Investigating combined toxicity of binary mixtures in bees: Meta-analysis of laboratory tests, modelling, mechanistic basis and implications for risk assessment

Detoxification response in honey bee larvae exposed to agricultural intensification

Honey bee Apis mellifera colonies located in agroecosystems are exposed to pesticides and more fragmented habitats. The resources that bees obtain in these environments may be exposed to agrochemicals, which can accumulate in their colonies and be distributed among their nest mates. Hives placed in an agricultural setting located in the region of the Argentine Pampas were studied. Changes in the expression levels of insect cytochrome P450s, enzymes involved in the detoxification of xenobiotics, and the presence of pesticides in hive products at different times of crop management were evaluated. Our results showed that CYP6AS2 and CYP6AS4 expression in honey bee larvae increased significantly after crop flowering and pesticide application. Furthermore, residues of the herbicides atrazine and glyphosate, and the insecticide chlorantraniliprole were found in beeswax and honey samples collected from the same beehives, and their concentrations correlated with the expression profiles of CYP6AS2, CYP6AS3 and CYP9BD1. These results underscore the potential risks of pesticides exposure to larval development, highlighting the need to mitigate agrochemical use in agricultural landscapes to safeguard honey bee colonies.

Bees as environmental and toxicological bioindicators in the light of pesticide non-targeted exposure

Pesticides have a significant impact on the environment, harming valuable non-target organisms like bees. Honeybees, in particular, are ideal bioindicators of pesticide exposure due to extensive research on how pesticides affect their behavior, immunity, development, biomolecules, and detoxification. However, wild pollinators are less studied in terms of pesticide exposure, and their inclusion is essential for a comprehensive risk assessment. Additionally, food chain organisms, such as the Asian hornet, could serve as indicators of pesticide bioaccumulation. Addressing gaps in honeybee toxicology, understanding the limitations, and exploring the role of wild pollinators and insects as complementary indicators, along with advancements in risk assessment methodologies, could enhance predictive models. These models would help anticipate environmental pesticide impacts while reducing the need for costly, time-consuming research.

Current status of toxicological research on stingless bees (Apidae, Meliponini): Important pollinators neglected by pesticides' regulations

Stingless bees (tribe Meliponini), comprising over 600 known species within the largest group of eusocial bees, play a critical role in ecosystem functioning through their pollination services. They contribute to the reproduction of numerous plant species, including many economically important crops such as cacao, coffee, and various fruits. Beyond their ecological significance, stingless bees hold cultural and economic importance for many native and rural communities, where they are managed for their honey, pollen, and propolis for nutritional and health purposes. The overwhelming majority of studies on pesticide toxicity and risk assessment on bees are conducted on the model species Apis mellifera in the United States and Europe, where stingless bees are absent. In May 2023, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published its revised guidance document on the risk assessment of plant protection products (PPPs) for bees, including, beyond honey bees, other bee species from Bombus and Osmia genera. Despite the Meliponini widespread distribution in tropical and subtropical regions, the impact of pesticides on stingless bees remains largely unexplored. Here, we present a systematic review of stingless bee toxicological studies which highlights a substantial knowledge gap. Up to October of 2024, only 144 research articles on the effects of pesticides on Meliponini had been identified, 80 % of those were conducted in a single country (Brazil). The number of bee species and PPPs tested is extremely low, with just five species accounting for almost 50 % of the collected data and only 79 PPPs tested, among which biopesticides were the most common. Concerning the experimental methodologies, there is a significant lack of studies focusing on chronic exposure and field assays, as well as a scarcity of studies focusing on sublethal effects. Furthermore, we pinpoint to areas where research is needed for the development of risk assessment guidelines to protect these vital pollinators.

Azoxystrobin hides the respiratory failure of low dose sulfoxaflor in bumble bees

Pollinators are exposed to multiple pesticides during their lifetime. Various pesticides are used in agriculture and thus not all mixtures have been tested against each other and little is known about them. In this article, we investigate the impact of sulfoxaflor, a novel sulfoximine insecticide, and azoxystrobin, a widely used strobilurin fungicide, on bumble bee Bombus terrestris worker survival and physiological functions. The dosages used in this experiment are selected from dose response experiments based on LD50 data. Due to variable interactive effects on survival, our findings reveal distinct effects on bumble bee metabolic rate and respiratory patterns induced by sulfoxaflor in combination with azoxystrobin, shedding light on previously unexplored aspects of its physiological impact. Notably, we observed noteworthy differences between oral and contact treatments, emphasizing the importance of considering distinct application methods when evaluating pesticide effects and interactions. Specifically, our results indicate that azoxystrobin can mitigate the impact of sulfoxaflor, suggesting dose-dependent antagonistic interaction between these pesticides in contact exposure. In oral exposure, however, Amistar tended to potentiate the sulfoxaflor effect. This study contributes valuable insights into the multifaceted dynamics of pesticide exposure and interactions, paving the way for a more nuanced understanding of their implications on pollinator health.

Mixture of neonicotinoid and fungicide affects foraging activity of honeybees

The use of plant protection products (PPPs) is a major factor contributing to global insect decline. We here use the honeybee (Apis mellifera) as a model to study combined effects of the last neonicotinoid in the EU (acetamiprid) and different fungicides on live-long foraging flights using radio frequency identification. The mixture of the sterol-biosynthesis-inhibiting fungicide difenoconazole and the insecticide acetamiprid significantly reduced the number of foraging trips per day compared to the control and each PPP alone, while a mixture of the insecticide with the non-sterol-biosynthesis inhibiting fungicide boscalid/dimoxystrobin did not affect behaviour. This potential synergistic effect of the fungicide/insecticide mixture supports the notion that some fungicides can enhance the effect of insecticides, which did not lead to significant changes in behaviour when applied on their own. Our results emphasize the need for more studies on the interaction of different PPPs.

Sublethal fungicide-insecticide co-exposure affects nest recognition and parental investment in a solitary bee

Fungicides may interact synergistically with insecticides. However, our understanding of the impacts of sublethal insecticide-fungicide combinations on solitary bees is mostly restricted to laboratory studies, providing no information about potential consequences on behavior and reproductive success. We analyzed the effects of a fungicide application, alone and in combination with sublethal levels of an insecticide, on the nesting behavior and reproductive output of the solitary bee Osmia cornuta. We released individually-marked females into oilseed rape field cages, and subsequently sprayed the plants with four treatments: control (water), fungicide (tebuconazole), insecticide (acetamiprid at a sublethal concentration), and mixture (fungicide + insecticide). We recorded nesting activity before and after the sprays and assessed post-spray individual reproductive success. Bees of the single pesticide treatments were unaffected by the sprays and did not differ from control bees in any of the parameters measured. The longevity of bees of the mixture treatment was unaffected. However, these bees showed reduced foraging activity, shorter in-nest pollen-nectar deposition times, and increased difficulty recognizing their nesting cavity, leading to a decrease in provisioning rate, parental investment, and offspring production. Our study demonstrates that co-exposure to a fungicide with otherwise harmless levels of an insecticide caused behavioral effects with consequences on reproductive success. Because longevity was unaffected, these effects would not have been easily detected in a chronic laboratory test. Our results have important implications for bee risk assessment, which should account for exposure to multiple compounds and address behavioral effects and reproductive output under semi-field and/or field conditions.

Towards unbiased interpretations of interactive effects in ecotoxicological studies

Ecotoxicological research has increasingly focused on the interactive effects of chemical mixtures on biological models, emphasising additive, synergistic, or antagonistic interactions. However, these combination studies often test chemicals at unique concentrations (e.g. x:y), limiting our understanding of the effects across the full spectrum of possible combinations. Evidence from human toxicology suggests that interactive effects among chemicals can vary significantly with total concentration (e.g. x:y vs. 2x:2y), their ratio (e.g. x:2y vs. 2x:y), and the magnitude of the tested effect (e.g. LC10vs. LC50). Our non-exhaustive review of studies on binary mixtures in bee ecotoxicology reveals that such parameters are frequently neglected. Of the 60 studies we examined, only two utilised multiple total concentrations and ratios, thus exploring a broad range of possible combinations. In contrast, 26 studies tested only a single concentration of each chemical, resulting in incomplete interpretations of the potential interactive effects. Other studies utilised various concentrations and/or ratios but failed to capture a broad spectrum of possible combinations. We also discuss potential discrepancies in interactive effects based on different metrics and exposure designs. We advocate for future ecotoxicological studies to investigate a wider spectrum of chemical combinations, including various concentrations and ratios, and to address different levels of effects.

Residues of agrochemicals in beebread as an indicator of landscape management

The agricultural intensification represents a major threat to biodiversity, with negative effects on the ecosystem. In particular, habitat loss and degradation, along with pesticide use have been recognised as primary factors contributing to the actual global decline of pollinators. Here we investigated the quality of agroecosystems in the Emilia-Romagna region (Northern Italy) within the national monitoring project BeeNet. We analysed pesticide residues in 100 samples of beebread collected in 25 BeeNet stations in March and June 2021 and 2022. We evaluated diversity and concentration of these chemicals, their risk (TWC) to honey bees, and their correlation with land use. Overall, in 84 % of the samples we found 63 out of 373 different pesticide residues, >90 % of them belonging to fungicides and insecticides. The TWC exceeded the risk threshold in seven samples (TWCmix), mostly due to only one or two compounds. We also found 15 compounds not approved in the EU as plant protection products (PPPs), raising concerns about illegal use or contamination through beeswax recycling. Samples collected in 2021 and in June presented a significantly higher number of active ingredients and TWC than those collected in 2022 and in March. The TWC calculated on single compounds (TWCcom) exceeded the risk threshold in case of four insecticides, namely carbaryl, fipronil, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam (although each detected in only one sample). Finally, both TWC and number of active ingredients were moderately or highly positively correlated with the percentage of area covered by orchards. Considering that we found on average more than five different molecules per sample, and that we ignored potential synergistic effects, the results of this work highlight the alarming situation regarding pesticide treatments and toxicity risk for bees linked to the current agricultural practices, and the need for implementing sustainable and pollinator-friendly strategies.

Interactive effects of chlorothalonil and Varroa destructor on Apis mellifera during adult stage

The interaction between environmental factors affecting honey bees is of growing concern due to their potential synergistic effects on bee health. Our study investigated the interactive impact of Varroa destructor and chlorothalonil on workers' survival, fat body morphology, and the expression of gene associated with detoxification, immunity, and nutrition metabolism during their adult stage. We found that both chlorothalonil and V. destructor significantly decreased workers' survival rates, with a synergistic effect observed when bees were exposed to both stressors simultaneously. Morphological analysis of fat body revealed significant alterations in trophocytes, particularly a reduction in vacuoles and granules after Day 12, coinciding with the transition of the bees from nursing to other in-hive work tasks. Gene expression analysis showed significant changes in detoxification, immunity, and nutrition metabolism over time. Detoxification genes, such as CYP9Q2, CYP9Q3, and GST-D1, were downregulated in response to stressor exposure, indicating a potential impairment in detoxification processes. Immune-related genes, including defensin-1, Dorsal-1, and Kayak, exhibited an initially upregulation followed by varied expression patterns, suggesting a complex immune response to stressors. Nutrition metabolism genes, such as hex 70a, AmIlp2, VGMC, AmFABP, and AmPTL, displayed dynamic expression changes, reflecting alterations in nutrient utilization and energy metabolism in response to stressors. Overall, these findings highlight the interactive and dynamic effects of environmental stressor on honey bees, providing insights into the mechanisms underlying honey bee decline. These results emphasize the need to consider the interactions between multiple stressors in honey bee research and to develop management strategies to mitigate their adverse effects on bee populations.

Evaluation of the ecological risk of pesticide residues from the European LUCAS Soil monitoring 2018 survey

The 2018 LUCAS (Land Use and Coverage Area frame Survey) Soil Pesticides survey provides a European Union (EU)-scale assessment of 118 pesticide residues in more than 3473 soil sites. This study responds to the policy need to develop risk-based indicators for pesticides in the environment. Two mixture risk indicators are presented for soil based, respectively, on the lowest and the median of available No Observed Effect Concentration (NOECsoil,min and NOECsoil,50) from publicly available toxicity datasets. Two further indicators were developed based on the corresponding equilibrium concentration in the aqueous phase and aquatic toxicity data, which are available as species sensitivity distributions. Pesticides were quantified in 74.5% of the sites. The mixture risk indicator based on the NOECsoil,min exceeds 1 in 14% of the sites and 0.1 in 23%. The insecticides imidacloprid and chlorpyrifos and the fungicide epoxiconazole are the largest contributors to the overall risk. At each site, one or a few substances drive mixture risk. Modes of actions most likely associated with mixture effects include modulation of acetylcholine metabolism (neonicotinoids and organophosphate substances) and sterol biosynthesis inhibition (triazole fungicides). Several pesticides driving the risk have been phased out since 2018. Following LUCAS surveys will determine the effectiveness of substance-specific risk management and the overall progress toward risk reduction targets established by EU and UN policies. Newly generated data and knowledge will stimulate needed future research on pesticides, soil health, and biodiversity protection. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:1639-1653. © 2024 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Exposure to sublethal levels of insecticide-fungicide mixtures affect reproductive success and population growth rates in the solitary bee Osmia cornuta

In agricultural environments, bees are routinely exposed to combinations of pesticides. For the most part, exposure to these pesticide mixtures does not result in acute lethal effects, but we know very little about potential sublethal effects and their consequences on reproductive success and population dynamics. In this study, we orally exposed newly emerged females of the solitary bee Osmia cornuta to environmentally-relevant levels of acetamiprid (a cyano-substituted neonicotinoid insecticide) singly and in combination with tebuconazole (a sterol-biosynthesis inhibitor (SBI) fungicide). The amount of feeding solution consumed during the exposure phase was lowest in bees exposed to the pesticide mixture. Following exposure, females were individually marked and released into oilseed rape field cages to monitor their nesting performance and assess their reproductive success. The nesting performance and reproductive success of bees exposed to the fungicide or the insecticide alone were similar to those of control bees and resulted in a 1.3-1.7 net population increases. By contrast, bees exposed to the pesticide mixture showed lower establishment, shortened nesting period, and reduced fecundity. Together, these effects led to a 0.5-0.6 population decrease. Female establishment and shortened nesting period were the main population bottlenecks. We found no effects of the pesticide mixture on nest provisioning rate, offspring body weight or sex ratio. Our study shows how sublethal pesticide exposure may affect several components of bee reproductive success and, ultimately, population growth. Our results calls for a rethinking of pollinator risk assessment schemes, which should target not only single compounds but also combinations of compounds likely to co-occur in agricultural environments.

Uncovering hidden dangers: The combined toxicity of abamectin and lambda-cyhalothrin on honey bees

Studying the toxic effects of pesticides on bees has consistently been a prominent area of interest for researchers. Nonetheless, existing research has predominantly concentrated on individual toxicity assessments, leaving a gap in our understanding of mixed toxicity. This study delves into the individual and combined toxic effects of abamectin (ABA) and lambda-cyhalothrin (LCY) on honey bees (Apis mellifera) in laboratory settings. We discovered that ABA (96 h-LC50 value of 0.079 mg/L) exhibited greater acute toxicity to honey bees compared to LCY (96 h-LC50 value of 9.177 mg/L). Moreover, the mixture of ABA and LCY presented an acute antagonistic effect on honey bees. Additionally, our results indicated that exposure to LCY, at medium concentration, led to a reduction in the abundance of gut core bacterium Snodgrassella. However, an increase in the abundance of Bifidobacterium was noted when exposed to a medium concentration of LCY and its mixture with ABA. Transcriptomic analysis revealed significant regulation of certain genes in the medium concentration of all three treatments compared to the control group, primarily enriching in metabolism and immune-related pathways. Following chronic exposure to field-relevant concentrations of ABA, LCY, and their mixture, there were significant alterations in the activities of immunity-related enzyme polyphenol oxidase (PPO) and detoxification enzymes glutathione S-transferase (GST) and carboxylesterase (CarE). Additionally, the expression of four genes (abaecin, cyp9e2, cyp302a1, and GstD1) associated with immune and detoxification metabolism was significantly altered. These findings suggest a potential health risk posed by the insecticides ABA and LCY to honey bees. Despite exhibiting acute antagonistic effect, mixed exposure still induced damage to bees at all levels. This study advances our knowledge of the potential adverse effects of individual or combined exposure to these two pesticides on non-target pollinators and offers crucial guidance for the use of insecticides in agricultural production.

Combined effects of three insecticides with different modes of action on biochemical responses of the solitary bee Osmia bicornis

Bees are simultaneously exposed to a variety of pesticides, which are often applied in mixtures and can cause lethal and sublethal effects. The combined effects of pesticides, however, are not measured in the current risk assessment schemes. Additionally, the sublethal effects of pesticides on a variety of physiological processes are poorly recognized in bees, especially in non-Apis solitary bees. In this study, we used a full-factorial design to examine the main and interactive effects of three insecticide formulations with different modes of action (Mospilan 20 SP, Sherpa 100 EC, and Dursban 480 EC) on bee biochemical processes. We measured acetylcholinesterase (AChE), glutathione S-transferase (GST) and esterase (EST) activities, as well as a nonenzymatic biomarker associated with energy metabolism, i.e., ATP level. All studied endpoints were affected by Sherpa 100 EC, and the activities of AChE and EST as well as ATP levels were affected by Dursban 480 EC. Moreover, complex interactions between all three insecticides affected ATP levels, showing outcomes that cannot be predicted when testing each insecticide separately. The results indicate that even if interactive effects are sometimes difficult to interpret, there is a need to study such interactions if laboratory-generated toxicity data are to be extrapolated to field conditions.

Enhancing knowledge of chemical exposures and fate in honey bee hives: Insights from colony structure and interactions

Honey bees are unintentionally exposed to a wide range of chemicals through various routes in their natural environment, yet research on the cumulative effects of multi-chemical and sublethal exposures on important caste members, including the queen bee and brood, is still in its infancy. The hive's social structure and food-sharing (trophallaxis) practices are important aspects to consider when identifying primary and secondary exposure pathways for residential hive members and possible chemical reservoirs within the colony. Secondary exposures may also occur through chemical transfer (maternal offloading) to the brood and by contact through possible chemical diffusion from wax cells to all hive members. The lack of research on peer-to-peer exposures to contaminants and their metabolites may be in part due to the limitations in sensitive analytical techniques for monitoring chemical fate and dispersion. Combined application of automated honey bee monitoring and modern chemical trace analysis techniques could offer rapid progress in quantifying chemical transfer and accumulation within the hive environment and developing effective mitigation strategies for toxic chemical co-exposures. To enhance the understanding of chemical fate and toxicity within the entire colony, it is crucial to consider both the intricate interactions among hive members and the potential synergistic effects arising from combinations of chemical and their metabolites.

Pesticide residues in ornamental plants marketed as bee friendly: Levels in flowers, leaves, roots and soil

Ornamental plants rich in pollen and nectar are often marketed as "pollinator-friendly" by flower retailers. However, even though the plants are attractive from a foraging perspective, i.e pollen and nectar rich, bees and other pollinating insects could be at risk from exposure of pesticide residues on the plants or from pesticide used during production. Pesticides used in ornamental plant production could lead to environmental emissions both during cultivation, at retailer displays and when planted in gardens by the consumers. This study aims to investigate what pesticides that are used in the production of perennial ornamental plants sold in Sweden and if the residues could pose a risk for wild pollinators. We analyze an array of 536 pesticides in whole flowers, leaves, roots and soil of 54 individual (46 had flowers) perennial plants specifically marketed as "bee friendly". In addition, seeds from 65 seed bags were analyzed for the same pesticides. Our result show for the first time the distribution of pesticide residues between flowers, leaves, roots and soils of ornamental plants. We also show that all ornamental plants analyzed contained at least one pesticide, and that some samples contained up to 19 different substances.

The role of the veterinary diagnostic toxicologist in apiary health

Susceptibility of individuals and groups to toxicants depends on complex interactions involving the host, environment, and other exposures. Apiary diagnostic investigation and honey bee health are truly population medicine: the colony is the patient. Here we provide basic information on the application of toxicology to the testing of domestic honey bees, and, in light of recent research, expand on some of the challenges of interpreting analytical chemistry findings as they pertain to hive health. The hive is an efficiently organized system of wax cells used to store brood, honey, and bee bread, and is protected by the bee-procured antimicrobial compound propolis. Toxicants can affect individual workers outside or inside the hive, with disease processes that range from acute to chronic and subclinical to lethal. Toxicants can impact brood and contaminate honey, bee bread, and structural wax. We provide an overview of important natural and synthetic toxicants to which honey bees are exposed; behavioral, husbandry, and external environmental factors influencing exposure; short- and long-term impacts of toxicant exposure on individual bee and colony health; and the convergent impacts of stress, nutrition, infectious disease, and toxicant exposures on colony health. Current and potential future toxicology testing options are included. Common contaminants in apiary products consumed or used by humans (honey, wax, pollen), their sources, and the potential need for product testing are also noted.

Machine learning - based q-RASAR modeling to predict acute contact toxicity of binary organic pesticide mixtures in honey bees

We have reported here a quantitative read-across structure-activity relationship (q-RASAR) model for the prediction of binary mixture toxicity (acute contact toxicity) in honey bees. Both the quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) and the similarity-based read-across algorithms are used simultaneously for enhancing the predictability of the model. Several similarity and error-based parameters, obtained from the read-across prediction tool, have been put together with the structural and physicochemical descriptors to develop the final q-RASAR model. The calculated statistical and validation metrics indicate the goodness-of-fit, robustness, and good predictability of the partial least squares (PLS) regression model. Machine learning algorithms like ridge regression, linear support vector machine (SVM), and non-linear SVM have been used to further enhance the predictability of the q-RASAR model. The prediction quality of the q-RASAR models outperforms the previously reported quasi-SMILEs-based QSAR model in terms of external correlation coefficient (Q2F1 SVM q-RASAR: 0.935 vs. Q2VLD QSAR: 0.89). In this research, the toxicity values of several new untested binary mixtures have been predicted with the new models, and the reliability of the PLS predictions has been validated by the prediction reliability indicator tool. The q-RASAR approach can be used as reliable, complementary, and integrative to the conventional experimental approaches of pesticide mixture risk assessment.

Description and validation of an improved method to feed solitary bees (Osmia spp.) known amounts of pesticides

Pesticide exposure is an important driver of bee declines. Laboratory toxicity tests provide baseline information on the potential effects of pesticides on bees, but current risk assessment schemes rely on one species, the highly social honey bee, Apis mellifera, and there is uncertainty regarding the extent to which this species is a suitable surrogate for other pollinators. For this reason, Osmia cornuta and Osmia bicornis have been proposed as model solitary bee species in the EU risk assessment scheme. The use of solitary bees in risk assessment requires the development of new methodologies adjusted to the biology of these species. For example, oral dosing methods used with honey bees cannot be readily applied to solitary bees due to differences in feeding behaviour and social interactions. In this study, we describe the "petal method", a laboratory feeding method, and validate its use in acute and chronic exposure oral tests with Osmia spp. We conducted five experiments in which we compared the performance of several artificial flowers combining visual and olfactory cues against the petal method, or in which variations of the petal method were confronted. We then use the results of these experiments to optimize the feeding arenas and propose standardized methods for both acute and chronic exposure tests. The petal method provides high levels of feeding success, thus reducing the number of bees needed. It works with a wide variety of petal species and with both female and male Osmia spp., thus ensuring reproducibility across studies. To validate the use of the petal method in ecotoxicology tests, we assess the toxicity of a standard reference insecticide, dimethoate, in O. cornuta adults and determine LD50 values for this species. The petal method should facilitate the inclusion of solitary bees in risk assessment schemes therefore increasing the protection coverage of pesticide regulation.

Chemical Mixtures and Multiple Stressors: Same but Different?

Ecosystems are strongly influenced by multiple anthropogenic stressors, including a wide range of chemicals and their mixtures. Studies on the effects of multiple stressors have largely focussed on nonchemical stressors, whereas studies on chemical mixtures have largely ignored other stressors. However, both research areas face similar challenges and require similar tools and methods to predict the joint effects of chemicals or nonchemical stressors, and frameworks to integrate multiple chemical and nonchemical stressors are missing. We provide an overview of the research paradigms, tools, and methods commonly used in multiple stressor and chemical mixture research and discuss potential domains of cross-fertilization and joint challenges. First, we compare the general paradigms of ecotoxicology and (applied) ecology to explain the historical divide. Subsequently, we compare methods and approaches for the identification of interactions, stressor characterization, and designing experiments. We suggest that both multiple stressor and chemical mixture research are too focused on interactions and would benefit from integration regarding null model selection. Stressor characterization is typically more costly for chemical mixtures. While for chemical mixtures comprehensive classification systems at suborganismal level have been developed, recent classification systems for multiple stressors account for environmental context. Both research areas suffer from rather simplified experimental designs that focus on only a limited number of stressors, chemicals, and treatments. We discuss concepts that can guide more realistic designs capturing spatiotemporal stressor dynamics. We suggest that process-based and data-driven models are particularly promising to tackle the challenge of prediction of effects of chemical mixtures and nonchemical stressors on (meta-)communities and (meta-)food webs. We propose a framework to integrate the assessment of effects for multiple stressors and chemical mixtures. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:1915-1936. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Pesticide residues in nectar and pollen of melon crops: Risk to pollinators and effects of a specific pesticide mixture on Bombus terrestris (Hymenoptera: Apidae) micro-colonies

Residues detected in pollen collected by honey bees are often used to estimate pesticide exposure in ecotoxicological studies. However, for a more accurate assessment of pesticides effect on foraging pollinators, residues found directly on flowers are a more realistic exposure approximation. We conducted a multi-residue analysis of pesticides on pollen and nectar of melon flowers collected from five fields. The cumulative chronic oral exposure Risk Index (RI) was calculated for Apis mellifera, Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis to multiple pesticides. However, this index could underestimate the risk since sublethal or synergistic effects are not considered. Therefore, a mixture containing three of the most frequently detected pesticides in our study was tested for synergistic impact on B. terrestris micro-colonies through a chronic oral toxicity test. According to the result, pollen and nectar samples contained numerous pesticide residues, including nine insecticides, nine fungicides, and one herbicide. Eleven of those were not applied by farmers during the crop season, revealing that melon agroecosystems may be pesticide contaminated environments. The primary contributor to the chronic RI was imidacloprid and O. bircornis is at greatest risk for lethality resulting from chronic oral exposure at these sites. In the bumblebee micro-colony bioassay, dietary exposure to acetamiprid, chlorpyrifos and oxamyl at residue level concentration, showed no effects on worker mortality, drone production or drone size and no synergies were detected when pesticide mixtures were evaluated. In conclusion, our findings have significant implications for improving pesticide risk assessment schemes to guarantee pollinator conservation. In particular, bee pesticide risk assessment should not be limited to acute exposure effects to isolated active ingredients in honey bees. Instead, risk assessments should consider the long-term pesticide exposure effects in both pollen and nectar on a range of bees that reflect the diversity of natural ecosystems and the synergistic potential among pesticide formulations.

Biochemical responses, feeding and survival in the solitary bee Osmia bicornis following exposure to an insecticide and a fungicide alone and in combination

In agricultural ecosystems, bees are exposed to combinations of pesticides that may have been applied at different times. For example, bees visiting a flowering crop may be chronically exposed to low concentrations of systemic insecticides applied before bloom and then to a pulse of fungicide, considered safe for bees, applied during bloom. In this study, we simulate this scenario under laboratory conditions with females of the solitary bee, Osmia bicornis L. We studied the effects of chronic exposure to the neonicotinoid insecticide, Confidor® (imidacloprid) at a realistic concentration, and of a pulse (1 day) exposure of the fungicide Folicur® SE (tebuconazole) at field application rate. Syrup consumption, survival, and four biomarkers: acetylcholinesterase (AChE), carboxylesterase (CaE), glutathione S-transferase (GST), and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) were evaluated at two different time points. An integrated biological response (IBRv2) index was elaborated with the biomarker results. The fungicide pulse had no impact on survival but temporarily reduced syrup consumption and increased the IBRv2 index, indicating potential molecular alterations. The neonicotinoid significantly reduced syrup consumption, survival, and the neurological activity of the enzymes. The co-exposure neonicotinoid-fungicide did not increase toxicity at the tested concentrations. AChE proved to be an efficient biomarker for the detection of early effects for both the insecticide and the fungicide. Our results highlight the importance of assessing individual and sub-individual endpoints to better understand pesticide effects on bees.

Acute toxicity of pesticide mixtures to honey bees is generally additive, and well predicted by Concentration Addition

Understanding the frequency of non-additive effects of pesticides (synergism and antagonism) is important in the context of risk assessment. The goal of this study was to investigate the prevalence of non-additive effects of pesticides to honey bees (Apis mellifera). We investigated a large set of mixtures including insecticides and fungicides of different chemical modes of action and classes. The mixtures included represent a relevant sample of pesticides that are currently used globally. We investigated whether the experimental toxicity of the mixtures could be predicted based on the Concentration Addition (CA) model for acute contact and oral adult bee toxicity tests. We measured the degree of deviation from the additivity predictions of the experimental toxicity based on the well-known Mixture Deviation Ratio (MDR). Further, we investigated the appropriate MDR thresholds that should be used for the identification of non-additive effects based on acceptable rates for false positive (alpha) and true positive (beta) findings. We found that a deviation factor of MDR = 5 is a sound reference for labeling potential non-additive effects in acute adult bee experimental designs when assuming a typical Coefficient of Variation (CV%) = 100 in the determination of the LD₅₀ of a pesticide (a factor of 2× deviation in the LD ₅₀ resulting from inter-experimental variability). We found that only 2.4 % and 9 % of the mixtures evaluated had an MDR > 5 and MDR < 0.2, respectively. The frequency and magnitude of deviation from additivity found for bees in this study are consistent with those of other terrestrial and aquatic taxa. Our findings suggest that additivity is a good baseline for predicting the toxicity of pesticide mixtures to bees, and that the rare cases of synergy of pesticide mixtures to bees are not random but have a mechanistic basis.

Effects of Flupyradifurone and Two Reference Insecticides Commonly Used in Toxicological Studies on the Larval Proteome of the Honey bee Apis mellifera

The western honey bee Apis mellifera is globally distributed due to its beekeeping advantages and plays an important role in the global ecology and economy. In recent decades, several studies have raised concerns about bee decline. Discussed are multiple reasons such as increased pathogen pressure, malnutrition or pesticide use. Insecticides are considered to be one of the major factors. In 2013, the use of three neonicotinoids in the field was prohibited in the EU. Flupyradifurone was introduced as a potential successor; it has a comparable mode of action as the banned neonicotinoids. However, there is a limited number of studies on the effects of sublethal concentrations of flupyradifurone on honey bees. Particularly, the larval physiological response by means of protein expression has not yet been studied. Hence, the larval protein expression was investigated via 2D gel electrophoresis after following a standardised protocol to apply sublethal concentrations of the active substance (flupyradifurone 10 mg/kg diet) to larval food. The treated larvae did not show increased mortality or an aberrant development. Proteome comparisons showed clear differences concerning the larval metabolism, immune response and energy supply. Further field studies are needed to validate the in vitro results at a colony level.

Risk Assessment of Combined Exposure to Multiple Chemicals at the European Food Safety Authority: Principles, Guidance Documents, Applications and Future Challenges

Human health and animal health risk assessment of combined exposure to multiple chemicals use the same steps as single-substance risk assessment, namely problem formulation, exposure assessment, hazard assessment and risk characterisation. The main unique feature of combined RA is the assessment of combined exposure, toxicity and risk. Recently, the Scientific Committee of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published two relevant guidance documents. The first one "Harmonised methodologies for the human health, animal health and ecological risk assessment of combined exposure to multiple chemicals" provides principles and explores methodologies for all steps of risk assessment together with a reporting table. This guidance supports also the default assumption that dose addition is applied for combined toxicity of the chemicals unless evidence for response addition or interactions (antagonism or synergism) is available. The second guidance document provides an account of the scientific criteria to group chemicals in assessment groups using hazard-driven criteria and prioritisation methods, i.e., exposure-driven and risk-based approaches. This manuscript describes such principles, provides a brief description of EFSA's guidance documents, examples of applications in the human health and animal health area and concludes with a discussion on future challenges in this field.

The acute toxicity of pesticide mixtures to honeybees

Honeybees (Apis mellifera) frequently live in complex environments where exposure to mixtures of pesticides is possible. Although several studies have expressed concern regarding the combined effects of pesticide mixtures, other studies did not find increased toxicity. Thus, the primary objective of this study was to identify peer-reviewed literature measuring the toxicity of pesticide mixtures to honeybees and determine how frequently synergistic interactions occur. Many experiments (258) were identified that met the criteria for inclusion. When considering all experiments, 34% of experiments had model deviation ratios (MDR; expected toxicity/observed toxicity) greater than 2, suggesting greater-than-additive toxicity. Twelve percent of experiments had MDR values greater than 5, with several studies exceeding 100. However, most experiments that had higher MDRs included azole fungicides or acaricides as a component of the mixture. After removal of these groups, only 8% of experiments exceeded an MDR of 2, and no experiments exceeded 5. Moreover, the influence of the azole fungicides was dose dependent. If only experiments that used azole exposure at environmentally relevant concentrations were considered, azole fungicides had limited impact on neonicotinoid insecticides. However, pyrethroid insecticides still had greater than expected toxicity with 80% of experiments having MDR values greater than 2. Acaricides also had greater than expected incidence of synergy with approximately 30% of studies reporting MDR values greater than 2. It should be noted that even the azole studies considered environmentally relevant frequently used maximum exposure rates and worst-case exposure scenarios. The primary finding is that synergy is uncommon except for a few cases where known synergists (azole fungicides) and pesticides with variable metabolism potential, such as some pyrethroids, are in combination. Future work is still needed to refine the relevance of azole fungicides at commonly occurring environmental concentrations. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:1694-1704. © 2022 SETAC.

Lethal, sublethal, and combined effects of pesticides on bees: A meta-analysis and new risk assessment tools

Multiple stressors threaten bee health, a major one being pesticides. Bees are simultaneously exposed to multiple pesticides that can cause both lethal and sublethal effects. Risk assessment and most research on bee health, however, focus on lethal individual effects. Here, we performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis that summarizes and re-interprets the available qualitative and quantitative information on the lethal, sublethal, and combined toxicity of a comprehensive range of pesticides on bees. We provide results (1970-2019) for multiple bee species (Bombus, Osmia, Megachile, Melipona, Partamona, Scaptotrigona), although most works focused on Apis mellifera L. (78 %). Our harmonised results document the lethal toxicity of pesticides in bees (n = 377 pesticides) and the types of sublethal testing methods and related effects that cause a sublethal effect (n = 375 sublethal experiments). We identified the most common combinations of pesticides and mode of actions tested, and summarize the experimental methods, magnitude of the interactions, and robustness of available data (n = 361 experiments). We provide open access searchable, comprehensive, and integrated list of pesticides and their levels causing lethal, sublethal, and combined effects. We report major data gaps related to pesticide's sublethal (71 %) and combined (e.g., ~99 %) toxicity. We identified pesticides and mode of actions of greatest concern in terms of sublethal (chlorothalonil, pymetrozine, glyphosate; neonicotinoids) and combined (tau-fluvalinate combinations; acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and neonicotinoids) effects. Although certain pesticides have faced regulatory restrictions in specific countries (chlorothalonil, pymetrozine, neonicotinoids), most are still widely used worldwide (e.g., glyphosate). This work aims at facilitating the implementation of more comprehensive and harmonised research and risk assessments, considering sublethal and combined effects. To ensure safeguarding pollinators and the environment, we advocate for a more refined and holistic assessment that do not only focus on lethality but uses harmonised methods to test sublethal and relevant combinations.

A Population-Based Human In Vitro Approach to Quantify Inter-Individual Variability in Responses to Chemical Mixtures

Human cell-based population-wide in vitro models have been proposed as a strategy to derive chemical-specific estimates of inter-individual variability; however, the utility of this approach has not yet been tested for cumulative exposures in mixtures. This study aimed to test defined mixtures and their individual components and determine whether adverse effects of the mixtures were likely to be more variable in a population than those of the individual chemicals. The in vitro model comprised 146 human lymphoblastoid cell lines from four diverse subpopulations of European and African descent. Cells were exposed, in concentration−response, to 42 chemicals from diverse classes of environmental pollutants; in addition, eight defined mixtures were prepared from these chemicals using several exposure- or hazard-based scenarios. Points of departure for cytotoxicity were derived using Bayesian concentration−response modeling and population variability was quantified in the form of a toxicodynamic variability factor (TDVF). We found that 28 chemicals and all mixtures exhibited concentration−response cytotoxicity, enabling calculation of the TDVF. The median TDVF across test substances, for both individual chemicals or defined mixtures, ranged from a default assumption (101/2) of toxicodynamic variability in human population to >10. The data also provide a proof of principle for single-variant genome-wide association mapping for toxicity of the chemicals and mixtures, although replication would be necessary due to statistical power limitations with the current sample size. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using a set of human lymphoblastoid cell lines as an in vitro model to quantify the extent of inter-individual variability in hazardous properties of both individual chemicals and mixtures. The data show that population variability of the mixtures is unlikely to exceed that of the most variable component, and that similarity in genome-wide associations among components may be used to accrue additional evidence for grouping of constituents in a mixture for cumulative assessments.

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.

No evidence for impaired solitary bee fitness following pre-flowering sulfoxaflor application alone or in combination with a common fungicide in a semi-field experiment

Pesticide exposure is considered a major driver of pollinator decline and the use of neonicotinoid insecticides has been restricted by regulatory authorities due to their risks for pollinators. Impacts of new alternative sulfoximine-based compounds on solitary bees and their potential interactive effects with other commonly applied pesticides in agriculture remain unclear. Here, we conducted a highly replicated full-factorial semi-field experiment with the solitary bee Osmia bicornis, an important pollinator of crops and wild plants in Europe, and Phacelia tanacetifolia as a model crop. We show that spray applications of the insecticide sulfoxaflor (product Closer) and the fungicide azoxystrobin (product Amistar), both alone and combined, had no significant negative impacts on adult female survival or the production, mortality, sex ratio and body size of offspring when sulfoxaflor was applied five days before crop flowering. Our results indicate that for O. bicornis (1) the risk of adverse impacts of sulfoxaflor (Closer) on fitness is small when applied at least five days before crop flowering and (2) that azoxystrobin (Amistar) has a low potential of exacerbating sulfoxaflor effects under field-realistic conditions.

A critical review of effect modeling for ecological risk assessment of plant protection products

A wide diversity of plant protection products (PPP) is used for crop protection leading to the contamination of soil, water, and air, which can have ecotoxicological impacts on living organisms. It is inconceivable to study the effects of each compound on each species from each compartment, experimental studies being time consuming and cost prohibitive, and animal testing having to be avoided. Therefore, numerous models are developed to assess PPP ecotoxicological effects. Our objective was to provide an overview of the modeling approaches enabling the assessment of PPP effects (including biopesticides) on the biota. Six categories of models were inventoried: (Q)SAR, DR and TKTD, population, multi-species, landscape, and mixture models. They were developed for various species (terrestrial and aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates, primary producers, micro-organisms) belonging to diverse environmental compartments, to address different goals (e.g., species sensitivity or PPP bioaccumulation assessment, ecosystem services protection). Among them, mechanistic models are increasingly recognized by EFSA for PPP regulatory risk assessment but, to date, remain not considered in notified guidance documents. The strengths and limits of the reviewed models are discussed together with improvement avenues (multigenerational effects, multiple biotic and abiotic stressors). This review also underlines a lack of model testing by means of field data and of sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Accurate and robust modeling of PPP effects and other stressors on living organisms, from their application in the field to their functional consequences on the ecosystems at different scales of time and space, would help going toward a more sustainable management of the environment. Graphical Abstract Combination of the keyword lists composing the first bibliographic query. Columns were joined together with the logical operator AND. All keyword lists are available in Supplementary Information at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5775038 (Larras et al. 2021).

Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Exposure to Pesticide Residues in Nectar and Pollen in Urban and Suburban Environments from Four Regions of the United States

The risk of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) exposure to pesticide residues while foraging for nectar and pollen is commonly explored in the context of agroecosystems. However, pesticides are also used in urban and suburban areas for vegetation management, vector control, and the management of ornamental plants in public and private landscapes. The extent to which pesticides pose a health risk to honey bees in these settings remains unclear. We addressed this at a landscape scale by conducting pesticide residue screening analyses on 768 nectar and 862 pollen samples collected monthly over 2 years from honey bee colonies located in urban and suburban areas in eight medium to large cities in California, Florida, Michigan, and Texas (USA). A risk assessment was performed using the US Environmental Protection Agency's BeeREX model whenever an oral toxicity value was available for a compound. Chemical analyses detected 17 pesticides in nectar and 60 in pollen samples during the survey. Approximately 73% of all samples contained no detectable pesticide residues. Although the number of detections varied among the sampled regions, fewer pesticides were detected in nectar than in pollen. Per BeeREX, four insecticides showed a potential acute risk to honey bees: imidacloprid, chlorpyrifos, and esfenvalerate in nectar, and deltamethrin in nectar and pollen. In general, exposure of honey bees to pesticides via nectar and pollen collection was low in urban and suburban areas across the United States, and no seasonal or spatial trends were evident. Our data suggest that honey bees are exposed to fewer pesticides in developed areas than in agricultural ones. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:991-1003. © 2022 SETAC.

A mechanism-based approach unveils metabolic routes potentially mediating chlorantraniliprole synergism in honey bees, Apis mellifera L., by azole fungicides

BACKGROUND

Almond production in California is an intensively managed agroecosystem dependent on managed pollination by honey bees, Apis mellifera L. A recent laboratory study reported synergism in honey bees between chlorantraniliprole, a common diamide insecticide used in almond orchards, and the fungicide propiconazole. Indeed, there is an emerging body of evidence that honey bee cytochrome P450 monooxygenases of the CYP9Q subfamily are involved in the detoxification of insecticides across a diverse range of chemical classes. The objective of the present study was to unveil the molecular background of the described synergism and to explore the potential role of CYP9Q enzymes in diamide detoxification.

RESULTS

Our study confirmed the previously reported synergistic potential of propiconazole on chlorantraniliprole in acute contact toxicity bioassays, whereas no synergism was observed for flubendiamide. Fluorescence-based biochemical assays revealed an interaction of chlorantraniliprole, but not flubendiamide, with functionally expressed CYP9Q2 and CYP9Q3. These findings were validated by an increased chlorantraniliprole tolerance of transgenic Drosophila lines expressing CYP9Q2/3, and an analytically confirmed oxidative metabolism of chlorantraniliprole by recombinantly expressed enzymes. Furthermore, we showed that several triazole fungicides used in almond orchards, including propiconazole, were strong nanomolar inhibitors of functionally expressed honey bee CYP9Q2 and CYP9Q3, whereas other fungicides such as iprodione and cyprodinil did not inhibit these enzymes.

CONCLUSION

Honey bee CYP9Q enzymes are involved in chlorantraniliprole metabolism and inhibited by triazole fungicides possibly leading to synergism in acute contact toxicity bioassays. Our mechanistic approach has the potential to inform tier I honey bee pesticide risk assessment.

Fungicide and insecticide exposure adversely impacts bumblebees and pollination services under semi-field conditions

Sulfoximines, the next generation systemic insecticides developed to replace neonicotinoids, have been shown to negatively impact pollinator development and reproduction. However, field-realistic studies on sulfoximines are few and consequences on pollination services unexplored. Moreover, the impacts of other agrochemicals such as fungicides, and their combined effects with insecticides remain poorly investigated. Here, we show in a full factorial semi-field experiment that spray applications of both the product Closer containing the insecticide sulfoxaflor and the product Amistar containing the fungicide azoxystrobin, negatively affected the individual foraging performance of bumblebees (Bombus terrestris). Insecticide exposure further reduced colony growth and size whereas fungicide exposure decreased pollen deposition. We found indications for resource limitation that might have exacerbated pesticide effects on bumblebee colonies. Our work demonstrates that field-realistic exposure to sulfoxaflor can adversely impact bumblebees and that applications before bloom may be insufficient as a mitigation measure to prevent its negative impacts on pollinators. Moreover, fungicide use during bloom could reduce bumblebee foraging performance and pollination services.

Pollen Treated with a Combination of Agrochemicals Commonly Applied During Almond Bloom Reduces the Emergence Rate and Longevity of Honey Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Queens

Honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies that pollinate California's almond orchards are often exposed to mixtures of agrochemicals. Although agrochemicals applied during almond bloom are typically considered bee-safe when applied alone, their combined effects to honey bees are largely untested. In recent years, beekeepers providing pollination services to California's almond orchards have reported reductions in queen quality during and immediately after bloom, raising concerns that pesticide exposure may be involved. Previous research identified a synergistic effect between the insecticide active ingredient chlorantraniliprole and the fungicide active ingredient propiconazole to lab-reared worker brood, but their effects to developing queens are unknown. To test the individual and combined effects of these pesticides on the survival and emergence of developing queens, we fed worker honey bees in closed queen rearing boxes with pollen artificially contaminated with formulated pesticides containing these active ingredients as well as the spray adjuvant Dyne-Amic, which contains both organosilicone and alkyphenol ethoxylate. The translocation of pesticides from pesticide-treated pollen into the royal jelly secretions of nurse bees was also measured. Despite consistently low levels of all pesticide active ingredients in royal jelly, the survival of queens from pupation to 7 d post-emergence were reduced in queens reared by worker bees fed pollen containing a combination of formulated chlorantraniliprole (Altacor), propiconazole (Tilt), and Dyne-Amic, as well as the toxic standard, diflubenzuron (Dimilin 2L), applied in isolation. These results support recommendations to protect honey bee health by avoiding application of pesticide tank-mixes containing insecticides and adjuvants during almond bloom.

Assessment of the Vulnerability to Pesticide Exposures Across Bee Species

In many countries, the western honey bee is used as surrogate in pesticide risk assessments for bees. However, uncertainty remains in the estimation of pesticide risk to non-Apis bees because their potential routes of exposure to pesticides, life histories, and ecologies differ from those of honey bees. We applied the vulnerability concept in pesticide risk assessment to 10 bee species including the honey bee, 2 bumble bee species, and 7 solitary bee species with different nesting strategies. Trait-based vulnerability considers the evaluation of a species at the level of both the organism (exposure and effect) and the population (recovery), which goes beyond the sensitivity of individuals to a toxicant assessed in standard laboratory toxicity studies by including effects on populations in the field. Based on expert judgment, each trait was classified by its relationship to the vulnerability to pesticide exposure, effects (intrinsic sensitivity), and population recovery. The results suggested that the non-Apis bees included in our approach are potentially more vulnerable to pesticides than the honey bee due to traits governing exposure and population recovery potential. Our analysis highlights many uncertainties related to the interaction between bee ecology and the potential exposures and population-level effects of pesticides, emphasizing the need for more research to identify suitable surrogate species for higher tier bee risk assessments. Environ Toxicol Chem 2021;40:2640-2651. © 2021 SETAC.

First application of an Integrated Biological Response index to assess the ecotoxicological status of honeybees from rural and urban areas

Understanding the effects of environmental contaminants on honeybees is essential to minimize their impacts on these important pollinating insects. The aim of this study was to assess the ecotoxicological status of honeybees in environments undergoing different anthropic pressure: a wood (reference site), an orchard, an agricultural area, and an urban site, using a multi-biomarker approach. To synthetically represent the ecotoxicological status of the honeybees, the responses of the single biomarkers were integrated by the Integrated Biological Response (IBRv2) index. Overall, the strongest alteration of the ecotoxicological status (IBRv2 = 7.52) was detected in the bees from the orchard due to the alteration of metabolic and genotoxicity biomarkers indicating the presence of pesticides, metals, and lipophilic compounds. Honeybees from the cultivated area (IBRv2 = 7.18) revealed an alteration especially in neurotoxicity, metabolic, and genotoxicity biomarkers probably related to the presence of pesticides, especially fungicides. Finally, in the urban area (IBRv2 = 6.60), the biomarker results (GST, lysozyme, and hemocytes) indicated immunosuppression in the honeybees and the effects of the presence of lipophilic compounds and metals in the environment.

Agrochemicals interact synergistically to increase bee mortality

Global concern over widely documented declines in pollinators^1-3 has led to the identification of anthropogenic stressors that, individually, are detrimental to bee populations^4-7. Synergistic interactions between these stressors could substantially amplify the environmental effect of these stressors and could therefore have important implications for policy decisions that aim to improve the health of pollinators^3,8,9. Here, to quantitatively assess the scale of this threat, we conducted a meta-analysis of 356 interaction effect sizes from 90 studies in which bees were exposed to combinations of agrochemicals, nutritional stressors and/or parasites. We found an overall synergistic effect between multiple stressors on bee mortality. Subgroup analysis of bee mortality revealed strong evidence for synergy when bees were exposed to multiple agrochemicals at field-realistic levels, but interactions were not greater than additive expectations when bees were exposed to parasites and/or nutritional stressors. All interactive effects on proxies of fitness, behaviour, parasite load and immune responses were either additive or antagonistic; therefore, the potential mechanisms that drive the observed synergistic interactions for bee mortality remain unclear. Environmental risk assessment schemes that assume additive effects of the risk of agrochemical exposure may underestimate the interactive effect of anthropogenic stressors on bee mortality and will fail to protect the pollinators that provide a key ecosystem service that underpins sustainable agriculture.

A toxicogenomics approach reveals characteristics supporting the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) safety profile of the butenolide insecticide flupyradifurone

Flupyradifurone, a novel butenolide insecticide, selectively targets insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), comparable to structurally different insecticidal chemotypes such as neonicotinoids and sulfoximines. However, flupyradifurone was shown in acute toxicity tests to be several orders of magnitude less toxic to western honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) than many other insecticides targeting insect nAChRs. The underlying reasons for this difference in toxicity remains unknown and were investigated here. Pharmacokinetic studies after contact application of [¹⁴C]flupyradifurone to honey bees revealed slow uptake, with internalized compound degraded into a few metabolites that are all practically non-toxic to honey bees in both oral and contact bioassays. Furthermore, receptor binding studies revealed a lack of high-affinity binding of these metabolites to honey bee nAChRs. Screening of a library of 27 heterologously expressed honey bee cytochrome P450 enzymes (P450s) identified three P450s involved in the detoxification of flupyradifurone: CYP6AQ1, CYP9Q2 and CYP9Q3. Transgenic Drosophila lines ectopically expressing CYP9Q2 and CYP9Q3 were significantly less susceptible to flupyradifurone when compared to control flies, confirming the importance of these P450s for flupyradifurone metabolism in honey bees. Biochemical assays using the fluorescent probe substrate 7-benzyloxymethoxy-4-(trifluoromethyl)-coumarin (BOMFC) indicated a weak, non-competitive inhibition of BOMFC metabolism by flupyradifurone. In contrast, the azole fungicides prochloraz and propiconazole were strong nanomolar inhibitors of these flupyradifurone metabolizing P450s, explaining their highly synergistic effects in combination with flupyradifurone as demonstrated in acute laboratory contact toxicity tests of adult bees. Interestingly, the azole fungicide prothioconazole is only slightly synergistic in combination with flupyradifurone - an observation supported by molecular P450 inhibition assays. Such molecular assays have value in the prediction of potential risks posed to bees by flupyradifurone mixture partners under applied conditions. Quantitative PCR confirmed the expression of the identified P450 genes in all honey bee life-stages, with highest expression levels observed in late larvae and adults, suggesting honey bees have the capacity to metabolize flupyradifurone across all life-stages. These findings provide a biochemical explanation for the low intrinsic toxicity of flupyradifurone to honey bees and offer a new, more holistic approach to support bee pollinator risk assessment by molecular means.

Pesticides in honey bee colonies: Establishing a baseline for real world exposure over seven years in the USA

Honey bees Apis mellifera forage in a wide radius around their colony, bringing back contaminated food resources that can function as terrestrial bioindicators of environmental pesticide exposure. Evaluating pesticide exposure risk to pollinators is an ongoing problem. Here we apply five metrics for pesticide exposure risk (prevalence, diversity, concentration, significant pesticide prevalence, and hazard quotient (HQ)) to a nation-wide field study of honey bees, Apis mellifera in the United States. We examined samples from 1055 apiaries over seven years for 218 different pesticide residues and metabolites, determining that bees were exposed to 120 different pesticide products with a mean of 2.78 per sample. Pesticides in pollen were highly prevalent and variable across states. While pesticide diversity increased over time, most detections occurred at levels predicted to be of low risk to colonies. Varroacides contributed most to concentration, followed by fungicides, while insecticides contributed most to diversity above a toxicity threshold. High risk samples contained one of 12 different insecticides or varroacides. Exposures predicted to be low-risk were nevertheless associated with colony morbidity, and low-level fungicide exposures were tied to queen loss, Nosema infection, and brood diseases.

Pesticides residues and metabolites in honeybees: A Greek overview exploring Varroa and Nosema potential synergies

The aim of this study was to investigate reported cases of honeybee mortality incidents and the potential association to pesticide exposure and to their metabolites. The same honeybee samples were also assessed for Varroa mites, and Nosema microsporidia provoked infections to provide an integrated picture of all observable stressors that may impact bees' survival. Thus, honeybee samples from different areas of Greece (2014-2018) were analyzed for the presence of pesticide residues and metabolites. In this context, an existing LC-ESI-QqQ-MS multiresidue method of analytes of different chemical classes such as neonicotinoids, organophosphates, triazoles, carbamates, was enriched with additional active substances, developed and validated. A complementary GC-EI-QqQ-MS method was also exploited for the same scope covering pyrethroid compounds. Both methods monitored more than 150 active substances and metabolites and presented acceptable linearity over the ranges assayed. The calculated recoveries ranged from 65 to 120% for the three concentration levels, while the precision (RSD%) values ranged between 4 and 15%. Therefore, this approach proved sufficient to act as a monitoring tool for the determination of pesticide residues in cases of suspected honeybee poisoning incidents. From the analysis of 320 samples, the presence of 70 active substances and metabolites was confirmed with concentrations varying from 1.4 ng/g to 166 μg/g. Predominant detections were the acaricide coumaphos, several neonicotinoids exemplified by clothianidin, organophosporous compounds dimethoate and chlorpyrifos, and some pyrethroids. Metabolites of imidacloprid, chlorpyrifos, coumaphos, acetamiprid, fenthion and amitraz were also identified. Concerning Nosema and Varroa they were identified in 27 and 22% of samples examined, respectively, verifying their prevalence and coexistence with pesticides and their metabolites in honeybees.

A systematic scoping review of the methodological approaches and effects of pesticide exposure on solitary bees

BACKGROUND

Pollination services provided by solitary bees, the largest group of bees worldwide, are critical to the vitality of ecosystems and agricultural systems alike. Disconcertingly, bee populations are in decline, and while no single causative factor has been identified, pesticides are believed to play a role in downward population trends. The effects of pesticides on solitary bee species have not been previously systematically cataloged and reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic scoping review examines available evidence for effects of pesticide exposure on solitary bees to identify data gaps and priority research needs.

METHODS

A systematic literature search strategy was developed to identify and document reports on solitary bee pesticide exposure-effects investigations. Literature was subsequently screened for relevance using a Population, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes (PECO) statement and organized into a systematic evidence map. Investigations were organized by effect category (lethal effects on immatures, lethal effects on adults, sublethal effects on immatures, and sublethal effects on adults), species, pesticide class, and publication year.

RESULTS

A comprehensive literature search of Web of Science and ProQuest Agricultural & Environmental Science supplemented by targeted internet searching and reference mining yielded 176 reports and publications for title and abstract screening and 65 that met PECO criteria (22 included lethal and 43 included sublethal effects endpoints). Relevant design details (pesticide, test compound configuration, study type, species, sex, exposure duration) were extracted into literature inventory tables to reveal the extent endpoints have been investigated and areas in need of additional research.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence mapping revealed diversity in the pesticides and endpoints studied across the database. However, dilution across bee species, lack of complementary laboratory work and paucity of replicated investigations complicate efforts to interpret and apply available data to support pesticide risk assessment.

Social disruption: Sublethal pesticides in pollen lead to Apis mellifera queen events and brood loss

Eusocial Apis mellifera colonies depend on queen longevity and brood viability to survive, as the queen is the sole reproductive individual and the maturing brood replenishes the shorter-lived worker bees. Production of many crops rely on both pesticides and bee pollination to improve crop quantity and quality, yet sublethal impacts of this pesticide exposure is often poorly understood. We investigated the resiliency of queens and their brood after one month of sublethal exposure to field relevant doses of pesticides that mimic exposure during commercial pollination contracts. We exposed full size colonies to pollen contaminated with field-relevant doses of the fungicides (chlorothalonil and propicanizole), insecticides (chlorypyrifos and fenpropathrin) or both, noting a significant reduction in pollen consumption in colonies exposed to fungicides compared to control. While we found no difference in the total amount of pollen collected per colony, a higher proportion of pollen to non-pollen foragers was detected in all pesticide exposed colonies. After ceasing treatments, we measured brood development, discovering a significant increase in brood loss and/or cannibalism across all pesticide exposed groups. Sublethal pesticide exposure in general was linked to reduced production of replacement workers and a change in protein acquisition (pollen vs. non-pollen foraging). Fungicide exposure also resulted in increased loss of the reproductive queen.

A systems-based approach to the environmental risk assessment of multiple stressors in honey bees

The European Parliament requested EFSA to develop a holistic risk assessment of multiple stressors in honey bees. To this end, a systems-based approach that is composed of two core components: a monitoring system and a modelling system are put forward with honey bees taken as a showcase. Key developments in the current scientific opinion (including systematic data collection from sentinel beehives and an agent-based simulation) have the potential to substantially contribute to future development of environmental risk assessments of multiple stressors at larger spatial and temporal scales. For the monitoring, sentinel hives would be placed across representative climatic zones and landscapes in the EU and connected to a platform for data storage and analysis. Data on bee health status, chemical residues and the immediate or broader landscape around the hives would be collected in a harmonised and standardised manner, and would be used to inform stakeholders, and the modelling system, ApisRAM, which simulates as accurately as possible a honey bee colony. ApisRAM would be calibrated and continuously updated with incoming monitoring data and emerging scientific knowledge from research. It will be a supportive tool for beekeeping, farming, research, risk assessment and risk management, and it will benefit the wider society. A societal outlook on the proposed approach is included and this was conducted with targeted social science research with 64 beekeepers from eight EU Member States and with members of the EU Bee Partnership. Gaps and opportunities are identified to further implement the approach. Conclusions and recommendations are made on a way forward, both for the application of the approach and its use in a broader context.

Toxicity of the insecticide sulfoxaflor alone and in combination with the fungicide fluxapyroxad in three bee species

The sulfoximine insecticide sulfoxaflor is regarded as a potential substitute for neonicotinoids that were recently banned in the EU due to their side effects on bees. Like neonicotinoids, sulfoxaflor acts as a competitive modulator of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. In agricultural environments, bees are commonly exposed to combinations of pesticides, and neonicotinoids are known to interact synergistically with fungicides. The objective of our study is to assess the acute oral toxicity of sulfoxaflor alone and in combination with a single dose of fluxapyroxad, a succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicide, in three bee species: Apis mellifera, Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis. Because synergism may be dose-dependent, we tested a range of sulfoxaflor doses. Synergistic effects were assessed using three different approaches: Bliss criterion of drugs independence, ratio test comparing LD50s and model deviation ratio. Osmia bicornis was the most sensitive species to sulfoxaflor and both O. bicornis and A. mellifera showed significant synergism between the insecticide and the fungicide. For the most part, these synergistic effects were weak and only occurred at early assessment times and intermediate sulfoxaflor doses. The potential ecological relevance of these effects should be confirmed in field and/or cage studies. Overall, our laboratory results demonstrate that sulfoxaflor is somewhat less toxic than the recently banned neonicotinoids imidacloprid, thiamethoxam and clothianidin, but much more toxic than other neonicotinoids (acetamiprid, thiacloprid) still in use in the EU at the time this study was conducted.

Review on Sublethal Effects of Environmental Contaminants in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera), Knowledge Gaps and Future Perspectives

Honey bees and the pollination services they provide are fundamental for agriculture and biodiversity. Agrochemical products and other classes of contaminants, such as trace elements and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, contribute to the general decline of bees' populations. For this reason, effects, and particularly sublethal effects of contaminants need to be investigated. We conducted a review of the existing literature regarding the type of effects evaluated in Apis mellifera, collecting information about regions, methodological approaches, the type of contaminants, and honey bees' life stages. Europe and North America are the regions in which A. mellifera biological responses were mostly studied and the most investigated compounds are insecticides. A. mellifera was studied more in the laboratory than in field conditions. Through the observation of the different responses examined, we found that there were several knowledge gaps that should be addressed, particularly within enzymatic and molecular responses, such as those regarding the immune system and genotoxicity. The importance of developing an integrated approach that combines responses at different levels, from molecular to organism and population, needs to be highlighted in order to evaluate the impact of anthropogenic contamination on this pollinator species.

Can Organophosphates and Carbamates Cause Synergisms by Inhibiting Esterases Responsible for Biotransformation of Pyrethroids?

Hydrolysis catalyzed by general esterases (GEs) is the most efficient route for hydrolyzation of pyrethroid insecticides. Organophosphate (OP) and carbamate (CB) insecticides are known to inhibit GEs in addition to acetylcholinesterase (AChE), which is their main target. We hypothesize that synergies can be induced by OPs and CBs when mixed with pyrethroids, due to their inhibition of GE-dependent detoxification of pyrethroids. To test this hypothesis, we conducted mixture toxicity experiments with Daphnia magna using α-cypermethrin (α-cyp) in combination with the noninsecticidal OP tetraisopropyl pyrophosphoramide (iso-OMPA) and five AChE inhibitors diazinon, chlorpyrifos, chlorfenviphos, parathion, and aldicarb. In addition, the in vivo GE activity inhibition was measured for all compounds. Up to 10-fold synergy was found between α-cyp and iso-OMPA, and the degree of synergy correlated linearly with the inhibition of the GE activity. No synergy, however, was found in any of the insecticide mixtures nor was the GE activity inhibited within the nonlethal concentration range tested. It was concluded that the effect of the insecticides on AChE occurred at lower concentrations than their effect on GEs, making the daphnids become immobilized before any synergistic effects on mortality could be observed. The implications of the findings are discussed from a risk assessment perspective.

Pesticide risk assessment at the molecular level using honey bee cytochrome P450 enzymes: A complementary approach

Honey bee (Apis mellifera) first-tier pesticide risk assessment is largely based on standardized laboratory toxicity bioassays after both acute and chronic exposure. Recent research on honey bee cytochrome P450 monooxygenases (P450s) uncovered CYP9Q3 as the molecular determinant mediating neonicotinoid insecticide selectivity and explaining why certain neonicotinoids such as thiacloprid show > 1000-fold lower acute toxicity than others (e.g. imidacloprid). Here this knowledge is leveraged for mechanistic risk assessment at the molecular level using a fluorescence-based high-throughput in vitro assay, predicting the interaction of diverse pesticidal chemotypes, including azole fungicides, with recombinantly expressed honey bee CYP9Q enzymes, known to metabolize thiacloprid, acetamiprid and tau-fluvalinate. Some azole fungicides were shown to be synergistic in combination with certain insecticides, including neonicotinoids and pyrethroids, whereas others such as prothioconazole were not. We demonstrate that biochemical CYP9Q2/CYP9Q3 inhibition data of azoles revealed a striking correlation with their synergistic potential at the organismal level, and even allow to explain combined toxicity effects observed for tank mixtures under field conditions. Our novel toxicogenomics-based approach is designed to complement existing methods for pesticide risk assessment with unprecedented screening capacity, by utilizing honey bee P450 enzymes known to confer pesticide selectivity, in order to biochemically address issues of ecotoxicological concern.

Pesticide and veterinary drug residues in Belgian beeswax: Occurrence, toxicity, and risk to honey bees

Pesticide and veterinary drug residues are one of the stress factors affecting bee health and mortality. To investigate the occurrence, the concentration and the toxicity risk to bees of pesticide residues in four different types of beeswax (brood comb wax, recycled comb wax, honey comb wax, and cappings wax), 182 samples were collected from apiaries located all over the Belgian territories, during spring 2016 and analysed by LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS for the presence of 294 chemical residues. The toxicity risk to bees expressed as the Hazard Quotient (HQ) was calculated for each wax sample, according to two scenarios with different tau-fluvalinate LD₅₀ values. Residues showing the highest prevalence were correlated to bee mortality in a multivariate logistic regression model and a risk-based model was used to predict colony bee mortality. Altogether, 54 different pesticide and veterinary drug residues were found in the four types of beeswax. The residues with a higher likelihood to be retained in beeswax are applied in-hive or with a high lipophilic nature. The multivariate logistic regression model showed a statistically significant influence of chlorfenvinphos on bee mortality. All our results indicated that cappings wax was substantially less contaminated. This national survey on beeswax contamination provides guidelines on the re-use of beeswax by beekeepers and shows the necessity to introduce maximum residue levels for global trade in beeswax. An online tool was developed to enable beekeepers and wax traders to estimate the risk to honey bee health associated with contaminated wax.