Assessment of risk to hoary squash bees (Peponapis pruinosa) and other ground-nesting bees from systemic insecticides in agricultural soil

Understanding and comparing relative pesticide risk among North American wild bees from their association with agriculture

In North America, approximately 21 % (739 species) of the total wild bee diversity is known to be associated with crops, with bee species varying in the extent of this association. While current evaluations of pesticide effects on bees primarily focus on a limited subset of species, a new focus is needed to ensure comprehensive protection of all wild bees in agricultural contexts. This study introduces a novel approach to characterize and compare the relative potential pesticide risk for wild bee species of their association with crops. Using intrinsic bee vulnerability traits and extrinsic factors like crop toxic loads and association strength, we calculated Bee-Crop Risk Scores for 594 wild bee species, identifying those experiencing the highest potential risk from pesticide exposure in North American agroecosystems. We discuss the influence of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on the relative potential risk calculated and outline avenues for refining our approach. As most species facing the highest potential risk from pesticide exposure across North America are ground-nesters, our study suggests that species (e.g., Osmia spp., Megachile spp.) commonly proposed as models for pesticide risk assessments may not accurately represent risk for those bee species facing the highest potential risk in agricultural contexts.

Bumblebee (Bombus impatiens) queens prefer pesticide-contaminated soils when selecting underground hibernation sites

New evidence points to substantial impacts of exposure to pesticide residues in soil for a range of bee taxa that have close regular contact with this substrate. Among others, the risk of exposure is high for bumblebee (Bombus spp.) queens hibernating in agricultural soils. An important question is whether bumblebee queens can detect and avoid pesticide-contaminated soils, or whether they might be attracted to such agrochemical residues. To address this question, we performed a multiple-choice preference experiment in which newly emerged bumblebee (Bombus impatiens) queens were given access to arrays of 36 crates of soil treated with different pesticides in large mesh-covered enclosures. Five of the most commonly encountered pesticides in agricultural soils (boscalid, chlorantraniliprole, clothianidin, cyantraniliprole, difenoconazole) were selected for testing at two contamination levels (lower or higher), based on field-realistic exposure estimates. Bumblebee queens consistently avoided hibernating in pesticide-free soil at both contamination levels, while showing no avoidance for any pesticide-treated soil types. At the lower contamination level, queens selected the pesticide-free soil 1.3 to 2.4-fold less frequently on average than any of the spiked soils, while none of the queens from the higher contamination group selected pesticide-free soil. This apparent preference for pesticide-contaminated soils increases the likelihood of exposure to and potential hazard from pesticide residues in soil for bumblebee queens during hibernation, a critical and highly vulnerable period of their annual life cycle.

SolBeePopecotox: A Population Model for Pesticide Risk Assessments of Solitary Bees

In agricultural landscapes, solitary bees occur in a large diversity of species and are important for crop and wildflower pollination. They are distinguished from honey bees and bumble bees by their solitary lifestyle as well as different nesting strategies, phenologies, and floral preferences. Their ecological traits and presence in agricultural landscapes imply potential exposure to pesticides and suggest a need to conduct ecological risk assessments for solitary bees. However, assessing risks to the large diversity of managed and wild bees across landscapes and regions poses a formidable challenge. Population models provide tools to estimate potential population-level effects of pesticide exposures, can support field study design and interpretation, and can be applied to expand study data to untested conditions. We present a population model for solitary bees, SolBeePopecotox, developed for use in the context of ecological risk assessments. The trait-based model extends a previous version with the explicit representation of exposures to pesticides from relevant routes. Effects are implemented in the model using a simplified toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic model, BeeGUTS (GUTS = generalized unified threshold model for survival), adapted specifically for bees. We evaluated the model with data from semifield studies conducted with the red mason bee, Osmia bicornis, in which bees were foraging in tunnels over control and insecticide-treated oilseed rape fields. We extended the simulations to capture hypothetical semifield studies with two soil-nesting species, Nomia melanderi and Eucera pruinosa, which are difficult to test in empirical studies. The model provides a versatile tool for higher-tier risk assessments, for instance, to estimate effects of potential exposures, expanding available study data to untested species, environmental conditions, or exposure scenarios. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;00:1-17. © 2024 SETAC.

Conventional agriculture affects sex communication and impacts local population size in a wild bee

Man-made agricultural stressors have been identified to compromise the reproductive dynamics of bee populations within agricultural environments. With the aid of bee hotels, we explored the influence of conventional and organic farming systems on local population size and body traits of the mason bee, Osmia bicornis, in southern Germany. We further used a chemical ecology approach and bioassays to test whether farming management influence male pre-copulatory behaviors. We observed a positive relationship between the extent of organic agriculture in the landscape and both overall brood cell production and nesting frequency. Moreover, farming systems were found to influence body traits, with bees from organic sites being smaller in size and having a different cuticular hydrocarbon composition compared with those at conventional sites. Bioassays revealed that males were more sexually attracted to freeze-killed females from conventional sites compared with those from organic sites. Intriguingly, treating females from organic fields with synthetic semiochemicals enhanced their sexual attraction to levels comparable with females from conventional sites. Our findings shed light on the intricate interplay between farming practices and the reproductive behaviors of wild mason bees, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive understanding of these dynamics for effective conservation and management strategies.

Plant versus pollinator protection: balancing pest management against floral contamination for insecticide use in Midwestern US cucurbits

Controlling crop pests while conserving pollinators is challenging, particularly when prophylactically applying broad-spectrum, systemic insecticides such as neonicotinoids. Systemic insecticides are often used in conventional agriculture in commercial settings, but the conditions that optimally balance pest management and pollination are poorly understood. We investigated how insecticide application strategies control pests and expose pollinators to insecticides with an observational study of cucurbit crops in the Midwestern United States. To define the window of protection and potential pollinator exposure resulting from alternative insecticide application strategies, we surveyed 62 farms cultivating cucumber, watermelon, or pumpkin across 2 yr. We evaluated insecticide regimes, abundance of striped and spotted cucumber beetles (Acalymma vittatum [Fabricius] and Diabrotica undecimpunctata Mannerheim), and insecticide residues in leaves, pollen, and nectar. We found that growers used neonicotinoids (thiamethoxam and imidacloprid) at planting in all cucumber and pumpkin and approximately half of watermelon farms. In cucumber, foliar thiamethoxam levels were orders of magnitude higher than the other crops, excluding nearly all beetles from fields. In watermelon and pumpkin, neonicotinoids applied at planting resulted in 4-8 wk of protection before beetle populations increased. Floral insecticide concentrations correlated strongly with foliar concentrations across all crops, resulting in high potential exposure to pollinators in cucumber and low-moderate exposure in pumpkin and watermelon. Thus, the highest-input insecticide regimes maintained cucumber beetles far below economic thresholds while also exposing pollinators to the highest pollen and nectar insecticide concentrations. In cucurbits, reducing pesticide inputs will likely better balance crop protection and pollination, reduce costs, and improve yields.

Size-dependent responses of colony-founding bumblebee (Bombus impatiens) queens to exposure to pesticide residues in soil during hibernation

Bumblebees and other key pollinators are experiencing global declines, a phenomenon driven by multiple environmental stressors, including pesticide exposure. While bumblebee queens spend most of their life hibernating underground, no study to date has examined how exposure to pesticide-contaminated soils might affect bumblebee queens during this solitary phase of their lifecycle. We exposed Bombus impatiens queens (n = 303) to soil treated with field-realistic concentrations of two diamide insecticides (chlorantraniliprole and cyantraniliprole) and two fungicides (boscalid and difenoconazole), alone or combined, during a 30-week hibernation period. We found that exposure to boscalid residues in soil doubled the likelihood of queens surviving through the colony initiation period (after successful hibernation) and laying eggs. Our data also revealed complex interactions between pesticide exposure and queen body mass on aspects of colony founding. Among others, exposure to cyantraniliprole led to lethal and sublethal post-hibernation effects that were dependent on queen size, with larger queens showing higher mortality rates, delayed emergence of their first brood, and producing smaller workers. Our results show that effects of pesticide exposure depend on intrinsic traits of bumblebee queen physiology and challenge our understanding of how bees respond to pesticides under environmentally realistic exposure scenarios.

Field agrochemical exposure impacts locomotor activity in wild bumblebees

Agricultural intensification has been identified as one of the key causes of global insect biodiversity losses. These losses have been further linked to the widespread use of agrochemicals associated with modern agricultural practices. Many of these chemicals are known to have negative sublethal effects on commercial pollinators, such as managed honeybees and bumblebees, but less is known about the impacts on wild bees. Laboratory-based studies with commercial pollinators have consistently shown that pesticide exposure can impact bee behavior, with cascading effects on foraging performance, reproductive success, and pollination services. However, these studies typically assess only one chemical, neglecting the complexity of real-world exposure to multiple agrochemicals and other stressors. In the summer of 2020, we collected wild-foraging workers of the common eastern bumblebee, Bombus impatiens, from five squash (Cucurbita) agricultural sites (organic and conventional farms), selected to represent a range of agrochemical, including neonicotinoid insecticide, use. For each bee, we measured two behaviors relevant to foraging success and previously shown to be impacted by pesticide exposure: sucrose responsiveness and locomotor activity. Following behavioral testing, we used liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) chemical analysis to detect and quantify the presence of 92 agrochemicals in each bumblebee. Bees collected from our sites did not vary in pesticide exposure as expected. While we found a limited occurrence of neonicotinoids, two fungicides (azoxystrobin and difenoconazole) were detected at all sites, and the pesticide synergist piperonyl butoxide (PBO) was present in all 123 bees. We found that bumblebees that contained higher levels of PBO were less active, and this effect was stronger for larger bumblebee workers. While PBO is unlikely to be the direct cause of the reduction in bee activity, it could be an indicator of exposure to pyrethroids and/or other insecticides that we were unable to directly quantify, but which PBO is frequently tank-mixed with during pesticide applications on crops. We did not find a relationship between agrochemical exposure and bumblebee sucrose responsiveness. To our knowledge, this is the first evidence of a sublethal behavioral impact of agrochemical exposure on wild-foraging bees.

Single and combined exposure to 'bee safe' pesticides alter behaviour and offspring production in a ground-nesting solitary bee (Xenoglossa pruinosa)

Mounting evidence supporting the negative impacts of exposure to neonicotinoids on bees has prompted the registration of novel 'bee-friendly' insecticides for agricultural use. Flupyradifurone (FPF) is a butenolide insecticide that shares the same mode of action as neonicotinoids and has been assessed to be 'practically non-toxic to adult honeybees' using current risk assessment procedures. However, these assessments overlook some routes of exposure specific to wild bees, such as contact with residues in soil for ground-nesters. Co-exposure with other pesticides may also lead to detrimental synergistic effects. In a fully crossed experiment, we assessed the possible lethal and sublethal effects of chronic exposure to two pesticides used on Cucurbita crops, the insecticide Sivanto Prime (FPF) and the fungicide Quadris Top (azoxystrobin and difenoconazole), alone or combined, on solitary ground-nesting squash bees (Xenoglossa pruinosa). Squash bees exposed to Quadris Top collected less pollen per flower visit, while Sivanto-exposed bees produced larger offspring. Pesticide co-exposure induced hyperactivity in female squash bees relative to both the control and single pesticide exposure, and reduced the number of emerging offspring per nest compared to individual pesticide treatments. This study demonstrates that 'low-toxicity' pesticides can adversely affect squash bees under field-realistic exposure, alone or in combination.

Route of exposure to veterinary products in bees: Unraveling pasture's impact on avermectin exposure and tolerance in stingless bees

Deforestation rapidly increases in tropical regions, primarily driven by converting natural habitats into pastures for extensive cattle ranching. This landscape transformation, coupled with pesticide use, are key drivers of bee population decline. Here, we investigate the impact of pasture-dominated landscapes on colony performance, pesticide exposure, and insecticide sensitivity of the stingless bee Tetragonisca angustula. We monitored 16 colonies located in landscapes with varying proportions of pasture. We collected bee bread for pesticide and palynological analysis. We found a positive correlation between pollen diversity and colony growth, with no effect of the proportion of pasture in the landscape. In contrast, we detected prevalent and hazardous concentrations of the insecticide abamectin (9.6-1,856 µg/kg) in bee bread, which significantly increased with a higher proportion of pasture. Despite the abamectin exposure, the bee colonies displayed no adverse effects on their growth, indicating a potential tolerance response. Further investigations revealed that bees from sites with higher proportions of pasture showed significantly reduced mortality when exposed to a lethal concentration of abamectin (0.021 µg/µL) after 48 h. Since abamectin is scarcely used in the study area, we designed an experiment to track ivermectin, a closely related antiparasitic drug used in cattle. Our findings uncovered a new exposure route of bees to pesticides, wherein ivermectin excreted by cattle is absorbed and biotransformed into abamectin within flowering plants in the pastures. These results highlight that unexplained exposure routes of bees to pesticides remain to be described while also revealing that bees adapt to changing landscapes.

Residue dynamics of a contact and a systemic fungicide in pollen, nectar, and other plant matrices of courgette (Cucurbita pepo L.)

Pollen and nectar can be contaminated with a range of pesticides, including insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides. Since these matrices are important food sources for pollinators and other beneficial insects, their contamination can represent a key route of exposure. However, limited knowledge exists with respect to pesticide residue levels and their dynamics in these matrices for many crops and active ingredients (AIs). We used controlled glasshouse studies to investigate the residue dynamics of a systemic (cyprodinil) and a contact (fludioxonil) fungicide in the floral matrices and other plant parts of courgette/zucchini (Cucurbita pepo L.). We aimed to better understand the processes behind residue accumulation and decline in pollen and nectar. Each AI was applied to plants, either by spraying whole plants or by targeted spraying onto leaves only. Samples of pollen, nectar, anthers, flowers, and leaves were taken on the day of application and each subsequent morning for up to 13 days and analysed for residues using LC-MS/MS. Significant differences in residue levels and dynamics were found between AIs and floral matrices. The present study allowed for the identification of potential routes by which residues translocate between tissues and to link those to the physicochemical properties of each AI, which may facilitate the prediction of residue levels in pollen and nectar. Residues of the contact AI declined more quickly than those of the systemic AI in pollen and nectar. Our results further suggest that the risk of oral exposure for pollinators may be considerably reduced by using contact AIs during the green bud stage of plants, but application of systemic compounds could still result in a low, but continuous long-term exposure for pollinators with limited decline.

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.

Honey bees and bumble bees may be exposed to pesticides differently when foraging on agricultural areas

In an agricultural environment, where crops are treated with pesticides, bees are likely to be exposed to a range of chemical compounds in a variety of ways. The extent to which different bee species are affected by these chemicals, largely depends on the concentrations and type of exposure. We quantified the presence of selected pesticide compounds in the pollen of two different entomophilous crops; oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and broad bean (Vicia faba). Sampling was performed in 12 sites in Ireland and our results were compared with the pollen loads of honey bees and bumble bees actively foraging on those crops in those same sites. Detections were compound specific, and the timing of pesticide application in relation to sampling likely influenced the final residue contamination levels. Most detections originated from compounds that were not recently applied on the fields, and samples from B. napus fields were more contaminated compared to those from V. faba fields. Crop pollen was contaminated only with fungicides, honey bee pollen loads contained mainly fungicides, while more insecticides were detected in bumble bee pollen loads. The highest number of compounds and most detections were observed in bumble bee pollen loads, where notably, all five neonicotinoids assessed (acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, thiacloprid, and thiamethoxam) were detected despite the no recent application of these compounds on the fields where samples were collected. The concentrations of neonicotinoid insecticides were positively correlated with the number of wild plant species present in the bumble bee-collected pollen samples, but this relationship could not be verified for honey bees. The compounds azoxystrobin, boscalid and thiamethoxam formed the most common pesticide combination in pollen. Our results raise concerns about potential long-term bee exposure to multiple residues and question whether honey bees are suitable surrogates for pesticide risk assessments for all bee species.

Moving past neonicotinoids and honeybees: A systematic review of existing research on other insecticides and bees

Synthetic pesticides (e.g. herbicides, fungicides and insecticides) are used widely in agriculture to protect crops from pests, weeds and disease. However, their use also comes with a range of environmental concerns. One key concern is the effect of insecticides on non-target organisms such as bees, who provide pollination services for crops and wild plants. This systematic literature review quantifies the existing research on bees and insecticides broadly, and then focuses more specifically on non-neonicotinoid insecticides and non-honeybees. We find that articles on honeybees (Apis sp.) and insecticides account for 80% of all research, with all other bees combined making up 20%. Neonicotinoids were studied in 34% of articles across all bees and were the most widely studied insecticide class for non-honeybees overall, with almost three times as many studies than the second most studied class. Of non-neonicotinoid insecticide classes and non-honeybees, the most studied were pyrethroids and organophosphates followed by carbamates, and the most widely represented bee taxa were bumblebees (Bombus), followed by leaf-cutter bees (Megachile) and mason bees (Osmia). Research has taken place across several countries, with the highest numbers of articles from Brazil and the US, and with notable gaps from countries in Asia, Africa and Oceania. Mortality was the most studied effect type, while sub-lethal effects such as on behaviour were less studied. Few studies tested how the effect of insecticides were influenced by multiple pressures, such as climate change and co-occurring pesticides (cocktail effects). As anthropogenic pressures do not occur in isolation, we suggest that future research also addresses these knowledge gaps. Given the changing global patterns in insecticide use, and the increasing inclusion of both non-honeybees and sub-lethal effects in pesticide risk assessment, there is a need for expanding research beyond its current state to ensure a strong scientific evidence base for the development of risk assessment and associated policy.

Implementing IPM in crop management simultaneously improves the health of managed bees and enhances the diversity of wild pollinator communities

Impacts of insecticide use on the health of wild and managed pollinators have been difficult to accurately quantify in the field. Existing designs tend to focus on single crops, even though highly mobile bees routinely forage across crop boundaries. We created fields of pollinator-dependent watermelon surrounded by corn, regionally important crops in the Midwestern US. These fields were paired at multiple sites in 2017-2020 with the only difference being pest management regimes: a standard set of conventional management (CM) practices vs. an integrated pest management (IPM) system that uses scouting and pest thresholds to determine if/when insecticides are used. Between these two systems we compared the performance (e.g., growth, survival) of managed pollinators-honey bees (Apis mellifera), bumble bees (Bombus impatiens)-along with the abundance and diversity of wild pollinators. Compared to CM fields, IPM led to higher growth and lower mortality of managed bees, while also increasing the abundance (+ 147%) and richness (+ 128%) of wild pollinator species, and lower concentrations of neonicotinoids in the hive material of both managed bees. By replicating realistic changes to pest management, this experiment provides one of the first demonstrations whereby tangible improvements to pollinator health and crop visitation result from IPM implementation in agriculture.

Pesticide mixtures detected in crop and non-target wild plant pollen and nectar

Cultivation of mass flowering entomophilous crops benefits from the presence of managed and wild pollinators, who visit flowers to forage on pollen and nectar. However, management of these crops typically includes application of pesticides, the presence of which may pose a hazard for pollinators foraging in an agricultural environment. To determine the levels of potential exposure to pesticides, their presence and concentration in pollen and nectar need assessing, both within and beyond the target crop plants. We selected ten pesticide compounds and one metabolite and analysed their occurrence in a crop (Brassica napus) and a wild plant (Rubus fruticosus agg.), which was flowering in field edges. Nectar and pollen from both plants were collected from five spring and five winter sown B. napus fields in Ireland, and were tested for pesticide residues, using QuEChERS and Liquid Chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Pesticide residues were detected in plant pollen and nectar of both plants. Most detections were from fields with no recorded application of the respective compounds in that year, but higher concentrations were observed in recently treated fields. Overall, more residues were detected in B. napus pollen and nectar than in the wild plant, and B. napus pollen had the highest mean concentration of residues. All matrices were contaminated with at least three compounds, and the most frequently detected compounds were fungicides. The most common compound mixture was comprised of the fungicides azoxystrobin, boscalid, and the neonicotinoid insecticide clothianidin, which was not recently applied on the fields. Our results indicate that persistent compounds like the neonicotinoids, should be continuously monitored for their presence and fate in the field environment. The toxicological evaluation of the compound mixtures identified in the present study should be performed, to determine their impacts on foraging insects that may be exposed to them.

Location and Creation of Nest Sites for Ground-Nesting Bees in Apple Orchards

Wild ground-nesting bees are key pollinators of apple (Malus domestica). We explored, (1) where they choose to nest, (2) what influences site selection and (3) species richness in orchards. Twenty-three orchards were studied over three years; twelve were treated with additional herbicide to increase bare ground with the remainder as untreated controls. Vegetation cover, soil type, soil compaction, nest number and location, and species were recorded. Fourteen species of ground-nesting solitary/eusocial bee were identified. Most nests were in areas free of vegetation and areas treated with additional herbicide were utilised by ground nesting bees within three years of application. Nests were also evenly distributed along the vegetation-free strips underneath the apple trees. This area was an important ground-nesting bee habitat with mean numbers of nests at peak nest activity of 873 per ha (range 44-5705), and 1153 per ha (range 0-4082) in 2018 and 2019, respectively. Increasing and maintaining areas of bare ground in apple orchards during peak nesting events could improve nesting opportunities for some species of ground-nesting bee and, combined with flowers strips, be part of a more sustainable pollinator management approach. The area under the tree row is an important contributor to the ground-nesting bee habitat and should be kept bare during peak nesting.

Potential Risk of Residues From Neonicotinoid-Treated Sugar Beet Flowering Weeds to Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.)

In 2018 the European Union (EU) banned the three neonicotinoid insecticides imidacloprid, clothianidin (CLO), and thiamethoxam (TMX), but they can still be used if an EU Member State issues an emergency approval. Such an approval went into effect in 2021 for TMX-coated sugar beet seeds in Germany. Usually, this crop is harvested before flowering without exposing non-target organisms to the active ingredient or its metabolites. In addition to the approval, strict mitigation measures were imposed by the EU and the German federal states. One of the measures was to monitor the drilling of sugar beet and its impact on the environment. Hence we took residue samples from different bee and plant matrices and at different dates to fully map beet growth in the German states of Lower Saxony, Bavaria, and Baden-Württemberg. A total of four treated and three untreated plots were surveyed, resulting in 189 samples. Residue data were evaluated using the US Environmental Protection Agency BeeREX model to assess acute and chronic risk to honey bees from the samples, because oral toxicity data are widely available for both TMX and CLO. Within treated plots, we found no residues either in pools of nectar and honey crop samples (n = 24) or dead bee samples (n = 21). Although 13% of beebread and pollen samples and 88% of weed and sugar beet shoot samples were positive, the BeeREX model found no evidence of acute or chronic risk. We also detected neonicotinoid residues in the nesting material of the solitary bee Osmia bicornis, probably from contaminated soil of a treated plot. All control plots were free of residues. Currently, there are insufficient data on wild bee species to allow for an individual risk assessment. In terms of the future use of these highly potent insecticides, therefore, it must be ensured that all regulatory requirements are complied with to mitigate any unintentional exposure. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:1167-1177. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Wild bees are exposed to low levels of pesticides in urban grasslands and community gardens

Globally documented wild bee declines threaten sustainable food production and natural ecosystem functioning. Urban environments are often florally abundant, and consequently can contain high levels of pollinator diversity compared with agricultural environments. This has led to the suggestion that urban environments are an increasingly important habitat for pollinators. However, pesticides, such as commercial bug sprays, have a range of lethal and sub-lethal impacts on bees and are widely available for public use, with past work indicating that managed bees (honeybees and bumblebees) are exposed to a range of pesticides in urban environments. Despite this, we still have a poor understanding of (i) whether wild bees foraging in urban environments are exposed to pesticides and (ii) if exposure differs between genera. Here we assessed pesticide exposure in 8 bee genera foraging across multiple urban landscapes. We detected 13 different pesticides, some at concentrations known to have sub-lethal impacts on pollinators. Both the likelihood of pesticides being detected, and the concentrations observed, were higher for larger bees, likely due to their greater foraging ranges. Our results suggest that restricting agrochemical use in urban environments, where the economic benefits are limited, is a simple way to reduce anthropogenic stress on wild bees.

Informing policy and practice on insect pollinator declines: Tensions between conservation and animal welfare

Climate change, agricultural intensification, and other anthropogenic ecosystem challenges have caused declines in the diversity and abundance of insect pollinators. In response to these declines, entomologists have called for greater attention to insect pollinator conservation. Conservation primarily aims to protect groups of non-human animals—populations or species—with only secondary concern for the welfare of individual animals. While conservation and animal welfare goals are sometimes aligned, they often are not. And because animal welfare comes second, it tends to be sacrificed when in tension with conversation priorities. Consider, for example, lethal sampling to monitor many pollinator populations. Growing evidence suggests that the welfare of individual insect pollinators may be morally significant, particularly in the Hymenoptera and Diptera. Considering insect welfare in conservation practices and policies presents many challenges as, in the face of rapid, anthropogenic change, it may be impossible to avoid harming individual animals while promoting diverse populations. We suggest some practical, implementable strategies that can allow for more robust integration of animal welfare goals into insect pollinator conservation. By following these strategies, entomologists may be able to find policies and practices that promote the health of ecosystems and the individual animals within them.

Identifying wild bee visitors of major crops in North America with notes on potential threats from agricultural practices

Considering the critical importance of insect pollination to food security and documented declines in wild bee populations, it is imperative to develop effective conservation and management strategies that promote the health of wild bee communities associated with agroecosystems. Identifying wild bee visitors of crops, including crop-flower visitors and species that nest within cropping areas, may prove critical to this endeavor as optimal conservation strategies may differ among bee species and/or guilds, regions, and cropping systems. Although lists of bee species that are associated with North American crops are scattered throughout the literature, there is a need for a comprehensive compilation of those species by crop, region, and nesting guild. Here, we searched the literature to compile a list of wild bee species associated with 33 major crops in North America and assessed the overlap in bee species communities among crops and regions. Of the 739 crop-associated bee species retrieved, 405 species (54.8%) were ground nesters, and 438 species (59.3%) were identified as crop-flower visitors of at least one crop. Because of their nesting and foraging behavior, we argue that these species are more likely to be exposed to agricultural pesticide residues than bee species that do not nest in the ground or feed directly on crop flowers. We further compiled lists of wild bees that have been found to be associated with all of the four most surveyed perennial fruit crops (apple, blueberry, cranberry, strawberry) and all of the three most surveyed cucurbit crops (cucumber, Cucurbita, watermelon) in eastern North America. These lists of bee species can be used to focus attention on species needing better protection strategies within agroecosystems, especially for these two important North American crop groups and can also inform the development of multi-species pesticide risk assessment schemes.

Quantifying exposure of bumblebee (Bombus spp.) queens to pesticide residues when hibernating in agricultural soils

Exposure to pesticides is a major threat to bumblebee (Bombus spp.) health. In temperate regions, queens of many bumblebee species hibernate underground for several months, putting them at potentially high risk of exposure to soil contaminants. The extent to which bumblebees are exposed to residues in agricultural soils during hibernation is currently unknown, which limits our understanding of the full pesticide exposome for bumblebees throughout their lifecycle. To generate field exposure estimates for overwintering bumblebee queens to pesticide residues, we sampled soils from areas corresponding to suitable likely hibernation sites at six apple orchards and 13 diversified farms throughout Southern Ontario (Canada) in fall 2019-2020. Detectable levels of pesticides were found in 65 of 66 soil samples analysed for multi-pesticide residues (UPLC-MS/MS). A total of 53 active ingredients (AIs) were detected in soils, including 27 fungicides, 13 insecticides, and 13 herbicides. Overall, the frequency of detection, residue levels (median = 37.82 vs. 2.20 ng/g), and number of pesticides per sample (mean = 12 vs. 4 AIs) were highest for orchard soils compared to soils from diversified farms. Ninety-one percent of samples contained multiple residues (up to 29 different AIs per sample), including mixtures of insecticides and fungicides that might lead to synergistic effects. Our results suggest that when hibernating in agricultural areas, bumblebee queens are very likely to be exposed to a wide range of pesticide residues in soil, including potentially harmful levels of insecticides (e.g., cyantraniliprole up to 148.82 ng/g). Our study indicates the importance of empirically testing the potential effects of pesticide residues in soils for hibernating bumblebee queens, using field exposure data such as those generated here. The differences in potential exposure that we detected between cropping systems can also be used to better inform regulations that govern the use of agricultural pesticides, notably in apple orchards.

Fungicides and bees: a review of exposure and risk

Fungicides account for more than 35% of the global pesticide market and their use is predicted to increase in the future. While fungicides are commonly applied during bloom when bees are likely foraging on crops, whether real-world exposure to these chemicals - alone or in combination with other stressors - constitutes a threat to the health of bees is still the subject of great uncertainty. The first step in estimating the risks of exposure to fungicides for bees is to understand how and to what extent bees are exposed to these active ingredients. Here we review the current knowledge that exists about exposure to fungicides that bees experience in the field, and link quantitative data on exposure to acute and chronic risk of lethal endpoints for honey bees (Apis mellifera). From the 702 publications we screened, 76 studies contained quantitative data on residue detections in honey bee matrices, and a further 47 provided qualitative information about exposure for a range of bee taxa through various routes. We compiled data for 90 fungicides and metabolites that have been detected in honey, beebread, pollen, beeswax, and the bodies of honey bees. The risks posed to honey bees by fungicide residues was estimated through the EPA Risk Quotient (RQ) approach. Based on residue concentrations detected in honey and pollen/beebread, none of the reported fungicides exceeded the levels of concern (LOC) set by regulatory agencies for acute risk, while 3 and 12 fungicides exceeded the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) chronic LOC for honey bees and wild bees, respectively. When considering exposure to all bees, fungicides of most concern include many broad-spectrum systemic fungicides, as well as the widely used broad-spectrum contact fungicide chlorothalonil. In addition to providing a detailed overview of the frequency and extent of fungicide residue detections in the bee environment, we identified important research gaps and suggest future directions to move towards a more comprehensive understanding and mitigation of the risks of exposure to fungicides for bees, including synergistic risks of co-exposure to fungicides and other pesticides or pathogens.

Acute oral toxicity and risks of four classes of systemic insecticide to the Common Eastern Bumblebee (Bombus impatiens)

The Common Eastern Bumblebee (Bombus impatiens) is native to North America with an expanding range across Eastern Canada and the USA. This species is commercially produced primarily for greenhouse crop pollination and is a common and abundant component of the wild bumblebee fauna in agricultural, suburban and urban landscapes. However, there is a dearth of pesticide toxicity information about North American bumblebees. The present study determined the acute oral lethal toxicity (48-h LD50) of: the butenolide, flupyradifurone (>1.7 μg/bee); the diamide, cyantraniliprole (>0.54 μg/bee); the neonicotinoid, thiamethoxam (0.0012 μg/bee); and the sulfoximine, sulfoxaflor (0.0177 μg/bee). Compared with published honey bee (Apis mellifera) LD50 values, the present study shows that sulfoxaflor and thiamethoxam are 8.3× and 3.3× more acutely toxic to B. impatiens, whereas flupyradifurone is more acutely toxic to A. mellifera. The current rule of thumb for toxicity extrapolation beyond the honey bee as a model species, termed 10× safety factor, may be sufficient for bumblebee acute oral toxicity. A comparison of five risk assessment equations suggested that the Standard Risk Approach (SRA) and Fixed Dose Risk Approach (FDRA) provide more nuanced levels of risk evaluation compared to the Exposure Toxicity Ratio (ETR), Hazard Quotient (HQ), and Risk Quotient (RQ), primarily because the SRA and FDRA take into account real world variability in pollen and nectar pesticide residues and the chances that bees may be exposed to them.

Regard and protect ground-nesting pollinators as part of soil biodiversity

While the Convention on Biological Diversity employs a habitat-oriented definition of soil biodiversity including all kinds of species living in soil, the Food and Agriculture Organization, since 2002 assigned to safeguard soil biodiversity, excludes them by focusing on species directly providing four ecosystem services contributing to soil quality and functions: nutrient cycling, regulation of water flow and storage, soil structure maintenance and erosion control, and carbon storage and regulation of atmospheric composition. Many solitary wasps and 70% of wild bees nest below ground and require protection during this long and crucial period of their lifecycle. Recent research has demonstrated the extent of threats to which ground-nesting pollinators are exposed, for example, chemicals and deep tillage. Ground-nesting pollinators change soil texture directly by digging cavities, but more importantly by their indirect contribution to soil quality and functions: 87% of all flowering plants require pollinators. Without pollinators, soil would lose all ecosystem services provided by these flowering plants, for example, litter, shade, roots for habitats, and erosion control. Above- and belowground biota are in constant interaction. Therefore, and in line with the Convention's definition, the key stakeholder, the Food and Agriculture Organization should protect ground-nesting pollinators explicitly within soil biodiversity conservation.

Effects of Provision Type and Pesticide Exposure on the Larval Development of Osmia lignaria (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae)

Wild and managed bee populations are in decline, and one of many environmental causes is the impact of pesticides on developing bees. For solitary bees, delayed larval development could lead to asynchronous adult emergence, unhealthy and inefficient adult pollinators, and decreased brood production and survival. We examined a methodology for testing Osmia lignaria Say (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) larval responses to pesticide exposure using a laboratory bioassay. We created two provision types: a homogenized blend of O. lignaria provisions from an apple orchard and homogenized almond pollen pellets collected by honey bees plus sugar water. Pesticides were administered to the provisions to compare toxic effects. We recorded larval developmental durations for second-fifth instar and for fifth instar to cocoon initiation for larvae fed provisions treated with water (control) or doses of three pesticides and a representative spray-tank mixture (acetamiprid, boscalid/pyraclostrobin, dimethoate, and acetamiprid plus boscalid/pyraclostrobin). All larvae survived to cocoon initiation when only water was added to provisions. Impacts of pesticide treatments significantly differed between the apple and almond homogenates. The greatest treatment effects occurred when the homogenized almond provision was mixed with acetamiprid alone and when combined with boscalid/pyraclostrobin. Optimizing bioassays through the use of appropriate larval food for exposing solitary bee larvae to agrochemicals is crucial for assessing risks for pollinators.

Sensitivity of Buff-Tailed Bumblebee (Bombus terrestris L.) to Insecticides with Different Mode of Action

Simple Summary

Several neonicotinoid insecticides that were once widely used for pest control are currently banned for outdoor use in the European Union (EU) because they pose a risk to bees. This restriction meant that farmers had to look for alternatives for pest management and use known insecticides or new substances with supposedly more bee-friendly characteristics. We evaluated the toxicity of six insecticides on buff-tailed bumblebee workers (Bombus terrestris): two banned neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, thiacloprid), two pyrethroids (deltamethrin, esfenvalerate), one sulfoximine (sulfoxaflor) and a microbial insecticide based on Bacillus thuringiensis toxins, which are present in genetically modified (Bt) maize. The results obtained show that certain insecticides in use have higher acute toxicity to B. terrestris than some of the banned neonicotinoids.

Abstract

Systemic insecticides are recognized as one of the drivers of the worldwide bee decline as they are exposed to them through multiple pathways. Specifically, neonicotinoids, some of which are banned for outdoor use in the European Union (EU), have been pointed out as a major cause of bee collapse. Thus, farmers have had to look for alternatives for pest control and use known insecticides or new substances reportedly less harmful to bees. We evaluated the oral acute toxicity of six insecticides (three of them systemic: imidacloprid, thiacloprid and sulfoxaflor) with four different modes of action on buff-tailed bumblebee workers (Bombus terrestris): two banned neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, thiacloprid), two pyrethroids (deltamethrin, esfenvalerate), one sulfoximine (sulfoxaflor) and a microbial insecticide based on Bacillus thuringiensis toxins, present in genetically modified (Bt) maize. The microbial insecticide only caused mortality to bumblebee workers at extremely high concentrations, so it is expected that Bt maize does not pose a risk to them. The toxicity of the other five insecticides on bumblebees was, from highest to lowest: imidacloprid, sulfoxaflor, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate and thiacloprid. This outcome suggests that certain insecticides in use are more toxic to B. terrestris than some banned neonicotinoids. Further chronic toxicity studies, under realistic conditions, are necessary for a proper risk assessment.

Pesticide-induced disturbances of bee gut microbiotas

Social bee gut microbiotas play key roles in host health and performance. Worryingly, a growing body of literature shows that pesticide exposure can disturb these microbiotas. Most studies examine changes in taxonomic composition in Western honey bee (Apis mellifera) gut microbiotas caused by insecticide exposure. Core bee gut microbiota taxa shift in abundance after exposure but are rarely eliminated, with declines in Bifidobacteriales and Lactobacillus near melliventris abundance being the most common shifts. Pesticide concentration, exposure duration, season and concurrent stressors all influence whether and how bee gut microbiotas are disturbed. Also, the mechanism of disturbance-i.e. whether a pesticide directly affects microbial growth or indirectly affects the microbiota by altering host health-likely affects disturbance consistency. Despite growing interest in this topic, important questions remain unanswered. Specifically, metabolic shifts in bee gut microbiotas remain largely uninvestigated, as do effects of pesticide-disturbed gut microbiotas on bee host performance. Furthermore, few bee species have been studied other than A. mellifera, and few herbicides and fungicides have been examined. We call for these knowledge gaps to be addressed so that we may obtain a comprehensive picture of how pesticides alter bee gut microbiotas, and of the functional consequences of these changes.

Mason Bees (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) Exhibit No Avoidance of Imidacloprid-Treated Soils

1) Many wild bee species interact with soil either as a nesting substrate or material. These soil interactions create a risk of exposure to agrochemicals such as imidacloprid or other neonicotinoid pesticides that can persist in soil for months after application. At the landscape level, concentrations of imidacloprid residue in soil are limited to the immediate treatment area, and thus risks to soil-interacting bees could be low if they avoid contaminated soils. 2) We utilized Osmia lignaria (Say), a solitary cavity nesting bee which collects mud to partition and seal nests, and conducted two laboratory experiments to test whether nesting females select or avoid soils containing various levels of imidacloprid residue. For the first experiment, we assessed behavioral responses of females to treated soil utilizing a choice arena and pairing various choices of soil with imidacloprid residues ranging between 0 and 780 ppb. For the second experiment, we developed a laboratory assay to assess soil selection of actively nesting O. lignaria, by providing choices of contaminated soil between 0 and 100 ppb and 0 and 1,000 ppb to nesting females. 3) We found no evidence that O. lignaria females avoided any level of imidacloprid contamination, even at the highest residue level (1,000 ppb) in both the experiments, which may have implications for risk. The in situ nesting methodology developed in this study has future applications for research on soil or pollen preferences of cavity nesting Osmia species, and potential for breeding of O. lignaria in laboratory.

Past insecticide exposure reduces bee reproduction and population growth rate

Pesticides are linked to global insect declines, with impacts on biodiversity and essential ecosystem services. In addition to well-documented direct impacts of pesticides at the current stage or time, potential delayed "carryover" effects from past exposure at a different life stage may augment impacts on individuals and populations. We investigated the effects of current exposure and the carryover effects of past insecticide exposure on the individual vital rates and population growth of the solitary bee, Osmia lignaria Bees in flight cages freely foraged on wildflowers, some treated with the common insecticide, imidacloprid, in a fully crossed design over 2 y, with insecticide exposure or no exposure in each year. Insecticide exposure directly to foraging adults and via carryover effects from past exposure reduced reproduction. Repeated exposure across 2 y additively impaired individual performance, leading to a nearly fourfold reduction in bee population growth. Exposure to even a single insecticide application can have persistent effects on vital rates and can reduce population growth for multiple generations. Carryover effects had profound implications for population persistence and must be considered in risk assessment, conservation, and management decisions for pollinators to mitigate the effects of insecticide exposure.

IPM reduces insecticide applications by 95% while maintaining or enhancing crop yields through wild pollinator conservation

Environmental damage from insecticide overuse is a major concern, particularly for conservation of “good” insects such as pollinators that ensure stable production of food crops like fruits and vegetables. However, insecticides are also necessary for farmers to manage “bad” insects (i.e., pests), and thus, a more holistic view of crop management needs to account for the proper balance between the beneficial and detrimental aspects of pesticides. Here, we used multiyear field experiments with a paired corn–watermelon cropping system to show that insecticide use can be dramatically reduced (by ∼95%) while maintaining or even increasing yields through the conservation of wild bees as crop pollinators. These data demonstrate that food production and ecosystem sustainability are not necessarily conflicting goals.

Pest management practices in modern industrial agriculture have increasingly relied on insurance-based insecticides such as seed treatments that are poorly correlated with pest density or crop damage. This approach, combined with high invertebrate toxicity for newer products like neonicotinoids, makes it challenging to conserve beneficial insects and the services that they provide. We used a 4-y experiment using commercial-scale fields replicated across multiple sites in the midwestern United States to evaluate the consequences of adopting integrated pest management (IPM) using pest thresholds compared with standard conventional management (CM). To do so, we employed a systems approach that integrated coproduction of a regionally dominant row crop (corn) with a pollinator-dependent specialty crop (watermelon). Pest populations, pollination rates, crop yields, and system profitability were measured. Despite higher pest densities and/or damage in both crops, IPM-managed pests rarely reached economic thresholds, resulting in 95% lower insecticide use (97 versus 4 treatments in CM and IPM, respectively, across all sites, crops, and years). In IPM corn, the absence of a neonicotinoid seed treatment had no impact on yields, whereas IPM watermelon experienced a 129% increase in flower visitation rate by pollinators, resulting in 26% higher yields. The pollinator-enhancement effect under IPM management was mediated entirely by wild bees; foraging by managed honey bees was unaffected by treatments and, overall, did not correlate with crop yield. This proof-of-concept experiment mimicking on-farm practices illustrates that cropping systems in major agricultural commodities can be redesigned via IPM to exploit ecosystem services without compromising, and in some cases increasing, yields.

The role of soils on pollination and seed dispersal

Ongoing environmental changes are affecting physical, chemical and biological soil components. Evidence of impacts of soil changes on pollinators' and seed dispersers' behaviour, fitness and density is scarce, but growing. Here, we reviewed information on such impacts and on a number of mechanisms that may explain its propagation, taking into account the full range of resources required by the large and diverse number of species of these two important functional groups. We show that while there is substantial evidence on the effects of soil nitrogen enrichment and changes in soil water content on the quality and quantity of floral and fruit resources, little is known on the effects of changes of other soil properties (e.g. soil pH, soil structure, other nutrients). Also, the few studies showing correlations between soil changes and pollinator and seed disperser foraging behaviour or fitness do not clearly identify the mechanisms that explain such correlation. Finally, most studies (including those with nitrogen and water) are local and limited to a small number of species, and it remains unclear how variable such effects are across time and geographical regions, and the strength of interactive effects between soil properties. Increasing research on this topic, taking into consideration how impacts propagate through species interaction networks, will provide essential information to predict impacts of ongoing environmental changes and help guide conservation plans that aim to minimize impacts on ecosystem functioning. This article is part of the theme issue 'The role of soils in delivering Nature's Contributions to People'.

Impacts of neonicotinoid seed treatments on the wild bee community in agricultural field margins

Wild bees support global agroecosystems via pollination of agricultural crops and maintaining diverse plant communities. However, with an increased reliance on pesticides to enhance crop production, wild bee communities may inadvertently be affected through exposure to chemical residues. Laboratory and semi-field studies have demonstrated lethal and sublethal effects of neonicotinoids on limited genera (e.g., Apis, Bombus, Megachile), yet full field studies evaluating impacts to wild bee communities remain limited. Here, we conducted a two-year field study to assess whether neonicotinoid seed treatment and presence in environmental media (e.g., soil, flowers) influenced bee nest and diet guild abundance and richness. In 2017 and 2018, we planted 23 Missouri agricultural fields to soybeans (Glycine max) using one of three seed treatments: untreated (no insecticide), treated (imidacloprid), or previously-treated (untreated, but neonicotinoid use prior to 2017). During both years, wild bees were collected in study field margins monthly (May to September) in tandem with soil and flowers from fields and field margins that were analyzed for neonicotinoid residues. Insecticide presence in soils and flowers varied over the study with neonicotinoids infrequently detected in both years within margin flowers (0%), soybean flowers (<1%), margin soils (<8%), and field soils (~39%). Wild bee abundance and species richness were not significantly different among field treatments. In contrast, neonicotinoid presence in field soils was associated with significantly lower richness (ground- and aboveground-nesting, diet generalists) of wild bee guilds. Our findings support that soil remains an underexplored route of exposure and long-term persistence of neonicotinoids in field soils may lead to reduced diversity in regional bee communities. Future reduction or elimination of neonicotinoid seed treatment use on areas managed for wildlife may facilitate conservation goals to sustain viable, diverse wild bee populations.

Field-realistic neonicotinoid exposure has sub-lethal effects on non-Apis bees: A meta-analysis

Neonicotinoid insecticides can have sub-lethal effects on bees which has led to calls from conservationists for a global ban. In contrast, agrochemical companies argue that neonicotinoids do not harm honeybees at field-realistic levels. However, the focus on honeybees neglects the potential impact on other bee species. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess whether field-realistic neonicotinoid exposure has sub-lethal effects on non-Apis bees. We extracted data from 53 papers (212 effects sizes) and found that it largely consisted of two genera: bumblebees (Bombus) and mason bees (Osmia), highlighting a substantial taxonomic knowledge gap. Neonicotinoid exposure negatively affected reproductive output across all bees and impaired bumblebee colony growth and foraging. Neonicotinoids also reduced Bombus, but not Osmia, individual development (growth and body size). Our results suggest that restrictions on neonicotinoids should benefit bee populations and highlight that the current regulatory process does not safeguard pollinators from the unwanted consequences of insecticide use.

The use of the Hazard Quotient approach to assess the potential risk to honeybees (Apis mellifera) posed by pesticide residues detected in bee-relevant matrices is not appropriate

BACKGROUND

Pesticide residue data for pollen and nectar are valuable for characterizing realistic exposure of pollinators, e.g. from agricultural crops, flowering margins. Interpretation of residues relies on comparing exposure with toxicity and the Hazard Quotient (HQ) is widely utilized. However, the HQ (threshold of concern 50) was only validated for foliar sprays, based on application rate as a proxy for exposure, not measured residues in bee-relevant matrices.

RESULTS

A review of the literature showed a range of HQ approaches and thresholds of concern used to assess non-foliar applications and residues detected in bee-relevant matrices, mostly pollen. The use of the HQ thresholds to assess risks associated with residue data or non-foliar spray application methods is not validated, does not reflect realistic exposure and the conclusions reached differ substantially from current risk assessment approaches. Re-evaluation of residue data from the first published use of the concentration-based HQ (2013) and a recent paper (2021) reduced the proportion of pesticides where a conclusion of potential risk was reached from 30 to 7% and 28% to 3-6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of the applicability of the selected risk assessment approach to the available residue data is needed to enable robust conclusions to be drawn on the potential risk to bees. Use of the HQ approach to assess the risk posed by application methods other than foliar sprays or residues in nectar and pollen is likely to result in unreliable conclusions. An alternative approach should be used to assess the significance of measured residues.

Assessment of the Vulnerability to Pesticide Exposures Across Bee Species

In many countries, the western honey bee is used as surrogate in pesticide risk assessments for bees. However, uncertainty remains in the estimation of pesticide risk to non-Apis bees because their potential routes of exposure to pesticides, life histories, and ecologies differ from those of honey bees. We applied the vulnerability concept in pesticide risk assessment to 10 bee species including the honey bee, 2 bumble bee species, and 7 solitary bee species with different nesting strategies. Trait-based vulnerability considers the evaluation of a species at the level of both the organism (exposure and effect) and the population (recovery), which goes beyond the sensitivity of individuals to a toxicant assessed in standard laboratory toxicity studies by including effects on populations in the field. Based on expert judgment, each trait was classified by its relationship to the vulnerability to pesticide exposure, effects (intrinsic sensitivity), and population recovery. The results suggested that the non-Apis bees included in our approach are potentially more vulnerable to pesticides than the honey bee due to traits governing exposure and population recovery potential. Our analysis highlights many uncertainties related to the interaction between bee ecology and the potential exposures and population-level effects of pesticides, emphasizing the need for more research to identify suitable surrogate species for higher tier bee risk assessments. Environ Toxicol Chem 2021;40:2640-2651. © 2021 SETAC.

Hoary Squash Bees (Eucera pruinosa: Hymenoptera: Apidae) Provide Abundant and Reliable Pollination Services to Cucurbita Crops in Ontario (Canada)

The increasing demand for insect-pollinated crops highlights the need for crop pollination paradigms that include all available pollinators. In North America, Cucurbita crops (pumpkin, squash) depend on both wild (solitary and Bombus spp.: Hymenoptera: Apidae) and managed honey bees (Apis mellifera L. 1758: Hymenoptera: Apidae) for pollination. Temporal and spatial differences in abundance may determine which bee taxa are the most important pollinators of Cucurbita crops. We surveyed bees visiting Cucurbita crop flowers on 19 farms over four years (2015-2018) during the crop flowering period (July 1-August 30 from 06:00-12:00). All the farms surveyed had hoary squash bees (Eucera pruinosa (Say, 1867), and most also had some combination of honey bees, bumble bees (Bombus spp.), or other wild bees present on their Cucurbita crop flowers. All four bee taxa were present on about two-thirds of farms. Spatially and temporally, wild bees were more abundant on Cucurbita crop flowers than managed honey bees. Hoary squash bees were the most abundant wild bees, maintaining their abundance relative to other wild bee taxa year-over-year. Male hoary squash bees were both more frequently and consistently seen visiting crop flowers than females in all years. Peak activity of hoary squash bees and bumble bees coincided with the daily crop pollination window, whereas peak activity of honey bees and other wild bees occurred after that window. In addition to elucidating the ecological interactions among wild and managed pollinators on Cucurbita crops, our work provides a novel practical way to evaluate pollinator abundance using a crop-centered benchmark framework.

Socioecological Factors and Farmer Perceptions Impacting Pesticide Use and Pollinator Conservation on Cucurbit Farms

While research suggests that pollinator decline is linked with agricultural practices, it is unclear whether farmers share this view and adapt management to promote pollinators based on their understanding of these threats. To address these issues, we surveyed farmers of pollinator-dependent cucurbit crops across four states in the Midwest, USA. We grouped farmers by their perceptions of pollinator declines and routes of pesticide exposure and used statistical models to evaluate if farmers manage pests and pollinators based on these perceptions. Out of 93 completed surveys, 39% of farmers believed pollinators were in decline. When grouped, 17% of farmers were classified as proponents, ranking (on a 1–5 Likert scale) the factors mediating pesticide exposure and pollinator declines as important or highly important. For comparison, 44 and 39% of farmers were classified as neutral or skeptical, respectively, of these same factors. Compared to the neutral and skeptic groups, proponents were on average younger, had fewer years farming but more years in family farming, and were more dependent on income from outside the farming system. Proponents also on average reported smaller farms, higher pest richness, more land in cucurbit production, and greater richness of crops that are not pollinator dependent, when compared to the neutrals and skeptics. We did not find pest and pollinator management to be related to farmer perceptions of pollinator decline or routes of pesticide exposure, but farmers classified as pollinator “proponents” were more likely to indicate participation in future pollinator habitat restoration programs. Rather, management strategies were better explained by on-farm environmental conditions (e.g., pest richness, farm size, number of pollinator dependent crops) and economic factors (e.g., sources of income). Generally, our research shows that farmers who perceive pollinator threats may not be using pollinator supportive practices. Thus, while some farmers believe in pollinator declines, there remains a need to connect this knowledge with on-farm practices.

Supplemental forage ameliorates the negative impact of insecticides on bumblebees in a pollinator-dependent crop

Insecticide use and insufficient forage are two of the leading stressors to pollinators in agroecosystems. While these factors have been well studied individually, the experimental designs do not reflect real-world conditions where insecticide exposure and lack of forage occur simultaneously and could interactively suppress pollinator health. Using outdoor enclosures, we tested the effects of insecticides (imidacloprid + lambda-cyhalothrin) and non-crop forage (clover) in a factorial design, measuring the survival, behaviour and performance of bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), as well as pollination of the focal crop, watermelon. Colony survival was synergistically reduced to 17% in watermelon alone + insecticides (survival was 100% in all other treatments). However, behavioural shifts in foraging were mainly owing to insecticides (e.g. 95% reduced visitation rate to watermelon flowers), while impacts on hive performance were primarily driven by clover presence (e.g. 374% increase in the number of live eggs). Insecticide-mediated reductions in foraging decreased crop pollination (fruit set) by 32%. Altogether, these data indicate that both insecticides and non-crop forage play integral roles in shaping pollinator health in agricultural landscapes, but the relative importance and interaction of these two factors depend on which aspect of ‘health’ is being considered.

Monitoring of Neonicotinoid Pesticides in Water-Soil Systems Along the Agro-Landscapes of the Cauvery Delta Region, South India

The prophylactic use of neonicotinoids in paddy fields has raised concern due to its toxicity to ecological systems and human health. The present study evaluated the concentrations of neonicotinoids such as clothianidin, imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, acetamiprid, and thiacloprid in the water-soil systems of the paddy fields, and their potential discharge into the groundwater along the Cauvery delta region, South India. Though neonicotinoids are extensively sprayed in the paddy fields, the concentration of residues analyzed by QuEChERS, combined with LC-MS/MS found no detectable residues at concentrations above LOD. The LOD and the LOQ values for water and soil were 0.001 ppm and 0.0025 ppm and 0.025 ppm and 0.05 ppm respectively. The results of the study found that neonicotinoids are less persistent in the water-soil systems of the delta region as they are readily exposed to photolysis and undergo rapid microbial degradation. Further, the hydropedological characteristics of the highly saturated delta soil facilitate ready leaching followed by vertical migration and infiltration into the soil aquifers.

A systematic scoping review of the methodological approaches and effects of pesticide exposure on solitary bees

BACKGROUND

Pollination services provided by solitary bees, the largest group of bees worldwide, are critical to the vitality of ecosystems and agricultural systems alike. Disconcertingly, bee populations are in decline, and while no single causative factor has been identified, pesticides are believed to play a role in downward population trends. The effects of pesticides on solitary bee species have not been previously systematically cataloged and reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic scoping review examines available evidence for effects of pesticide exposure on solitary bees to identify data gaps and priority research needs.

METHODS

A systematic literature search strategy was developed to identify and document reports on solitary bee pesticide exposure-effects investigations. Literature was subsequently screened for relevance using a Population, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes (PECO) statement and organized into a systematic evidence map. Investigations were organized by effect category (lethal effects on immatures, lethal effects on adults, sublethal effects on immatures, and sublethal effects on adults), species, pesticide class, and publication year.

RESULTS

A comprehensive literature search of Web of Science and ProQuest Agricultural & Environmental Science supplemented by targeted internet searching and reference mining yielded 176 reports and publications for title and abstract screening and 65 that met PECO criteria (22 included lethal and 43 included sublethal effects endpoints). Relevant design details (pesticide, test compound configuration, study type, species, sex, exposure duration) were extracted into literature inventory tables to reveal the extent endpoints have been investigated and areas in need of additional research.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence mapping revealed diversity in the pesticides and endpoints studied across the database. However, dilution across bee species, lack of complementary laboratory work and paucity of replicated investigations complicate efforts to interpret and apply available data to support pesticide risk assessment.

Landscape Enhancements in Apple Orchards: Higher Bumble Bee Queen Species Richness, but No Effect on Apple Quality

Simple Summary

Pollinators are essential to produce fruits in apple production. Bumble bees are among the most effective pollinators in orchards during the blooming season, yet they are often threatened by the high levels of pesticide use in apple production. Hedgerows and flower strips are infrequently sprayed by pesticides and are thus potentially good shelter for bumble bees. This study evaluated the influence of landscaping in the form of hedgerows and flower strips on the abundance and number of bumble bee species found in apple orchards. The number of bumble bee species found in orchards with hedgerows or flower strips was higher than in orchards without such landscape enhancements. Similarly, three species were more abundant in orchards with landscaping than orchards without those enhancements. Our work provides additional evidence that landscaping in the form of hedgerows and/or flower strips improves bumble bee presence in apple orchards and should therefore be considered as a means to enhance and ensure pollination within farms.

Abstract

Bumble bees are among the most effective pollinators in orchards during the blooming period, yet they are often threatened by the high levels of pesticide use in apple production. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of landscape enhancements (e.g., hedgerows, flower strips) on bumble bee queens in apple orchards. Bumble bee queens from 12 orchards in southern Québec (Canada) were marked, released, and recaptured in the springs and falls of 2017 to 2019. Half of the 12 orchards had landscape enhancements. Apples were harvested in 2018 and 2019 to compare their quality (weight, diameter, sugar level, and seed number) in sites with and without landscape enhancements. Species richness, as well as the occurrence of three species out of eight, was higher in orchards with landscape enhancements than in orchards without such structures. The occurrence of Bombus ternarius was lower in orchards with high levels of pesticide use. Apples had fewer seeds when collected in orchards with landscape enhancements and were heavier in orchards that used more pesticides. Our work provides additional evidence that landscape enhancements improve bumble bee presence in apple orchards and should therefore be considered as a means to enhance pollination within farms.

Toxicity of the insecticide sulfoxaflor alone and in combination with the fungicide fluxapyroxad in three bee species

The sulfoximine insecticide sulfoxaflor is regarded as a potential substitute for neonicotinoids that were recently banned in the EU due to their side effects on bees. Like neonicotinoids, sulfoxaflor acts as a competitive modulator of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. In agricultural environments, bees are commonly exposed to combinations of pesticides, and neonicotinoids are known to interact synergistically with fungicides. The objective of our study is to assess the acute oral toxicity of sulfoxaflor alone and in combination with a single dose of fluxapyroxad, a succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide, in three bee species: Apis mellifera, Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis. Because synergism may be dose-dependent, we tested a range of sulfoxaflor doses. Synergistic effects were assessed using three different approaches: Bliss criterion of drugs independence, ratio test comparing LD50s and model deviation ratio. Osmia bicornis was the most sensitive species to sulfoxaflor and both O. bicornis and A. mellifera showed significant synergism between the insecticide and the fungicide. For the most part, these synergistic effects were weak and only occurred at early assessment times and intermediate sulfoxaflor doses. The potential ecological relevance of these effects should be confirmed in field and/or cage studies. Overall, our laboratory results demonstrate that sulfoxaflor is somewhat less toxic than the recently banned neonicotinoids imidacloprid, thiamethoxam and clothianidin, but much more toxic than other neonicotinoids (acetamiprid, thiacloprid) still in use in the EU at the time this study was conducted.

Population decline in a ground-nesting solitary squash bee (Eucera pruinosa) following exposure to a neonicotinoid insecticide treated crop (Cucurbita pepo)

Insect pollinators are threatened by multiple environmental stressors, including pesticide exposure. Despite being important pollinators, solitary ground-nesting bees are inadequately represented by pesticide risk assessments reliant almost exclusively on honeybee ecotoxicology. Here we evaluate the effects of realistic exposure via squash crops treated with systemic insecticides (Admire-imidacloprid soil application, FarMore FI400-thiamethoxam seed-coating, or Coragen-chlorantraniliprole foliar spray) for a ground-nesting bee species (Hoary squash bee, Eucera pruinosa) in a 3-year semi-field experiment. Hoary squash bees provide essential pollination services to pumpkin and squash crops and commonly nest within cropping areas increasing their risk of pesticide exposure from soil, nectar, and pollen. When exposed to a crop treated at planting with soil-applied imidacloprid, these bees initiated 85% fewer nests, left 5.3 times more pollen unharvested, and produced 89% fewer offspring than untreated controls. No measurable impacts on bees from exposure to squash treated with thiamethoxam as a seed-coating or foliage sprayed with chlorantraniliprole were found. Our results demonstrate important sublethal effects of field-realistic exposure to a soil-applied neonicotinoid (imidacloprid) on bee behaviour and reproductive success. Soil must be considered a potential route of pesticide exposure in risk assessments, and restrictions on soil-applied insecticides may be justified, to mitigate impacts on ground-nesting solitary bee populations and the crop pollination services they provide.

Effects of early-life exposure to sublethal levels of a common neonicotinoid insecticide on the orientation and migration of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus)

Migratory insects use a variety of innate mechanisms to determine their orientation and maintain correct bearing. For long-distance migrants, such as the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus), these journeys could be affected by exposure to environmental contaminants. Neonicotinoids are synthetic insecticides that work by affecting the nervous system of insects, resulting in impairment of their mobility, cognitive performance, and other physiological and behavioural functions. To examine how neonicotinoids might affect the ability of monarch butterflies to maintain a proper directional orientation on their ∼4000 km migration, we grew swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata) in soil that was either untreated (0 ng g-1: control) or mixed with low (15 ng g-1 of soil) or high (25 ng g-1 of soil) levels of the neonicotinoid clothianidin. Monarch caterpillars were raised on control or clothianidin-treated milkweed and, after pupation, either tested for orientation in a static flight simulator or radio-tracked in the wild during the autumn migration period. Despite clothianidin being detectable in milkweed tissue consumed by caterpillars, there was no evidence that clothianidin influenced the orientation, vector strength (i.e. concentration of direction data around the mean) or rate of travel of adult butterflies, nor was there evidence that morphological traits (i.e. mass and forewing length), testing time, wind speed or temperature impacted directionality. Although sample sizes for both flight simulator and radio-tracking tests were limited, our preliminary results suggest that clothianidin exposure during early caterpillar development does not affect the directed flight of adult migratory monarch butterflies or influence their orientation at the beginning of migration.

Acute contact with imidacloprid in soil affects the nesting and survival success of a solitary wild bee, Osmia lignaria (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae)

We assessed impacts of direct acute contact with imidacloprid-treated soil on nesting behavior and mortality of the blue orchard mason bee (Osmia lignaria Say), which is a native solitary cavity-nesting species that collects mud for nest partitions. Laboratory-reared O. lignaria females were exposed to three concentrations of imidacloprid (0, 50, 390 and 780 ppb), in wet (30% moisture) soil for 20 min and released in large flight cages, where impacts on nesting activity and nest cell production were evaluated. Mortality was tested in another experiment using exposure at the same concentrations with two differing soil moisture levels (20% and 40%). Nesting activity was reduced by 42% for females exposed at 390 ppb and by 66% for females exposed at 780 ppb. Females treated at 780 ppb produced 40% fewer nest cells per day. Sex ratios of F1 generation were skewed toward male in the 50 ppb treatment group with 50% fewer females. The number of cells and pre-pupae per nest, as well as the weight of pre-pupal cocoons did not vary among exposure levels. There were no mortality effects at 20% soil moisture for any level of imidacloprid, but at 40%, mortality of females was >50% at all levels of imidacloprid. These results suggest that acute exposure to imidacloprid residue in soil can have negative impacts on soil-interacting bees, and the effects may be relative to the degree of soil moisture.

Nanoselenium foliar application enhances biosynthesis of tea leaves in metabolic cycles and associated responsive pathways

An emerging stress of pesticides in plant and soil is closely watched as it affects crop antioxidant systems, nutritional quality, and flavor. Although selenium (Se) can enhance the resistance of plants, the protective mechanism of nanoselenium is still not known under the long-term pesticide stress in tea trees. In this study, we investigated the potential effects of foliar application of nanoselenium for a two-year field experiment on tea plants under pesticide-induced oxidative stress. Compared to control, nano-Se (10 mg/L) markedly enhanced the protein, soluble sugar, carotenoid, tea polyphenols, and catechins contents. High levels of theanine, glutamic acid, proline, and arginine were found to be induced most likely by adjusting the GS-GOGAT cycle. Se-supplementation may promote tea leaves' secondary metabolism, thus increasing the accumulation of total phenols and flavonoids (apigenin, kaempferol, quercetin, myricetin, and rutin). It also minimized the accumulation of malondialdehyde, hydrogen peroxide, and superoxide anion by activating the antioxidants enzymes including in the AsA-GSH cycle. Selenium-rich tea also showed better fragrance and flavor. In summary, nano-Se can ameliorate the nutrients quality and abiotic stresses resistance of crops.

Phenological synchrony between the hoary squash bee (Eucera pruinosa) and cultivated acorn squash (Cucurbita pepo) flowering is imperfect at a northern site

The phenology of crop flowering and pollinator reproduction can become asynchronous at the edge of their respective ranges. At a northern site in Peterborough County, Ontario, we evaluated offspring emergence of Cucurbita pollen specialist hoary squash bees (Eucera pruinosa) from nests in enclosures to determine their phenological synchrony with a squash crop (Cucurbita pepo). For the crop, we evaluated the percentage of bees that emerged in time to provide pollination services during the crop pollination window. For the bees, we compared the period when both male and females were present and could mate to the whole crop flowering period. We found that fewer than half the bees had emerged by the time the crop pollination window closed and only 34.1% of the flowering period of the crop could support the reproductive activities of the bees, suggesting that phenological synchrony was imperfect from the perspective of both the crop and the pollinator at this northern site.

Pollination Is Sufficient, Even with Low Bee Diversity, in Pumpkin and Winter Squash Fields

Pumpkins and winter squash require insect pollination to set fruit, but only three bee species are important pollinators of these crops in the Northeastern US. To determine if natural levels of pollen deposition are sufficient for full fruit production, open pollination was measured by counting pollen grains on stigmas, and open pollination was compared to supplemental hand pollination for fruit set, fruit size, and seed number. A threshold of 2300 pollen grains per stigma was sufficient for full pollination and fruit production. This threshold was met in 79 out of 80 combinations of site and sample date over four years on farms across Connecticut with a wide range of field sizes and pest management practices. Along with stigma collection, bees per flower were counted hourly on 100 flowers along a transect. Counts of bumble bees on female flowers were more closely related to the amount of pollen deposited than counts of bees on all flowers or counts of honey bees or squash bees on female flowers. There was tremendous variation in abundance of the three bee species on female flowers across farms within a year and even among years on a single farm.

Neonicotinoid-induced mortality risk for bees foraging on oilseed rape nectar persists despite EU moratorium

The implication of neonicotinoids in bee declines led in 2013 to an EU moratorium on three neonicotinoids in bee-attractive crops. However, neonicotinoids are frequently detected in wild flowers or untreated crops suggesting that neonicotinoids applied to cereals can spread into the environment and harm bees. Therefore, we quantified neonicotinoid residues in nectar from winter-sown oilseed rape in western France collected within the five years under the EU moratorium. We detected all three restricted neonicotinoids. Imidacloprid was detected in all years with no clear declining trend but a strong inter- and intra-annual variation and maximum concentrations exceeding reported concentrations in treated crops. No relation to non-organic winter-sown cereals was identified even though these were the only crops treated with imidacloprid, but residue levels depended on soil type and increased with rainfall. Simulating acute and chronic mortality suggests a considerable risk for nectar foraging bees. We conclude that persistent imidacloprid soil residues diffuse on a large scale in the environment and substantially contaminate a major mass-flowering crop. Despite the limitations of case-studies and risk simulations, our findings provide additional support to the recent extension of the moratorium to a permanent ban in all outdoor crops.