Laboratory toxicology of six forestry insecticides to four species of bee (hymenoptera: Apoidea)

Helson, B. V.; Barber, Kevin N.; Kingsbury, P. D.

doi:10.1007/bf00203895

Cited by 23 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies have suggested that the sensitivity of different bee species is inversely proportional to mean body weight (Devillers et al, 2003) while others have found no effect (Helson et al, 1994). In our study accounting for differences in body weight did not alter the overall patterns of NEC ratios, but for B. terrestris did significantly alter the slope of sensitivity ratio with A. mellifera.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 74%

Comparative toxicity of pesticides and environmental contaminants in bees: Are honey bees a useful proxy for wild bee species?

Heard

Baas

Dorne

et al. 2017

Science of The Total Environment

124

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Threats to wild and managed insect pollinators in Europe are cause for both ecological and socio-economic concern. Multiple anthropogenic pressures may be exacerbating pollinator declines. One key pressure is exposure to chemicals including pesticides and other contaminants. Historically the honey bee (Apis mellifera spp.) has been used as an 'indicator' species for 'standard' ecotoxicological testing but it has been suggested that it is not always a good proxy for other types of eusocial and solitary bees because of species differences in autecology and sensitivity to various stressors. We developed a common toxicity test system to conduct acute and chronic exposures of up to 240h of similar doses of seven chemicals, targeting different metabolic pathways, on three bee species (Apis mellifera spp., Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis). We compared the relative sensitivity between species in terms of potency between the chemicals and the influence of exposure time on toxicity. While there were significant interspecific differences that varied through time, overall the magnitude of these differences (in terms of treatment effect ratios) was generally comparable (<2 fold) although there were some large divergences from this pattern. Our results suggest that A. mellifera spp. could be used as a proxy for other bee species provided a reasonable assessment factor is used to cover interspecific variation. Perhaps more importantly our results show significant and large time dependency of toxicity across all three tested species that greatly exceeds species differences (>25 fold within test). These are rarely considered in standard regulatory testing but may have severe environmental consequences, especially when coupled with the likelihood of differential species exposures in the wild. These insights indicate that further work is required to understand how differences in toxicokinetics vary between species and mixtures of chemicals.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 74%

Comparative toxicity of pesticides and environmental contaminants in bees: Are honey bees a useful proxy for wild bee species?

Heard

Baas

Dorne

et al. 2017

Science of The Total Environment

124

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Johansen (1977) suggested that increased potential for picking up pesticide residues with increased surface‐area‐to‐volume‐ratios in smaller bees would result in increasing susceptibility of bees to insecticides with decreasing body size. Other studies, such as that by Helson et al (1994), however, found no relationship between body size of bees and relative susceptibility to insecticides. The lack of an effect of insecticides on the abundance of small bees might be a consequence of extinction of susceptible small bee species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…The higher susceptibility of small bees supports Johansen's (1977) theory about the higher sensitivity of smaller bees resulting in fewer species in sprayed fields. The effects of insecticides on bees depend on the spraying method, the application rate and also on the pre‐ and post‐spray weather (Helson et al , 1994). The received dose and the bee's physiological detoxification system primarily determine the susceptibility of a bee species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Local and landscape effects on bee communities of Hungarian winter cereal fields

Kovács‐Hostyánszki

Batáry

Báldi

2010

Agricultural and Forest Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 Pollination is a key ecosystem service. Although bees are the most important pollinators, they are endangered by intensive agricultural practices. The present study investigated the effects of farmland management and environmental factors at local and landscape scales on bees in Central Hungary. 2 Bees were sampled in winter cereal fields that varied in the amount of applied fertilizer and insecticide use. Measurements included total, small and large bee species richness and abundance; stability of total species richness and abundance (coefficient of variation, CV); the nitrogen content of fertilizers; the number of insecticide applications; within-field location; species richness and abundance of insect-pollinated plants; and the percentage of semi-natural areas in a 500-m radius circle around the fields under study. 3 Increasing the amount of fertilizer decreased total and small bee abundance and increased the CV of total bee abundance. Insecticide use had a significant negative effect on total and small bee species richness and on large bee abundance. The percentage of semi-natural habitats in a 500-m radius did not influence bee species richness and abundance. 4 The results obtained confirms that the intensification of farmland management poses a threat to bee diversity, and thus may reduce pollination services. Recentlyintroduced agri-environment schemes are one potential approach for managing agricultural land use: reduced amounts of fertilizer and a cessation of insecticide application might lead to high bee species richness and abundance and ensure the pollination of wild plants and flowering crops.

show abstract

“…Moreover, recent field studies on oilseed rape revealed that deducing responses from honey bee populations to wild bees may not be adequate in realistic exposure scenarios either 12 13 . Interspecific susceptibility patterns towards insecticides seem to be substance-specific at least at generic level 10 14 . Indicators for different sensitivities of bee species towards insecticides are not clearly established.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was consistent for five out of six tested insecticide classes, whereas wild bees displayed equal to higher sensitivity to neonicotinoids (median factor 1.06). Since relative susceptibility patterns vary for different insecticides, it is difficult to extrapolate acute toxicity data of a specific insecticide from the honey bee to a specific wild bee species using the current data 10 11 . Moreover, recent field studies on oilseed rape revealed that deducing responses from honey bee populations to wild bees may not be adequate in realistic exposure scenarios either 12 13 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interspecific sensitivity of bees towards dimethoate and implications for environmental risk assessment

Uhl

Franke

Rehberg

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wild and domesticated bee species are exposed to a variety of pesticides which may drive pollinator decline. Due to wild bee sensitivity data shortage, it is unclear if the honey bee Apis mellifera is a suitable surrogate species in the current EU risk assessment scheme. Furthermore, the underlying causes for sensitivity differences in bees are not established. We assessed the acute toxicity (median lethal dose, LD50) of dimethoate towards multiple bee species, generated a species sensitivity distribution and derived a hazardous dose (HD5). Furthermore, we performed a regression analysis with body weight and dimethoate toxicity. HD5 lower 95% confidence limit was equal to honey bee mean LD50 when applying a safety factor of 10. Body weight proved to be a predictor of interspecific bee sensitivity but did not explain the pattern completely. Using acute toxicity values from honey bees and a safety factor of 10 seems to cover the interspecific sensitivity range of bees in the case of dimethoate. Acute endpoints of proposed additional test species, the buff-tailed bumblebee Bombus terrestris and the red mason bee Osmia bicornis, do not improve the risk assessment for the entire group. However, this might not apply to other insecticides such as neonicotinoids.

show abstract

Laboratory toxicology of six forestry insecticides to four species of bee (hymenoptera: Apoidea)

Cited by 23 publications

References 32 publications

Comparative toxicity of pesticides and environmental contaminants in bees: Are honey bees a useful proxy for wild bee species?

Comparative toxicity of pesticides and environmental contaminants in bees: Are honey bees a useful proxy for wild bee species?

Local and landscape effects on bee communities of Hungarian winter cereal fields

Interspecific sensitivity of bees towards dimethoate and implications for environmental risk assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About