No abstract

Honey bees and the pollination services they provide are fundamental for agriculture and biodiversity. Agrochemical products and other classes of contaminants, such as trace elements and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, contribute to the general decline of bees’ populations. For this reason, effects, and particularly sublethal effects of contaminants need to be investigated. We conducted a review of the existing literature regarding the type of effects evaluated in Apis mellifera, collecting information about regions, methodological approaches, the type of contaminants, and honey bees’ life stages. Europe and North America are the regions in which A. mellifera biological responses were mostly studied and the most investigated compounds are insecticides. A. mellifera was studied more in the laboratory than in field conditions. Through the observation of the different responses examined, we found that there were several knowledge gaps that should be addressed, particularly within enzymatic and molecular responses, such as those regarding the immune system and genotoxicity. The importance of developing an integrated approach that combines responses at different levels, from molecular to organism and population, needs to be highlighted in order to evaluate the impact of anthropogenic contamination on this pollinator species.

Understanding the effects of environmental contaminants on honeybees is essential to minimize their impacts on these important pollinating insects. The aim of this study was to assess the ecotoxicological status of honeybees in environments undergoing different anthropic pressure: a wood (reference site), an orchard, an agricultural area, and an urban site, using a multi-biomarker approach. To synthetically represent the ecotoxicological status of the honeybees, the responses of the single biomarkers were integrated by the Integrated Biological Response (IBRv2) index. Overall, the strongest alteration of the ecotoxicological status (IBRv2 = 7.52) was detected in the bees from the orchard due to the alteration of metabolic and genotoxicity biomarkers indicating the presence of pesticides, metals, and lipophilic compounds. Honeybees from the cultivated area (IBRv2 = 7.18) revealed an alteration especially in neurotoxicity, metabolic, and genotoxicity biomarkers probably related to the presence of pesticides, especially fungicides. Finally, in the urban area (IBRv2 = 6.60), the biomarker results (GST, lysozyme, and hemocytes) indicated immunosuppression in the honeybees and the effects of the presence of lipophilic compounds and metals in the environment.

The principal aim of the present study was to develop and apply novel ex vivo tests as an alternative to cell cultures able to evaluate the possible effects of emerging and legacy contaminants in Caretta caretta. To this end, we performed ex vivo experiments on non-invasively collected whole-blood and skin-biopsy slices treated with chrysene, MEHP, or PBDE-47. Blood samples were tested by oxidative stress (TAS), immune system (respiratory burst, lysozyme, and complement system), and genotoxicity (ENA assay) biomarkers, and genotoxic and immune system effects were observed. Skin slices were analyzed by applying a 2D-PAGE/MS proteomic approach, and specific contaminant signatures were delineated on the skin proteomic profile. These reflect biochemical effects induced by each treatment and allowed to identify glutathione S-transferase P, peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase A, mimecan, and protein S100-A6 as potential biomarkers of the health-threatening impact the texted toxicants have on C. caretta. Obtained results confirm the suitability of the ex vivo system and indicate the potential risk the loggerhead sea turtle is undergoing in the natural environment. In conclusion, this work proved the relevance that the applied ex vivo models may have in testing the toxicity of other compounds and mixtures and in biomarker discovery.

In agricultural ecosystems, bees are exposed to combinations of pesticides that may have been applied at different times. For example, bees visiting a flowering crop may be chronically exposed to low concentrations of systemic insecticides applied before bloom and then to a pulse of fungicide, considered safe for bees, applied during bloom. In this study, we simulate this scenario under laboratory conditions with females of the solitary bee, Osmia bicornis L. We studied the effects of chronic exposure to the neonicotinoid insecticide, Confidor® (imidacloprid) at a realistic concentration, and of a pulse (1 day) exposure of the fungicide Folicur® SE (tebuconazole) at field application rate. Syrup consumption, survival, and four biomarkers: acetylcholinesterase (AChE), carboxylesterase (CaE), glutathione S-transferase (GST), and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) were evaluated at two different time points. An integrated biological response (IBRv2) index was elaborated with the biomarker results. The fungicide pulse had no impact on survival but temporarily reduced syrup consumption and increased the IBRv2 index, indicating potential molecular alterations. The neonicotinoid significantly reduced syrup consumption, survival, and the neurological activity of the enzymes. The co-exposure neonicotinoid-fungicide did not increase toxicity at the tested concentrations. AChE proved to be an efficient biomarker for the detection of early effects for both the insecticide and the fungicide. Our results highlight the importance of assessing individual and sub-individual endpoints to better understand pesticide effects on bees.