Pollen Treated with a Combination of Agrochemicals Commonly Applied During Almond Bloom Reduces the Emergence Rate and Longevity of Honey Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Queens

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.

Trisiloxane Surfactants Negatively Affect Reproductive Behaviors and Enhance Viral Replication in Honey Bees

Trisiloxane surfactants are often applied in formulated adjuvant products to blooming crops, including almonds, exposing the managed honey bees (Apis mellifera) used for pollination of these crops and persisting in colony matrices, such as bee bread. Despite this, little is known regarding the effects of trisiloxane surfactants on important aspects of colony health, such as reproduction. In the present study, we use laboratory assays to examine how exposure to field-relevant concentrations of three trisiloxane surfactants found in commonly used adjuvant formulations affect queen oviposition rates, worker interactions with the queen, and worker susceptibility to endogenous viral pathogens. Trisiloxane surfactants were administered at 5 mg/kg in pollen supplement diet for 14 days. No effects on worker behavior or physiology could be detected, but our results demonstrate that hydroxy-capped trisiloxane surfactants can negatively affect queen oviposition and methyl-capped trisiloxane surfactants cause increased replication of Deformed Wing Virus in workers, suggesting that trisiloxane surfactant use while honey bees are foraging may negatively impact colony longevity and growth. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;43:222-233. © 2023 SETAC. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Re-using food resources from failed honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies and their impact on colony queen rearing capacity

For over a decade, beekeepers have experienced high losses of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies due to a variety of stressors including pesticide exposure. Some of these chemical stressors may residually remain in the colony comb and food resources (pollen and nectar) of failed colonies and be later re-used by beekeepers when splitting and building back new colonies. The practice of re-using comb from previously perished colonies (termed "deadout") is common in beekeeping practice, but its role in affecting colony health is not well understood. Here, we evaluate the impact of reused, pesticide-contaminated "deadout" combs on colony function during the process of replacing a queen bee. Queenless microcolonies were established to monitor queen rearing capacity in two treatment groups: (1) colonies given frames containing food resources from deadout colonies in control "clean" apiaries and, (2) colonies given frames containing "contaminated" resources from deadout colonies originating from apiaries experiencing chronic pesticide exposure from widespread systemic pesticide pollution (including neonicotinoid insecticides: clothianidin and thiamethoxam). Results indicate that colonies given pesticide-contaminated resources produced fewer queen cells per colony and had a lower proportion of colonies successfully raising a functional, diploid egg-laying queen. This research highlights the deleterious effects of re-using deadout combs from colonies previously lost due to pesticide contamination.

Contamination of Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) Royal Jelly by Pesticides and Sample Preparation Methods for Its Determination: A Critical Appraisal

Pesticides can easily enter the food chain, harming bee populations and ecosystems. Exposure of beehive products to various contaminants has been identified as one of the factors contributing to the decline in bee populations, and multiple food alerts have been reported. Despite this fact, royal jelly, a valuable bee product with nutritional and functional properties, has received less attention in this context. Pesticide residues of different chemical class can contaminate royal jelly when foraging bees collect pollen or nectar from pesticide-treated flowers, or in some cases, due to its frequent and inappropriate use in the treatment of mites in beehives. To monitor this issue and also make it more reliable, it is crucial to develop effective sample preparation methods for extracting pesticides from royal jelly for subsequent analysis. In this context, this review provides information about sample preparation methods (solid-phase extraction, solvent extraction, and QuEChERS-quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe) and analytical methods that have been validated or improved to extract and analyze pesticides, respectively, in royal jelly samples of different origins. Finally, future perspectives are discussed. With this background, we aim to provide data that can guide future research related to this topic.

Effects of pesticide-adjuvant combinations used in almond orchards on olfactory responses to social signals in honey bees (Apis mellifera)

Exposure to agrochemical sprays containing pesticides and tank-mix adjuvants has been implicated in post-bloom mortality, particularly of brood, in honey bee colonies brought into California almond orchards for pollination. Although adjuvants are generally considered to be biologically inert, some adjuvants have exhibited toxicity and sublethal effects, including decreasing survival rates of next-generation queens. Honey bees have a highly developed olfactory system to detect and discriminate among social signals. To investigate the impact of pesticide-adjuvant combinations on honey bee signal perception, we performed electroantennography assays to assess alterations in their olfactory responsiveness to the brood ester pheromone (BEP), the volatile larval pheromone β-ocimene, and the alarm pheromone 2-heptanone. These assays aimed to uncover potential mechanisms underlying changes in social behaviors and reduced brood survival after pesticide exposure. We found that combining the adjuvant Dyne-Amic with the fungicide Tilt (propiconazole) and the insecticide Altacor (chlorantraniliprole) synergistically enhanced olfactory responses to three concentrations of BEP and as well exerted dampening and compensatory effects on responses to 2-heptanone and β-ocimene, respectively. In contrast, exposure to adjuvant alone or the combination of fungicide and insecticide had no effect on olfactory responses to BEP at most concentrations but altered responses to β-ocimene and 2-heptanone. Exposure to Dyne-Amic, Altacor, and Tilt increased BEP signal amplitude, indicating potential changes in olfactory receptor sensitivity or sensilla permeability to odorants. Given that, in a previous study, next-generation queens raised by nurses exposed to the same treated pollen experienced reduced survival, these new findings highlight the potential disruption of social signaling in honey bees and its implications for colony reproductive success.

A selected organosilicone spray adjuvant does not enhance lethal effects of a pyrethroid and carbamate insecticide on honey bees

As part of the agricultural landscape, non-target organisms, such as bees, may be exposed to a cocktail of agrochemicals including insecticides and spray adjuvants like organosilicone surfactants (OSS). While the risks of insecticides are evaluated extensively in their approval process, in most parts of the world however, authorization of adjuvants is performed without prior examination of the effects on bees. Nevertheless, recent laboratory studies evidence that adjuvants can have a toxicity increasing effect when mixed with insecticides. Therefore, this semi-field study aims to test whether an OSS mixed with insecticides can influence the insecticidal activity causing increased effects on bees and bee colonies under more realistic exposure conditions. To answer this question a pyrethroid (Karate Zeon) and a carbamate (Pirimor Granulat) were applied in a highly bee attractive crop (oil seed rape) during bee flight either alone or mixed with the OSS Break-Thru S 301 at field realistic application rates. The following parameters were assessed: mortality, flower visitation, population and brood development of full-sized bee colonies. Our results show that none of the above mentioned parameters was significantly affected by the insecticides alone or their combination with the adjuvant, except for a reduced flower visitation rate in both carbamate treatments (Tukey-HSD, p < 0.05). This indicates that the OSS did not increase mortality to a biologically relevant extent or any of the parameters observed on honey bees and colonies in this trial. Hence, social buffering may have played a crucial role in increasing thresholds for such environmental stressors. We confirm that the results of laboratory studies on individual bees cannot necessarily be extrapolated to the colony level and further trials with additional combinations are required for a well-founded evaluation of these substances.

Toxic evaluation of Proclaim Fit® on adult and larval worker honey bees

Impacts to honey bees due to exposure to agricultural pesticides is one of the most serious threats to the beekeeping industry. Our research evaluated toxicity of the formulated insecticides Lufenuron+Emamectin benzoate (Proclaim Fit^®) on the European honey bee Apis mellifera L. at field-realistic concentration (worst-case scenario). Newly emerged (≤24-h old) and forager (unknown age) worker bees were treated with the field recommended concentration of Proclaim Fit^® using three routes of exposure including residual contact, oral, and spray within the laboratory. We also assessed the effects of Proclaim Fit^® on the specific activity of some well-known detoxifying enzymes including α-esterase, β-esterase, and Glutathione S-transferase (GST) in the honey bees. In addition, toxicity of the formulation was tested on 4^th instar larvae within the hive. Based on estimated median survival times (MSTs), Proclaim Fit^® was highly toxic to the bees, especially when applied as spray. According to our estimated relative median potency (RMP) values, newly emerged bees were 1.72× more susceptible than foragers to Proclaim Fit^® applied orally. Enzyme assays revealed the considerable involvement of the enzymes, especially GST and α-esterase, in detoxification of the Proclaim Fit^®, but their activities were significantly influenced by route of exposure and age of bee. Notably, Proclaim Fit^® was highly toxic to 4^th instar honey bee larvae. Our results generally indicate a potent toxicity of Proclaim Fit^® toward honey bees. Therefore, its application requires serious consideration and adherence to strict guidelines, especially during the flowering time of crops.

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

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

'Inert' ingredients are understudied, potentially dangerous to bees and deserve more research attention

Agrochemical formulations are composed of two broad groups of chemicals: active ingredients, which confer pest control action, and 'inert' ingredients, which facilitate the action of the active ingredient. Most research into the effects of agrochemicals focusses on the effects of active ingredients. This reflects the assumption that 'inert' ingredients are non-toxic. A review of relevant research shows that for bees, this assumption is without empirical foundation. After conducting a systematic literature search, we found just 19 studies that tested the effects of 'inert' ingredients on bee health. In these studies, 'inert' ingredients were found to cause mortality in bees through multiple exposure routes, act synergistically with other stressors and cause colony level effects. This lack of research is compounded by a lack of diversity in study organism used. We argue that 'inert' ingredients have distinct, and poorly understood, ecological persistency profiles and toxicities, making research into their individual effects necessary. We highlight the lack of mitigation in place to protect bees from 'inert' ingredients and argue that research efforts should be redistributed to address the knowledge gap identified here. If so-called 'inert' ingredients are, in fact, detrimental to bee health, their potential role in widespread bee declines needs urgent assessment.