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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Compound tested Species Imidacloprid ‘Bees’ Imidacloprid (60%, Gaucho FS) Apis mellifera ligustica Study type Test dose Test duration Dosed in semifield (tunnel)/oral/adults (foraging) Field study / oral exposure / adults + brood 50µg/kg and higher imidacloprid in sucrose 25µg/kg and higher imidacloprid in sucrose 100µg/kg to 3ug/kg imidacloprid in sucrose Seeds treated with 0.24 mg a.i./seed (Sunflower treated at 600 ml/100 kg of different times of the season and 3 colonies before contaminati on and during 4 days after Long-term (226 days: 10 days in the field and observation s on the remaining Endpoints Results Notes (reference to study numbers in figures 20 and Foraging activity (i) Frequency of visits to feeding station (ii) quantity of syrup taken (iii) duration of visits Population development and honey production (hive weight, nectar, pollen, brood, honey the proportion of active bees at the feeder (i) Number of bees fell to 0 during the imidacloprid treated phase (1h) (ii) Quantity of syrup taken declined during the treated phase (1h) (iii) Affected at all concentrations No significant difference for their development regarding pollen entrance and pollen in the hives, nectar and mortality. Treated hives were Neonicotinoid pesticides and bees Page 75 of 133 Report to Syngenta Ltd 21) Reference (39) Colin et al (2001) Stadler et al (2003)
Compound tested Species Imidacloprid (Gaucho) Honeybees Imidacloprid Bee Imidacloprid (200 SL) Bees Imidacloprid (Confidor 200 SL) Honeybees Study type Test dose Test duration Field test / field / workers Field/field application/adults Field/field exposure/adults Field/field exposure/workers seed, 60.000 seeds/ha) Not recorded but states recommended rate is 0.7mg a.i./plant (sunflower). (Equivalent to 50g a.i./ha at 70,000 plants/ha.) 0.0178% (??) 140, 168 or 196ml product/ha 46g a.i./ha leaf wall area (calculated taking height Endpoints Results Notes (reference to study numbers in figures 20 and 216 days) production, foraging activity, pollen entrance and mortality) Not recorded Number of bees entering hive. Number of bees visiting flowers Hive weight development 5d Bee visits to crop NR Number of foraging bees Flower visits following spraying at either green bud significantly more productive (higher weight, honey production, increased foraging activity, brood). High proportion of sunflower pollen in both treated and controls No effects on any parameter. No behaviourally impaired bees observed. Reduced number of visits compared to controls (in line with data for other insecticides, endosulfan, malathion) No effect on number of foraging bees. No effects on visits to flowers following either treatment therefore no repellency observed. Neonicotinoid pesticides and bees Page 76 of 133 Report to Syngenta Ltd 21) Reference Cure et al (2001) Kumar and Singh (2012) Singh and Singh (2004) Gobin et al (2008)
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 and 42: 2.4 Interactions between neonicotin
Page 43 and 44: 2.5 Exposure of bees to pesticides
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 75: Compound tested Species Imidaclopri
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 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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?