Natural biocide disrupts nestmate recognition in honeybees

Insects, 2015

Bees provide vital pollination services to the majority of flowering plants in both natural and agricultural systems. Unfortunately, both native and managed bee populations are experiencing declines, threatening the persistence of these plants and crops. Agricultural chemicals are one possible culprit contributing to bee declines. Even fungicides, generally considered safe for bees, have been shown to disrupt honey bee development and impair bumble bee behavior. Little is known, however, how fungicides may affect bumble bee colony growth. We conducted a controlled cage study to determine the effects of fungicide exposure on colonies of a native bumble bee species (Bombus impatiens). Colonies of B. impatiens were exposed to flowers treated with field-relevant levels of the fungicide chlorothalonil over the course of one month. Colony success was assessed by the number and biomass of larvae, pupae, and adult bumble bees. Bumble bee colonies exposed to fungicide produced fewer workers, lower total bee biomass, and had lighter mother queens than control colonies. Our results suggest that fungicides negatively affect the colony success of a native bumble bee species and that the use of fungicides during bloom has the potential to severely impact the success of native bumble bee populations foraging in agroecosystems.

Insects

Environmental quality (e.g., diversity of resource availability, nesting sites, environmental display) plays an important role in an animal’s life. While homogeneous environments can restrict organisms from developing activities such as food seeking (behavioral impairment), more complex environments allow animals to perform activities with learning and behavioral perfecting outcomes. Pesticides are known to affect the learning and foraging behaviors of bees; however, little is known about the counterbalance displayed by the environment. Herein, we conducted two experiments that simulated distinct environmental displays, in which the effects of a fungicide (IndarTM 5EW-febunconazole) on solitary bee foraging activities were tested. We found that the fungicide only impaired the activities of bees in one of the studied environments. The difference in visitation rates and flower exploitation of bees between the two different environmental displays led to changes in metrics of bee–flower...

Chemical Senses, 2005

In social insects, recognition of nestmates from aliens is based on olfactory cues, and many studies have demonstrated that such cues are contained within the lipid layer covering the insect cuticle. These lipids are usually a complex mixture of tens of compounds in which aliphatic hydrocarbons are generally the major components. The experiments described here tested whether artificial changes in the cuticular profile through supplementation of naturally occurring alkanes and alkenes in honeybees affect the behaviour of nestmate guards. Compounds were applied to live foragers in microgram quantities and the bees returned to their hive entrance where the behaviour of the guard bees was observed. In this fashion we compared the effect of single alkenes with that of single alkanes; the effect of mixtures of alkenes versus that of mixtures of alkanes and the whole alkane fraction separated from the cuticular lipids versus the alkene fraction. With only one exception (the comparison between n-C 19 and (Z)9-C 19), in all the experiments bees treated with alkenes were attacked more intensively than bees treated with alkanes. This leads us to conclude that modification of the natural chemical profile with the two different classes of compounds has a different effect on acceptance and suggests that this may correspond to a differential importance in the recognition signature.

Environmental Pollution, 2021

Honey bees (Apis mellifera) and other pollinator populations are declining worldwide, and the reasons remain controversial. Based on laboratory testing, fungicides have traditionally been considered bee-safe. However, there have been no experimental tests of the effects of fungicides on colony health under field conditions, and limited correlational data suggests there may be negative impacts on bees at levels experienced in the field. We tested the effects of one of the most commonly used fungicides on colony health by feeding honey bee colonies pollen containing Pristine® (active ingredients: 25.2% boscalid, 12.8% pyraclostrobin) at four levels that bracketed concentrations we measured for pollen collected by bees in almond orchards. We also developed a method for calculating per-bee and per-larva dose. Pristine® consumption significantly and dose-dependently reduced worker lifespan and colony population size, with negative health effects observed even at the lowest doses. The lowest concentration we tested caused a 15% reduction in the worker population at an estimated dosage that was three orders of magnitude below the estimated LD 15 values for previous acute laboratory studies. The enhanced toxicity under field conditions is at least partially due to activation of colonial nutritional responses missed by lab tests. Pristine® causes colonies to respond to perceived protein malnutrition by increasing colony pollen collection. Additionally, Pristine induces much earlier transitioning to foraging in individual workers, which could be the cause of shortened lifespans. These findings demonstrate that Pristine® can negatively impact honey bee individual and colony health at concentrations relevant to what they experience from pollination behavior under current agricultural conditions.

2013

In a study replicated across two states and two years, we tested the sublethal effects on honey bees of the miticides Apistan (tau fluvalinate) and Check Mite+ (coumaphos) and the wood preservative copper naphthenate applied at label rates in field conditions. A continuous covariate, a colony Varroa mite index, helped us disambiguate the effects of the chemicals on bees while adjusting for a presumed benefit of controlling mites. Mite levels in colonies treated with Apistan or Check Mite+ were not different from levels in non-treated controls. Experimental chemicals significantly decreased 3-day brood survivorship and increased construction of queen supercedure cells compared to non-treated controls. Bees exposed to Check Mite+ as immatures had higher legacy mortality as adults relative to non-treated controls, whereas bees exposed to Apistan had improved legacy mortality relative to non-treated controls. Relative to non-treated controls, Check Mite+ increased adult emergence weight. Although there was a treatment effect on a test of associative learning, it was not possible to statistically separate the treatment means, but bees treated with Apistan performed comparatively well. And finally, there were no detected effects of bee hive chemical on colony bee population, amount of brood, amount of honey, foraging rate, time required for marked released bees to return to their nest, percentage of released bees that return to the nest, and colony Nosema spore loads. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine sublethal effects of bee hive chemicals applied at label rates under field conditions while disambiguating the results from mite control benefits realized from the chemicals. Given the poor performance of the miticides at reducing mites and their inconsistent effects on the host, these results defend the use of bee health management practices that minimize use of exotic hive chemicals.

PLOS ONE, 2015

There is a growing body of empirical evidence showing that wild and managed bees are negatively impacted by various pesticides that are applied in agroecosystems around the world. The lethal and sublethal effects of two widely used fungicides and one adjuvant were assessed in cage studies in California on blue orchard bees, Osmia lignaria, and in cage studies in Utah on alfalfa leafcutting bees, Megachile rotundata. The fungicides tested were Rovral 4F (iprodione) and Pristine (mixture of pyraclostrobin + boscalid), and the adjuvant tested was N-90, a non-ionic wetting agent (90% polyethoxylated nonylphenol) added to certain tank mixtures of fungicides to improve the distribution and contact of sprays to plants. In separate trials, we erected screened cages and released 20 paint-marked females plus 30-50 males per cage to document the behavior of nesting bees under treated and control conditions. For all females in each cage, we recorded pollen-collecting trip times, nest substrate-collecting trip times (i.e., mud for O. lignaria and cut leaf pieces for M. rotundata), cell production rate, and the number of attempts each female made to enter her own or to enter other nest entrances upon returning from a foraging trip. No lethal effects of treatments were observed on adults, nor were there effects on time spent foraging for pollen and nest substrates and on cell production rate. However, Rovral 4F, Pristine, and N-90 disrupted the nest recognition abilities of O. lignaria females. Pristine, N-90, and Pristine + N-90 disrupted nest recognition ability of M. rotundata females. Electroantennogram responses of antennae of O. lignaria females maintained in the laboratory did not differ significantly between the fungicide-exposed and control bees. Our results provide the first empirical evidence that two commonly used fungicides and a non-ionic adjuvant can disrupt nest recognition in two managed solitary bee species.

PLOS ONE

Science, 2012

Nature, 2012

Reported widespread declines of wild and managed insect pollinators have serious consequences for global ecosystem services and agricultural production 1-3 . Bees contribute approximately 80% of insect pollination, so it is important to understand and mitigate the causes of current declines in bee populations 4-6 . Recent studies have implicated the role of pesticides in these declines, as exposure to these chemicals has been associated with changes in bee behaviour 7-11 and reductions in colony queen production 12 . However, the key link between changes in individual behaviour and the consequent impact at the colony level has not been shown. Social bee colonies depend on the collective performance of many individual workers. Thus, although field-level pesticide concentrations can have subtle or sublethal effects at the individual level 8 , it is not known whether bee societies can buffer such effects or whether it results in a severe cumulative effect at the colony level. Furthermore, widespread agricultural intensification means that bees are exposed to numerous pesticides when foraging 13-15 , yet the possible combinatorial effects of pesticide exposure have rarely been investigated . Here we show that chronic exposure of bumblebees to two pesticides (neonicotinoid and pyrethroid) at concentrations that could approximate field-level exposure impairs natural foraging behaviour and increases worker mortality leading to significant reductions in brood development and colony success. We found that worker foraging performance, particularly pollen collecting efficiency, was significantly reduced with observed knock-on effects for forager recruitment, worker losses and overall worker productivity. Moreover, we provide evidence that combinatorial exposure to pesticides increases the propensity of colonies to fail.

Chemical Senses, 2005

In social insect colonies, recognition of nestmates, kinship, caste and reproductive status is crucial both for individuals and for the colony. The recognition cues used are thought to be chemical, with the hydrocarbons found on the cuticle of insects often cited as being particularly important. However, in honeybees (Apis mellifera) the role of cuticular hydrocarbons in nestmate recognition is controversial. Here we use the proboscis extension response (PER) conditioning paradigm to determine how well honeybees learn long-chain linear alkanes and (Z)-alkenes present on the cuticle of worker bees, and also how well they can discriminate between them. We found large differences both in learning and discrimination abilities with the different cuticular hydrocarbons. Thus, the tested hydrocarbons could be classified into those which the bees learnt and discriminated well (mostly alkenes) and those which they did not (alkanes and some alkenes). These well-learnt alkenes may constitute important compounds used as cues in the social recognition processes.