Balancing Control and Complexity in Field Studies of Neonicotinoids and Honey Bee Health

Regulatory framework for the assessment of the impacts of plant protection products on biodiversity: review of strengths and limits

The placing of plant protection products (PPPs) on the market in the European Union is governed by numerous regulations. These regulations are among the most stringent in the world, however they have been the subject of criticisms especially because of the decline in biodiversity. The objectives of this work were to review (1) the functioning and actors involved in the PPP framework processes, (2) the construction of the environmental risk assessment focused on biodiversity, and (3) the suggested ways to respond to the identified limits. Both literature from social sciences and ecotoxicology were examined. Despite the protective nature of the European regulation on PPPs, the very imperfect consideration of biodiversity in the evaluation process was underlined. The main limits are the multiplicity of applicable rules, the routinization of the evaluation procedures, the lack of consideration of social data, and the lack of independence of the evaluation. Strengths of the regulation are the decision to integrate a systemic approach in the evaluation of PPPs, the development of modeling tools, and the phytopharmacovigilance systems. The avenues for improvement concern the realism of the risk assessment (species used, cocktail effects…), a greater transparency and independence in the conduct of evaluations, and the opening of the evaluation and decision-making processes to actors such as beekeepers or NGOs. Truly interdisciplinary reflections crossing the functioning of the living world, its alteration by PPPs, and how these elements question the users of PPPs would allow to specify social actions, public policies, and their regulation to better protect biodiversity.

Impacts of neonicotinoids on biodiversity: a critical review

Neonicotinoids are the most widely used class of insecticides in the world, but they have raised numerous concerns regarding their effects on biodiversity. Thus, the objective of this work was to do a critical review of the contamination of the environment (soil, water, air, biota) by neonicotinoids (acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, thiacloprid, thiamethoxam) and of their impacts on terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity. Neonicotinoids are very frequently detected in soils and in freshwater, and they are also found in the air. They have only been recently monitored in coastal and marine environments, but some studies already reported the presence of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam in transitional or semi-enclosed ecosystems (lagoons, bays, and estuaries). The contamination of the environment leads to the exposure and to the contamination of non-target organisms and to negative effects on biodiversity. Direct impacts of neonicotinoids are mainly reported on terrestrial invertebrates (e.g., pollinators, natural enemies, earthworms) and vertebrates (e.g., birds) and on aquatic invertebrates (e.g., arthropods). Impacts on aquatic vertebrate populations and communities, as well as on microorganisms, are less documented. In addition to their toxicity to directly exposed organisms, neonicotinoid induce indirect effects via trophic cascades as demonstrated in several species (terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates). However, more data are needed to reach firmer conclusions and to get a clearer picture of such indirect effects. Finally, we identified specific knowledge gaps that need to be filled to better understand the effects of neonicotinoids on terrestrial, freshwater, and marine organisms, as well as on ecosystem services associated with these biotas.

The role of the veterinary diagnostic toxicologist in apiary health

Susceptibility of individuals and groups to toxicants depends on complex interactions involving the host, environment, and other exposures. Apiary diagnostic investigation and honey bee health are truly population medicine: the colony is the patient. Here we provide basic information on the application of toxicology to the testing of domestic honey bees, and, in light of recent research, expand on some of the challenges of interpreting analytical chemistry findings as they pertain to hive health. The hive is an efficiently organized system of wax cells used to store brood, honey, and bee bread, and is protected by the bee-procured antimicrobial compound propolis. Toxicants can affect individual workers outside or inside the hive, with disease processes that range from acute to chronic and subclinical to lethal. Toxicants can impact brood and contaminate honey, bee bread, and structural wax. We provide an overview of important natural and synthetic toxicants to which honey bees are exposed; behavioral, husbandry, and external environmental factors influencing exposure; short- and long-term impacts of toxicant exposure on individual bee and colony health; and the convergent impacts of stress, nutrition, infectious disease, and toxicant exposures on colony health. Current and potential future toxicology testing options are included. Common contaminants in apiary products consumed or used by humans (honey, wax, pollen), their sources, and the potential need for product testing are also noted.

Using Citronella to Protect Bees (honeybee Apis mellifera L.) from certain Insecticides and Their Nano Formulations

Abstract Experiments were performed investigating citronella (Cymbopogon winterianus Jowitt) as a repellent to honeybee Apis mellifera (L.) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in Egypt, it was conducted in laboratory in the Department of Entomology and Pesticides Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Cairo University, to check long-term survival of honeybee when exposed to different nano insecticides alone or combined with citronella at the same examination box for each. In this study, we used a modeling approach regarding survival data of caged worker bees under chronic exposure to four insecticides (Chloropyrophos, Nano-chloropyrophos Imidacloprid, Nano-Imidacloprid) each of them was supplemented in a box alone and in combination with citronella. Having three replicates and five concentrations (100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 ppm). Laboratory bioassay of these insecticides showed that chloropyrophos and nano chloropyrophos were the most toxic at their high dose (500 ppm) with LT50 of 120.98 and 122.02 followed by 132.14 and 136.5 minutes for Imidacloprid and Nano-Imidacloprid, respectively. No consumption occurred by bees to mixed sugar syrup with insecticides in all treatments when citronella was added. These data highly recommended that adding citronella is very effective when nicotinoid pesticides are used to longevity honeybee life and keep bee safe.

The Effects of Exposure to Flupyradifurone on Survival, Development, and Foraging Activity of Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.) under Field Conditions

Flupyradifurone (FPF) is a novel systemic nAChR agonist that interferes with signal transduction in the central nervous system of sucking pests. Despite claims that FPF is potentially "bee-safe" by risk assessments, laboratory data have suggested that FPF has multiple sub-lethal effects on individual honey bees. Our study aimed to expand the studies to the effects of field-realistic concentration of FPF. We found a statistically significant decrease in the survival rate of honey bees exposed to FPF, whereas there were no significantly negative effects on larvae development durations nor foraging activity. In addition, we found that the exposed foragers showed significantly higher expression of ApidNT, CYP9Q2, CYP9Q3, and AmInR-2 compared to the CK group (control group), but no alteration in the gene expression was observed in larvae. The exposed newly emerged bees showed significantly higher expression of Defensin and ApidNT. These results indicate that the chronic exposure to the field-realistic concentration of FPF has negligible effects, but more important synergistic and behavioral effects that can affect colony fitness should be explored in the future, considering the wide use of FPF on crops pollinated and visited by honey bees.

A One-Health Model for Reversing Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) Decline

Global insect decline impacts ecosystem resilience; pollinators such as honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) have suffered extensive losses over the last decade, threatening food security. Research has focused discretely on in-hive threats (e.g., Nosema and Varroa destructor) and broader external causes of decline (e.g., agrochemicals, habitat loss). This has notably failed to translate into successful reversal of bee declines. Working at the interdisciplinary nexus of entomological, social and ecological research, we posit that veterinary research needs to adopt a "One-Health" approach to address the scope of crises facing pollinators. We demonstrate that reversing declines will require integration of hive-specific solutions, a reappraisal of engagement with the many stakeholders whose actions affect bee health, and recontextualising both of these within landscape scale efforts. Other publications within this special issue explore novel technologies, emergent diseases and management approaches; our aim is to place these within the "One-Health" context as a pathway to securing honeybee health. Governmental policy reform offers a particularly timely pathway to achieving this goal. Acknowledging that healthy honeybees need an interdisciplinary approach to their management will enhance the contributions of veterinary research in delivering systemic improvements in bee health.

From Ideal to Real Risk: Philosophy of Causation Meets Risk Analysis

A question has been raised in recent years as to whether the risk field, including analysis, assessment, and management, ought to be considered a discipline on its own. As suggested by Terje Aven, unification of the risk field would require a common understanding of basic concepts, such as risk and probability; hence, more discussion is needed of what he calls "foundational issues." In this article, we show that causation is a foundational issue of risk, and that a proper understanding of it is crucial. We propose that some old ideas about the nature of causation must be abandoned in order to overcome certain persisting challenges facing risk experts over the last decade. In particular, we discuss the challenge of including causally relevant knowledge from the local context when studying risk. Although it is uncontroversial that the receptor plays an important role for risk evaluations, we show how the implementation of receptor-based frameworks is hindered by methodological shortcomings that can be traced back to Humean orthodoxies about causation. We argue that the first step toward the development of frameworks better suited to make realistic risk predictions is to reconceptualize causation, by examining a philosophical alternative to the Humean understanding. In this article, we show how our preferred account, causal dispositionalism, offers a different perspective in how risk is evaluated and understood.

Field Residues and Effects of the Insect Growth Regulator Novaluron and Its Major Co-Formulant N-Methyl-2-Pyrrolidone on Honey Bee Reproduction and Development

Owing to the recent declines in honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) populations, there is a need for field and laboratory studies to investigate threats to pollinator health. This study examines the hypothesis that the organophosphate alternative, Rimon 0.83EC, can have consequences to honey bee health by combining newly acquired field residue data, laboratory bioassays, and colony level feeding studies. Following label rate applications of Rimon 0.83EC to apple trees, average residue concentrations of the active ingredient, novaluron, were found to be 3.38 ppm in tree-collected pollen. Residues of the major co-formulant in Rimon 0.83EC, N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), were below the limit of detection in the field, but a growth chamber study described here found that NMP can persist in pollen for up to 7 d with average concentrations of 69.3 ppm. Concurrent larval rearing studies found novaluron and NMP to be toxic to developing honey bees at doses as low as 100 ppb and 100 ppm, respectively. Nucleus colony feeding studies found that chronic exposure to Rimon 0.83EC at doses as low as 200 ppm (18.6 ppm novaluron) can result in interruptions to brood production that can last for up to 2 wk after exposure. Taken together, these data indicate the use of Rimon 0.83EC on blooming flowers is a significant threat to honey bee reproduction, and suggest the need for more strict and clear usage guidelines.

Stress indicator gene expression profiles, colony dynamics and tissue development of honey bees exposed to sub-lethal doses of imidacloprid in laboratory and field experiments

In this study, different context-dependent effects of imidacloprid exposure on the honey bee response were studied. Honey bees were exposed to different concentrations of imidacloprid during a time period of 40 days. Next to these variables, a laboratory-field comparison was conducted. The influence of the chronic exposure on gene expression levels was determined using an in-house developed microarray targeting different immunity-related and detoxification genes to determine stress-related gene expression changes. Increased levels of the detoxification genes encoding, CYP9Q3 and CYT P450, were detected in imidacloprid-exposed honey bees. The different context-dependent effects of imidacloprid exposure on honey bees were confirmed physiologically by decreased hypopharyngeal gland sizes. Honey bees exposed to imidacloprid in laboratory cages showed a general immunosuppression and no detoxification mechanisms were triggered significantly, while honey bees in-field showed a resilient response with an immune stimulation at later time points. However, the treated colonies had a brood and population decline tendency after the first brood cycle in the field. In conclusion, this study highlighted the different context-dependent effects of imidacloprid exposure on the honey bee response. These findings warn for possible pitfalls concerning the generalization of results based on specific experiments with short exposure times. The increased levels of CYT P450 and CYP9Q3 combined with an immune response reaction can be used as markers for bees which are exposed to pesticides in the field.

A review of the direct and indirect effects of neonicotinoids and fipronil on vertebrate wildlife

Concerns over the role of pesticides affecting vertebrate wildlife populations have recently focussed on systemic products which exert broad-spectrum toxicity. Given that the neonicotinoids have become the fastest-growing class of insecticides globally, we review here 150 studies of their direct (toxic) and indirect (e.g. food chain) effects on vertebrate wildlife--mammals, birds, fish, amphibians and reptiles. We focus on two neonicotinoids, imidacloprid and clothianidin, and a third insecticide, fipronil, which also acts in the same systemic manner. Imidacloprid and fipronil were found to be toxic to many birds and most fish, respectively. All three insecticides exert sub-lethal effects, ranging from genotoxic and cytotoxic effects, and impaired immune function, to reduced growth and reproductive success, often at concentrations well below those associated with mortality. Use of imidacloprid and clothianidin as seed treatments on some crops poses risks to small birds, and ingestion of even a few treated seeds could cause mortality or reproductive impairment to sensitive bird species. In contrast, environmental concentrations of imidacloprid and clothianidin appear to be at levels below those which will cause mortality to freshwater vertebrates, although sub-lethal effects may occur. Some recorded environmental concentrations of fipronil, however, may be sufficiently high to harm fish. Indirect effects are rarely considered in risk assessment processes and there is a paucity of data, despite the potential to exert population-level effects. Our research revealed two field case studies of indirect effects. In one, reductions in invertebrate prey from both imidacloprid and fipronil uses led to impaired growth in a fish species, and in another, reductions in populations in two lizard species were linked to effects of fipronil on termite prey. Evidence presented here suggests that the systemic insecticides, neonicotinoids and fipronil, are capable of exerting direct and indirect effects on terrestrial and aquatic vertebrate wildlife, thus warranting further review of their environmental safety.