An Amazon stingless bee foraging activity predicted using recurrent artificial neural networks and attribute selection

Gomes, Pedro; Suhara, Yoshihiko; Nunes‐Silva, Patrícia; Costa, Luciano; Arruda, Helder; Venturieri, G. C.; Imperatriz-Fonseca, Vera Lúcia; Pentland, Alex; Souza, P. A. de; Pessin, Gustavo

doi:10.1038/s41598-019-56352-8

Cited by 25 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The presence of glyphosate in the soil can cause changes in DHA and in the total content of microorganisms [ 86 ]. However, the effects of herbicides on soil microbial biomass and enzymes have been shown to be short-term and, over time, a recovery of biological parameters can be observed [ 55 ]. According to EFSA, the persistence of fluroxypyr in soil is on the low to moderate level and its risk for soil organism was assessed as low [ 80 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Determination of the Ecotoxicity of Herbicides Roundup® Classic Pro and Garlon New in Aquatic and Terrestrial Environments

Tajnaiová

Vurm

Kholomyeva

et al. 2020

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herbicides help increase agricultural yields significantly, but they may negatively impact the life of non-target organisms. Modifying the life cycle of primary producers can affect other organisms in the food chain, and consequently in the whole ecosystem. We investigated the effect of common herbicides Roundup® Classic Pro (active substance glyphosate) and Garlon New (triclopyr and fluroxypyr) on aquatic organisms duckweed Lemna minor and green algae Desmodesmus subspicatus, and on the enzymatic activity of soil. We also compared the effects of Roundup® Classic Pro to that of a metabolite of its active substance, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA). The results of an algal growth test showed that AMPA has a 1.5× weaker inhibitory effect on the growth of D. subspicatus than the Roundup formula, and the strongest growth inhibition was caused by Garlon New (IC50Roundup = 267.3 µg/L, IC50Garlon = 21.0 µg/L, IC50AMPA = 117.8 mg/L). The results of the duckweed growth inhibition test revealed that Roundup and Garlon New caused 100% growth inhibition of L. minor even at significantly lower concentrations than the ready-to-use concentration. The total chlorophyll content in the fronds was lowest when Garlon New was used. The highest dehydrogenase activity was observed in soil treated with Garlon New, and the lowest in soil treated with Roundup® Classic Pro. The results of this study showed that all three tested substances were ecotoxic to the tested organisms.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Herbicides may affect the biological properties of the soil [ 55 ]. Soil enzyme activity is an indicator of processes in the soil environment, including metabolic processes, and levels of contamination [ 56 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of the Ecotoxicity of Herbicides Roundup® Classic Pro and Garlon New in Aquatic and Terrestrial Environments

Tajnaiová

Vurm

Kholomyeva

et al. 2020

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This review provides this specific finfish aquaculture lens as this industry continues to grow in importance as a global protein source. In particular, the papers included in the review discuss the PCU metric and mg/PCU indicator, which are increasingly used as reporting tools for national surveillance programs such as CIPARS and ESVAC ( 26 , 55 ) and recent global aquaculture AMU projections ( 57 ) based on FAO production statistics ( 54 ). Radke ( 34 ) proposed the APCU metric as a means to consider the variable lengths of life of different food animal species.…”

Section: Discussion—an Example Application Of Amu Indicators To Finfimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rationale for finfish PCU departing from the terrestrial animal PCU approach of using animal numbers and ATW is unclear, other than data availability, as is the effect of this departure on the resulting national PCUs and mg/PCU indicators for AMU. A recent study by Schar et al ( 57 ) reported current and projected trends in global aquaculture AMU using the mg/PCU metric where the PCU was also based on total annual production weights by species class ( 57 ) from the FAO FishStat data ( 54 ).…”

Section: An Overview Of Antimicrobial Use Metrics and Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antimicrobial Use Surveillance Indicators for Finfish Aquaculture Production: A Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantification and tracking of antimicrobial use (AMU) are key factors for the development of responsible antimicrobial stewardship programs and comparison between countries. Global finfish aquaculture growth and increased AMU creates the potential for exchange of antimicrobial resistance between aquatic and terrestrial environments, making AMU surveillance imperative for this industry. The objective of this review is to collate current literature on AMU surveillance indicators and their application to commercial finfish aquaculture production. A systematic search strategy was applied to five databases: Medline, Embase, Agricola, CAB abstracts, and Biosis. To be included, studies must report on at least one AMU surveillance indicator for use in animals. There is no single, standardized indicator suitable to report finfish aquaculture AMU. The type and availability of finfish aquaculture data presents unique considerations for AMU reporting. Ultimately, the indicator used should be fit-for-purpose to satisfy the objective of the surveillance program, motivation for comparison and provide useful information to the industry stakeholders. Finfish aquaculture total annual slaughter weight allows estimation of biomass for the population correction unit (PCU) to report annual total mg of active antimicrobial ingredient per PCU. These data are commonly reported by finfish aquaculture-producing countries, allowing for international comparisons. However, this precludes the ability to compare to terrestrial livestock where the PCU is based on animal numbers and an average treatment weight, which are not available for finfish aquaculture. The mg per adjusted PCU indicator provides an interesting alternative that incorporates the length of the marine grow-out phase for finfish, but is subject to the same limitations. The number of defined daily doses animal per animal-days-at-risk is useful but also limited by a lack of a defined average treatment weight. The concept of average treatment weight remains challenging for the industry as it does not accurately reflect the timing of actual AMU to fish in the system. The term “average biomass” is more reflective of the intent of AMU surveillance indicators. Defining an average treatment weight, or average biomass, will require industry engagement, which is crucial if AMU reporting is to be deemed credible and provide value back to the finfish aquaculture industry.

show abstract

“…To monitor bee return, on the front of the wooden bee boxes we placed modified plastic boxes (Fig. 2) containing the RFID reader equipment: an antenna (RFID detector) and a computer (reader and data recorder-Intel Edison) [details in (Gomes et al 2020) and(Nunes-Silva et al 2019)]. This RFID reading system allowed us to take multiple readings of the same bee as it passed over the antenna (Fig.…”

Section: Preparation Of the Bees For The Experiments And Rfid Monitoring Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

RFID-tagged amazonian stingless bees confirm that landscape configuration and nest re-establishment time affect homing ability

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bee flight capacity determines the area that a colony can exploit, and this knowledge is essential to formulate management and conservation strategies for each species. In this study, we evaluated the flight capacity of Melipona seminigra using radio frequency identification (RFID). Three questions were addressed: Do the RFID tags affect the flight of M. seminigra workers? What is the effect of the landscape on foraging activity? Does the time since the colony was re-established affect the flight range of foragers? Our results indicate that the RFID tag used does not affect the flight ability of M. seminigra. Bees marked with nontoxic paint vs. RFID tags had the same return ratio and return time to the colony of origin. Flight capacity was affected by the landscape, because the return rate to the colonies was higher from the tested vegetated area than from the sterile area. The time elapsed since the bee colony re-establishment also affected the flight range because the return rate increased with time since the colony was relocated in the new site. We estimate that M. seminigra workers make foraging flights of approximately 1000 m from the colony and that the maximum flight range is 5000 m. Colonies of this species take more than 1 or 2 months to be able to fully exploit a landscape.

show abstract

An Amazon stingless bee foraging activity predicted using recurrent artificial neural networks and attribute selection

Abstract: bees on average, per day. Figure 2 shows a section of the data employed in this research, where the time series of activity level and weather can be observed.

Cited by 25 publications

References 33 publications

Determination of the Ecotoxicity of Herbicides Roundup® Classic Pro and Garlon New in Aquatic and Terrestrial Environments

Determination of the Ecotoxicity of Herbicides Roundup® Classic Pro and Garlon New in Aquatic and Terrestrial Environments

Antimicrobial Use Surveillance Indicators for Finfish Aquaculture Production: A Review

RFID-tagged amazonian stingless bees confirm that landscape configuration and nest re-establishment time affect homing ability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About