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

Combined effects of three insecticides with different modes of action on biochemical responses of the solitary bee Osmia bicornis

Bees are simultaneously exposed to a variety of pesticides, which are often applied in mixtures and can cause lethal and sublethal effects. The combined effects of pesticides, however, are not measured in the current risk assessment schemes. Additionally, the sublethal effects of pesticides on a variety of physiological processes are poorly recognized in bees, especially in non-Apis solitary bees. In this study, we used a full-factorial design to examine the main and interactive effects of three insecticide formulations with different modes of action (Mospilan 20 SP, Sherpa 100 EC, and Dursban 480 EC) on bee biochemical processes. We measured acetylcholinesterase (AChE), glutathione S-transferase (GST) and esterase (EST) activities, as well as a nonenzymatic biomarker associated with energy metabolism, i.e., ATP level. All studied endpoints were affected by Sherpa 100 EC, and the activities of AChE and EST as well as ATP levels were affected by Dursban 480 EC. Moreover, complex interactions between all three insecticides affected ATP levels, showing outcomes that cannot be predicted when testing each insecticide separately. The results indicate that even if interactive effects are sometimes difficult to interpret, there is a need to study such interactions if laboratory-generated toxicity data are to be extrapolated to field conditions.

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.

Exposure to a fungicide for a field-realistic duration does not alter bumble bee fecal microbiota structure

Social bees are frequently exposed to pesticides when foraging on nectar and pollen. Recent research has shown that pesticide exposure not only impacts social bee host health but can also alter the community structure of social bee gut microbiotas. However, most research on pesticide-bee gut microbiota interactions has been conducted in honey bees; bumble bees, native North American pollinators, have received less attention and, due to differences in their ecology, may be exposed to certain pesticides for shorter durations than honey bees. Here, we examine how exposure to the fungicide chlorothalonil for a short, field-realistic duration alters bumble bee fecal microbiotas (used as a proxy for gut microbiotas) and host performance. We expose small groups of Bombus impatiens workers (microcolonies) to field-realistic chlorothalonil concentrations for 5 days, track changes in fecal microbiotas during the exposure period and a recovery period, and compare microcolony offspring production between treatments at the end of the experiment. We also assess the use of fecal microbiotas as a gut microbiota proxy by comparing community structures of fecal and gut microbiotas. We find that chlorothalonil exposure for a short duration does not alter bumble bee fecal microbiota structure or affect microcolony production at any concentration but that fecal and gut microbiotas differ significantly in community structure. Our results show that, at least when exposure durations are brief and unaccompanied by other stressors, bumble bee microbiotas are resilient to fungicide exposure. Additionally, our work highlights the importance of sampling gut microbiotas directly, when possible.IMPORTANCEWith global pesticide use expected to increase in the coming decades, studies on how pesticides affect the health and performance of animals, including and perhaps especially pollinators, will be crucial to minimize negative environmental impacts of pesticides in agriculture. Here, we find no effect of exposure to chlorothalonil for a short, field-realistic period on bumble bee fecal microbiota community structure or microcolony production regardless of pesticide concentration. Our results can help inform pesticide use practices to minimize negative environmental impacts on the health and fitness of bumble bees, which are key native, commercial pollinators in North America. We also find that concurrently sampled bumble bee fecal and gut microbiotas contain similar microbes but differ from one another in community structure and consequently suggest that using fecal microbiotas as a proxy for gut microbiotas be done cautiously; this result contributes to our understanding of proxy use in gut microbiota research.

Fungicide ingestion reduces net energy gain and microbiome diversity of the solitary mason bee

Fungicides are frequently used during tree fruit bloom and can threaten insect pollinators. However, little is known about how non-honey bee pollinators such as the solitary bee, Osmia cornifrons, respond to contact and systemic fungicides commonly used in apple production during bloom. This knowledge gap limits regulatory decisions that determine safe concentrations and timing for fungicide spraying. We evaluated the effects of two contact fungicides (captan and mancozeb) and four translaminar/plant systemic fungicides (cyprodinil, myclobutanil, penthiopyrad, and trifloxystrobin) on larval weight gain, survival, sex ratio, and bacterial diversity. This assessment was carried out using chronic oral ingestion bioassays where pollen provisions were treated with three doses based on the currently recommended field use dose (1X), half dose (0.5X), and low dose (0.1X). Mancozeb and penthiopyrad significantly reduced larval weight and survival at all doses. We then sequenced the 16S gene to characterize the larvae bacteriome of mancozeb, the fungicide that caused the highest mortality. We found that larvae fed on mancozeb-treated pollen carried significantly lower bacterial diversity and abundance. Our laboratory results suggest that some of these fungicides can be particularly harmful to the health of O. cornifrons when sprayed during bloom. This information is relevant for future management decisions about the sustainable use of fruit tree crop protection products and informing regulatory processes that aim to protect pollinators.

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.

A cytochrome P450 insecticide detoxification mechanism is not conserved across the Megachilidae family of bees

Recent work has demonstrated that many bee species have specific cytochrome P450 enzymes (P450s) that can efficiently detoxify certain insecticides. The presence of these P450s, belonging or closely related to the CYP9Q subfamily (CYP9Q-related), is generally well conserved across the diversity of bees. However, the alfalfa leafcutter bee, Megachile rotundata, lacks CYP9Q-related P450s and is 170-2500 times more sensitive to certain insecticides than bee pollinators with these P450s. The extent to which these findings apply to other Megachilidae bee species remains uncertain. To address this knowledge gap, we sequenced the transcriptomes of four Megachile species and leveraged the data obtained, in combination with publicly available genomic data, to investigate the evolution and function of P450s in the Megachilidae. Our analyses reveal that several Megachilidae species, belonging to the Lithurgini, Megachilini and Anthidini tribes, including all species of the Megachile genus investigated, lack CYP9Q-related genes. In place of these genes Megachile species have evolved phylogenetically distinct CYP9 genes, the CYP9DM lineage. Functional expression of these P450s from M. rotundata reveal they lack the capacity to metabolize the neonicotinoid insecticides thiacloprid and imidacloprid. In contrast, species from the Osmiini and Dioxyini tribes of Megachilidae have CYP9Q-related P450s belonging to the CYP9BU subfamily that are able to detoxify thiacloprid. These findings provide new insight into the evolution of P450s that act as key determinants of insecticide sensitivity in bees and have important applied implications for pesticide risk assessment.

Sensitivity of the Neotropical Solitary Bee Centris analis F. (Hymenoptera, Apidae) to the Reference Insecticide Dimethoate for Pesticide Risk Assessment

Currently, only Apis mellifera is used in environmental regulation to evaluate the hazard of pesticides to pollinators. The low representativeness of pollinators and bee diversity in this approach may result in insufficient protection for the wild species. This scenario is intensified in tropical environments, where little is known about the effects of pesticides on solitary bees. We aimed to calculate the medium lethal dose (LD50) and medium lethal concentration (LC50) of the insecticide dimethoate in the Neotropical solitary bee Centris analis, a cavity-nesting, oil-collecting bee distributed from Brazil to Mexico. Males and females of C. analis were exposed orally to dimethoate for 48 h under laboratory conditions. Lethality was assessed every 24 h until 144 h after the beginning of the test. After the LD50 calculation, we compared the value with available LD50 values in the literature of other bee species using the species sensitivity distribution curve. In 48 h of exposure, males showed an LD50 value 1.33 times lower than females (32.78 and 43.84 ng active ingredient/bee, respectively). Centris analis was more sensitive to dimethoate than the model species A. mellifera and the solitary bee from temperate zones, Osmia lignaria. However, on a body weight basis, C. analis and A. mellifera had similar LD50 values. Ours is the first study that calculated an LD50 for a Neotropical solitary bee. Besides, the results are of crucial importance for a better understanding of the effects of pesticides on the tropical bee fauna and will help to improve the risk assessment of pesticides to bees under tropical conditions, giving attention to wild species, which are commonly neglected. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:2758-2767. © 2023 SETAC.

Pollination crisis Down-Under: Has Australasia dodged the bullet?

Since mid-1990s, concerns have increased about a human-induced "pollination crisis." Threats have been identified to animals that act as plant pollinators, plants pollinated by these animals, and consequently human well-being. Threatening processes include loss of natural habitat, climate change, pesticide use, pathogen spread, and introduced species. However, concern has mostly been during last 10-15 years and from Europe and North America, with Australasia, known as Down-Under, receiving little attention. So perhaps Australasia has "dodged the bullet"? We systematically reviewed the published literature relating to the "pollination crisis" via Web of Science, focusing on issues amenable to this approach. Across these issues, we found a steep increase in publications over the last few decades and a major geographic bias towards Europe and North America, with relatively little attention in Australasia. While publications from Australasia are underrepresented, factors responsible elsewhere for causing the "pollination crisis" commonly occur in Australasia, so this lack of coverage probably reflects a lack of awareness rather than the absence of a problem. In other words, Australasia has not "dodged the bullet" and should take immediate action to address and mitigate its own "pollination crisis." Sensible steps would include increased taxonomic work on suspected plant pollinators, protection for pollinator populations threatened with extinction, establishing long-term monitoring of plant-pollinator relationships, incorporating pollination into sustainable agriculture, restricting the use of various pesticides, adopting an Integrated Pest and Pollinator Management approach, and developing partnerships with First Nations peoples for research, conservation and management of plants and their pollinators. Appropriate Government policy, funding and regulation could help.

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.

Wild Bee Exposure to Pesticides in Conservation Grasslands Increases along an Agricultural Gradient: A Tale of Two Sample Types

Conservation efforts have been implemented in agroecosystems to enhance pollinator diversity by creating grassland habitat, but little is known about the exposure of bees to pesticides while foraging in these grassland fields. Pesticide exposure was assessed in 24 conservation grassland fields along an agricultural gradient at two time points (July and August) using silicone band passive samplers (nonlethal) and bee tissues (lethal). Overall, 46 pesticides were detected including 9 herbicides, 19 insecticides, 17 fungicides, and a plant growth regulator. For the bands, there were more frequent/higher concentrations of herbicides in July (maximum: 1600 ng/band in July; 570 ng/band in August), while insecticides and fungicides had more frequent/higher concentrations in August (maximum: 110 and 65 ng/band in July; 1500 and 1700 ng/band in August). Pesticide concentrations in bands increased 16% with every 10% increase in cultivated crops. The bee tissues showed no difference in detection frequency, and concentrations were similar among months; maximum concentrations of herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides in July and August were 17, 27, and 180 and 19, 120, and 170 ng/g, respectively. Pesticide residues in bands and bee tissues did not always show the same patterns; of the 20 compounds observed in both media, six (primarily fungicides) showed a detection-concentration relationship between the two media. Together, the band and bee residue data can provide a more complete understanding of pesticide exposure and accumulation in conserved grasslands.

Using physiology to better support wild bee conservation

There is accumulating evidence that wild bees are experiencing a decline in terms of species diversity, abundance or distribution, which leads to major concerns about the sustainability of both pollination services and intrinsic biodiversity. There is therefore an urgent need to better understand the drivers of their decline, as well as design conservation strategies. In this context, the current approach consists of linking observed occurrence and distribution data of species to environmental features. While useful, a highly complementary approach would be the use of new biological metrics that can link individual bee responses to environmental alteration with population-level responses, which could communicate the actual bee sensitivity to environmental changes and act as early warning signals of bee population decline or sustainability. We discuss here through several examples how the measurement of bee physiological traits or performance can play this role not only in better assessing the impact of anthropogenic pressures on bees, but also in guiding conservation practices with the help of the documentation of species' physiological needs. Last but not least, because physiological changes generally occur well in advance of demographic changes, we argue that physiological traits can help in predicting and anticipating future population trends, which would represent a more proactive approach to conservation. In conclusion, we believe that future efforts to combine physiological, ecological and population-level knowledge will provide meaningful contributions to wild bee conservation-based research.

Commonly used triazole fungicides accelerate the metamorphosis of digger wasps (Hymenoptera: Spheciformes)

Azole fungicides have been essential pillars of global food security since the commercialization of triadimefon. However, the potential for fungicides to induce sublethal effects on larval development and emergence from overwintering is underresearched. We hypothesized that contact exposure to field-realistic concentrations of a broad spectrum of triazole fungicides alters the pupation and metamorphosis of crabronid wasps. Therefore, triazole fungicides shape the hymenopteran communities in agrocenoses. We applied field-realistic concentrations of three triazole fungicides, difenoconazole, penconazole, and tebuconazole, to the defecated prepupae of Pemphredon fabricii (Hymenoptera: Crabronidae). We monitored their survival, pupation, and metamorphosis into adults, including the timing of these events. All three tested triazole fungicides altered the time to the metamorphosis into adults of P. fabricii prepupae compared to the vehicle-treated controls. This effect was concentration-independent within the recommended concentration ranges for foliar applications. However, the three triazole fungicides were not associated with any significant declines in overall survival. Thus, the commonly used triazole fungicides affect the synchronization of the metamorphosis into adults with the availability of food and nesting resources of the study species. The study compounds did not affect the survival, which agrees with previous studies of other azole fungicides, which revealed effects on survival only when used in combination with other compounds. Further research should address the multiplicative effects of the triazole fungicides with other agrochemicals on the timing of the metamorphosis of bees and wasps.

No evidence for impaired solitary bee fitness following pre-flowering sulfoxaflor application alone or in combination with a common fungicide in a semi-field experiment

Pesticide exposure is considered a major driver of pollinator decline and the use of neonicotinoid insecticides has been restricted by regulatory authorities due to their risks for pollinators. Impacts of new alternative sulfoximine-based compounds on solitary bees and their potential interactive effects with other commonly applied pesticides in agriculture remain unclear. Here, we conducted a highly replicated full-factorial semi-field experiment with the solitary bee Osmia bicornis, an important pollinator of crops and wild plants in Europe, and Phacelia tanacetifolia as a model crop. We show that spray applications of the insecticide sulfoxaflor (product Closer) and the fungicide azoxystrobin (product Amistar), both alone and combined, had no significant negative impacts on adult female survival or the production, mortality, sex ratio and body size of offspring when sulfoxaflor was applied five days before crop flowering. Our results indicate that for O. bicornis (1) the risk of adverse impacts of sulfoxaflor (Closer) on fitness is small when applied at least five days before crop flowering and (2) that azoxystrobin (Amistar) has a low potential of exacerbating sulfoxaflor effects under field-realistic conditions.

Impact of microorganisms and entomopathogenic nematodes used for plant protection on solitary and social bee pollinators: Host range, specificity, pathogenicity, toxicity, and effects of experimental parameters

Pollinating bees are stressed by highly variable environmental conditions, malnutrition, parasites and pathogens, but may also by getting in contact with microorganisms or entomopathogenic nematodes that are used to control plant pests and diseases. While foraging for water, food, or nest material social as well as solitary bees have direct contact or even consume the plant protection product with its active substance (e.g., viruses, bacteria, fungi, etc.). Here, we summarize the results of cage, microcolony, observation hive assays, semi-field and field studies using full-size queen-right colonies. By now, some species and subspecies of the Western and Eastern honey bee (Apis mellifera, A. cerana), few species of bumble bees, very few stingless bee species and only a single species of leafcutter bees have been studied as non-target host organisms. Survival and reproduction are the major criteria that have been evaluated. Especially sublethal effects on the bees' physiology, immune response and metabolisms will be targets of future investigations. By studying infectivity and pathogenic mechanisms, individual strains of the microorganism and impact on different bee species are future challenges, especially under field conditions. Overall, it became evident that honey bees, bumble bees and few stingless bee species may not be suitable surrogate species to make general conclusions for biological mechanisms of bee-microorganism interactions of other social bee species. Solitary bees have been studied on leafcutter bees (Megachile rotundata) only, which shows that this huge group of bees (∼20,000 species worldwide) is right at the beginning to get an insight into the interaction of wild pollinators and microbial plant protection organisms.