Initial recommendations for higher-tier risk assessment protocols for bumble bees, Bombus spp. (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Pesticide Exposure and Effects on Non-Apis Bees

Bees are essential pollinators of many crops and wild plants, and pesticide exposure is one of the key environmental stressors affecting their health in anthropogenically modified landscapes. Until recently, almost all information on routes and impacts of pesticide exposure came from honey bees, at least partially because they were the only model species required for environmental risk assessments (ERAs) for insect pollinators. Recently, there has been a surge in research activity focusing on pesticide exposure and effects for non-Apis bees, including other social bees (bumble bees and stingless bees) and solitary bees. These taxa vary substantially from honey bees and one another in several important ecological traits, including spatial and temporal activity patterns, foraging and nesting requirements, and degree of sociality. In this article, we review the current evidence base about pesticide exposure pathways and the consequences of exposure for non-Apis bees. We find that the insights into non-Apis bee pesticide exposure and resulting impacts across biological organizations, landscapes, mixtures, and multiple stressors are still in their infancy. The good news is that there are many promising approaches that could be used to advance our understanding, with priority given to informing exposure pathways, extrapolating effects, and determining how well our current insights (limited to very few species and mostly neonicotinoid insecticides under unrealistic conditions) can be generalized to the diversity of species and lifestyles in the global bee community. We conclude that future research to expand our knowledge would also be beneficial for ERAs and wider policy decisions concerning pollinator conservation and pesticide regulation.

Land-use-associated stressors interact to reduce bumblebee health at the individual and colony level

In agricultural landscapes, bees face a variety of stressors, including insecticides and poor-quality food. Although both stressors individually have been shown to affect bumblebee health negatively, few studies have focused on stressor interactions, a scenario expected in intensively used agricultural landscapes. Using the bumblebee Bombus terrestris, a key pollinator in agricultural landscapes, we conducted a fully factorial laboratory experiment starting at nest initiation. We assessed the effects of food quality and insecticides, alone and in interaction, on health traits at various levels, some of which have been rarely studied. Pollen with a diluted nutrient content (low quality) reduced ovary size and delayed colony development. Wing asymmetry, indicating developmental stress, was increased during insecticide exposure and interactions with poor food, whereas both stressors reduced body size. Both stressors and their interaction changed the workers' chemical profile and reduced worker interactions and the immune response. Our findings suggest that insecticides combined with nutritional stress reduce bumblebee health at the individual and colony levels, thus possibly affecting colony performance, such as development and reproduction, and the stability of plant-pollinator networks. The synergistic effects highlight the need of combining stressors in risk assessments and when studying the complex effects of anthropogenic stressors on health outcomes.

Higher Essential Amino Acid and Crude Protein Contents in Pollen Accelerate the Oviposition and Colony Foundation of Bombus breviceps (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Pollen is an important source of nutrition for bumblebees to survive, reproduce, and raise their offspring. To explore the nutritional requirements for the egg laying and hatching of queenright Bombus breviceps colonies, camellia pollen, oilseed rape pollen, apricot pollen, and mixtures of two or three types of pollen in equal proportions were used to feed the queens in this study. The results showed that the camellia pollen with a higher essential amino acid content was superior to the pollen with a lower essential amino acid content in the initial egg-laying time (p < 0.05), egg number (p < 0.05), larval ejection (p < 0.01), time of first worker emergence (p < 0.05), and the average weight of workers in the first batch (p < 0.01). It took less time for colonies under the camellia pollen and camellia-oilseed rape-apricot pollen mix treatments, both with a higher crude protein content, to reach ten workers in the colony (p < 0.01). On the contrary, the queens fed apricot pollen never laid an egg, and larvae fed oilseed rape pollen were all ejected-both pollens with a lower essential amino acid content. The results emphasize that the diet should be rationally allocated to meet the nutritional needs of local bumblebees at various stages when guiding them to lay eggs, hatch, and develop a colony.

Results of Ring-Testing of a Semifield Study Design to Investigate Potential Impacts of Crop Protection Products on Bumblebees (Hymenoptera, Apidae) and a Proposal of a Potential Test Design

In Europe, the risk assessment for bees at the European Union or national level has always focussed on potential impacts on honeybees. During the revision of the European Food Safety Authority bee guidance it was explicitly stated that bumblebees and solitary bees should be considered as well and consequently concerns were raised regarding the representativeness of honeybees for these other bee species. These concerns originate from differences in size as well as differences in behavioral and life history traits of other bee species. In response to this concern, the non-Apis working group of the International Commission for Plant-Pollinator Relationships initiated a ring-test of a semifield tunnel study design using the bumblebee Bombus terrestris. Nine laboratories participated, validating and improving the proposed design over a 2-year period. The intention of the ring-test experiments was to develop and if possible, establish a test protocol to conduct more standardized semifield tests with bumblebees. In the present study, the results of the ring-tests are summarized and discussed to give recommendations for a promising experimental design. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:2548-2564. © 2022 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Laboratory Risk Assessment of Three Entomopathogenic Fungi Used for Pest Control toward Social Bee Pollinators

The use of fungal-based biopesticides to reduce pest damage and protect crop quality is often considered a low-risk control strategy. Nevertheless, risk assessment of mycopesticides is still needed since pests and beneficial insects, such as pollinators, co-exist in the same agroecosystem where mass use of this strategy occurs. In this context, we evaluated the effect of five concentrations of three commercial entomopathogenic fungi, Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae, and Cordyceps fumosorosea, by direct contact and ingestion, on the tropical stingless bees Scaptotrigona depilis and Tetragonisca angustula, temperate bee species, the honey bee Apis mellifera, and the bumble bee Bombus terrestris, at the individual level. Furthermore, we studied the potential of two infection routes, either by direct contact or ingestion. In general, all three fungi caused considerable mortalities in the four bee species, which differed in their response to the different fungal species. Scaptotrigona depilis and B. terrestris were more susceptible to B. bassiana than the other fungi when exposed topically, and B. terrestris and A. mellifera were more susceptible to M. anisopliae when exposed orally. Interestingly, increased positive concentration responses were not observed for all fungal species and application methods. For example, B. terrestris mortalities were similar at the lowest and highest fungal concentrations for both exposure methods. This study demonstrates that under laboratory conditions, the three fungal species can potentially reduce the survival of social bees at the individual level. However, further colony and field studies are needed to elucidate the susceptibility of these fungi towards social bees to fully assess the ecological risks.

Fungicides and bees: a review of exposure and risk

Fungicides account for more than 35% of the global pesticide market and their use is predicted to increase in the future. While fungicides are commonly applied during bloom when bees are likely foraging on crops, whether real-world exposure to these chemicals - alone or in combination with other stressors - constitutes a threat to the health of bees is still the subject of great uncertainty. The first step in estimating the risks of exposure to fungicides for bees is to understand how and to what extent bees are exposed to these active ingredients. Here we review the current knowledge that exists about exposure to fungicides that bees experience in the field, and link quantitative data on exposure to acute and chronic risk of lethal endpoints for honey bees (Apis mellifera). From the 702 publications we screened, 76 studies contained quantitative data on residue detections in honey bee matrices, and a further 47 provided qualitative information about exposure for a range of bee taxa through various routes. We compiled data for 90 fungicides and metabolites that have been detected in honey, beebread, pollen, beeswax, and the bodies of honey bees. The risks posed to honey bees by fungicide residues was estimated through the EPA Risk Quotient (RQ) approach. Based on residue concentrations detected in honey and pollen/beebread, none of the reported fungicides exceeded the levels of concern (LOC) set by regulatory agencies for acute risk, while 3 and 12 fungicides exceeded the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) chronic LOC for honey bees and wild bees, respectively. When considering exposure to all bees, fungicides of most concern include many broad-spectrum systemic fungicides, as well as the widely used broad-spectrum contact fungicide chlorothalonil. In addition to providing a detailed overview of the frequency and extent of fungicide residue detections in the bee environment, we identified important research gaps and suggest future directions to move towards a more comprehensive understanding and mitigation of the risks of exposure to fungicides for bees, including synergistic risks of co-exposure to fungicides and other pesticides or pathogens.

The Utility of a Bumble Bee (Bombus spp. [Hymenoptera: Apidae]) Brood Test for Evaluating the Effects of Pesticides

Risk assessment for chemicals in the United States relies upon the honey bee (Apis meliffera L. [Hymenoptera: Apidae]) as a surrogate for other bee species. There is uncertainty in extrapolating honey bee toxicity data to bumble bees due to differences in life history strategies, food consumption, and nest structure. Here we evaluated the design of a queenless bumble bee microcolony test that could be considered for generating larval toxicity data. Three microcolony studies were conducted with Bombus impatiens to evaluate the effects of exposure to 1) diflubenzuron in pollen, 2) dimethoate in pollen, and 3) dimethoate in sucrose. Immature drone bee emergence, worker survival, pollen, and sucrose utilization were measured throughout the study duration. For dimethoate, a 10-d chronic adult bumble bee study was also conducted to compare microcolony endpoints to toxicity endpoints on individual adults. Microcolonies exposed to 10 mg diflubenzuron/kg pollen produced fewer adult drones despite no effects on worker survival. Microcolonies treated with dimethoate at ≥3 mg a.i./kg pollen and ≥0.1 mg a.i./kg sucrose solution produced fewer drones. Exposure to dimethoate in the 10-d chronic adult study resulted in direct mortality to the adult workers at ≥0.1 mg a.i./kg diet. Results from the 10-d study suggest direct effects of dimethoate on workers in the microcolony will alter provisioning of diet to the brood, resulting in lower drone production in the microcolony. Our data suggest that the microcolony study is only appropriate to assess brood effects to bumble bees for substances with low toxicity to adults, as demonstrated with diflubenzuron.

Short-term lab assessments and microcolonies are insufficient for the risk assessment of insecticides for bees

Risk assessment studies addressing effects of agrochemicals on bumblebees frequently use microcolonies. These are queenless colonies consisting of workers only in which typically one worker will lay unfertilized male-destined eggs. In the first tier of risk assessment for bees, short-term laboratory experiments (e.g. microcolonies) are used, the results of which will determine whether higher tier (semi-)field experiments are needed. To evaluate the suitability of microcolonies for risk assessment, a direct comparison between different assessment methods for the neonicotinoid pesticides acetamiprid and thiacloprid was made: microcolonies and queenright colonies under short-term laboratory conditions, queenright colonies under long-term laboratory conditions, and queenright colonies under field conditions. Here, we demonstrate that results from microcolonies contradict results from queenright colonies. While thiacloprid negatively impacted gyne production in queenright colonies, it had a positive effect on microcolony size. By contrast, thiacloprid had no significant effect on fitness parameters of queenright colonies under short-term laboratory conditions when mostly workers are produced. These results thus highlight both the need for long term assessments, allowing evaluation of gyne production, and the risk of reaching erroneous conclusions when using microcolonies. The negative effect of thiacloprid on colony fitness was confirmed under field conditions, where thiacloprid affected the production of reproductives, colony weight gain, worker weight, and foraging behaviour. For acetamiprid, a negative trend on colony fitness could only be shown in a field setup. Therefore, field-realistic setups, which allow colonies to forage freely, are most appropriate to assess sublethal effects of pesticides affecting behaviour and learning.

The Minimum Detectable Difference (MDD) Concept for Establishing Trust in Nonsignificant Results: A Critical Review

Current regulatory guidelines for pesticide risk assessment recommend that nonsignificant results should be complemented by the minimum detectable difference (MDD), a statistical indicator that is used to decide whether the experiment could have detected biologically relevant effects. We review the statistical theory of the MDD and perform simulations to understand its properties and error rates. Most importantly, we compare the skill of the MDD in distinguishing between true and false negatives (i.e., type II errors) with 2 alternatives: the minimum detectable effect (MDE), an indicator based on a post hoc power analysis common in medical studies; and confidence intervals (CIs). Our results demonstrate that MDD and MDE only differ in that the power of the MDD depends on the sample size. Moreover, although both MDD and MDE have some skill in distinguishing between false negatives and true absence of an effect, they do not perform as well as using CI upper bounds to establish trust in a nonsignificant result. The reason is that, unlike the CI, neither MDD nor MDE consider the estimated effect size in their calculation. We also show that MDD and MDE are no better than CIs in identifying larger effects among the false negatives. We conclude that, although MDDs are useful, CIs are preferable for deciding whether to treat a nonsignificant test result as a true negative, or for determining an upper bound for an unknown true effect. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:2109-2123. © 2020 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Comparing response of buff-tailed bumblebees and red mason bees to application of a thiacloprid-prochloraz mixture under semi-field conditions

Recent studies have reported interspecific differences in how bee species respond to various stressors. Evaluating the exposure and responses of different bee species to plant protection products is considered an essential part of their risk assessment. This study was conducted to assess the impacts of thiacloprid-prochloraz mixture on buff-tailed bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) and red mason bees (Osmia bicornis) in a worst-case scenario under semi-field conditions. Bumblebee colonies or solitary bee trap nests were confined in tunnels with flowering oilseed rape. The recommended maximum application rates of 72 g thiacloprid/ha and 675 g prochloraz/ha were applied as a tank mixture during bee flight in full flowering oilseed rape. Several parameters such as flight and foraging activity, population parameters, and exposure level were investigated. Our results show adverse effects of the combination of thiacloprid and prochloraz on the reproductive performance of red mason bees. The number of cocoons produced by O. bicornis was significantly reduced in the treatment compared to the control group. Regarding bumblebees, we found no effects of the thiacloprid-prochloraz mixture on any observed parameters of colony development. The maximum detected concentrations of both active substances three days after application were higher in O. bicornis pollen mass compared to B. terrestris stored pollen. We conclude that this worst-case scenario of thiacloprid-prochloraz exposure poses a high risk to solitary bees and thus the use of such mixture should be restricted.

Immunosuppression response to the neonicotinoid insecticide thiacloprid in females and males of the red mason bee Osmia bicornis L

Solitary bees are frequently exposed to pesticides, which are considered as one of the main stress factors that may lead to population declines. A strong immune defence is vital for the fitness of bees. However, the immune system can be weakened by environmental factors that may render bees more vulnerable to parasites and pathogens. Here we demonstrate for the first time that field-realistic concentrations of the commonly used neonicotinoid insecticide thiacloprid can severely affect the immunocompetence of Osmia bicornis. In detail, males exposed to thiacloprid solutions of 200 and 555 µg/kg showed a reduction in hemocyte density. Moreover, functional aspects of the immune defence - the antimicrobial activity of the hemolymph - were impaired in males. In females, however, only a concentration of 555 µg/kg elicited similar immunosuppressive effects. Although males are smaller than females, they consumed more food solution. This leads to a 2.77 times higher exposure in males, probably explaining the different concentration thresholds observed between the sexes. In contrast to honeybees, dietary exposure to thiacloprid did not affect melanisation or wound healing in O. bicornis. Our results demonstrate that neonicotinoid insecticides can negatively affect the immunocompetence of O. bicornis, possibly leading to an impaired disease resistance capacity.

Comparison of Pesticide Exposure in Honey Bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) and Bumble Bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae): Implications for Risk Assessments

To date, regulatory pesticide risk assessments have relied on the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) as a surrogate test species for estimating the risk of pesticide exposure to all bee species. However, honey bees and non-Apis bees may differ in their susceptibility and exposure to pesticides. In 2017, a workshop ('Pesticide Exposure Assessment Paradigm for Non-Apis Bees') was held to assess if honey bee risk assessment frameworks are reflective of non-Apis bee pesticide exposure. In this article, we summarize the workshop discussions on bumble bees (Bombus spp.). We review the life history and foraging behavior of bumble bees and honey bees and discuss how these traits may influence routes and levels of exposure for both taxa. Overall, the major pesticide exposure routes for bumble bees and honey bees are similar; however, bumble bees face additional exposure routes (direct exposure of foraging queens and exposure of larvae and adults to soil residues). Furthermore, bumble bees may receive comparatively higher pesticide doses via contact or oral exposure. We conclude that honey bee pesticide risk assessments may not always be protective of bumble bees, especially queens, in terms of exposure. Data needed to reliably quantify pesticide exposure for bumble bees (e.g., food consumption rates, soil residue levels) are lacking. Addressing these knowledge gaps will be crucial before bumble bee exposure can be incorporated into the pesticide risk assessment process. Because bumble bees exhibit appreciable interspecific variation in colony and behavioral characteristics, data relevant to pesticide exposure should be generated for multiple species.

Workshop on Pesticide Exposure Assessment Paradigm for Non-Apis Bees: Foundation and Summaries

Current pesticide risk assessment practices use the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., as a surrogate to characterize the likelihood of chemical exposure of a candidate pesticide for all bee species. Bees make up a diverse insect group that provides critical pollination services to both managed and wild ecosystems. Accordingly, they display a diversity of behaviors and vary greatly in their lifestyles and phenologies, such as their timing of emergence, degree of sociality, and foraging and nesting behaviors. Some of these factors may lead to disparate or variable routes of exposure when compared to honey bees. For those that possess life histories that are distinct from A. mellifera, further risk assessments may be warranted. In January 2017, 40 bee researchers, representative of regulatory agencies, academia, and agrochemical industries, gathered to discuss the current state of science on pesticide exposure to non-Apis bees and to determine how well honey bee exposure estimates, implemented by different regulatory agencies, may be protective for non-Apis bees. Workshop participants determined that although current risk assessment procedures for honey bees are largely conservative, several routes of exposure are unique to non-Apis bees and warranted further investigation. In this forum article, we discuss these key routes of exposure relevant to non-Apis bees and identify important research gaps that can help inform future bee risk assessment decisions.

One size does not fit all: Caste and sex differences in the response of bumblebees (Bombus impatiens) to chronic oral neonicotinoid exposure

Neonicotinoid insecticides have been implicated in the rapid global decline of bumblebees over recent years, particularly in agricultural and urban areas. While there is much known about neonicotinoid toxicity effects at the colony stage of the bumblebee annual cycle, far less is known about such effects at other stages critical for the maintenance of wild populations. In the present work, individual-based feeding assays were used to show that chronic consumption of the widely used neonicotinoid clothianidin at a field-realistic average rate of 3.6 and 4.0 ng/g·bee/day reduces survival of queen and male bumblebees, respectively, within a 7-day period. In contrast, worker survival was unaffected at a similar consumption rate of 3.9 ng/g·bee/day. To test the hypothesis that males have a lower tolerance for oral clothianidin exposure than workers due to their haploid genetic status, RNAseq analysis was used to compare the transcriptomic responses of workers and males to chronic intake of clothianidin at a sub-lethal dose of 0.37ng/bee/day for 5 days. Surprisingly, clothianidin consumption only altered the expression of 19 putative detoxification genes in a sex-specific manner, with 11/19 genes showing increased expression in workers. Sub-lethal clothianidin exposure also altered the expression of 40 genes associated with other major biological functions, including locomotion, reproduction, and immunity. Collectively, these results suggest that chronic oral toxicity effects of neonicotinoids are greatest during mating and nest establishment phases of the bumblebee life cycle. Chronic oral toxicity testing on males and queens is therefore required in order to fully assess the impact of neonicotinoids on wild bumblebee populations.

Uptake and dissipation of neonicotinoid residues in nectar and foliage of systemically treated woody landscape plants

Systemic neonicotinoid insecticides used in urban arboriculture could pose a risk to bees and other pollinators foraging on treated plants. We measured uptake and dissipation of soil-applied imidacloprid and dinotefuran in nectar and leaves of 2 woody plant species, a broadleaf evergreen tree (Ilex × attenuata) and a deciduous shrub (Clethra alnifolia), to assess concentrations to which pollinators and pests might be exposed in landscape settings. Three application timings, autumn (postbloom), spring (prebloom), and summer (early postbloom), were evaluated to see if taking advantage of differences in the neonicotinoids' systemic mobility and persistence might enable pest control while minimizing transference into nectar. Nectar and tissue samples were collected from in-ground plants and analyzed for residues by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) in 2 successive years. Concentrations found in nectar following autumn or spring applications ranged from 166 to 515 ng/g for imidacloprid and from 70 to 1235 ng/gg for dinotefuran, depending on plant and timing. These residues exceed concentrations shown to adversely affect individual- and colony-level traits of bees. Summer application mitigated concentrations of imidacloprid (8-31 ng/g), but not dinotefuran (235-1191 ng/g), in nectar. Our data suggest that dinotefuran may be more persistent than is generally believed. Implications for integrated pest and pollinator management in urban landscapes are discussed. Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:860-870. © 2017 SETAC.

Bumblebee colony development following chronic exposure to field-realistic levels of the neonicotinoid pesticide thiamethoxam under laboratory conditions

Neonicotinoid pesticides are used in agriculture to reduce damage from crop pests. However, beneficial insects such as bees can come into contact with these pesticides when foraging in treated areas, with potential consequences for bee declines and pollination service delivery. Honeybees are typically used as a model organism to investigate insecticide impacts on bees, but relatively little is known about impacts on other taxa such as bumblebees. In this experiment, we chronically exposed whole mature bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) colonies to field-realistic levels of the neonicotinoid thiamethoxam (2.4ppb & 10ppb) over four weeks, and compared colony growth under laboratory conditions. We found no impact of insecticide exposure on colony weight gain, or the number or mass of sexuals produced, although colonies exposed to 2.4ppb produced larger males. As previous studies have reported pesticide effects on bumblebee colony growth, this may suggest that impacts on bumblebee colonies are more pronounced for colonies at an earlier stage in the reproductive cycle. Alternatively, it may also indicate that thiamethoxam differs in toxicity compared to previously tested neonicotinoids in terms of reproductive effects. In either case, assessing bumblebee colony development under field conditions is likely more informative for real world scenarios than tests conducted in laboratory conditions.

Large-scale monitoring of effects of clothianidin-dressed OSR seeds on pollinating insects in Northern Germany: effects on large earth bumble bees (Bombus terrestris)

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of Elado®-dressed winter oilseed rape (OSR, 10 g clothianidin & 2 g beta-cyfluthrin/kg seed) on the development, reproduction and behaviour of large earth bumble bees (Bombus terrestris) as part of a large-scale monitoring field study in Northern Germany, where OSR is usually cultivated at 25-33 % of the arable land. Both reference and test sites comprised 65 km2 in which no other crops attractive to pollinating insects were present. Six study locations were selected per site and 10 bumble bee hives were placed at each location. At each site, three locations were directly adjacent to OSR fields and three locations were situated 400 m distant from the nearest OSR field. The development of colonies was monitored from the beginning of OSR flowering in April until June 2014. Pollen from returning foragers was analysed for its composition. An average of 44 % of OSR pollen was found in pollen loads of bumble bees indicating that OSR was a major resource for the colonies. At the end of OSR flowering, hives were transferred to a nature reserve until the end of the study. Colony development in terms of hive weight and the number of workers showed a typical course with no statistically significant differences between the sites. Reproductive output was comparatively high and not negatively affected by the exposure to treated OSR. In summary, Elado®-dressed OSR did not cause any detrimental effects on the development or reproduction of bumble bee colonies.

Comparison of buckwheat, red clover, and purple tansy as potential surrogate plants for use in semi-field pesticide risk assessments with Bombus impatiens

Background. Bumble bees (Bombus spp.) are important wild and managed pollinators. There is increased interest in incorporating data on bumble bees into risk assessments for pesticides, but standardized methods for assessing hazards of pesticides in semi-field and field settings have not yet been established for bumble bees. During semi-field studies, colonies are caged with pesticide-treated flowering surrogate plants, which must be attractive to foragers to ensure colony exposure to the test compound, and must produce an ample nectar and pollen to sustain colonies during testing. However, it is not known which plant(s) are suitable for use in semi-field studies with bumble bees.

Materials and Methods. We compared B. impatiens foraging activity and colony development on small plots of flowering buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum, var. common), red clover (Trifolium pratense), and purple tansy (Phacelia tanacetifolia) under semi-field conditions to assess their suitability as surrogate plants for pesticide risk assessment studies with bumble bees. We also compared the growth characteristics and input requirements of each plant type.

Results. All three plant types generally established and grew well. Red clover and purple tansy experienced significant weed pressure and/or insect pest damage. In contrast, pest pressure was extremely low in buckwheat. Overall, B. impatiens foraging activity was significantly greater on buckwheat plots than red clover or purple tansy, but plant type had no effect on number of individuals produced per colony or colony weight.

Discussion. Because of the consistently high foraging activity and successful colony development observed on buckwheat plots, combined with its favourable growth characteristics and low maintenance requirements, we recommend buckwheat as a surrogate plant for use in semi-field pesticide toxicity assessments with B. impatiens.