Non-Apis bees as model organisms in laboratory, semi-field and field experiments

Dietzsch, Anke C.; Jütte, Tobias

doi:10.5073/jfk.2020.05.06

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In total, we tested 409 A. mellifera , 385 B. terrestris , 383 O. bicornis , 139 O. cornuta , 140 M. rotundata , 105 A. vaga, and 103 C. cunicularius individuals in six trials (Supplement 2 ). We exclusively used female individuals as their active foraging and effects of exposure to pesticides are directly (or in the case of worker bees indirectly) linked to reproduction 14 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The life history traits of wild bees induce further exposure pathways, such as exposure via nesting location or via nesting substrates for brood cells (e.g. soil and leaf material), affecting both adult bees and juvenile stages (for a more comprehensive review of differences in pathways compare 14 ). These pathways are irrelevant for the honey bee that is mainly exposed to pesticides via pollen, nectar, and to a lower extent, guttation water 6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most data on sensitivity, often measured as a lethal (mortality) and a sublethal (abnormal behavior) component, are only available for a few wild bee species (e.g., Bombus terrestris , Osmia bicornis ; cf. review 14 ), and come with limitations (methodologies of different studies are not comparable, non-standardized sampling times), so that it is difficult to compare species across different studies 20 . To address these shortcomings, we carried out comparative trials on contact exposure of seven social and solitary bee species with the pyrethroid lambda-cyhalothrin, including the honey bee as a reference.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Risk assessment requires several bee species to address species-specific sensitivity to insecticides at field-realistic concentrations

Jütte,

Wernecke,

Klaus

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the European registration process, pesticides are currently mainly tested on the honey bee. Since sensitivity data for other bee species are lacking for the majority of xenobiotics, it is unclear if and to which extent this model species can adequately serve as surrogate for all wild bees. Here, we investigated the effects of field-realistic contact exposure to a pyrethroid insecticide, containing lambda-cyhalothrin, on seven bee species (Andrena vaga, Bombus terrestris, Colletes cunicularius, Osmia bicornis, Osmia cornuta, Megachile rotundata, Apis mellifera) with different life history characteristics in a series of laboratory trials over two years. Our results on sensitivity showed significant species-specific responses to the pesticide at a field-realistic application rate (i.e., 7.5 g a.s./ha). Species did not group into distinct classes of high and low mortality. Bumble bee and mason bee survival was the least affected by the insecticide, and M. rotundata survival was the most affected with all individuals dead 48 h after application. Apis mellifera showed medium mortality compared to the other bee species. Most sublethal effects, i.e. behavioral abnormalities, were observed within the first hours after application. In some of the solitary species, for example O. bicornis and A. vaga, a higher percentage of individuals performed some abnormal behavior for longer until the end of the observation period. While individual bee weight explained some of the observed mortality patterns, differences are likely linked to additional ecological, phylogenetic or toxicogenomic parameters as well. Our results support the idea that honey bee data can be substitute for some bee species’ sensitivity and may justify the usage of safety factors. To adequately cover more sensitive species, a larger set of bee species should be considered for risk assessment.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation