey bees (Apis mellifera), an eusocial insect in which a single individual, the queen, fulfills the reproductive functions of the whole colony. Boscalid is a succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide mainly used on rapeseed flowers to target mitochondrial respiration in fungi but it is also suspected to disrupt foraging-linked functions in bees. We found that immature queen exposure to sublethal, field relevant doses of boscalid disrupted reproduction, as indicated by a dramatic increase in queen mortality during and shortly after the nuptial flights period and a decreased number of spermatozoa stored in the spermatheca of surviving queens. However, we did not observe a decreased paternity frequency in exposed queens that successfully established a colony. Queen exposure to boscalid had detrimental consequences on the colonies they later established regarding brood production, Varroa destructor infection and pollen storage but not nectar storage and population size. These perturbations at the colony-level correspond to nutritional stress conditions, and may have resulted from queen reduced energy provisioning to the eggs. Accordingly, we found that exposed queens had decreased gene expression levels of vitellogenin, a protein involved in egg-yolk formation. Overall, our results indicate that boscalid decreases honey bee queen reproductive quality, thus supporting the need to include reproduction in the traits measured during pesticide risk assessment procedures.

Ternary Mixture of Azoxystrobin, Boscalid and Pyraclostrobin Disrupts the Gut Microbiota and Metabolic Balance of Honeybees (Apis cerana cerana)

There is a growing risk of pollinators being exposed to multiple fungicides due to the widespread use of fungicides for plant protection. A safety assessment of honeybees exposed to multiple commonly used fungicides is urgently required. Therefore, the acute oral toxicity of the ternary mixed fungicide of ABP (azoxystrobin: boscalid: pyraclostrobin = 1:1:1, m/m/m) was tested on honeybees (Apis cerana cerana), and its sublethal effect on foragers’ guts was evaluated. The results showed that the acute oral median lethal concentration (LD50) of ABP for foragers was 12.6 μg a.i./bee. ABP caused disorder of the morphological structure of midgut tissue and affected the intestinal metabolism; the composition and structure of the intestinal microbial community was perturbed, which altered its function. Moreover, the transcripts of genes involved in detoxification and immunity were strongly upregulated with ABP treatment. The study implies that exposure to a fungicide mixture of ABP can cause a series of negative effects on the health of foragers. This work provides a comprehensive understanding of the comprehensive effects of common fungicides on non-target pollinators in the context of ecological risk assessment and the future use of fungicides in agriculture.

Seasonal variability in physiology and behavior affect the impact of fungicide exposure on honey bee (Apis mellifera) health

Honey bee pollination services are of tremendous agricultural and economic importance. Despite this, honey bees and other pollinators face ongoing perils, including population declines due to a variety of environmental stressors. Fungicides may be particularly insidious stressors for pollinators due to their environmental ubiquity and widespread approval for application during crop bloom. The mechanisms by which fungicides affect honey bees are poorly understood and any seasonal variations in their impact are unknown. Here we assess the effects on honey bee colonies of four-week exposure (the approximate duration of the almond pollination season) of a fungicide, Pristine® (25.2% boscalid, 12.8% pyraclostrobin), that has been commonly used for almonds. We exposed colonies to Pristine® in pollen patties placed into the hive, in either summer or fall, and assessed colony brood and worker populations, colony pollen collection and consumption, and worker age of first foraging and longevity. During the summer, Pristine® exposure induced precocious foraging, and reduced worker longevity resulting in smaller colonies. During the fall, Pristine® exposure induced precocious foraging but otherwise had no significant measured effects. During the fall, adult and brood population levels, and pollen consumption and collection, were all much lower, likely due to preparations for winter. Fungicides and other pesticides may often have reduced effects on honey bees during seasons of suppressed colony growth due to bees consuming less pollen and pesticide.

Effect of carbendazim on honey bee health: Assessment of survival, pollen consumption, and gut microbiome composition

Gut microbiota and nutrition play major roles in honey bee health. Recent reports have shown that pesticides can disrupt the gut microbiota and cause malnutrition in honey bees. Carbendazim is the most commonly used fungicide in China, but it is not clear whether carbendazim negatively affects the gut microbes and nutrient intake levels in honey bees. To address this research gap, we assessed the effects of carbendazim on the survival, pollen consumption, and sequenced 16 S rRNA gene to determine the bacterial composition in the midgut and hindgut. Our results suggest that carbendazim exposure does not cause acute death in honey bees even at high concentrations (5000 mg/L), which are extremely unlikely to exist under field conditions. Carbendazim does not disturb the microbiome composition in the gut of young worker bees during gut microbial colonization and adult worker bees with established gut communities in the mid and hindgut. However, carbendazim exposure significantly decreases pollen consumption in honey bees. Thus, exposure of bees to carbendazim can perturb their beneficial nutrition homeostasis, potentially reducing honey bee immunity and increasing their susceptibility to infection by pathogens, which influence effectiveness as pollinators, even colony health.

The Value of Hazard Quotients in Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Ecotoxicology: A Review

Estimates of pesticide application hazards have grown to be one of the most common methodologies for evaluating the impact of pest management practices on honey bees. Typically, hazards are estimated by calculating a Hazard Quotient (HQ), which is based on acute toxicity data for different pesticides and the quantity of those pesticides applied to a field or detected on bees and matrices associated with their hive (honey, wax, pollen, and/or bee bread). Although use of HQ is widespread, there have been few reviews of this methodology, particularly with focus on how effective this method is at predicting effects of pesticides on hives. We evaluated 36 relevant papers, containing calculations of HQ to estimate hazards to honey bees. We observed that HQ was primarily calculated using two different approaches: (1) from the concentration of pesticides in the food, hive, or tissues of honey bees or (2) using the field application rate of the active ingredient as the estimation of pesticide hazard. Within and between HQ calculation methods, thresholds vary widely with some HQ thresholds set below 1 and others set at 10,000. Based on our review we identify key weakness with current HQ methodology and how studies relate HQ to honey bee health endpoints. First, HQ thresholds from studies of pesticides in hives are not based on the same pesticide consumption models from the EPA, potentially overestimating the risk of impacts to colonies. Conversely, HQ estimates calculated from field application rates are not based on eco-toxicological estimates of field exposure, resulting in an overestimation of pesticide reaching colonies. We suggest it is for these reasons that there is poor correspondence between HQ and field-level honey bee health endpoints. Considering these challenges, HQ calculations should be used cautiously in future studies and more research should be dedicated to field level exposure models.

A common fungicide, Pristine®, impairs olfactory associative learning performance in honey bees (Apis mellifera)

Although fungicides were previously considered to be safe for important agricultural pollinators such as honey bees, recent evidence has shown that they can cause a number of behavioral and physiological sublethal effects. Here, we focus on the fungicide Pristine® (active ingredients: 25.2% boscalid, 12.8% pyraclostrobin), which is sprayed during the blooming period on a variety of crops and is known to affect honey bee mitochondria at field-relevant levels. To date, no study has tested the effects of a field-relevant concentration of a fungicide on associative learning ability in honey bees. We tested whether chronic, colony-level exposure at field-relevant and higher concentrations of Pristine® impairs performance on the proboscis extension reflex (PER) paradigm, an associative learning task. Learning performance was reduced at higher field-relevant concentrations of Pristine®. The reductions in learning performance could not be explained by effects on hunger or motivation, as sucrose responsiveness was not affected by Pristine® exposure. To determine whether Pristine®'s negative effects on learning performance were mediated at a specific life stage, we conducted a cross-fostering experiment that exposed bees to the fungicide either only as larvae, only as adults, or during both stages. We found that exposure across the entire life was necessary to significantly reduce learning performance, although non-significant reductions occurred when bees were exposed during just one stage. Our study provides strong evidence that Pristine® has significant sublethal effects on learning performance. As associative learning is a necessary ability for foraging, our results raise concerns that Pristine® could impair foraging abilities and substantially weaken colony health.