A spatial model of honey bee colony collapse due to pesticide contamination of foraging bees.

We develop a model of honey bee colony collapse based on contamination of forager bees in pesticide contaminated spatial environments. The model consists of differential and difference equations for the spatial distributions of the uncontaminated and contaminated forager bees. A key feature of the model is incorporation of the return to the hive each day of forager bees. The model quantifies colony collapse in terms of two significant properties of honey bee colonies: (1) the fraction of contaminated forager bees that fail to return home due to pesticide contamination, and (2) the fraction of forager bees in the total forager bee population that return to the sites visited on the previous day. If the fraction of contaminated foragers failing to return home is high, then the total population falls below a critical threshold and colony collapse ensues. If the fraction of all foragers that return to previous foraging sites is high, then foragers who visit contaminated sites multiple times have a higher probability of becoming contaminated, and colony collapse ensues. This quantification of colony collapse provides guidance for implementing measures for its avoidance.

An Environmental Model of Honey Bee Colony Collapse Due to Pesticide Contamination.

We develop a model of honey bee colony collapse based on the contamination of forager bees in environmental regions contaminated with pesticides. An important feature of the model is the daily homing capacity each day of foragers bees. The model consists of difference equations describing the daily homing of uncontaminated and contaminated forager bees, with an increased homing failure of contaminated bees. The model quantifies colony collapse in terms of the fraction of contaminated bees subject to this increased homing failure. If the fraction is sufficiently high, then the hive falls below a viability threshold population size that leads to rapid disintegration. If the fraction is sufficiently low, then the hive can rise above the viability threshold and attain a stable population level.

A neonicotinoid pesticide impairs foraging, but not learning, in free-flying bumblebees.

Neonicotinoids are widely-used pesticides implicated in the decline of bees, known to have sub-lethal effects on bees' foraging and colony performance. One proposed mechanism for these negative effects is impairment to bees' ability to learn floral associations. However, the effects of neonicotinoids on learning performance have largely been addressed using a single protocol, where immobilized bees learn an association based on a single sensory modality. We thus have an incomplete understanding of how these pesticides affect bee learning in more naturalistic foraging scenarios. We carried out the first free-foraging study into the effects of acute exposure of a neonicotinoid (imidacloprid) on bumblebees' (Bombus impatiens) ability to learn associations with visual stimuli. We uncovered dose-dependent detrimental effects on motivation to initiate foraging, amount of nectar collected, and initiation of subsequent foraging bouts. However, we did not find any impairment to bees' ability to learn visual associations. While not precluding the possibility that other forms of learning are impaired, our findings suggest that some of the major effects of acute neonicotinoid exposure on foraging performance may be due to motivational and/or sensory impairments. In light of these findings, we discuss more broadly how pesticide effects on pollinator cognition might be studied.

Synergistic effects of pathogen and pesticide exposure on honey bee (Apis mellifera) survival and immunity.

Declines in native insect pollinator populations and substantial losses in managed honey bees have been reported on a global scale and become a widespread concern because of the importance of these insects for human food production and ecosystem stability. Several potential factors have been studied as possible causes of declining pollinator health, such as parasites and pathogens, exposure to agricultural pesticides, habitat loss and/or climate change. More recently, a combination of these factors rather than a single cause have been blamed for observed pollinator losses, but field studies of such interactions are challenging, especially in the presence of confounding environmental stressors. We therefore examined the impact of single and combined stressors on the honey bee (Apis mellifera) in a generally healthy Australian population. We exposed workers during their larval development and drones until they reached sexual maturity to the neonicotinoid pesticide Thiamethoxam, at concentrations more than 20 times lower than we initially measured in the field, the microsporidian gut pathogen Nosema apis or both stressors at the same time. We found that simultaneous exposure significantly reduced bee health. We observed a substantial increase in mortality and a reduction of immunocompetence in workers exposed to both the pathogen and the pesticide. We conclude that the exposure of generally healthy bees to multiple environmental stressors results in synergistic effects where the effects are expected to negatively impact performance and could be sufficient to trigger colony collapse. We found that the vast majority of males did not survive to sexual maturity after exposure to very low levels of Thiamethoxam. This would not only reduce the reproductive success of individual colonies, but can also impact gene flow and genetic diversity at the population level, which are both known as key components of honey bee health.

Drivers of colony losses.

Over the past decade, in some regions of the world, honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies have experienced rates of colony loss that are difficult for beekeepers to sustain. The reasons for losses are complex and interacting, with major drivers including Varroaand related viruses, pesticides, nutrition and beekeeper practices. In these endeavors it has also become apparent that defining a dead colony, and singling out the effects of specific drivers of loss, is not so straightforward. Using the class of neonicotinoid pesticides as an example we explain why quantifying risk factor impact at the colony level is at times elusive and in some cases unpractical. In this review, we discuss the caveats of defining and quantifying dead colonies. We also summarize the current leading drivers of colony losses, their interactions and the most recent research on their effects on colony mortality.

Three years of banning neonicotinoid insecticides based on sub-lethal effects: can we expect to see effects on bees?

The 2013 EU ban of three neonicotinoids used in seed coating of pollinator attractive crops was put in place because of concern about declining wild pollinator populations and numbers of honeybee colonies. It was also concluded that there is an urgent need for good field data to fill knowledge gaps. In the meantime such data have been generated. Based on recent literature we question the existence of recent pollinator declines and their possible link with the use of neonicotinoids. Because of temporal non-coincidence we conclude that declines of wild pollinators and of honeybees are not likely caused by neonicotinoids. Even if bee decline does occur and if there is a causal relationship with the use of neonicotinoids, we argue that it is not possible on such short term to evaluate the effects of the 2013 ban. In order to supply future debate with realistic (field) data and to discourage extrapolating the effects of studies using overdoses that are not of environmental relevance, we propose - in addition to field studies performed by the chemical industry - to use the 'semi-field worst case' treated artificial diet studies approach to free flying colonies in the field. This kind of study may provide realistic estimates for risk and be useful to study realistic interactions with non-pesticide stressors. © 2017 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Colony impact of pesticide-induced sublethal effects on honeybee workers: A simulation study using BEEHAVE.

Research on neonicotinoids and honeybees have changed focus from direct mortality to sublethal effects. In the present study, a published honeybee model, BEEHAVE, is used to compare induced colony level impact of pesticides including direct mortality, poor brood care, disorientation, and increased handling time in oilseed rape and sunflower crops. Actual effects on individual bees will depend on exposure concentrations, but in the present study large effects were enforced. In oilseed rape, poor brood care had the largest colony impact, because it created a bottleneck for spring build-up of the workforce, and colony impact for all effect types peaked 1 mo after exposure ceased. In sunflower, the later exposure changed the response so colony impact peaked during exposure, and the bottleneck was honey store build-up. In all scenarios, good forage mitigated effects substantially. It is concluded that field studies should continue at least 1 mo after exposure to ensure detection of ecologically relevant sublethal effects. The results indicated that even if a sublethal effect is difficult to detect in the field, subsequent ecologically relevant colony level impacts would be clear if studies are continued for 1 mo after exposure. Guidance for regulatory studies recommends extended observation periods, and published field studies already use extended observation periods, so it is concluded that current methods are adequate for detecting ecologically relevant sublethal effects. Although published laboratory and semifield studies conducted under controlled exposure conditions suggest that sublethal effects may occur, published field studies with neonicotinoid seed treatments, naturally foraging bees, and extended observation periods do not report colony-level effects, suggesting that in these studies no ecologically relevant sublethal effects occurred. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:831-840. © 2016 SETAC.

A beekeeper's perspective on the neonicotinoid ban.

Bees and agrochemicals have a long history. For example, the first volume of IBRA's journal Bee World in 1919 contains mention of poisoning of bees by spraying an orchard with lead arsenate. Bees being insects, it is self-evident that the use of insecticides to control crop pests poses a risk to them. Bee poisoning incidents became a very serious problem in the 1960s and 1970s with spraying of, in particular, oilseed rape with organophosphorus compounds. The introduction of carbamates and then especially synthetic pyrethroids reduced these problems. Data from the Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme show that in recent years there have been very few poisoning incidents in the United Kingdom that can be attributed to agricultural insecticides. The introduction of neonicotinoid insecticides has, however, been very controversial. Almost as soon as they were introduced in the 1990s, French beekeepers blamed colony losses on imidacloprid used on sunflowers and maize, but restrictions on its use did not lead to a reduction in losses or to a reduction in beekeepers' concerns. Acute pesticide poisoning incidents by neonicotinoids in Germany and Italy in 2008 further sealed their reputation. Despite laboratory evidence showing their harm, field experience remains equivocal, and many commercial beekeepers continue to move their colonies to oilseed rape crops for honey production. The neonicotinoid moratorium has undoubtedly led to the increased use of older insecticides, and the effect of this on bee populations is unknown and unquantified. Many beekeepers are currently confused by the conflicting evidence. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry.

Assessment of chronic sublethal effects of imidacloprid on honey bee colony health.

Here we present results of a three-year study to determine the fate of imidacloprid residues in hive matrices and to assess chronic sublethal effects on whole honey bee colonies fed supplemental pollen diet containing imidacloprid at 5, 20 and 100 µg/kg over multiple brood cycles. Various endpoints of colony performance and foraging behavior were measured during and after exposure, including winter survival. Imidacloprid residues became diluted or non-detectable within colonies due to the processing of beebread and honey and the rapid metabolism of the chemical. Imidacloprid exposure doses up to 100 µg/kg had no significant effects on foraging activity or other colony performance indicators during and shortly after exposure. Diseases and pest species did not affect colony health but infestations of Varroa mites were significantly higher in exposed colonies. Honey stores indicated that exposed colonies may have avoided the contaminated food. Imidacloprid dose effects was delayed later in the summer, when colonies exposed to 20 and 100 µg/kg experienced higher rates of queen failure and broodless periods, which led to weaker colonies going into the winter. Pooled over two years, winter survival of colonies averaged 85.7, 72.4, 61.2 and 59.2% in the control, 5, 20 and 100 µg/kg treatment groups, respectively. Analysis of colony survival data showed a significant dose effect, and all contrast tests comparing survival between control and treatment groups were significant, except for colonies exposed to 5 µg/kg. Given the weight of evidence, chronic exposure to imidacloprid at the higher range of field doses (20 to 100 µg/kg) in pollen of certain treated crops could cause negative impacts on honey bee colony health and reduced overwintering success, but the most likely encountered high range of field doses relevant for seed-treated crops (5 µg/kg) had negligible effects on colony health and are unlikely a sole cause of colony declines.

A re-examination of the pollinator crisis.

Reports of colony collapse disorder in bees and studies showing the toxicity of neonicotinoid pesticides have led to claims that we are experiencing a pollinator crisis. As Cyrus Martin reports, however, the issue is complex with threats to bees being multifold and the status of populations unclear due to a surprising lack of data.

Honeybee colony disorder in crop areas: the role of pesticides and viruses.

As in many other locations in the world, honeybee colony losses and disorders have increased in Belgium. Some of the symptoms observed rest unspecific and their causes remain unknown. The present study aims to determine the role of both pesticide exposure and virus load on the appraisal of unexplained honeybee colony disorders in field conditions. From July 2011 to May 2012, 330 colonies were monitored. Honeybees, wax, beebread and honey samples were collected. Morbidity and mortality information provided by beekeepers, colony clinical visits and availability of analytical matrix were used to form 2 groups: healthy colonies and colonies with disorders (n = 29, n = 25, respectively). Disorders included: (1) dead colonies or colonies in which part of the colony appeared dead, or had disappeared; (2) weak colonies; (3) queen loss; (4) problems linked to brood and not related to any known disease. Five common viruses and 99 pesticides (41 fungicides, 39 insecticides and synergist, 14 herbicides, 5 acaricides and metabolites) were quantified in the samples.The main symptoms observed in the group with disorders are linked to brood and queens. The viruses most frequently found are Black Queen Cell Virus, Sac Brood Virus, Deformed Wing Virus. No significant difference in virus load was observed between the two groups. Three acaricides, 5 insecticides and 13 fungicides were detected in the analysed samples. A significant correlation was found between the presence of fungicide residues and honeybee colony disorders. A significant positive link could also be established between the observation of disorder and the abundance of crop surface around the beehive. According to our results, the role of fungicides as a potential stressor for honeybee colonies should be further studied, either by their direct and/or indirect impacts on bees and bee colonies.

Risks of neonicotinoid insecticides to honeybees.

The European honeybee, Apis mellifera, is an important pollinator of agricultural crops. Since 2006, when unexpectedly high colony losses were first reported, articles have proliferated in the popular press suggesting a range of possible causes and raising alarm over the general decline of bees. Suggested causes include pesticides, genetically modified crops, habitat fragmentation, and introduced diseases and parasites. Scientists have concluded that multiple factors in various combinations-including mites, fungi, viruses, and pesticides, as well as other factors such as reduction in forage, poor nutrition, and queen failure-are the most probable cause of elevated colony loss rates. Investigators and regulators continue to focus on the possible role that insecticides, particularly the neonicotinoids, may play in honeybee health. Neonicotinoid insecticides are insect neurotoxicants with desirable features such as broad-spectrum activity, low application rates, low mammalian toxicity, upward systemic movement in plants, and versatile application methods. Their distribution throughout the plant, including pollen, nectar, and guttation fluids, poses particular concern for exposure to pollinators. The authors describe how neonicotinoids interact with the nervous system of honeybees and affect individual honeybees in laboratory situations. Because honeybees are social insects, colony effects in semifield and field studies are discussed. The authors conclude with a review of current and proposed guidance in the United States and Europe for assessing the risks of pesticides to honeybees.

A four-year field program investigating long-term effects of repeated exposure of honey bee colonies to flowering crops treated with thiamethoxam.

Neonicotinoid residues in nectar and pollen from crop plants have been implicated as one of the potential factors causing the declines of honey bee populations. Median residues of thiamethoxam in pollen collected from honey bees after foraging on flowering seed treated maize were found to be between 1 and 7 µg/kg, median residues of the metabolite CGA322704 (clothianidin) in the pollen were between 1 and 4 µg/kg. In oilseed rape, median residues of thiamethoxam found in pollen collected from bees were between <1 and 3.5 µg/kg and in nectar from foraging bees were between 0.65 and 2.4 µg/kg. Median residues of CGA322704 in pollen and nectar in the oilseed rape trials were all below the limit of quantification (1 µg/kg). Residues in the hive were even lower in both the maize and oilseed rape trials, being at or below the level of detection of 1 µg/kg for bee bread in the hive and at or below the level of detection of 0.5 µg/kg for hive nectar, honey and royal jelly samples. The long-term risk to honey bee colonies in the field was also investigated, including the sensitive overwintering stage, from four years consecutive single treatment crop exposures to flowering maize and oilseed rape grown from thiamethoxam treated seeds at rates recommended for insect control. Throughout the study, mortality, foraging behavior, colony strength, colony weight, brood development and food storage levels were similar between treatment and control colonies. Detailed examination of brood development throughout the year demonstrated that colonies exposed to the treated crop were able to successfully overwinter and had a similar health status to the control colonies in the following spring. We conclude that these data demonstrate there is a low risk to honey bees from systemic residues in nectar and pollen following the use of thiamethoxam as a seed treatment on oilseed rape and maize.

Chronic sublethal stress causes bee colony failure.

Current bee population declines and colony failures are well documented yet poorly understood and no single factor has been identified as a leading cause. The evidence is equivocal and puzzling: for instance, many pathogens and parasites can be found in both failing and surviving colonies and field pesticide exposure is typically sublethal. Here, we investigate how these results can be due to sublethal stress impairing colony function. We mathematically modelled stress on individual bees which impairs colony function and found how positive density dependence can cause multiple dynamic outcomes: some colonies fail while others thrive. We then exposed bumblebee colonies to sublethal levels of a neonicotinoid pesticide. The dynamics of colony failure, which we observed, were most accurately described by our model. We argue that our model can explain the enigmatic aspects of bee colony failures, highlighting an important role for sublethal stress in colony declines.

Honey constituents up-regulate detoxification and immunity genes in the western honey bee Apis mellifera.

As a managed pollinator, the honey bee Apis mellifera is critical to the American agricultural enterprise. Recent colony losses have thus raised concerns; possible explanations for bee decline include nutritional deficiencies and exposures to pesticides and pathogens. We determined that constituents found in honey, including p-coumaric acid, pinocembrin, and pinobanksin 5-methyl ether, specifically induce detoxification genes. These inducers are primarily found not in nectar but in pollen in the case of p-coumaric acid (a monomer of sporopollenin, the principal constituent of pollen cell walls) and propolis, a resinous material gathered and processed by bees to line wax cells. RNA-seq analysis (massively parallel RNA sequencing) revealed that p-coumaric acid specifically up-regulates all classes of detoxification genes as well as select antimicrobial peptide genes. This up-regulation has functional significance in that that adding p-coumaric acid to a diet of sucrose increases midgut metabolism of coumaphos, a widely used in-hive acaricide, by ∼60%. As a major component of pollen grains, p-coumaric acid is ubiquitous in the natural diet of honey bees and may function as a nutraceutical regulating immune and detoxification processes. The widespread apicultural use of honey substitutes, including high-fructose corn syrup, may thus compromise the ability of honey bees to cope with pesticides and pathogens and contribute to colony losses.

A potential link among biogenic amines-based pesticides, learning and memory, and colony collapse disorder: a unique hypothesis.

Pesticides are substances that have been widely used throughout the world to kill, repel, or control organisms such as certain forms of plants or animals considered as pests. Depending on their type, dose, and persistence in the environment, they can have impact even on non-target species such as beneficial insects (honeybees) in different ways, including reduction in their survival rate and interference with their reproduction process. Honeybee Apis mellifera is a major pollinator and has substantial economical and ecological values. Colony collapse disorder (CCD) is a mysterious phenomenon in which adult honeybee workers suddenly abandon from their hives, leaving behind food, brood, and queen. It is lately drawing a lot of attention due to pollination crisis as well as global agriculture and medical demands. If the problem of CCD is not resolved soon enough, this could have a major impact on food industry affecting world's economy a big time. Causes of CCD are not known. In this overview, I discuss CCD, biogenic amines-based-pesticides (neonicotinoids and formamidines), and their disruptive effects on biogenic amine signaling causing olfactory dysfunction in honeybees. According to my hypothesis, chronic exposure of biogenic amines-based-pesticides to honeybee foragers in hives and agricultural fields can disrupt neural cholinergic and octopaminergic signaling. Abnormality in biogenic amines-mediated neuronal signaling impairs their olfactory learning and memory, therefore foragers do not return to their hive - a possible cause of CCD. This overview is an attempt to discuss a hypothetical link among biogenic amines-based pesticides, olfactory learning and memory, and CCD.

Detection of pesticides in active and depopulated beehives in Uruguay.

The influence of insecticides commonly used for agricultural purposes on beehive depopulation in Uruguay was investigated. Honeycombs, bees, honey and propolis from depopulated hives were analyzed for pesticide residues, whereas from active beehives only honey and propolis were evaluated. A total of 37 samples were analyzed, representing 14,800 beehives. In depopulated beehives only imidacloprid and fipronil were detected and in active beehives endosulfan, coumaphos, cypermethrin, ethion and chlorpyrifos were found. Coumaphos was present in the highest concentrations, around 1,000 µg/kg, in all the propolis samples from active beehives. Regarding depopulated beehives, the mean levels of imidacloprid found in honeycomb (377 µg/kg, Standard Deviation: 118) and propolis (60 µg/kg, Standard Deviation: 57) are higher than those described to produce bee disorientation and fipronil levels detected in bees (150 and 170 µg/kg) are toxic per se. The other insecticides found can affect the global fitness of the bees causing weakness and a decrease in their overall productivity. These preliminary results suggest that bees exposed to pesticides or its residues can lead them in different ways to the beehive.

Sudden deaths and colony population decline in Greek honey bee colonies.

During June and July of 2009, sudden deaths, tremulous movements and population declines of adult honey bees were reported by the beekeepers in the region of Peloponnesus (Mt. Mainalo), Greece. A preliminary study was carried out to investigate these unexplained phenomena in this region. In total, 37 bee samples, two brood frames containing honey bee brood of various ages, eight sugar samples and four sugar patties were collected from the affected colonies. The samples were tested for a range of pests, pathogens and pesticides. Symptomatic adult honey bees tested positive for Varroa destructor, Nosema ceranae, Chronic bee paralysis virus (CBPV), Acute paralysis virus (ABPV), Deformed wing virus (DWV), Sacbrood virus (SBV) and Black queen cell virus (BQCV), but negative for Acarapis woodi. American Foulbrood was absent from the brood samples. Chemical analysis revealed that amitraz, thiametoxan, clothianidin and acetamiprid were all absent from symptomatic adult bees, sugar and sugar patty samples. However, some bee samples, were contaminated with imidacloprid in concentrations between 14 ng/g and 39 ng/g tissue. We present: the infection of Greek honey bees by multiple viruses; the presence of N. ceranae in Greek honey bees and the first record of imidacloprid (neonicotonoid) residues in Greek honey bee tissues. The presence of multiple pathogens and pesticides made it difficult to associate a single specific cause to the depopulation phenomena observed in Greece, although we believe that viruses and N. ceranae synergistically played the most important role. A follow-up in-depth survey across all Greek regions is required to provide context to these preliminary findings.