Combined Toxicity of Insecticides and Fungicides Applied to California Almond Orchards to Honey Bee Larvae and Adults

The neonicotinoid acetamiprid reduces larval and adult survival in honeybees (Apis mellifera) and interacts with a fungicide mixture

Plant protection products (PPPs), which are frequently used in agriculture, can be major stressors for honeybees. They have been found abundantly in the beehive, particularly in pollen. Few studies have analysed effects on honeybee larvae, and little is known about effects of insecticide-fungicide-mixtures, although this is a highly realistic exposure scenario. We asked whether the combination of a frequently used insecticide and fungicides would affect developing bees. Honeybee larvae (Apis mellifera carnica) were reared in vitro on larval diets containing different PPPs at two concentrations, derived from residues found in pollen. We used the neonicotinoid acetamiprid, the combined fungicides boscalid/dimoxystrobin and the mixture of all three substances. Mortality was assessed at larval, pupal, and adult stages, and the size and weight of newly emerged bees were measured. The insecticide treatment in higher concentrations significantly reduced larval and adult survival. Interestingly, survival was not affected by the high concentrated insecticide-fungicides-mixture. However, negative synergistic effects on adult survival were caused by the low concentrated insecticide-fungicides-mixture, which had no effect when applied alone. The lower concentrated combined fungicides led to significantly lighter adult bees, although the survival was unaffected. Our results suggest that environmental relevant concentrations can be harmful to honeybees. To fully understand the interaction of different PPPs, more combinations and concentrations should be studied in social and solitary bees with possibly different sensitivities.

Diflubenzuron larvicide auto-dissemination: A modeling study

Proposing substitutes for Pyriproxyfen (PPF) in the auto-dissemination strategy is essential to ensure the continuity of the strategy in the field, especially in the case of the emergence of populations resistant to this larvicide. One possible substitute among the compounds already in use in Brazil is the larvicide Diflubenzuron (DFB). The equation that defines the proportion of oviposition sites (habitats) contaminated by the auto-dissemination strategy was modified to account for the number of visits required to reach the necessary concentration of DFB for contamination, considering scenarios with varying numbers of oviposition sites and mosquito densities. The dissemination was evaluated in oviposition sites of 2 L, 1.5 L, 1 L, 0.5 L, 0.2 L, and 0.1 L. The minimum concentration of active ingredient (a.i) of DFB required for a commercial product to contaminate at least 50% of oviposition sites was also investigated, along with the impact of other vector control methods, such as the removal/destruction of oviposition sites and the use of insecticides to kill adult 'females, on the auto-dissemination approach. The use of pure DFB compounds enabled contamination efficiency of more than 50% in oviposition sites with a volume of less than 2 L in scenarios with fewer oviposition sites. On the other hand, with the use of the commonly used concentration of the product, similar efficacy was only achieved in oviposition sites of 0.1 L and 0.2 L in medium and high infestation scenarios. Strategies that reduce the number of available oviposition sites work synergistically with the auto-dissemination strategy, making it possible to use less concentrated products and contaminated sites of larger volume. The strategy proved to be resilient in situations of insecticide application according to the concentration of DFB used, abundance of females, and low number of oviposition sites. Increasing the number of dissemination traps on the field also contributes to better results, especially for oviposition sites of 0.5 L and 1 L. The results of the model obtained under the stipulated conditions provide further support for the potential use of DFB as a substitute for PPF in the auto-dissemination strategy.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Relative impacts of Varroa destructor (Mesostigmata:Varroidae) infestation and pesticide exposure on honey bee colony health and survival in a high-intensity corn and soybean producing region in northern Iowa

The negative effects of Varroa and pesticides on colony health and survival are among the most important concerns to beekeepers. To compare the relative contribution of Varroa, pesticides, and interactions between them on honey bee colony performance and survival, a 2-year longitudinal study was performed in corn and soybean growing areas of Iowa. Varroa infestation and pesticide content in stored pollen were measured from 3 apiaries across a gradient of corn and soybean production areas and compared to measurements of colony health and survival. Colonies were not treated for Varroa the first year, but were treated the second year, leading to reduced Varroa infestation that was associated with larger honey bee populations, increased honey production, and higher colony survival. Pesticide detections were highest in areas with high-intensity corn and soybean production treated with conventional methods. Pesticide detections were positively associated with honey bee population size in May 2015 in the intermediate conventional (IC) and intermediate organic (IO) apiaries. Varroa populations across all apiaries in October 2015 were negatively correlated with miticide and chlorpyrifos detections. Miticide detections across all apiaries and neonicotinoid detections in the IC apiary in May 2015 were higher in colonies that survived. In July 2015, colony survival was positively associated with total pesticide detections in all apiaries and chlorpyrifos exposure in the IC and high conventional (HC) apiaries. This research suggests that Varroa are a major cause of reduced colony performance and increased colony losses, and honey bees are resilient upon low to moderate pesticide detections.

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.

Successful application of anthranilic diamides in preventing small hive beetle (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) infestation in honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies

The nest-scavenging beetle Aethina tumida remains a persistent problem for beekeepers in parts of the Southeast United States, where warm wet soils allow beetle populations to grow rapidly and overwhelm colonies, especially during the summer dearth. Furthermore, small hive beetle infestation prevents beekeepers from easily provisioning colonies with additional pollen or protein feed (patties), preventing holistic management of honey bee health via improved nutrition, and reducing the economic potential of package and nucleus colony rearing in the Southeast. Here, we demonstrate using both in vitro laboratory trials and a small in vivo field trial that the differential specificity of anthranilic diamide insecticides (specifically, chlorantraniliprole) between bees and beetles allows for the control and prevention of small hive beetle infestation in honey bee colonies even when feeding with large patties. Honey bees show orders of magnitude higher tolerance to chlorantraniliprole compared to small hive beetles, opening new avenues for improving bee health including during spring splits and throughout the summer.

Indirect exposure to insect growth disruptors affects honey bee (Apis mellifera) reproductive behaviors and ovarian protein expression

Pesticide exposure and queen loss are considered to be major causes of honey bee colony mortality, yet little is known regarding the effects of regularly encountered agrochemicals on honey bee reproduction. Here, we present the results of a two-generational study using specialized cages to expose queens to commonly used insect growth disrupting pesticides (IGDs) via their retinue of worker bees. Under IGD exposure, we tracked queen performance and worker responses to queens, then the performance of the exposed queens' offspring was assessed to identify patterns that may contribute to the long-term health and stability of a social insect colony. The positive control, novaluron, resulted in deformed larvae hatching from eggs laid by exposed queens, and methoxyfenozide, diflubenzuron, and novaluron caused a slight decrease in daily egg laying rates, but this was not reflected in the total egg production over the course of the experiment. Curiously, eggs laid by queens exposed to pyriproxyfen exhibited increased hatching rates, and those larvae developed into worker progeny with increased responsiveness to their queens. Additionally, pyriproxyfen and novaluron exposure affected the queen ovarian protein expression, with the overwhelming majority of differentially expressed proteins coming from the pyriproxyfen exposure. We discuss these results and the potential implications for honey bee reproduction and colony health.

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.

Pesticide residues in honey bee (Apis mellifera) pollen collected in two ornamental plant nurseries in Connecticut: Implications for bee health and risk assessment

Honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are one of the most important managed pollinators of agricultural crops. While potential effects of agricultural pesticides on honey bee health have been investigated in some settings, risks to honey bees associated with exposures occurring in the plant nursery setting have received little attention. We sought to identify and quantify pesticide levels present in honey bee-collected pollen harvested in two ornamental plant nurseries (i.e., Nursery A and Nursery B) in Connecticut. From June to September 2018, pollen was collected weekly from 8 colonies using bottom-mounted pollen traps. Fifty-five unique pesticides (including related metabolites) were detected: 24 insecticides, 20 fungicides, and 11 herbicides. Some of the pesticide contaminants detected in the pollen had not been applied by the nurseries, indicating that the honey bee colonies did not exclusively forage on pollen at their respective nursery. The average number of pesticides per sample was similar at both nurseries (i.e., 12.9 at Nursery A and 14.2 at Nursery B). To estimate the potential risk posed to honey bees from these samples, we utilized the USEPA's BeeREX tool to calculate risk quotients (RQs) for each pesticide within each sample. The median aggregate RQ for nurse bees was 0.003 at both nurseries, well below the acute risk level of concern (LOC) of ≥0.4. We also calculated RQs for larvae due to their increased sensitivity to certain pesticides. In total, 6 samples had larval RQs above the LOC (0.45-2.51), resulting from the organophosphate insecticide diazinon. Since 2015, the frequency and amount of diazinon detected in pollen increased at one of our study locations, potentially due to pressure to reduce the use of neonicotinoid insecticides. Overall, these data highlight the importance of considering all life stages when estimating potential risk to honey bee colonies from pesticide exposure.

Gut microbiota composition and gene expression changes induced in the Apis cerana exposed to acetamiprid and difenoconazole at environmentally realistic concentrations alone or combined

Apis cerana is an important pollinator of agricultural crops in China. In the agricultural environment, A. cerana may be exposed to acetamiprid (neonicotinoid insecticide) and difenoconazole (triazole fungicide), alone or in combination because they are commonly applied to various crops. At present, our understanding of the toxicological effects of acetamiprid and difenoconazole on honey bee gut microbiomes is limited. The primary objective of this study was to explore whether these two pesticides affect honey bees' gut microbiota and to analyze the transcriptional effects of these two pesticides on honey bees' head and gut. In this study, adults of A. cerana were exposed to acetamiprid and/or difenoconazole by contaminated syrup at field-realistic concentrations for 10 days. Results indicated that acetamiprid and/or difenoconazole chronic exposure did not affect honey bees' survival and food consumption, whereas difenoconazole decreased the weight of honey bees. 16S rRNA sequencing suggested that difenoconazole and the mixture of difenoconazole and acetamiprid decreased the diversity index and shaped the composition of gut bacteria microbiota, whereas acetamiprid did not impact the gut bacterial community. The ITS sequence data showed that neither of the two pesticides affected the fungal community structure. Meanwhile, we also observed that acetamiprid or difenoconazole significantly altered the expression of genes related to detoxification and immunity in honey bees' tissues. Furthermore, we observed that the adverse effect of the acetamiprid and difenoconazole mixture on honey bees' health was greater than that of a single mixture. Taken together, our study demonstrates that acetamiprid and/or difenoconazole exposure at field-realistic concentrations induced changes to the honey bee gut microbiome and gene expression.

Mixture toxic effects of thiacloprid and cyproconazole on honey bees (Apis mellifera L.)

Pesticide exposure remains one of the main factors in the population decline of insect pollinators. It is urgently necessary to assess the effects of mixtures on pollinator risk assessments because they are often exposed to numerous agrochemicals. In the present study, we explored the mixture toxic effects of thiacloprid (THI) and cyproconazole (CYP) on honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Our findings revealed that THI possessed higher acute toxicity to A. mellifera (96-h LC₅₀ value of 216.3 mg a.i. L^-1) than CYP (96-h LC₅₀ value of 601.4 mg a.i. L^-1). It's worth noting that the mixture of THI and CYP exerted an acute synergistic effect on honey bees. At the same time, the activities of detoxification enzyme cytochrome P450s (CYP450s) and neuro target enzyme Acetylcholinesterase (AChE), as well as the expressions of seven genes (CRBXase, CYP306A1, CYP6AS14, apidaecin, defensing-2, vtg, and gp-93) associated with detoxification metabolism, immune response, development, and endoplasmic reticulum stress, were significantly altered in the combined treatment compared with the corresponding individual exposures of THI or CYP. These data indicated that a mixture of THI and CYP could disturb the physiological homeostasis of honey bees. Our study provides a theoretical basis for in-depth studies on the impacts of pesticide mixtures on the health of honey bees. Our study also provides important guidance for the rational application of pesticide mixtures to protect pollinators in agricultural production effectively.

Nutritional resources modulate the responses of three bee species to pesticide exposure

The response of bee species to various stressors is assumed to depend on the availability of sufficient nutrients in their environment. We compare the response of three bee species (Apis mellifera, Bombus terrestris, Osmia bicornis) under laboratory conditions. Survival, physiology, and sensitivity, after exposure to the fungicide prochloraz, the insecticide chlorantraniliprole, and their mixture with different nutritional resources (sugar only, sugar with amino acids or pollen) were observed. Prochloraz reduced the bee survival of A. mellifera and O. bicornis fed with pollen, but not with other diets. Chlorantraniliprole impaired the survival of A. mellifera fed with sugar or pollen diet, but not with amino acid diet. The mixture impaired survival of A. mellifera and O. bicornis in association with every diet. B. terrestris was only affected by chlorantraniliprole and its mixture with prochloraz fed with sugar diet. The activity of P450 reductase was higher in A. mellifera fed with amino acids in all treatments, whereas no effect emerged in O. bicornis and B. terrestris. Our results indicate that the sensitivity of bee species after exposure to agrochemicals is affected by diet. Thus, balanced and species-dependent nutrition ameliorated the effects. Further field studies are necessary to evaluate the potential effects of such mixtures on bee populations.

Mixture toxicities of tetrachlorantraniliprole and tebuconazole to honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) and the potential mechanism

The extensive use of pesticides has negative effects on the health of insect pollinators. Although pollinators in the field are seldom exposed to individual pesticides, few reports have assessed the toxic impacts of pesticide combinations on them. In this work, we purposed to reveal the combined impacts of tetrachlorantraniliprole (TET) and tebuconazole (TEB) on honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Our data exhibited that TET had greater toxicity to A. mellifera (96-h LC₅₀ value of 298.2 mg a.i. L^-1) than TEB (96-h LC₅₀ value of 1,841 mg a.i. L^-1). The mixture of TET and TEB displayed acute synergistic toxicity to the pollinators. Meanwhile, the activities of CarE, CYP450, trypsin, and sucrase, as well as the expressions of five genes (ppo, abaecin, cat, CYP4G11, and CYP6AS14) associated with immune response, oxidative stress, and detoxification metabolism, were conspicuously altered when exposed to the mixture relative to the individual exposures. These results provided an overall comprehension of honey bees upon the challenge of sublethal toxicity between neonicotinoid insecticides and triazole fungicides and could be used to assess the intricate toxic mechanisms in honey bees when exposed to pesticide mixtures. Additionally, these results might guide pesticide regulation strategies to enhance the honey bee populations.

Strategies and techniques to mitigate the negative impacts of pesticide exposure to honey bees

In order to support food, fiber, and fuel production around the world, billions of kilograms of pesticides are applied to crop fields every year to suppress pests, plant diseases and weeds. These fields are often home to the most important commercial pollinators, honey bees (Apis spp.), which improve yield and quality of many agricultural products. The pesticides applied to support crop health can be detrimental to honey bee health. The conflict of pesticide use and reliance on honey bees contributes to significant honey bee colony losses across the world. Recommendations for reducing impact on honey bees are generally suggested in literature, pesticide regulations, and by crop consultants, but without a considerable discussion of the realistic limitations of protecting honey bees. New techniques in farming and beekeeping can reduce pesticide exposure through reduction in bee exposure, reduced toxicity of pesticides, and remedies that can be in response to exposure. However, lack of assessment of those new techniques under a systematical, comprehensive framework may overestimate or underestimate these techniques' potential to protect honey bees from pesticide damage. In this review, we summarize the current and arising strategies and techniques with the goal to inspire the development and adoption of pesticide mitigation practices for both agriculture and apiculture.

Large-scale study investigating the effects of a tank mixture containing thiacloprid-prochloraz on honey bees (Apis mellifera)

Risk assessment of plant protection products (PPPs) will be conducted before authorization for their possible effects on non-target organisms, including honey bees. Tank mixtures are often common practice by farmers, and mostly their effects on honey bees are not routinely assessed. To enable a realistic assessment of laboratory-reported effects of a combination of the insecticide thiacloprid and fungicide prochloraz on honey bees, a large-scale field study with spray application in winter oilseed rape was conducted in four regions in Germany. Several parameters were investigated, including mortality, flight activity, and colony development. Residue analysis of various materials (e.g., dead bees, nectar, and pollen) was conducted to assess exposure level. We observed several intoxication symptoms 2 h after application, including a high number of moribund bees and dead bees on the first day after application (DAA +1) compared to the control. Adverse effects were observed on the number of open brood cells, with a significant reduction of approximately 22% compared to control over the experimental period. High residue concentrations were detected on flowers and dead bees on the day of application, which decreased rapidly within six days. The residue concentrations detected were higher in bee-collected materials than in materials stored in the hive. In conclusion, exposure to a combination containing thiacloprid-prochloraz poses a high risk to honey bees. Thus, the application of such a mixture on flowering crops is restricted in Germany.

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.

Effects of fungicides on the ultrastructure of the hypopharyngeal glands and the strength of the hives of Apis mellifera Linnaeus, 1758 (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Several crops of agronomic interest depend on bees' pollination, and Apis mellifera L (Hymanoptera: Apidae) is the most studied direct pollinator. Nevertheless, the use of pesticides in agricultural environments is common, including fungicides. Studies that seek to evaluate the effects of fungicides on the hypopharyngeal glands of bees, the site of royal jelly synthesis, are lacking. Thus, this work aimed to evaluate the effect of field doses of fungicides (Captan SC® and Zignal®), alone or in mixture, on the hypopharyngeal glands and their subsequent effect on the strength of hives. The evaluations were carried out under field conditions in three hives per treatment. For a period of one month, bee hives received feed containing sugar syrup, pollen and 1.2 mL of Zignal® and 3 mL of Captan SC® in the isolated treatments and 4.2 mL in the mixture. The action of fungicides on the hypopharyngeal glands was determined by transmission electron microscopy analysis in bees 7 and 15 days old, collected in the hives one month after exposure to fungicides. The strength of the hives was evaluated for six months based on the number of frames with adult bees, open and closed brood, and stored food. The results indicate that fungicides promote early degeneration of the rough endoplasmic reticulum and morphological and structural changes in mitochondria. In addition, a reduction in adult population, open and closed breeding and food stock was observed. More pronounced damage occurred when bees were exposed to the mixture of fungicides. Overall, it can be concluded that the presence of fungicides in bee diets promotes harm accentuated over time and compromises the survival of hives. It will be worth estimating the fungicide effects of the queen development and on the colony heath.

Using the Honey Bee (Apis mellifera L.) Cell Line AmE-711 to Evaluate Insecticide Toxicity

One of the main contributors to poor productivity and elevated mortality of honey bee colonies globally is insecticide exposure. Whole-organism and colony-level studies have demonstrated the effects of insecticides on many aspects of honey bee biology and have also shown their interactions with pathogens. However, there is a need for in vitro studies using cell lines to provide greater illumination of the effects of insecticides on honey bee cellular and molecular processes. We used a continuous cell line established from honey bee embryonic tissues (AmE-711) in assays that enabled assessment of cell viability in response to insecticide exposure. We exposed AmE-711 cells to four formulations, each containing a different insecticide. Treatment of cells with the insecticides resulted in a concentration-dependent reduction in viability after a 24-h exposure, whereas long-term exposure (120 h) to sublethal concentrations had limited effects on viability. The 24-h exposure data allowed us to predict the half-maximal lethal concentration (LC50) for each insecticide using a four-parameter logistical model. We then exposed cells for 12 h to the predicted LC50 and observed changes in morphology that would indicate stress and death. Reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis corroborated changes in morphology: expression of a cellular stress response gene, 410087a, increased after an 18-h exposure to the predicted LC50. Demonstration of the effects of insecticides through use of AmE-711 provides a foundation for additional research addressing issues specific to honey bee toxicology and complements whole-organism and colony-level approaches. Moreover, advances in the use of AmE-711 in high-throughput screening and in-depth analysis of cell regulatory networks will promote the discovery of novel control agents with decreased negative impacts on honey bees. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:88-99. Published 2022. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Biology, Genetic Diversity, and Conservation of Wild Bees in Tree Fruit Orchards

Different species of bees provide essential ecosystem services by pollinating various agricultural crops, including tree fruits. Many fruits and nuts depend on insect pollination, primarily by wild and managed bees. In different geographical regions where orchard crops are grown, fruit growers rely on wild bees in the farmscape and use orchard bees as alternative pollinators. Orchard crops such as apples, pears, plums, apricots, etc., are mass-flowering crops and attract many different bee species during their bloom period. Many bee species found in orchards emerge from overwintering as the fruit trees start flowering in spring, and the active duration of these bees aligns very closely with the blooming time of fruit trees. In addition, most of the bees in orchards are short-range foragers and tend to stay close to the fruit crops. However, the importance of orchard bee communities is not well understood, and many challenges in maintaining their populations remain. This comprehensive review paper summarizes the different types of bees commonly found in tree fruit orchards in the fruit-growing regions of the United States, their bio-ecology, and genetic diversity. Additionally, recommendations for the management of orchard bees, different strategies for protecting them from multiple stressors, and providing suitable on-farm nesting and floral resource habitats for propagation and conservation are discussed.

The acute toxicity of pesticide mixtures to honeybees

Honeybees (Apis mellifera) frequently live in complex environments where exposure to mixtures of pesticides is possible. Although several studies have expressed concern regarding the combined effects of pesticide mixtures, other studies did not find increased toxicity. Thus, the primary objective of this study was to identify peer-reviewed literature measuring the toxicity of pesticide mixtures to honeybees and determine how frequently synergistic interactions occur. Many experiments (258) were identified that met the criteria for inclusion. When considering all experiments, 34% of experiments had model deviation ratios (MDR; expected toxicity/observed toxicity) greater than 2, suggesting greater-than-additive toxicity. Twelve percent of experiments had MDR values greater than 5, with several studies exceeding 100. However, most experiments that had higher MDRs included azole fungicides or acaricides as a component of the mixture. After removal of these groups, only 8% of experiments exceeded an MDR of 2, and no experiments exceeded 5. Moreover, the influence of the azole fungicides was dose dependent. If only experiments that used azole exposure at environmentally relevant concentrations were considered, azole fungicides had limited impact on neonicotinoid insecticides. However, pyrethroid insecticides still had greater than expected toxicity with 80% of experiments having MDR values greater than 2. Acaricides also had greater than expected incidence of synergy with approximately 30% of studies reporting MDR values greater than 2. It should be noted that even the azole studies considered environmentally relevant frequently used maximum exposure rates and worst-case exposure scenarios. The primary finding is that synergy is uncommon except for a few cases where known synergists (azole fungicides) and pesticides with variable metabolism potential, such as some pyrethroids, are in combination. Future work is still needed to refine the relevance of azole fungicides at commonly occurring environmental concentrations. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:1694-1704. © 2022 SETAC.

“Migratory beekeeping and its influence on the prevalence and dispersal of pathogens to managed and wild bees”

Demand for food is growing along with the human population, leading to an increase in plant production. Many crops are pollinated by insects, so the global demand for managed pollinators is also increasing. The honey bee has traditionally been considered the main provider of crop pollination services. For providing it beekeepers seasonally transport hives to different locations after the flowering of different crops. These movements could be detrimental to pollinators by: i) stressing honey bees, making them more susceptible to pathogens and parasites; ii) spreading bee parasites and pathogens across locations; iii) increasing the transmission of parasites and pathogens between managed and wild pollinators and vice versa (spillover and spillback, respectively). To understand the impact of migratory beekeeping on bee health, we conducted a systematic review to identify the main trends and provide a complete picture of existing knowledge on the subject. We found 52 studies analysing pathogen-related impacts of migratory beekeeping on honey bees. However, only 16 investigations tested the effect of migratory practices on the prevalence and spread of pathogens and parasites. We found no studies that assessed the impact of migratory beekeeping on the occurrence and spread of pests and diseases in wild bees. In general, migratory beekeeping tends to increase the prevalence of pathogens and parasites in honey bee colonies. However, the results were very heterogeneous, probably due to several uncontrolled underlying factors such as management, biological and geographical factors, and the interactions between them. In conclusion, there is an urgent need for studies to assess the impact of migratory beekeeping on bee health, given the current global bee decline and the expected increase in migratory beekeeping due to climate change and crop pollination demand.

•

Migratory beekeeping may affect the health of both managed and wild bees.

•

Only 16 studies compare the prevalence of pathogens between migratory and stationary hives.

•

Results are heterogeneous due to the complex interaction of the underlying factors.

•

Overall, the prevalence of pathogens and parasites increased in migratory honey bees.

•

The impact of migratory beekeeping on the health of wild bees is unknown.

Pesticide exposure of wild bees and honey bees foraging from field border flowers in intensively managed agriculture areas

Bees are critical for food crop pollination, yet their populations are declining as agricultural practices intensify. Pollinator-attractive field border plantings (e.g. hedgerows and forb strips) can increase bee diversity and abundance in agricultural areas; however, recent studies suggest these plants may contain pesticides. Pesticide exposure for wild bees remains largely unknown; however, this information is needed to inform agricultural practices and pesticide regulations meant to protect bees. It is important to determine whether border plantings that attract and support pollinators may also deliver pesticides to them. In this study, we collected various samples for pesticide residue analysis, including: multiple species of wild bees, honey bees, flowers from four types of bee-attractive field border plants, and soil. Silicone bands were also utilized as passive aerial samplers of pesticide residues. The five pesticides detected most frequently across all samples were the insecticide bifenthrin, the herbicides thiobencarb, metolaclor, and propanil, and the fungicide fluopyram. We detected the greatest number of parent pesticides in bands (24), followed by soil (21). Pesticides were also detected in field border plant flowers (16), which do not receive direct pesticide applications, and included many products which were not applied to adjacent field crops. Pesticide concentrations were lower in bees than in flowers but higher in bees than in soils. Pesticide residue per bee (ng/bee) increased with increasing wild bee size, though pesticide concentration (ng/g) did not increase. While honey bees and wild bees contained a similar number and concentration of pesticides overall, pesticide mixtures varied by bee type, and included some mixtures known to cause sublethal effects. The results from this study highlight the benefits of measuring more sample types to capture the total exposome of bees, including a greater range of bee species, as well as the need to consider exposure to pesticides at the landscape level.

Effect of carbendazim on honey bee health: Assessment of survival, pollen consumption, and gut microbiome composition

Gut microbiota and nutrition play major roles in honey bee health. Recent reports have shown that pesticides can disrupt the gut microbiota and cause malnutrition in honey bees. Carbendazim is the most commonly used fungicide in China, but it is not clear whether carbendazim negatively affects the gut microbes and nutrient intake levels in honey bees. To address this research gap, we assessed the effects of carbendazim on the survival, pollen consumption, and sequenced 16 S rRNA gene to determine the bacterial composition in the midgut and hindgut. Our results suggest that carbendazim exposure does not cause acute death in honey bees even at high concentrations (5000 mg/L), which are extremely unlikely to exist under field conditions. Carbendazim does not disturb the microbiome composition in the gut of young worker bees during gut microbial colonization and adult worker bees with established gut communities in the mid and hindgut. However, carbendazim exposure significantly decreases pollen consumption in honey bees. Thus, exposure of bees to carbendazim can perturb their beneficial nutrition homeostasis, potentially reducing honey bee immunity and increasing their susceptibility to infection by pathogens, which influence effectiveness as pollinators, even colony health.

The Value of Hazard Quotients in Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Ecotoxicology: A Review

Estimates of pesticide application hazards have grown to be one of the most common methodologies for evaluating the impact of pest management practices on honey bees. Typically, hazards are estimated by calculating a Hazard Quotient (HQ), which is based on acute toxicity data for different pesticides and the quantity of those pesticides applied to a field or detected on bees and matrices associated with their hive (honey, wax, pollen, and/or bee bread). Although use of HQ is widespread, there have been few reviews of this methodology, particularly with focus on how effective this method is at predicting effects of pesticides on hives. We evaluated 36 relevant papers, containing calculations of HQ to estimate hazards to honey bees. We observed that HQ was primarily calculated using two different approaches: (1) from the concentration of pesticides in the food, hive, or tissues of honey bees or (2) using the field application rate of the active ingredient as the estimation of pesticide hazard. Within and between HQ calculation methods, thresholds vary widely with some HQ thresholds set below 1 and others set at 10,000. Based on our review we identify key weakness with current HQ methodology and how studies relate HQ to honey bee health endpoints. First, HQ thresholds from studies of pesticides in hives are not based on the same pesticide consumption models from the EPA, potentially overestimating the risk of impacts to colonies. Conversely, HQ estimates calculated from field application rates are not based on eco-toxicological estimates of field exposure, resulting in an overestimation of pesticide reaching colonies. We suggest it is for these reasons that there is poor correspondence between HQ and field-level honey bee health endpoints. Considering these challenges, HQ calculations should be used cautiously in future studies and more research should be dedicated to field level exposure models.

Acute Toxicity of Fungicide-Insecticide-Adjuvant Combinations Applied to Almonds During Bloom on Adult Honey Bees

Beekeepers report significant honey bee deaths during and after almond bloom. These losses pose a major problem for the California almond industry because of its dependence on honey bees as pollinators. The present study aimed to determine if combinations of pesticides applied during almond bloom during daylight hours were a possible explanation for these losses. In this study we aimed to mimic the spray application route of exposure to pesticides using a Potter Spray Tower to treat adult honey bees with commonly encountered pesticides and pesticide combinations at multiples of the maximum recommended field application rates. Tested insecticides included Altacor® and Intrepid®, and tested fungicides included Tilt®, Pristine®, Luna Sensation®, and Vangard®. Synergistic toxicity was observed when the fungicide Tilt (active ingredient propiconazole) was applied with the insecticide Altacor (chlorantraniliprole), though neither caused significant mortality when applied independently. The study also looked at the effect of adding a spray adjuvant, Dyne-Amic®, to pesticide mixtures. Dyne-Amic was toxic to honey bees at concentrations above the maximum recommended field application rate, and toxicity was increased when combined with the fungicide Pristine (pyraclostrobin and boscalid). Addition of Dyne-Amic also increased toxicity of the Tilt and Altacor combination. These results suggest that application of Altacor and Tilt in combination with an adjuvant at the recommended field application rates could cause mortality in adult honey bees. These findings highlight a potential explanation for honey bee losses around almond bloom, emphasize that the safety of spray adjuvants to bees should not be assumed, and provide support for recommendations to protect bees from pesticides through application at night when bees are not foraging. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:1042-1053. © 2022 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Particularities of Fungicides and Factors Affecting Their Fate and Removal Efficacy: A Review

Systemic fungicide use has increased over the last decades, despite the susceptibility of resistance development and the side effects to human health and the environment. Although herbicides and insecticides are detected more frequently in environmental samples, there are many fungicides that have the ability to enter water bodies due to their physicochemical properties and their increasing use. Key factors affecting fungicide fate in the environment have been discussed, including the non-target effects of fungicides. For instance, fungicides are associated with the steep decline in bumblebee populations. Secondary actions of certain fungicides on plants have also been reported recently. In addition, the use of alternative eco-friendly disease management approaches has been described. Constructed Wetlands (CWs) comprise an environmentally friendly, low cost, and efficient fungicide remediation technique. Fungicide removal within CWs is dependent on plant uptake and metabolism, absorption in porous media and soil, hydrolysis, photodegradation, and biodegradation. Factors related to the efficacy of CWs on the removal of fungicides, such as the type of CW, plant species, and the physicochemical parameters of fungicides, are also discussed in this paper. There are low-environmental-risk fungicides, phytohormones and other compounds, which could improve the removal performance of CW vegetation. In addition, specific parameters such as the multiple modes of action of fungicides, side effects on substrate microbial communities and endophytes, and plant physiological response were also studied. Prospects and challenges for future research are suggested under the prism of reducing the risk related to fungicides and enhancing CW performance.

Comparative Study on Synergistic Toxicity of Enrofloxacin Combined with Three Antibiotics on Proliferation of THLE-2 Cell

Little attention has been paid to the problem of the combined toxicity of accumulated antibiotics on humans from food and clinical treatments. Therefore, we used human hepatocytes to study the joint toxicity of four common antibiotics. The cytotoxicity of enrofloxacin (ENR), combined with ciprofloxacin (CFX), florfenicol (FFC), or sulfadimidine (SMD) on THLE-2 cells was determined by CCK-8 assays; then their joint toxicity was evaluated using CalcuSyn 2.0. Dose–effect curves and median-effect plots established on large amounts of data and CI values were calculated to judge the nature of the combination’s interaction. ED50, ED75, and ED90 were predicted to elucidate the changing trend of the concentration on the toxicity of each drug pair. The ENR-CFX and ENR-FFC pairs exhibited synergistic toxicity only at special concentration rates, while ENR and SMD synergistically induced cytotoxicity at almost all the concentration rates studied. The mixed ratio was a significant factor for synergistic toxicity and should be evaluated in all combined effect studies. These results suggested that the combined toxicity of these four drugs should be taken into account in their risk assessment.

A mechanism-based approach unveils metabolic routes potentially mediating chlorantraniliprole synergism in honey bees, Apis mellifera L., by azole fungicides

BACKGROUND

Almond production in California is an intensively managed agroecosystem dependent on managed pollination by honey bees, Apis mellifera L. A recent laboratory study reported synergism in honey bees between chlorantraniliprole, a common diamide insecticide used in almond orchards, and the fungicide propiconazole. Indeed, there is an emerging body of evidence that honey bee cytochrome P450 monooxygenases of the CYP9Q subfamily are involved in the detoxification of insecticides across a diverse range of chemical classes. The objective of the present study was to unveil the molecular background of the described synergism and to explore the potential role of CYP9Q enzymes in diamide detoxification.

RESULTS

Our study confirmed the previously reported synergistic potential of propiconazole on chlorantraniliprole in acute contact toxicity bioassays, whereas no synergism was observed for flubendiamide. Fluorescence-based biochemical assays revealed an interaction of chlorantraniliprole, but not flubendiamide, with functionally expressed CYP9Q2 and CYP9Q3. These findings were validated by an increased chlorantraniliprole tolerance of transgenic Drosophila lines expressing CYP9Q2/3, and an analytically confirmed oxidative metabolism of chlorantraniliprole by recombinantly expressed enzymes. Furthermore, we showed that several triazole fungicides used in almond orchards, including propiconazole, were strong nanomolar inhibitors of functionally expressed honey bee CYP9Q2 and CYP9Q3, whereas other fungicides such as iprodione and cyprodinil did not inhibit these enzymes.

CONCLUSION

Honey bee CYP9Q enzymes are involved in chlorantraniliprole metabolism and inhibited by triazole fungicides possibly leading to synergism in acute contact toxicity bioassays. Our mechanistic approach has the potential to inform tier I honey bee pesticide risk assessment.

Identification of the AccCDK1 gene in Apis cerana cerana and its relationship with the oxidative stress response

The cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) protein family plays an important role in regulating life functions, such as the cell cycle and metabolism. This study reports the first cloning and functional analysis of A. cerana cerana CDK1 (AccCDK1). The distribution profile of AccCDK1 in different developmental periods and different tissues was determined. The experimental results showed that the distribution of AccCDK1 was tissue-specific. AccCDK1 distribution at the transcriptional and translational levels was affected by stress conditions induced by H₂O₂, UV, HgCl₂, CdCl₂, extreme temperatures (4 °C, 44 °C) and pesticides (avermectin, lambda-cyhalothrin, haloxyfop-R-methyl, and glyphosate), which resulted in changes in the expression levels. These results suggest that AccCDK1 may have an important part to play in honey bee resistance to stress. The expression of a recombinant AccCDK1 protein in vitro enhanced the antistress capacities of E. coli and yeast, which suggests that AccCDK1 is related to the stress response. When AccCDK1 was silenced, the expression of some antioxidant genes was downregulated, and the enzymatic potencies of superoxide dismutase (SOD), peroxidase (POD) and catalase (CAT) were reduced, which suggests that AccCDK1 takes part in the body's resistance to oxidative stress upon external stimulation by influencing relevant antioxidants. Notably, the survival rate of A. cerana cerana under high-temperature-induced stress decreased after AccCDK1 silencing, which verifies our results. In conclusion, we found that AccCDK1 played an indispensable function in resisting oxidative stress and maintaining normal cellular functions.

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.

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.

Floral Microbes Suppress Growth of Monilinia laxa with Minimal Effects on Honey Bee Feeding

Management of Monilinia laxa, the causal agent of brown rot blossom blight in almond (Prunus dulcis), relies heavily on the use of chemical fungicides during bloom. However, chemical fungicides can have nontarget effects on beneficial arthropods, including pollinators, and select for resistance in the pathogen of concern. Almond yield is heavily reliant on successful pollination by healthy honey bees (Apis mellifera); thus, identifying sustainable, effective, and pollinator-friendly control methods for blossom blight during bloom is desirable. Flower-inhabiting microbes could provide a natural, sustainable form of biocontrol for M. laxa, while potentially minimizing costly nontarget effects on almond pollinators and the services they provide. As pollinators are sensitive to floral microbes and their associated taste and scent cues, assessing effects of prospective biocontrol species on pollinator attraction is also necessary. Here, our objective was to isolate and identify potential biocontrol microbes from an array of agricultural and natural flowering hosts and test their efficacy in suppressing M. laxa growth in culture. Out of an initial 287 bacterial and fungal isolates identified, 56 were screened using a dual culture plate assay. Most strains reduced M. laxa growth in vitro. Ten particularly effective candidate microbes were further screened for their effect on honey bee feeding. Of the 10, nine were found to both strongly suppress M. laxa growth in culture and not reduce honey bee feeding. These promising results suggest a number of strong candidates for augmentative microbial biocontrol of brown rot blossom blight in almond with potentially minimal effects on honey bee pollination.

High nutritional status promotes vitality of honey bees and mitigates negative effects of pesticides

Honey bee health is affected by multiple stressors, such as the exposure to plant protection products (PPPs), dietary limitation, monofloral diets and pressure of diseases and pathogens and their interactions. Here, we analysed the interacting effects of plant protection products and low nutritional pollen source on honey bee health under semi-field conditions. We established a healthy honey bee colony in each of 24 tents, planted either with monofloral maize, maize with a diverse flower strip or with monofloral Phacelia tanacetifolia. To evaluate the interaction between exposure to PPPs and nutritional status, a mixture of the insecticide thiacloprid and the fungicide prochloraz was applied. For each colony, we investigated brood capping rate as well as adult longevity, body and head weight, and enzyme activity of acetylcholinesterase and P450 reductase of newly hatched worker bees. We found a significant reduced capping rate in treated maize compared to flowering strips and Phacelia, but no interaction effect between pesticide treatment and nutritional status on capping rate. The response to treatment on the longevity of adults differed significantly between maize and Phacelia, with flower strips being intermediate, indicating interaction effects of PPP treatment and low pollen quality in maize compared to Phacelia and flowering strip treatments. Head weight of newly hatched worker bees showed significant interaction of nutritional status and treatment of PPPs. PPPs slightly increased body weight in all nutritional statuses, except for Phacelia. Enzyme activity of acetylcholinesterase and P450 reductase showed significant different responses between maize and Phacelia to PPP exposure, but not between maize and flowering strip. Our results support the hypothesis that higher pollen quality promotes development of larvae and pupae, longevity of adults and detoxification of PPPs.

Environmental monitoring study of pesticide contamination in Denmark through honey bee colonies using APIStrip-based sampling

Due to their extensive use in both agricultural and non-agricultural applications, pesticides are a major source of environmental contamination. Honey bee colonies are proven sentinels of these and other contaminants, as they come into contact with them during their foraging activities. However, active sampling strategies involve a negative impact on these organisms and, in most cases, the need of analyzing multiple heterogeneous matrices. Conversely, the APIStrip-based passive sampling is innocuous for the bees and allows for long-term monitorings using the same colony. The versatility of the sorbent Tenax, included in the APIStrip composition, ensures that comprehensive information regarding the contaminants inside the beehive will be obtained in one single matrix. In the present study, 180 APIStrips were placed in nine apiaries distributed in Denmark throughout a six-month sampling period (10 subsequent samplings, April to September 2020). Seventy-five pesticide residues were detected (out of a 428-pesticide scope), boscalid and azoxystrobin being the most frequently detected compounds. There were significant variations in the findings of the sampling sites in terms of number of detections, pesticide diversity and average concentration. A relative indicator of the potential risk of pesticide exposure for the honey bees was calculated for each sampling site. The evolution of pesticide detections over the sampling periods, as well as the individual tendencies of selected pesticides, is herein described. The findings of this large-scale monitoring were compared to the ones obtained in a previous Danish, APIStrip-based pilot monitoring program in 2019. Samples of honey and wax were also analyzed and compared to the APIStrip findings.

Chemical Stimulants and Stressors Impact the Outcome of Virus Infection and Immune Gene Expression in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera)

Western honey bees (Apis mellifera) are ecologically, agriculturally, and economically important plant pollinators. High average annual losses of honey bee colonies in the US have been partially attributed to agrochemical exposure and virus infections. To examine the potential negative synergistic impacts of agrochemical exposure and virus infection, as well as the potential promise of phytochemicals to ameliorate the impact of pathogenic infections on honey bees, we infected bees with a panel of viruses (i.e., Flock House virus, deformed wing virus, or Sindbis virus) and exposed to one of three chemical compounds. Specifically, honey bees were fed sucrose syrup containing: (1) thyme oil, a phytochemical and putative immune stimulant, (2) fumagillin, a beekeeper applied fungicide, or (3) clothianidin, a grower-applied insecticide. We determined that virus abundance was lower in honey bees fed 0.16 ppb thyme oil augmented sucrose syrup, compared to bees fed sucrose syrup alone. Parallel analysis of honey bee gene expression revealed that honey bees fed thyme oil augmented sucrose syrup had higher expression of key RNAi genes (argonaute-2 and dicer-like), antimicrobial peptide expressing genes (abaecin and hymenoptaecin), and vitellogenin, a putative honey bee health and age indicator, compared to bees fed only sucrose syrup. Virus abundance was higher in bees fed fumagillin (25 ppm or 75 ppm) or 1 ppb clothianidin containing sucrose syrup relative to levels in bees fed only sucrose syrup. Whereas, honey bees fed 10 ppb clothianidin had lower virus levels, likely because consuming a near lethal dose of insecticide made them poor hosts for virus infection. The negative impact of fumagillin and clothianidin on honey bee health was indicated by the lower expression of argonaute-2, dicer-like, abaecin, and hymenoptaecin, and vitellogenin. Together, these results indicate that chemical stimulants and stressors impact the outcome of virus infection and immune gene expression in honey bees.

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

Honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies that pollinate California's almond orchards are often exposed to mixtures of agrochemicals. Although agrochemicals applied during almond bloom are typically considered bee-safe when applied alone, their combined effects to honey bees are largely untested. In recent years, beekeepers providing pollination services to California's almond orchards have reported reductions in queen quality during and immediately after bloom, raising concerns that pesticide exposure may be involved. Previous research identified a synergistic effect between the insecticide active ingredient chlorantraniliprole and the fungicide active ingredient propiconazole to lab-reared worker brood, but their effects to developing queens are unknown. To test the individual and combined effects of these pesticides on the survival and emergence of developing queens, we fed worker honey bees in closed queen rearing boxes with pollen artificially contaminated with formulated pesticides containing these active ingredients as well as the spray adjuvant Dyne-Amic, which contains both organosilicone and alkyphenol ethoxylate. The translocation of pesticides from pesticide-treated pollen into the royal jelly secretions of nurse bees was also measured. Despite consistently low levels of all pesticide active ingredients in royal jelly, the survival of queens from pupation to 7 d post-emergence were reduced in queens reared by worker bees fed pollen containing a combination of formulated chlorantraniliprole (Altacor), propiconazole (Tilt), and Dyne-Amic, as well as the toxic standard, diflubenzuron (Dimilin 2L), applied in isolation. These results support recommendations to protect honey bee health by avoiding application of pesticide tank-mixes containing insecticides and adjuvants during almond bloom.

Tyrosinase-mediated synthesis of larvicidal active 1,5-diphenyl pent-4-en-1-one derivatives against Culex quinquefasciatus and investigation of their ichthyotoxicity

1,5-diphenylpent-4-en-1-one derivatives were synthesised using the grindstone method with Cu(II)-tyrosinase used as a catalyst. This method showed a high yield under mild reaction conditions. The synthesised compounds were identified by FTIR, 1H NMR, 13C NMR, mass spectrometry, and elemental analysis. In this study, a total of 17 compounds (1a-1q) were synthesised, and their larvicidal and antifeedant activities were evaluated. Compound 1i (1-(5-oxo-1,5-diphenylpent-1-en-3-yl)-3-(3-phenylallylidene)thiourea) was notably more active (LD50: 28.5 µM) against Culex quinquefasciatus than permethrin(54.6 µM) and temephos(37.9 µM), whereas compound 1i at 100 µM caused 0% mortality in Oreochromis mossambicus within 24 h in an antifeedant screening, with ichthyotoxicity determined as the death ratio (%) at 24 h. Compounds 1a, 1e, 1f, 1j, and 1k were found to be highly toxic, whereas 1i was not toxic in antifeedant screening. Compound 1i was found to possess a high larvicidal activity against C. quinquefasciatus and was non-toxic to non-target aquatic species. Molecular docking studies also supported the finding that 1i is a potent larvicide with higher binding energy than the control (- 10.0 vs. - 7.6 kcal/mol) in the 3OGN protein. Lead molecules are important for their larvicidal properties and application as insecticides.

Binary and ternary toxicological interactions of clothianidin and eight commonly used pesticides on honey bees (Apis mellifera)

Although many toxicological evaluations have been conducted for honey bees (Apis mellifera), most of these studies have only focused on the effects of individual chemicals. However, honey bees are usually exposed to pesticide mixtures under field conditions. In this study, we examined the effects of individual pesticides and mixtures of clothianidin (CLO) with eight other pesticides [carbaryl (CAR), thiodicarb (THI), chlorpyrifos (CHL), beta-cyfluthrin (BCY), gamma-cyhalothrin (GCY), tetraconazole (TET), spinosad (SPI) and indoxacarb (IND)] on honey bees using a feeding method. Toxicity tests of a 4-day exposure to individual pesticides revealed that CLO had the highest toxicity to A. mellifera, with an LC₅₀ value of 0.24 μg a.i. mL^-1, followed by IND and CHL with LC₅₀ values of 3.40 and 3.56 μg a.i. mL^-1, respectively. SPI and CAR had relatively low toxicities, with LC₅₀ values of 7.19 and 8.42 μg a.i. mL^-1, respectively. In contrast, TET exhibited the least toxicity, with an LC₅₀ value of 258.7 μg a.i. mL^-1. Most binary mixtures of CLO with other pesticides exerted additive and antagonistic effects. However, all the ternary mixtures containing CLO and TET (except for CLO+TET+THD) elicited synergistic responses to bees. Either increased numbers of components in the mixture or/and a unique mode of action appeared to be responsible for the higher toxicity of mixtures. Our findings emphasized the need for risk assessment of pesticide mixtures rather than the individual chemicals. Our data also provided information that might help growers avoid increased toxicity and unnecessary injury to pollinators.

The Behavioral Toxicity of Insect Growth Disruptors on Apis mellifera Queen Care

As social insects, honey bees (Apis mellifera) rely on the coordinated performance of various behaviors to ensure that the needs of the colony are met. One of the most critical of these behaviors is the feeding and care of egg laying honey bee queens by non-fecund female worker attendants. These behaviors are crucial to honey bee reproduction and are known to be elicited by the queen’s pheromone blend. The degree to which workers respond to this blend can vary depending on their physiological status, but little is known regarding the impacts of developmental exposure to agrochemicals on this behavior. This work investigated how exposing workers during larval development to chronic sublethal doses of insect growth disruptors affected their development time, weight, longevity, and queen pheromone responsiveness as adult worker honey bees. Exposure to the juvenile hormone analog pyriproxyfen consistently shortened the duration of pupation, and pyriproxyfen and diflubenzuron inconsistently reduced the survivorship of adult bees. Finally, pyriproxyfen and methoxyfenozide treated bees were found to be less responsive to queen pheromone relative to other treatment groups. Here, we describe these results and discuss their possible physiological underpinnings as well as their potential impacts on honey bee reproduction and colony performance.

Sublethal effects of Isoclast™ Active (50% sulfoxaflor water dispersible granules) on larval and adult worker honey bees (Apis mellifera L.)

Sulfoxaflor is a novel sulfoximine insecticide which is widely used to control crop pests. Risk assessments have reported its high toxicity to pollinators. However, sulfoxaflor is not persistent in the environment and few studies have addressed its negative effects on larval and newly emerged honeybees at environmentally relevant concentrations. In the present study, the sublethal effects of a sulfoxaflor commercial product, Isoclast™ Active, were evaluated in the laboratory using larvae and newly emerged worker honeybees. The results of 96-h acute toxicity showed that Isoclast is moderately toxic to adult bees, and it could induce significant death and growth failure of larvae after continuous dietary intake. In addition, Isoclast induced significant changes in antioxidative (SOD, CAT), lipid peroxidation (POD, LPO, MDA), detoxification (GST, GR, GSH) and signal transduction-related (AChE, ACh) enzymes or products both in larvae and adult honey bees under residue levels. Here we firstly reported the lethal and sublethal effects of commercial sulfoxaflor to honeybees' larvae and young workers. All these findings revealed the potential risks of sulfoxaflor residue in environment to honey bees, and may also to other pollinators. This is a laboratory mimic studies, and further studies are still needed to investigate the risks and in-depth mechanisms of sulfoxaflor to bees in field.

Impact of broad-spectrum pesticides used in the agricultural and forestry sector on the pesticide profile in wild boar, roe deer and deer and risk assessment for venison consumers

The present work is the first extensive study of large-scale pesticides research in wild animals. The investigation covered three game species: wild boar (n = 42), roe deer (n = 79) and deer (n = 15) collected from north-eastern Poland. To characterize the 480 pesticides in muscle samples, LC-GC-MS/MS techniques were used. A total of 28 compounds were detected: 5 neonicotinoids, 6 organochlorine and 5 other insecticides, 9 fungicides and 4 herbicides, in the range of 0.1-85.3 ng g^-1. Over four hundred detections were done. The highest mean concentrations were as follows: anthraquinone (85.3 ng g^-1) > DDT-p,p' (4.6 ng g^-1) > imidacloprid (4.3 ng g^-1) > permethrin (3.6 ng g^-1) > thiacloprid (2.8 ng g^-1). DDT and metabolites were the most frequently detected, followed by acetamiprid, tebuconazole, clothianidin and imidacloprid. Overall, 92% samples with residues were recorded, including 100% of wild boar, 88% of roe deer and 86% of deer. More than one pesticide (up to 9) was found in over 73% of the tested samples. The estimated chronic and acute risk to consumers of venison were very low (below 1% ADI and ARfD). This interdisciplinary study may be helpful for estimating ecological risk to wild animals and risk to consumers of wild animal products, and also as a source of biomonitoring data.

Identities, concentrations, and sources of pesticide exposure in pollen collected by managed bees during blueberry pollination

Bees are critical for crop pollination, but there is limited information on levels and sources of pesticide exposure in commercial agriculture. We collected pollen from foraging honey bees and bumble bees returning to colonies placed in blooming blueberry fields with different management approaches (conventional, organic, unmanaged) and located across different landscape settings to determine how these factors affect pesticide exposure. We also identified the pollen and analyzed whether pesticide exposure was correlated with corbicular load composition. Across 188 samples collected in 2 years, we detected 80 of the 259 pesticide active ingredients (AIs) screened for using a modified QuEChERS method. Detections included 28 fungicides, 26 insecticides, and 21 herbicides. All samples contained pesticides (mean = 22 AIs per pollen sample), with pollen collected from bees on conventional fields having significantly higher average concentrations (2019 mean = 882.0 ppb) than those on unmanaged fields (2019 mean = 279.6 ppb). Pollen collected by honey bees had more AIs than pollen collected by bumble bees (mean = 35 vs. 19 AIs detected at each farm, respectively), whereas samples from bumble bees had higher average concentrations, likely reflecting differences in foraging behavior. Blueberry pollen was more common in pollen samples collected by bumble bees (25.9% per sample) than honey bees (1.8%), though pesticide concentrations were only correlated with blueberry pollen for honey bees. Pollen collected at farms with more blueberry in the surrounding landscape had higher pesticide concentrations, mostly AIs applied for control of blueberry pathogens and pests during bloom. However, for honey bees, the majority of AIs detected at each farm are not registered for use on blueberry at any time (55.2% of AIs detected), including several highly toxic insecticides. These AIs therefore came from outside the fields and farms they are expected to pollinate. For bumble bees, the majority of AIs detected in their pollen are registered for use on blueberry during bloom (56.9% of AIs detected), though far fewer AIs were sprayed at the focal farm (16.7%). Our results highlight the need for integrated farm and landscape-scale stewardship of pesticides to reduce exposure to pollinators during crop pollination.

Combined Effects of Pesticides and Electromagnetic-Fields on Honeybees: Multi-Stress Exposure

Honeybee and general pollinator decline is extensively reported in many countries, adding new concern to the general biodiversity loss. Many studies were addressed to assess the causes of pollinator decline, concluding that in most cases multi-stress effects were the most probable ones. In this research, the combined effects of two possible stress sources for bees, pesticides and electromagnetic fields (multi-stress conditions), were analyzed in the field. Three experimental sites were chosen: a control one far from direct anthropogenic stress sources, a pesticide-stress site and multi-stress one, adding to the same exposure to pesticides the presence of an electromagnetic field, coming from a high-voltage electric line. Experimental apiaries were monitored weekly for one year (from April 2017 to April 2018) by means of colony survival, queen activity, storage and brood amount, parasites and pathogens, and several biomarkers in young workers and pupae. Both exposure and effect biomarkers were analysed: among the first, acetylcholinesterase (AChE), catalase (CAT), glutathione S-transferase (GST) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS); and among the last, DNA fragmentation (DNAFRAGM) and lipid peroxidation (LPO). Results showed that bee health conditions were the worst in the multi-stress site with only one colony alive out of the four ones present at the beginning. In this site, a complex picture of adverse effects was observed, such as disease appearance (American foulbrood), higher mortality in the underbaskets (common to pesticide-stress site), behavioral alterations (queen changes, excess of honey storage) and biochemical anomalies (higher ALP activity at the end of the season). The overall results clearly indicate that the multi-stress conditions were able to induce biochemical, physiological and behavioral alterations which severely threatened bee colony survival.