Literature DB >> 27217075

Using BEEHAVE to explore pesticide protection goals for European honeybee (Apis melifera L.) worker losses at different forage qualities.

Pernille Thorbek1, Peter J Campbell1, Paul J Sweeney1, Helen M Thompson1.   

Abstract

Losses of honeybee colonies are intensely debated and although honeybees suffer multiple stressors, the main focus has been on pesticides. As a result, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) revised the guidance for pesticide risk assessment for honeybees. The European Food Safety Authority reported a protection goal of negligible effect at 7% of colony size and then used the Khoury honeybee colony model to set trigger values for forager losses. However, the Khoury model is very simplistic and simulates colonies in an idealized state. In the present study, the authors demonstrate how a more realistic published honeybee model, BEEHAVE, with a few simple changes, can be used to explore pesticide risks. The results show that forage availability interacts with pesticide-induced worker losses, and colony resilience increases with forage quality. Adding alternative unexposed forage to the landscape also substantially mitigates the effects of pesticide exposure. The results indicate that EFSA's reported protection goal of 7% of colony size and triggers for daily worker losses are overly conservative. The authors conclude that forage availability is critical for colony resilience and that with adequate forage the colonies are resilient to even high levels of worker losses. However, the authors recommend setting protection goals using suboptimal forage conditions to ensure conservatism and for such suboptimal forage, a total of 20% reduction in colony size was safe. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:254-264.
© 2016 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC. © 2016 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Landscape ecology; Mechanistic effect model; Pesticide risk assessment; Pollinator; Population modeling; Population-level effects

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27217075     DOI: 10.1002/etc.3504

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem        ISSN: 0730-7268            Impact factor:   3.742


  5 in total

1.  An experiment on the impact of a neonicotinoid pesticide on honeybees: the value of a formal analysis of the data.

Authors:  Robert S Schick; Jeremy J D Greenwood; Stephen T Buckland
Journal:  Environ Sci Eur       Date:  2017-01-23       Impact factor: 5.893

2.  Bee++: An Object-Oriented, Agent-Based Simulator for Honey Bee Colonies.

Authors:  Matthew Betti; Josh LeClair; Lindi M Wahl; Mair Zamir
Journal:  Insects       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 2.769

3.  An Evaluation of the BEEHAVE Model Using Honey Bee Field Study Data: Insights and Recommendations.

Authors:  Annika Agatz; Roland Kuhl; Mark Miles; Thorsten Schad; Thomas G Preuss
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 3.742

4.  Honey bee colony-level exposure and effects in realistic landscapes: An application of BEEHAVE simulating clothianidin residues in corn pollen.

Authors:  Amelie Schmolke; Farah Abi-Akar; Silvia Hinarejos
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 3.742

5.  Honeybee colonies compensate for pesticide-induced effects on royal jelly composition and brood survival with increased brood production.

Authors:  Matthias Schott; Maximilian Sandmann; James E Cresswell; Matthias A Becher; Gerrit Eichner; Dominique Tobias Brandt; Rayko Halitschke; Stephanie Krueger; Gertrud Morlock; Rolf-Alexander Düring; Andreas Vilcinskas; Marina Doris Meixner; Ralph Büchler; Annely Brandt
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.