Authors response on Schick et al. 2017 "An experiment of the impact of a neonicotinoid pesticide on honey bees; the value of a formal analysis of the data". Environ Sci Eur (2017)

Thiamethoxam: Long-term effects following honey bee colony-level exposure and implications for risk assessment

Neonicotinoid insecticides have been used in a wide range of crops through seed treatment, soil and foliar applications and a large database exists on both their lethal and sub-lethal effects on honey bees under controlled laboratory conditions. However, colony-level studies on the effects of neonicotinoids in field studies are limited, primarily due to their complexity and the resources required. This paper reports the combined results of two large-scale colony-feeding studies, each with 6 weeks of continuous dosing of 12 colonies per treatment (24 control) to 12.5, 25, 37.5, 50 or 100 ng thiamethoxam/g sucrose solution. Exposure continued beyond dosing with residues present in stored nectar and bee-bread. The studies were conducted in an area with limited alternative forage and colonies were required to forage for pollen and additional nectar The studies provide colony-level endpoints: significant effects (reductions in bees, brood) were observed after exposure to the two highest dose rates, colony loss occurred at the highest dose rate, but colonies were able to recover (2-3 brood cycles after the end of dosing) after dosing with 50 ng thiamethoxam/g sucrose. No significant colony-level effects were observed at lower dose rates. The data reported here support the conclusions of previous colony-level crop-based field studies with thiamethoxam, in which residues in pollen and nectar were an order of magnitude below the colony-level NOEC of 37.5 ng thiamethoxam/g sucrose. The feeding study data are also compared to the outcomes of regulatory Tier 1 risk assessments conducted using guidance provided by the USA, Canada, Brazil and the EU regulatory authorities. We propose an adaptation of the European chronic adult bee risk assessment that takes into account the full dataset generated in laboratory studies while still providing an order of magnitude of safety compared with the colony feeding study NOEC.

Authors response on Schick et al. 2017 "An experiment of the impact of a neonicotinoid pesticide on honey bees; the value of a formal analysis of the data". Environ Sci Eur (2017)

Whilst a formal statistical analysis of any experimental data is always preferable in principle, in the case of Pilling et al. (PLoS ONE 8:e77193, 2013), it is hard to see how the results of any formal analysis-including those provided by Schick et al.-could be considered reliable. Regardless of the issue of statistical analysis, there was a wealth of valuable and novel biological and chemical residue data generated under field conditions of use in Pilling et al., which when taken into consideration alongside other relevant available published data and information (i.e. expert judgement) demonstrated a low risk to honeybees from thiamethoxam when used as a seed treatment on oilseed rape. Indeed, similar conclusions have been reported in subsequent published honeybee field studies using thiamethoxam seed-treated oilseed rape, thus supporting the original conclusions of Pilling et al.