Pesticide risk to managed bees during blueberry pollination is primarily driven by off-farm exposures

The power to (detect) change: Can honey bee collected pollen be used to monitor pesticide residues in the landscape?

Analysis of trapped honey bee pollen for pesticide residues is the most widely used method of monitoring the amount of pesticide entering colonies and its change over time. In this study, we collected and analyzed pollen from 70 sites across four bee-pollinated crops over two years to characterize the variation in pesticide detection across sites, crops and at different periods during bloom. Hazard Quotient, HQ, is the most common way that pesticide residues are aggregated into a single pesticide hazard value in the current literature. Therefore, change in pesticide hazard (HQ) was quantified in composite pollen samples collected from pollen traps and in pollen color subsamples separated into pollen from the target crop being pollinated and pollen from other plant species. We used our estimates of the variation in HQ to calculate the number of sample location sites needed to detect a 5% annual change in HQ across all crops or within specific crops over a 5-year period. The number of sites required to be sampled varied by crop and year and ranged between 139 and 7194 sites, costing an estimated $129,548 and $3.35 million, respectively. The HQ values detectable for this cost would be 575 and 154. We identified additional factors that complicate the interpretation of the results as a way to evaluate changes in pest management practices at a state level. First, in all but one crop (meadowfoam), the pollen collected from outside the crop honey bee colonies were pollinating comprised a major percentage of the total pollen catch. Moreover, we found that when the overall quantity of pollen from different pollen sources was taken into account, differences in HQ among crops widened. We also found that while HQ estimates remain consistent across the bloom period for some crops, such as cherry, we observed large differences in other crops, notably meadowfoam. Overall, our results suggest the current practice of interpreting pesticides levels in pollen may come with limitations for agencies charged with improving pesticide stewardship due to the high variation associated with HQ values over time and across crops. Despite the limitations of HQ for detecting change in pesticide hazard, there remains a potential for HQ to provide feedback to regulators and scientists on field-realistic pesticide hazard within a landscape.

Pesticide exposure patterns in honey bees during migratory pollination

Monitoring pesticide exposures in honey bees provides fundamental risk information that informs efforts to improve regulatory policy, pesticide use, and beekeeping management so pollinators are protected in realistic field conditions. We investigated pesticide exposures to bee colonies while colonies moved along commercial migratory routes in 2022 and 2023 to pollinate multiple pollinator-dependent, high-value U.S. specialty crops (e.g., almonds in California and apples and cherries in Washington). We found evident pesticide exposure patterns, including increasing exposures (both levels and number of pesticides) to fungicides during almond pollination, higher exposures to insecticides and persistent exposures to fungicides during springtime fruit pollination, and declining exposures in summer. Exposure risk assessment by risk quotient (RQ) model based on residues in bee bread indicates no concern of acute toxicity to adult honey bees during pollination, however, during colony inspections we found severe brood mortality in fields associated with high exposure to buprofezin, an insect growth regulator (IGR) thought to be safe for adult bees, which is permitted for use any time across the season. Our results suggest a need to improve compliance with insecticide label requirements during tree fruit pollination and a need for further research into the negative impacts of IGR on colony health especially on immature bees to inform potential policy changes.

Higher prevalence of sacbrood virus in Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies after pollinating highbush blueberries

Highbush blueberry pollination depends on managed honey bees (Apis mellifera) L. for adequate fruit sets; however, beekeepers have raised concerns about the poor health of colonies after pollinating this crop. Postulated causes include agrochemical exposure, nutritional deficits, and interactions with parasites and pathogens, particularly Melisococcus plutonius [(ex. White) Bailey and Collins, Lactobacillales: Enterococcaceae], the causal agent of European foulbrood disease, but other pathogens could be involved. To broadly investigate common honey bee pathogens in relation to blueberry pollination, we sampled adult honey bees from colonies at time points corresponding to before (t1), during (t2), at the end (t3), and after (t4) highbush blueberry pollination in British Columbia, Canada, across 2 years (2020 and 2021). Nine viruses, as well as M. plutonius, Vairimorpha ceranae, and V. apis [Tokarev et al., Microsporidia: Nosematidae; formerly Nosema ceranae (Fries et al.) and N. apis (Zander)], were detected by PCR and compared among colonies located near and far from blueberry fields. We found a significant interactive effect of time and blueberry proximity on the multivariate pathogen community, mainly due to differences at t4 (corresponding to ~6 wk after the beginning of the pollination period). Post hoc comparisons of pathogens in near and far groups at t4 showed that detections of sacbrood virus (SBV), which was significantly higher in the near group, not M. plutonius, was the primary driver. Further research is needed to determine if the association of SBV with highbush blueberry pollination is contributing to the health decline that beekeepers observe after pollinating this crop.

Acute toxicity of the fungicide captan to honey bees and mixed evidence for synergism with the insecticide thiamethoxam

Honey bees are commonly co-exposed to pesticides during crop pollination, including the fungicide captan and neonicotinoid insecticide thiamethoxam. We assessed the impact of exposure to these two pesticides individually and in combination, at a range of field-realistic doses. In laboratory assays, mortality of larvae treated with captan was 80-90% greater than controls, dose-independent, and similar to mortality from the lowest dose of thiamethoxam. There was evidence of synergism (i.e., a non-additive response) from captan-thiamethoxam co-exposure at the highest dose of thiamethoxam, but not at lower doses. In the field, we exposed whole colonies to the lowest doses used in the laboratory. Exposure to captan and thiamethoxam individually and in combination resulted in minimal impacts on population growth or colony mortality, and there was no evidence of synergism or antagonism. These results suggest captan and thiamethoxam are each acutely toxic to immature honey bees, but whole colonies can potentially compensate for detrimental effects, at least at the low doses used in our field trial, or that methodological differences of the field experiment impacted results (e.g., dilution of treatments with natural pollen). If compensation occurred, further work is needed to assess how it occurred, potentially via increased queen egg laying, and whether short-term compensation leads to long-term costs. Further work is also needed for other crop pollinators that lack the social detoxification capabilities of honey bee colonies and may be less resilient to pesticides.

Following Regulation, Imidacloprid Persists and Flupyradifurone Increases in Nontarget Wildlife

After regulation of pesticides, determination of their persistence in the environment is an important indicator of effectiveness of these measures. We quantified concentrations of two types of systemic insecticides, neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin, thiacloprid, and thiamethoxam) and butenolides (flupyradifurone), in off-crop nontarget media of hummingbird cloacal fluid, honey bee (Apis mellifera) nectar and honey, and wildflowers before and after regulation of imidacloprid on highbush blueberries in Canada in April 2021. We found that mean total pesticide load increased in hummingbird cloacal fluid, nectar, and flower samples following imidacloprid regulation. On average, we did not find evidence of a decrease in imidacloprid concentrations after regulation. However, there were some decreases, some increases, and other cases with no changes in imidacloprid levels depending on the specific media, time point of sampling, and site type. At the same time, we found an overall increase in flupyradifurone, acetamiprid, thiamethoxam, and thiacloprid but no change in clothianidin concentrations. In particular, flupyradifurone concentrations observed in biota sampled near agricultural areas increased twofold in honey bee nectar, sevenfold in hummingbird cloacal fluid, and eightfold in flowers after the 2021 imidacloprid regulation. The highest residue detected was flupyradifurone at 665 ng/mL (parts per billion [ppb]) in honey bee nectar. Mean total pesticide loads were highest in honey samples (84 ± 10 ppb), followed by nectar (56 ± 7 ppb), then hummingbird cloacal fluid (1.8 ± 0.5 ppb), and least, flowers (0.51 ± 0.06 ppb). Our results highlight that limited regulation of imidacloprid does not immediately reduce residue concentrations, while other systemic insecticides, possibly replacement compounds, concurrently increase in wildlife. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;43:1497-1508. © 2024 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Pesticide Contamination in Native North American Crops, Part I-Development of a Baseline and Comparison of Honey Bee Exposure to Residues in Lowbush Blueberry and Cranberry

A pesticide exposure baseline for honey bees was compiled for two New England cropping systems, the native North American plant species consisting of lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium Aiton) and cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon Aiton). More unique pesticide compounds were applied in blueberry than cranberry, but the numbers of pesticides discovered in trapped honey bee pollen were similar between the two crop systems. Not all pesticides found in pollen were the result of the applications reported by growers of either crop. When comparing residues, number of pesticides detected, total concentration, and risk quotient varied between the two crops. Also, blueberry was dominated by fungicides and miticides (varroacides) and cranberry was dominated by insecticides and herbicides. When comparing reported grower applications that were matched with detection in residues, the proportion of pesticide numbers, concentrations, and risk quotients varied by crop system and pesticide class. In most cases, pesticide residue concentrations were of low risk (low risk quotient) to honey bees in these crops. Estimation of decay rates of some of the most common pesticide residues under field conditions could aid growers in selection of less persistent compounds, together with safe application dates, prior to bringing in honey bees for pollination.

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.

Novel indices reveal that pollinator exposure to pesticides varies across biological compartments and crop surroundings

Declines in insect pollinators have been linked to a range of causative factors such as disease, loss of habitats, the quality and availability of food, and exposure to pesticides. Here, we analysed an extensive dataset generated from pesticide screening of foraging insects, pollen-nectar stores/beebread, pollen and ingested nectar across three species of bees collected at 128 European sites set in two types of crop. In this paper, we aimed to (i) derive a new index to summarise key aspects of complex pesticide exposure data and (ii) understand the links between pesticide exposures depicted by the different matrices, bee species and apple orchards versus oilseed rape crops. We found that summary indices were highly correlated with the number of pesticides detected in the related matrix but not with which pesticides were present. Matrices collected from apple orchards generally contained a higher number of pesticides (7.6 pesticides per site) than matrices from sites collected from oilseed rape crops (3.5 pesticides), with fungicides being highly represented in apple crops. A greater number of pesticides were found in pollen-nectar stores/beebread and pollen matrices compared with nectar and bee body matrices. Our results show that for a complete assessment of pollinator pesticide exposure, it is necessary to consider several different exposure routes and multiple species of bees across different agricultural systems.

Honey bee stressor networks are complex and dependent on crop and region

Honey bees play a major role in crop pollination but have experienced declining health throughout most of the globe. Despite decades of research on key honey bee stressors (e.g., parasitic Varroa destructor mites and viruses), researchers cannot fully explain or predict colony mortality, potentially because it is caused by exposure to multiple interacting stressors in the field. Understanding which honey bee stressors co-occur and have the potential to interact is therefore of profound importance. Here, we used the emerging field of systems theory to characterize the stressor networks found in honey bee colonies after they were placed in fields containing economically valuable crops across Canada. Honey bee stressor networks were often highly complex, with hundreds of potential interactions between stressors. Their placement in crops for the pollination season generally exposed colonies to more complex stressor networks, with an average of 23 stressors and 307 interactions. We discovered that the most influential stressors in a network-those that substantively impacted network architecture-are not currently addressed by beekeepers. Finally, the stressor networks showed substantial divergence among crop systems from different regions, which is consistent with the knowledge that some crops (e.g., highbush blueberry) are traditionally riskier to honey bees than others. Our approach sheds light on the stressor networks that honey bees encounter in the field and underscores the importance of considering interactions among stressors. Clearly, addressing and managing these issues will require solutions that are tailored to specific crops and regions and their associated stressor networks.

High pesticide exposure and risk to bees in pollinator plantings adjacent to conventionally managed blueberry fields

Wildflower plantings adjacent to agricultural fields provide diverse floral resources and nesting sites for wild bees. However, their proximity to pest control activities in the crop may result in pesticide exposure if pesticides drift into pollinator plantings. To quantify pesticide residues in pollinator plantings, we sampled flowers and soil from pollinator plantings and compared them to samples from unenhanced field margins and crop row middles. At conventionally managed farms, flowers from pollinator plantings had similar exposure profiles to those from unenhanced field margins or crop row middles, with multiple pesticides and high and similar risk quotient (RQ) values (with pollinator planting RQ: 3.9; without pollinator planting RQ: 4.0). Whereas samples from unsprayed sites had significantly lower risk (RQ: 0.005). Soil samples had overall low risk to bees. Additionally, we placed bumble bee colonies (Bombus impatiens) in field margins of crop fields with and without pollinator plantings and measured residues in bee-collected pollen. Pesticide exposure was similar in pollen from sites with or without pollinator plantings, and risk was generally high (with pollinator planting RQ: 0.5; without pollinator planting RQ: 1.1) and not significant between the two field types. Risk was lower at sites where there was no pesticide activity (RQ: 0.3), but again there was no significant difference between management types. The insecticide phosmet, which is used on blueberry farms for control of Drosophila suzukii, accounted for the majority of elevated risk. Additionally, analysis of pollen collected by bumble bees found no significant difference in floral species richness between sites with or without pollinator plantings. Our results suggest that pollinator plantings do not reduce pesticide risk and do not increase pollen diversity collected by B. impatiens, further highlighting the need to reduce exposure through enhanced IPM adoption, drift mitigation, and removal of attractive flowering weeds prior to insecticide applications.

Pesticide use negatively affects bumble bees across European landscapes

Sustainable agriculture requires balancing crop yields with the effects of pesticides on non-target organisms, such as bees and other crop pollinators. Field studies demonstrated that agricultural use of neonicotinoid insecticides can negatively affect wild bee species1,2, leading to restrictions on these compounds3. However, besides neonicotinoids, field-based evidence of the effects of landscape pesticide exposure on wild bees is lacking. Bees encounter many pesticides in agricultural landscapes4-9 and the effects of this landscape exposure on colony growth and development of any bee species remains unknown. Here we show that the many pesticides found in bumble bee-collected pollen are associated with reduced colony performance during crop bloom, especially in simplified landscapes with intensive agricultural practices. Our results from 316 Bombus terrestris colonies at 106 agricultural sites across eight European countries confirm that the regulatory system fails to sufficiently prevent pesticide-related impacts on non-target organisms, even for a eusocial pollinator species in which colony size may buffer against such impacts10,11. These findings support the need for postapproval monitoring of both pesticide exposure and effects to confirm that the regulatory process is sufficiently protective in limiting the collateral environmental damage of agricultural pesticide use.

Impact of landscape composition on honey bee pollen contamination by pesticides: A multi-residue analysis

The honey bee is the most common and important managed pollinator of crops. In recent years, honey bee colonies faced high mortality for multiple causes, including land-use change and the use of plant protection products (hereafter pesticides). This work aimed to explore how contamination by pesticides of pollen collected by honey bees was modulated by landscape composition and seasonality. We placed two honey bee colonies in 13 locations in Northern Italy in contrasting landscapes, from which we collected pollen samples monthly during the whole flowering season in 2019 and 2020. We searched for almost 400 compounds, including fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and acaricides. We then calculated for each pollen sample the Pollen Hazard Quotient (PHQ), an index that provides a measure of multi-residue toxicity of contaminated pollen. Almost all pollen samples were contaminated by at least one compound. We detected 97 compounds, mainly fungicides, but insecticides and acaricides showed the highest toxicity. Fifteen % of the pollen samples had medium-high or high levels of PHQ, which could pose serious threats to honey bees. Fungicides showed a nearly constant PHQ throughout the season, while herbicides and insecticides and acaricides showed higher PHQ values in spring and early summer. Also, PHQ increased with increasing cover of agricultural and urban areas from April to July, while it was low and independent of landscape composition at the end of the season. The cover of perennial crops, i.e., fruit trees and vineyards, but not of annual crops, increased PHQ of pollen samples. Our work highlighted that the potential toxicity of pollen collected by honey bees was modulated by complex interactions among pesticide category, seasonality, and landscape composition. Due to the large number of compounds detected, our study should be complemented with additional experimental research on the potential interactive effects of multiple compounds on honey bee health.

A spatially explicit model of landscape pesticide exposure to bees: Development, exploration, and evaluation

Pesticides represent one of the greatest threats to bees and other beneficial insects in agricultural landscapes. Potential exposure is generated through compound- and crop-specific patterns of pesticide use over space and time and unique degradation behavior among compounds. Realized exposure develops through bees foraging from their nests across the spatiotemporal mosaic of floral resources and associated pesticides throughout the landscape. Despite the recognized importance of a landscape-wide approach to assessing exposure, we lack a sufficiently-evaluated predictive framework to inform mitigation decisions and environmental risk assessment for bees. We address this gap by developing a bee pesticide exposure model that incorporates spatiotemporal pesticide use patterns, estimated rates of pesticide degradation, floral resource dynamics across habitats, and bee foraging movements. We parameterized the model with pesticide use data from a public database containing crop-field- and date-specific records of uses throughout our study region over an entire year. We evaluate the model performance in predicting bee pesticide exposure using a dataset of pesticide residues in pollens gathered by bumble bees (Bombus vosnesenskii) returning to colonies across 14 spatially independent landscapes in Northern California. We applied alternative model formulations of pesticide accumulation and degradation, floral resource seasonality, and bee foraging behavior to evaluate different levels of detail for predicting observed pesticide exposure. Our best model explained 73 % of observed variation in pesticide exposure of bumble bee colonies, with generally positive correlations for the dominant compounds. Timing and location of pesticide use were integral, but more detailed parameterizations of pesticide degradation, floral resources, and bee foraging improved the predictions little if at all. Our results suggest that this approach to predict bees' pesticide exposure has value in extending from the local field scale to the landscape in environmental risk assessment and for exploring mitigation options to support bees in agricultural landscapes.

Phytochemicals, Probiotics, Recombinant Proteins: Enzymatic Remedies to Pesticide Poisonings in Bees

The ongoing global decline of bees threatens biodiversity and food safety as both wild plants and crops rely on bee pollination to produce viable progeny or high-quality products in high yields. Pesticide exposure is a major driving force for the decline, yet pesticide use remains unreconciled with bee conservation since studies demonstrate that bees continue to be heavily exposed to and threatened by pesticides in crops and natural habitats. Pharmaceutical methods, including the administration of phytochemicals, probiotics (beneficial bacteria), and recombinant proteins (enzymes) with detoxification functions, show promise as potential solutions to mitigate pesticide poisonings. We discuss how these new methods can be appropriately developed and applied in agriculture from bee biology and ecotoxicology perspectives. As countless phytochemicals, probiotics, and recombinant proteins exist, this Perspective will provide suggestive guidance to accelerate the development of new techniques by directing research and resources toward promising candidates. Furthermore, we discuss practical limitations of the new methods mentioned above in realistic field applications and propose recommendations to overcome these limitations. This Perspective builds a framework to allow researchers to use new detoxification techniques more efficiently in order to mitigate the harmful impacts of pesticides on bees.

Blueberry floral probiotics: nectar microbes inhibit the growth of Colletotrichum pathogens

AIMS

To identify whether microorganisms isolated from blueberry flowers can inhibit the growth of Colletotrichum, an opportunistic plant pathogen that infects flowers and threatens yields, and to assess the impacts of floral microbes and Colletotrichum pathogens on artificial nectar sugars and honey bee consumption.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The growth inhibition of Colletotrichum (Colletotrichum acutatum, Colletotrichum fioriniae, and Colletotrichum gloeosporioides) was screened using both artificial nectar co-culture and dual culture plate assays. All candidate nectar microbes were screened for antagonism against a single C. acutatum isolate. Then, the top four candidate nectar microbes showing the strongest inhibition of C. acutatum (Neokomagataea thailandica, Neokomagataea tanensis, Metschnikowia rancensis, and Symmetrospora symmetrica) were evaluated for antagonism against three additional C. acutatum isolates, and single isolates of both C. fioriniae and C. gloeosporioides. In artificial nectar assays, single and three-species cultures inhibited the growth of two of four C. acutatum isolates by ca. 60%, but growth of other Colletotrichum species was not affected. In dual culture plate assays, inhibition was observed for all Colletotrichum species for at least three of four selected microbial antagonists (13%‒53%). Neither honey bee consumption of nectar nor nectar sugar concentrations were affected by any microbe or pathogen tested.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected floral microbes inhibited growth of all Colletotrichum species in vitro, although the degree of inhibition was specific to the assay and pathogen examined. In all microbial treatments, nectar sugars were preserved, and honey bee preference was not affected.

Global taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity of bees in apple orchards

An essential prerequisite to safeguard pollinator species is characterisation of the multifaceted diversity of crop pollinators and identification of the drivers of pollinator community changes across biogeographical gradients. The extent to which intensive agriculture is associated with the homogenisation of biological communities at large spatial scales remains poorly understood. In this study, we investigated diversity drivers for 644 bee species/morphospecies in 177 commercial apple orchards across 33 countries and four global biogeographical biomes. Our findings reveal significant taxonomic dissimilarity among biogeographical zones. Interestingly, despite this dissimilarity, species from different zones share similar higher-level phylogenetic groups and similar ecological and behavioural traits (i.e. functional traits), likely due to habitat filtering caused by perennial monoculture systems managed intensively for crop production. Honey bee species dominated orchard communities, while other managed/manageable and wild species were collected in lower numbers. Moreover, the presence of herbaceous, uncultivated open areas and organic management practices were associated with increased wild bee diversity. Overall, our study sheds light on the importance of large-scale analyses contributing to the emerging fields of functional and phylogenetic diversity, which can be related to ecosystem function to promote biodiversity as a key asset in agroecosystems in the face of global change pressures.

British Columbia beekeeping revenues and costs: survey data and profit modeling

British Columbia beekeepers, like many beekeepers around the world, are currently facing declines in honey bee health and high overwinter colony losses. To better understand the economics and the cycle of yearly colony loss and replacement of this critical agricultural industry, we collected and analyzed survey data on beekeeping costs and returns. Forty British Columbia beekeepers provided details about revenue sources, variable costs, capital costs, and investments. Ten surveyed beekeepers managed between 1 and 9 colonies, 10 managed between 10 and 39 colonies, 9 managed between 40 and 100 colonies, 5 managed between 101 and 299 colonies, 3 managed between 300 and 699 colonies, and 3 managed 700 colonies or more. The data was used to calculate beekeeping profit and to parameterize a model that explores the economic impact of colony loss rates and replacement strategies. Survey results show that when the data is aggregated, revenues exceed costs for beekeeping operations in British Columbia with a per colony profit of $56.92 or $0.87 per pound of honey produced. Surveyed operations with fewer than 100 colonies have negative profits, while operations with 100-299 colonies have positive profits. Surveyed operations in the Cariboo, North Coast, and Okanagan regions have the highest profits while surveyed operations in the Peace region have the lowest profits. Profit modeling shows that replacing losses with packages generates lower profit than replacing losses with split colonies. Our modeling shows that operations that diversify their revenue to include bee sales and commercial pollination accrue higher profits and can withstand higher winter loss rates.

Pesticide residues in nectar and pollen of melon crops: Risk to pollinators and effects of a specific pesticide mixture on Bombus terrestris (Hymenoptera: Apidae) micro-colonies

Residues detected in pollen collected by honey bees are often used to estimate pesticide exposure in ecotoxicological studies. However, for a more accurate assessment of pesticides effect on foraging pollinators, residues found directly on flowers are a more realistic exposure approximation. We conducted a multi-residue analysis of pesticides on pollen and nectar of melon flowers collected from five fields. The cumulative chronic oral exposure Risk Index (RI) was calculated for Apis mellifera, Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis to multiple pesticides. However, this index could underestimate the risk since sublethal or synergistic effects are not considered. Therefore, a mixture containing three of the most frequently detected pesticides in our study was tested for synergistic impact on B. terrestris micro-colonies through a chronic oral toxicity test. According to the result, pollen and nectar samples contained numerous pesticide residues, including nine insecticides, nine fungicides, and one herbicide. Eleven of those were not applied by farmers during the crop season, revealing that melon agroecosystems may be pesticide contaminated environments. The primary contributor to the chronic RI was imidacloprid and O. bircornis is at greatest risk for lethality resulting from chronic oral exposure at these sites. In the bumblebee micro-colony bioassay, dietary exposure to acetamiprid, chlorpyrifos and oxamyl at residue level concentration, showed no effects on worker mortality, drone production or drone size and no synergies were detected when pesticide mixtures were evaluated. In conclusion, our findings have significant implications for improving pesticide risk assessment schemes to guarantee pollinator conservation. In particular, bee pesticide risk assessment should not be limited to acute exposure effects to isolated active ingredients in honey bees. Instead, risk assessments should consider the long-term pesticide exposure effects in both pollen and nectar on a range of bees that reflect the diversity of natural ecosystems and the synergistic potential among pesticide formulations.

Ecological traits interact with landscape context to determine bees' pesticide risk

Widespread contamination of ecosystems with pesticides threatens non-target organisms. However, the extent to which life-history traits affect pesticide exposure and resulting risk in different landscape contexts remains poorly understood. We address this for bees across an agricultural land-use gradient based on pesticide assays of pollen and nectar collected by Apis mellifera, Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis, representing extensive, intermediate and limited foraging traits. We found that extensive foragers (A. mellifera) experienced the highest pesticide risk-additive toxicity-weighted concentrations. However, only intermediate (B. terrestris) and limited foragers (O. bicornis) responded to landscape context-experiencing lower pesticide risk with less agricultural land. Pesticide risk correlated among bee species and between food sources and was greatest in A. mellifera-collected pollen-useful information for future postapproval pesticide monitoring. We provide foraging trait- and landscape-dependent information on the occurrence, concentration and identity of pesticides that bees encounter to estimate pesticide risk, which is necessary for more realistic risk assessment and essential information for tracking policy goals to reduce pesticide risk.

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.

Are fungicides a driver of European foulbrood disease in honey bee colonies pollinating blueberries?

Introduction

Blueberry producers in Canada depend heavily on pollination services provided by honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Anecdotal reports indicate an increased incidence of European foulbrood (EFB), a bacterial disease caused by Melissococcus plutonius, is compromising pollination services and colony health. Fungicidal products are commonly used in blueberry production to prevent fungal diseases such as anthracnose and botrytis fruit rot. Pesticide exposure has been implicated in honey bee immunosuppression; however, the effects of commercial fungicidal products, commonly used during blueberry pollination, on honey bee larval susceptibility to EFB have not been investigated.

Methods

Using an in vitro infection model of EFB, we infected first instar honey bee larvae with M. plutonius 2019 BC1, a strain isolated from an EFB outbreak in British Columbia, Canada, and chronically exposed larvae to environmentally relevant concentrations of fungicide products over 6 days. Survival was monitored until pupation or eclosion.

Results

We found that larvae chronically exposed to one, two, or three fungicidal products [Supra® Captan 80WDG (Captan), low concentration of Kenja™ 400SC (Kenja), Luna® Tranquility (Luna), and/or Switch® 62.5 WG (Switch)], did not significantly reduce survival from EFB relative to infected controls. When larvae were exposed to four fungicide products concurrently, we observed a significant 24.2% decrease in survival from M. plutonius infection (p = 0.0038). Similarly, higher concentrations of Kenja significantly reduced larval survival by 24.7–33.0% from EFB (p < 0.0001).

Discussion

These in vitro results suggest that fungicides may contribute to larval susceptibility and response to M. plutonius infections. Further testing of other pesticide combinations is warranted as well as continued surveillance of pesticide residues in blueberry-pollinating colonies.

Honey bee foraging and pesticide exposure in a desert urban agroecosystem

The negative impacts of industrial farming on honey bee health have been widely recognized regarding pesticide use and natural foraging habitat loss. An assessment of suitability of urban farms regarding honey bee health is necessary for sustainable development of agriculture and apiculture in urban settings. Urban farms that adopt organic farming practices with restrictions on synthetic pesticide use and conservation of natural habitat can potentially create an environment to mitigate these environmental stressors on honey bees. In this experiment, bee-collected pollen was taken from honey bee colonies that were located on five organically managed urban farms located in Albuquerque, New Mexico, to evaluate pesticide exposure and forage use. We also explored the influence of hive equipment on honey bee health in a high desert climate. We found that honey bees on organic urban farms were not stressed by pesticides with limited pesticide types detected (2 out of 187), low residue levels (< 20 µg/kg) and low toxicity (either no, or low toxicity with LD50 at 1,450,300 µg/kg). Honey bees had access to diverse forage resources based on pollen barcoding data. When comparing hive equipment between 10-frame, 8-frame Langstroth and top bar hives, it was determined that 8-frame hives could significantly enhance honey bee health including colony survival and weight growth, comb construction and brood production. Our results suggest that organic urban farms are appropriate locations for securing honey bee health and food safety in a desert climate; while, the selection of hive equipment should be considered when mitigating environmental stress to colonies.