Neonicotinoid Pesticides and Bees - The Food and Environment ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Honeybees are the target of a large number of viruses with a total of 18 identified to date. Often virus vectoring by Varroa, which is a significant stressor in honeybee colonies by feeding on the haemolymph causes a variety of physical and physiological effects on the colony, and results in infections from viruses which are otherwise present as covert infections resulting in severe disease and mortality within the colony. In addition viruses can be transmitted within the colony by trophallaxis, contact, faeces and salivary gland secretions. However to date there are no reports of interactions between neonicotinoids and viruses Neonicotinoid pesticides and bees Page 41 of 133 Report to Syngenta Ltd
2.5 Exposure of bees to pesticides See EFSA 2012 http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/supporting/pub/340e.htm. Conclusions Bees are exposed to pesticides via a number of routes and the relative importance of each depends on the life stage of the insect and the mode of application of the pesticide. Adults may be exposed directly to pesticides through direct overspray or flying through spray drift, by consumption of pollen and nectar (which may contain directly over-sprayed or systemic residues), by contact with treated surfaces (such as resting on recently treated leaves or flowers), by contact with dusts generated during drilling of treated seeds, or by exposure to guttation fluid potentially as a source of water or as dried residues on the surface of leaves. The exposure of larvae is primarily via processed pollen and nectar in brood food. Data available in the literature includes residues in pollen, wax and nectar within colonies, pollen and nectar residues from plants, in pollen loads on bees returning to the hives and in adult workers. Such data also includes the residues of veterinary medicines detected and the distribution of chemicals around the hive. The routes of exposure of bees to pesticides has been assessed and recently reviewed in an EFSA Scientific Opinion particularly in relation to quantifying uptake and extended to include other non-Apis species where data were available. The exposure of bumble bees to pesticides has also been reviewed and showed there are key times in the year when exposure of queens may be particularly important in determining the fate of a colony. A review of residues in bees after pesticide applications in the EFSA review (2012) provides evidence of the exposure of bees to applications aggregated through all routes of exposure, i.e. through direct overspray, foraging on treated crops and consumption of treated food and water as samples were collected over time after exposure. This showed peak residues in the first sample after application with declines for spray applications over the following week. No data from systemic seed or soil application field studies were available but residues of imidacloprid and its metabolite 6-chloronitoctinic acid and fipronil and its metabolites were detected at low levels in monitoring studies Studies on residues deposited as dust containing neonicotinoids are summarised obviously this does not take into account recent EU requirements to limit dust emissions through the use of professionally treated seeds and deflectors. Drift during agricultural treatment determines the deposition of pesticides within a small distance from the field edge. What is less obvious is how to calculate the drift onto flowering weeds in the field margin as dust drift is unlikely to behave in the same way as spray drift due to the wide variations in particle size. Unfortunately the deposition data generated to date for grasses and flowering weeds in flower margins have limitations in terms of the reporting of sowing rates and seed treatment rates. Contact of bees with treated surfaces may occur through resting on treated leaves or during foraging on treated flowers. The major issue is that bees do not come into contact with the treated plant over the entire surface of their body but primarily through their feet; however Neonicotinoid pesticides and bees Page 42 of 133 Report to Syngenta Ltd
Page 1 and 2: Neonicotinoid Pesticides and Bees R
Page 3 and 4: Contents 1. Executive Summary .....
Page 5 and 6: (thiamethoxam, clothianidin, imidac
Page 7 and 8: why some immune competence effects
Page 9 and 10: metabolite 6-chloronicotinic acid a
Page 11 and 12: Nectar collected by foragers from p
Page 13 and 14: 2. Introduction This literature rev
Page 15 and 16: 4. Results 2.1 Mode of Action and M
Page 17 and 18: and O-demethlase activity which is
Page 19 and 20: toxicity similar to imidacloprid an
Page 21 and 22: Table 1: Oral and contact 48 LD50 v
Page 23 and 24: Table 1. It is particularly true fo
Page 25 and 26: Incidentally, (Suchail et al., 2001
Page 27 and 28: Table 5:Summary of toxicity of neon
Page 29 and 30: Table 8: Showing published acute to
Page 31 and 32: Insecticide Concentration Range Bee
Page 37 and 38: 2.3 Multiple exposure to pesticides
Page 39 and 40: Insecticide Clothianidin Imidaclopr
Page 41: 2.4 Interactions between neonicotin
Page 45 and 46: contaminated pollen and nectar brou
Page 47 and 48: none reported effects at or below t
Page 49 and 50: Figure 4. Comparison of reported ef
Page 51 and 52: Table 11 Overview of laboratory stu
Page 53 and 54: Compound tested Species Imidaclopri
Page 55 and 56: Compound tested Species 5hydroxymid
Page 57 and 58: Compound tested Species (Gaucho) Ap
Page 61 and 62: Compound tested Species ligustica t
Page 63 and 64: Compound tested Species Thiamethoxa
Page 65 and 66: Compound tested Species Fipronil (9
Page 67 and 68: Compound tested Species Fipronil Ap
Page 69 and 70: Table 16 Overview of semi-field, do
Page 83 and 84: Compound tested Species Thiamethoxa
Page 85 and 86: Compound tested Species (analytical
Page 87 and 88: Table 20 Overview of studies of the
Page 89 and 90: Compound tested species/subspecies
Page 91 and 92: Compound tested species/subspecies
Page 93 and 94:
Compound tested species/subspecies
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Clothianidin (99.75% TG) Bombus imp
Page 101 and 102:
Bombus terrestris oral/adults Thiam
Page 103 and 104:
5. References References in bold ar
Page 105 and 106:
Bernadou A, Damares F, Couret-Fauve
Page 107 and 108:
Colin M, Bonmatin J, Moineau I, Gai
Page 109 and 110:
EFSA (2012b) Public consultation on
Page 111 and 112:
Gauthier, M. (2010). State of the A
Page 113 and 114:
Iwasa, T., N. Motoyama, et al. (200
Page 115 and 116:
Liu, M. Y. and J. E. Casida (1993).
Page 117 and 118:
Nakajima C, Sakogawa T, Okayama A,
Page 119 and 120:
Megachile rotundata (Hymentoptera:
Page 121 and 122:
Tomizawa, M. and I. Yamamoto (1993)
Page 123 and 124:
Wu JY, Anelli CM, and Sheppard WS,
Page 125 and 126:
14. Apis mellifera.mp. [mp=ab, bc,
Page 127 and 128:
SYSTEM:OS - DIALOG OneSearch File 1
Page 129 and 130:
S21 486 S11 AND S19 S22 500316 ROUT
Page 131 and 132:
COBOMBUS OR CERATINA OR ZADONTOMERU
Page 133:
DEFRA hereby excludes all liability
show all

Neonicotinoid Pesticides and Bees - The Food and Environment ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?