Dust abraded from thiamethoxam-treated seed during sowing: Refining the risk assessment for native bees in Brazil.

During sowing using pneumatic machinery, dust may be abraded from pesticide-treated seed and contaminate adjacent bee-attractive off-crop areas. This study quantified the risk to native bees of dust released during sowing of Brazilian crop seeds treated with a thiamethoxam formulation (Cruiser 350FS). To address toxicity to native bees, adult acute contact LD50 data for thiamethoxam were collated from the literature, a species sensitivity distribution generated, and the HD5 calculated. The LD50 HD5 was used to refine the default safety factor applied to the honeybee acute contact LD50 from 10 to 5.45 for thiamethoxam. Crop-specific abraded dust data (Heubach dust and Heubach AI) were generated for seeds treated with Cruiser 350FS sourced from on-farm and industrial facilities. The mean Heubach dust levels was ranked as cotton = maize > sunflower = soybean > drybean. There was no correlation between the measured residues of thiamethoxam (Heubach AI) and those estimated in dust based on the thiamethoxam content of Cruiser 350FS. A hazard quotient (HQ) for each crop (based on application rate, the default dust deposition factor, and the honeybee contact LD50/10) identified risks during sowing for all crops. Refinement of the application rate with the measured 90th percentile Heubach dust (assuming 100% thiamethoxam) resulted in sowing of industrially treated soybean and on-farm treated cotton being identified as risks. Further refinement using either the measured 90th percentile Heubach AI or the acute contact LD50 (HD5 ) resulted in sowing of all crops treated with Cruiser 350FS as being identified as low risk. Similar high quality seed treatment should be demonstrated for other formulations containing insecticides with high toxicity to bees. Data on dust drift from machinery and crops more representative of those in Brazil may allow further refinement of the default dust deposition value of 17% used in this study. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:1361-1373. © 2023 SETAC.

Applying a tiered environmental risk assessment framework to estimate the risk of pesticides to soil organisms in Latin America.

This work investigates the application of a tiered risk assessment scheme for soil organisms based on the risk quotient (RQ) and the toxicity exposure ratio (TER). Forty-five pesticides registered in Latin America were chosen and the ecotoxicological endpoints for earthworms, Collembola, and microorganisms were collated. Tier I assessment was made on conservative assumptions in which no refinements were applied. There, 14 pesticides (31%) exceed the RQ regulatory trigger indicating unacceptable risk, whereas 27 (60%) indicate unacceptable risk on the TER approach. In a Tier II evaluation when refinement options such as foliar interception, field half-life, and the dissipation following the peak estimated environmental concentration are considered, eight (18%) pesticides indicate unacceptable risk based on the RQ, and 15 (33%) indicate unacceptable risk based on the TER. A nonmetric multidimensional scaling evaluation was performed to understand the relevant characteristics involved in how each pesticide poses a risk to soil organisms. Based on the outcome of this analysis, we observed that, for a given pesticide, the combination of high persistence, low or no crop interception, and high toxicity are likely to require higher tier risk assessment. Refinement options can consider either or both the exposure and/or the effect side of the framework. Exposure refinements are potentially simpler and can be conducted with data already available to risk assessors, whereas effect refinements involving further testing with the organisms potentially at risk are still under discussion for intermediate and higher tiers. A sensitive, simple, and logical environmental risk assessment framework can be used to adequately identify risks based on the relevant protection goals that, in turn, will help to protect the desired soil multifunctionality of the ecosystem. We encourage academia and industry to further investigate these topics to provide the most scientifically robust and evidence-based information to decision makers. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:446-460. © 2022 SETAC.

Adaptive monitoring of coral health at Scott Reef where data exhibit nonlinear and disturbed trends over time.

Time series data are often observed in ecological monitoring. Frequently, such data exhibit nonlinear trends over time potentially due to complex relationships between observed and auxiliary variables, and there may also be sudden declines over time due to major disturbances. This poses substantial challenges for modeling such data and also for adaptive monitoring. To address this, we propose methods for finding adaptive designs for monitoring in such settings. This work is motivated by a monitoring program that has been established at Scott Reef; a coral reef off the Western coast of Australia. Data collected for monitoring the health of Scott Reef are considered, and semiparametric and interrupted time series modeling approaches are adopted to describe how these data vary over time. New methods are then proposed that enable adaptive monitoring designs to be found based on such modeling approaches. These methods are then applied to find future monitoring designs at Scott Reef where it was found that future information gain is expected to be similar across a variety of different sites, suggesting that no particular location needs to be prioritized at Scott Reef for the next monitoring phase. In addition, it was found that omitting some sampling sites/reef locations was possible without substantial loss in expected information gain, depending upon the disturbances that were observed. The resulting adaptive designs are used to form recommendations for future monitoring in this region, and for reefs where changes in the current monitoring practices are being sought. As the methods used and developed throughout this study are generic in nature, this research has the potential to improve ecological monitoring more broadly where complex data are being collected over time.

Assessment of the Vulnerability to Pesticide Exposures Across Bee Species.

In many countries, the western honey bee is used as surrogate in pesticide risk assessments for bees. However, uncertainty remains in the estimation of pesticide risk to non-Apis bees because their potential routes of exposure to pesticides, life histories, and ecologies differ from those of honey bees. We applied the vulnerability concept in pesticide risk assessment to 10 bee species including the honey bee, 2 bumble bee species, and 7 solitary bee species with different nesting strategies. Trait-based vulnerability considers the evaluation of a species at the level of both the organism (exposure and effect) and the population (recovery), which goes beyond the sensitivity of individuals to a toxicant assessed in standard laboratory toxicity studies by including effects on populations in the field. Based on expert judgment, each trait was classified by its relationship to the vulnerability to pesticide exposure, effects (intrinsic sensitivity), and population recovery. The results suggested that the non-Apis bees included in our approach are potentially more vulnerable to pesticides than the honey bee due to traits governing exposure and population recovery potential. Our analysis highlights many uncertainties related to the interaction between bee ecology and the potential exposures and population-level effects of pesticides, emphasizing the need for more research to identify suitable surrogate species for higher tier bee risk assessments. Environ Toxicol Chem 2021;40:2640-2651. © 2021 SETAC.

Are honeybees suitable surrogates for use in pesticide risk assessment for non-Apis bees?

Historically, bee regulatory risk assessment for pesticides has centred on the European honeybee (Apis mellifera), primarily due to its availability and adaptability to laboratory conditions. Recently, there have been efforts to develop a battery of laboratory toxicity tests for a range of non-Apis bee species to directly assess the risk to them. However, it is not clear whether the substantial investment associated with the development and implementation of such routine screening will actually improve the level of protection of non-Apis bees. We argue, using published acute toxicity data from a range of bee species and standard regulatory exposure scenarios, that current first-tier honeybee acute risk assessment schemes utilised by regulatory authorities are protective of other bee species and further tests should be conducted only in cases of concern. We propose similar analysis of alternative exposure scenarios (chronic and developmental) once reliable data for non-Apis bees are available to expand our approach to these scenarios. In addition, we propose that in silico (simulation) approaches can then be used to address population-level effects in more field-realistic scenarios. Such an approach could lead to a protective, but also workable, risk assessment for non-Apis species while contributing to pollination security in agricultural landscapes around the globe. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry.

Thiamethoxam: Long-term effects following honey bee colony-level exposure and implications for risk assessment.

Neonicotinoid insecticides have been used in a wide range of crops through seed treatment, soil and foliar applications and a large database exists on both their lethal and sub-lethal effects on honey bees under controlled laboratory conditions. However, colony-level studies on the effects of neonicotinoids in field studies are limited, primarily due to their complexity and the resources required. This paper reports the combined results of two large-scale colony-feeding studies, each with 6 weeks of continuous dosing of 12 colonies per treatment (24 control) to 12.5, 25, 37.5, 50 or 100 ng thiamethoxam/g sucrose solution. Exposure continued beyond dosing with residues present in stored nectar and bee-bread. The studies were conducted in an area with limited alternative forage and colonies were required to forage for pollen and additional nectar The studies provide colony-level endpoints: significant effects (reductions in bees, brood) were observed after exposure to the two highest dose rates, colony loss occurred at the highest dose rate, but colonies were able to recover (2-3 brood cycles after the end of dosing) after dosing with 50 ng thiamethoxam/g sucrose. No significant colony-level effects were observed at lower dose rates. The data reported here support the conclusions of previous colony-level crop-based field studies with thiamethoxam, in which residues in pollen and nectar were an order of magnitude below the colony-level NOEC of 37.5 ng thiamethoxam/g sucrose. The feeding study data are also compared to the outcomes of regulatory Tier 1 risk assessments conducted using guidance provided by the USA, Canada, Brazil and the EU regulatory authorities. We propose an adaptation of the European chronic adult bee risk assessment that takes into account the full dataset generated in laboratory studies while still providing an order of magnitude of safety compared with the colony feeding study NOEC.

Workshop on Pesticide Exposure Assessment Paradigm for Non-Apis Bees: Foundation and Summaries.

Current pesticide risk assessment practices use the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., as a surrogate to characterize the likelihood of chemical exposure of a candidate pesticide for all bee species. Bees make up a diverse insect group that provides critical pollination services to both managed and wild ecosystems. Accordingly, they display a diversity of behaviors and vary greatly in their lifestyles and phenologies, such as their timing of emergence, degree of sociality, and foraging and nesting behaviors. Some of these factors may lead to disparate or variable routes of exposure when compared to honey bees. For those that possess life histories that are distinct from A. mellifera, further risk assessments may be warranted. In January 2017, 40 bee researchers, representative of regulatory agencies, academia, and agrochemical industries, gathered to discuss the current state of science on pesticide exposure to non-Apis bees and to determine how well honey bee exposure estimates, implemented by different regulatory agencies, may be protective for non-Apis bees. Workshop participants determined that although current risk assessment procedures for honey bees are largely conservative, several routes of exposure are unique to non-Apis bees and warranted further investigation. In this forum article, we discuss these key routes of exposure relevant to non-Apis bees and identify important research gaps that can help inform future bee risk assessment decisions.

Initial recommendations for higher-tier risk assessment protocols for bumble bees, Bombus spp. (Hymenoptera: Apidae).

Global declines of bumble bees and other pollinator populations are of concern because of their critical role for crop production and maintenance of wild plant biodiversity. Although the consensus among scientists is that the interaction of many factors, including habitat loss, forage scarcity, diseases, parasites, and pesticides, potentially plays a role in causing these declines, pesticides have received considerable attention and scrutiny. In response, regulatory agencies have introduced more stringent pollinator testing requirements for registration and reregistration of pesticides, to ensure that the risks to pollinators are minimized. In this context, guidelines for testing bumble bees (Bombus spp.) in regulatory studies are not yet available, and a pressing need exists to develop suitable protocols for routine higher-tier studies with these non-Apis sp., social bees. To meet this need, Bayer CropScience LP, Syngenta Crop Protection LLC US, and Valent USA. Corporation organized a workshop bringing together a group of global experts on bumble bee behavior, ecology, and ecotoxicology to discuss and develop draft protocols for both semi-field (Tier II) and field (Tier III) studies. The workshop was held May 8-9, 2014, at the Bayer Bee Care Center, North Carolina, USA. The participants represented academic, consulting, and industry scientists from Europe, Canada, the United States, and Brazil. The workshop identified a clear protection goal and generated proposals for basic experimental designs, relevant measurements, and endpoints for both semifield (tunnel) and field tests. These initial recommendations are intended to form the basis of discussions to help advance the development of appropriate protocol guidelines.

Risk assessment for honey bees and pesticides--recent developments and 'new issues'.

In 2008, major areas of discussion at the ICPBR Bee Protection Group meeting were the development of a honey bee risk assessment scheme for systemic pesticides and revision of the test guidelines for semi-field and field studies. The risk assessment scheme for systemic pesticides is based on analysis of conditions for exposure of bees to residues. These are based on a stepwise approach, starting with simple calculations based on existing data in dossiers and progressing to higher-tier semi-field and field studies (the guidelines for these have been modified in line with this). The proposed scheme has been tested with data packages of high- and low-risk PPPs. A future area of interest for the group may be the risks posed by guttation fluid containing systemic pesticides. A recent paper on 'Translocation of neonicotinoid insecticides from coated seeds to seedling guttation drops: a novel way of intoxication for bees' has focused significant interest on the possible risks posed by the presence of residues of systemic pesticides in guttation fluid to water-collecting honey bees. The occurrence of guttation and the presence of pesticide residues in the fluid are discussed, together with remaining questions that will need to be addressed in answering whether such a route of exposure may pose a risk to honey bees.

The relevance of sublethal effects in honey bee testing for pesticide risk assessment.

The option of an evaluation and assessment of possible sublethal effects of pesticides on bees has been a subject of discussion by scientists and regulatory authorities. Effects considered included learning behaviour and orientation capacity. This discussion was enhanced by the French bee issue and allegations against systemic insecticides that were linked to the hypothesis that sublethal intoxication might even have led to reported colony losses. This paper considers whether and, if so, how sublethal effects should be incorporated into risk assessment, by addressing a number of questions: What is meant by a sublethal effect? Which sublethal effects should be measured, when and how? How are sublethal effects to be included in risk assessments? The authors conclude that sublethal studies may be helpful as an optional test to address particular, compound-specific concerns, as a lower-tier alternative to semi-field or field testing, if the effects are shown to be ecologically relevant. However, available higher-tier data (semi-field, field tests) should make any additional sublethal testing unnecessary, and higher-tier data should always override data of lower-tier trials on sublethal effects.

Behavioural effects of pesticides in bees--their potential for use in risk assessment.

This paper reviews a wide variety of behavioural effects that have been reported in bees following exposure to pesticides, primarily insecticides. These range from effects on odour discrimination in the individual to the loss of foraging bees due to disruption of their homing behaviour. Some of these effects have the potential to have a significant impact on the development and survival of colonies. However, there is currently little guidance available on the types of behavioural data which should be collected during laboratory, semi-field or field regulatory studies or how they should be included and interpreted in risk assessment. Further work is required to allow risk assessment to include significant behavioural effects and their longer term consequences on colony survival and development. Such an approach will require a larger base set of data to predict the longer-term consequences on colonies of short-term effects on individuals, e.g. through population modelling.