Sulfoxaflor insecticide and azoxystrobin fungicide have no major impact on honeybees in a realistic-exposure semi-field experiment

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.

Bumblebees prefer sulfoxaflor-contaminated food and show caste-specific differences in sulfoxaflor sensitivity

More than 30% of human food crop yield requires animal pollination. In addition, successful crop production depends on agrochemicals to control pests. However, agrochemicals can have negative consequences on beneficial insect pollinators, such as bees. We investigated the effects of an emerging class of pesticides, sulfoximines, on the common eastern bumblebee, Bombus impatiens. We performed a series of 96-hour toxicity tests on microcolonies of laboratory-reared B. impatiens. Our data showed that sulfoxaflor (SFX) is significantly less toxic to B. impatiens than historically used neonicotinoid pesticides, such as thiamethoxam. Further, for the first time, we found significant differences among castes in sensitivity to SFX; workers and drones were more sensitive than queens. These findings are notable because they reveal both caste and sex-specific differences in bumblebee sensitivity to pesticides. Interestingly, we found no evidence that bumblebees avoid SFX-contaminated sugar syrup. To the contrary, B. impatiens workers had an apparent preference for SFX-contaminated sugar syrup over sugar syrup alone. Overall, our investigation provides novel information on an important pesticide and may help inform regulatory decisions regarding pesticide use.

Pesticide impacts on insect pollinators: Current knowledge and future research challenges

With the need to intensify agriculture to meet growing food demand, there has been significant rise in pesticide use to protect crops, but at different rates in different world regions. In 2016, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) global assessment on pollinators, pollination and food production identified pesticides as one of the major drivers of pollinator decline. This assessment highlighted that studies on the effects of pesticides on pollinating insects have been limited to only a few species, primarily from developed countries. Given the worldwide variation in the scale of intensive agricultural practices, pesticide application intensities are likely to vary regionally and consequently the associated risks for insect pollinators. We provide the first long-term, global analysis of inter-regional trends in the use of different classes of pesticide between 1995 and 2020 (FAOSTAT) and a review of literature since the IPBES pollination assessment (2016). All three pesticide classes use rates varied greatly with some countries seeing increased use by 3000 to 4000 % between 1995 and 2020, while for most countries, growth roughly doubled. We present forecast models to predict regional trends of different pesticides up to 2030. Use of all three pesticide classes is to increase in Africa and South America. Herbicide use is to increase in North America and Central Asia. Fungicide use is to increase across all Asian regions. In each of the respective regions, we also examined the number of studies since 2016 in relation to pesticide use trends over the past twenty-five years. Additionally, we present a comprehensive update on the status of knowledge on pesticide impacts on different pollinating insects from literature published during 2016-2022. Finally, we outline several research challenges and knowledge gaps with respect to pesticides and highlight some regional and international conservation efforts and initiatives that address pesticide reduction and/or elimination.

Bumblebees under stress: Interacting effects of pesticides and heatwaves on colony development and longevity

Pollinator decline is linked to intensified agricultural practices, pathogens, climate change, and several other factors. We investigated the combined impact of heat and pesticide stress on food consumption, survival, and reproductive fitness of bumble bees. As climate change is expected to intensify heatwaves, we simulated a present-day and a future heatwave scenario (as expected in 50 years). In both scenarios, we exposed microcolonies to three widely used pesticides: azoxystrobin (fungicide), flupyradifurone, and sulfoxaflor (both insecticides)-mixed into pollen and nectar in field-realistic concentrations. We found that bees always consumed the least of sulfoxaflor-treated food, whereas consumption did not differ between other treatments or heatwave scenarios. Surprisingly, pesticide-stressed colonies performed slightly better in the future heatwave scenario in terms of reproductive fitness and survival. Sulfoxaflor consistently had the strongest negative effect, reducing survival rates, brood development, and food consumption, although effects were less severe in the future heatwave scenario.

Effect of neonicotinoid and fungicide strobilurin in neotropical solitary bee Centris analis

The indiscriminate use of pesticides is one of the factors directly impacting bee populations. However, limited information is available on the pesticide effects on solitary bees, especially in Neotropical countries. In this scenario, this study evaluated the survival and histopathological effects caused by the neonicotinoid insecticide acetamiprid (7 ng/μL) and the fungicide azoxystrobin (10 ng/μL) in the midgut and parietal fat body of the solitary bee Centris analis. Female and male newly-emerged bees were orally exposed for 48 h to the pesticides, or alone or in combination, under laboratory conditions. The exposure to the insecticide reduced the survival of males, while the mixture reduced survival in both sexes. Acetamiprid promoted a reduction in the number of regenerative nests in the midgut, alterations of fat body cells by increasing carbohydrates in trophocytes, and reduction of oenocyte size, and increased the frequency of pericardial cells in the advanced activity stage. Both pesticides caused changes in HSP70 immunolabelling of midgut from males at the end of pesticide exposure. Comparatively, the effects on males were stronger than in females exposed to the same pesticides. Therefore, acetamiprid alone and in mixture with fungicide azoxystrobin can be harmful to males and females of Neotropical solitary bee C. analis showing lethal and sublethal effects at a concentration likely to be found in the environment.

Effects of the insecticide acetamiprid and the fungicide azoxystrobin on locomotion activity and mushroom bodies of solitary bee Centris analis

Pesticide use is a major factor contributing to the global decline in bee populations. Sublethal effects, such as behavior alterations, are neglected in pesticide regulation for pollinators. However, these effects can bring important information to understanding the impacts of pesticides on bees' daily activities. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of the insecticide acetamiprid (7 ng/μL) and the fungicide azoxystrobin (10 ng/μL) on the behavior of the Neotropical solitary bee Centris analis. Female and male bees were exposed to these chemicals continuously for 48 h, followed by an additional 48 h without contaminated food, totaling 96 h of observation. We used five experimental groups: control, solvent control, insecticide, fungicide, and pesticide mixture (insecticide + fungicide). Behavioral alterations based on locomotion and light response were assessed by video tracking at 48 (end of pesticide exposure) and 96 h (end of bioassay). In addition, after recording bees at 96 h, the individuals were anesthetized for brain collection and histological evaluation of mushroom bodies to evaluate if pesticides can damage their neurons and impair the cognitive processes and responses of bees to sensory stimuli. Bees exposed to acetamiprid and pesticide mixture showed lethargic movements and impaired locomotion at 48 h. Notably, these behavioral effects were no longer evident after the bees consumed uncontaminated food for an additional 48 h, totaling 96 h from the start of pesticide exposure. Only fungicide exposure did not result in any behavioral or brain histological changes. Therefore, our study showed that acetamiprid at an estimated residual concentration, despite being classified as having low toxicity for bees, can cause significant initial locomotion disruption in solitary bees. These findings highlight the importance of considering sublethal effects in environmental risk assessment.

Assessing lethal and sublethal effects of pesticides on honey bees in a multifactorial context

The registration of novel pesticides that are subsequently banned because of their unexpected negative effects on non-target species can have a huge environmental impact. Therefore, the pre-emptive evaluation of the potential effects of new compounds is essential. To this aim both lethal and sublethal effects should be assessed in a realistic scenario including the other stressors that can interact with pesticides. However, laboratory studies addressing such interactive effects are rare, while standardized laboratory-based protocols focus on lethal effects and not on sub-lethal effects. We propose to assess both lethal and sublethal effects in a multifactorial context including the other stressors affecting the non-target species. We tested this approach by studying the impact on honey bees of the insecticide sulfoxaflor in combination with a common parasite, a sub-optimal temperature and food deprivation. We studied the survival and the transcriptome of honey bees, to assess both the lethal and the potential sublethal effects of the insecticide, respectively. With this method we show that a field realistic concentration of sulfoxaflor in food does not affect the survival of honey bees; however, the significant impact on some key genes indicates that sublethal effects are possible in a realistically complex scenario. Moreover, our results demonstrate the feasibility and reliability of a novel approach to hazard assessment considering the interactive effects of pesticides. We anticipate our approach to be a starting point for a paradigm shift in toxicology: from an unifactorial, mortality-centered assessment to a multifactorial, comprehensive approach. This is something of the utmost importance to preserve pollination, thus contributing to the sustainability of our food production system.

Relative impacts of Varroa destructor (Mesostigmata:Varroidae) infestation and pesticide exposure on honey bee colony health and survival in a high-intensity corn and soybean producing region in northern Iowa

The negative effects of Varroa and pesticides on colony health and survival are among the most important concerns to beekeepers. To compare the relative contribution of Varroa, pesticides, and interactions between them on honey bee colony performance and survival, a 2-year longitudinal study was performed in corn and soybean growing areas of Iowa. Varroa infestation and pesticide content in stored pollen were measured from 3 apiaries across a gradient of corn and soybean production areas and compared to measurements of colony health and survival. Colonies were not treated for Varroa the first year, but were treated the second year, leading to reduced Varroa infestation that was associated with larger honey bee populations, increased honey production, and higher colony survival. Pesticide detections were highest in areas with high-intensity corn and soybean production treated with conventional methods. Pesticide detections were positively associated with honey bee population size in May 2015 in the intermediate conventional (IC) and intermediate organic (IO) apiaries. Varroa populations across all apiaries in October 2015 were negatively correlated with miticide and chlorpyrifos detections. Miticide detections across all apiaries and neonicotinoid detections in the IC apiary in May 2015 were higher in colonies that survived. In July 2015, colony survival was positively associated with total pesticide detections in all apiaries and chlorpyrifos exposure in the IC and high conventional (HC) apiaries. This research suggests that Varroa are a major cause of reduced colony performance and increased colony losses, and honey bees are resilient upon low to moderate pesticide detections.

Impact of landscape composition on honey bee pollen contamination by pesticides: A multi-residue analysis

The honey bee is the most common and important managed pollinator of crops. In recent years, honey bee colonies faced high mortality for multiple causes, including land-use change and the use of plant protection products (hereafter pesticides). This work aimed to explore how contamination by pesticides of pollen collected by honey bees was modulated by landscape composition and seasonality. We placed two honey bee colonies in 13 locations in Northern Italy in contrasting landscapes, from which we collected pollen samples monthly during the whole flowering season in 2019 and 2020. We searched for almost 400 compounds, including fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and acaricides. We then calculated for each pollen sample the Pollen Hazard Quotient (PHQ), an index that provides a measure of multi-residue toxicity of contaminated pollen. Almost all pollen samples were contaminated by at least one compound. We detected 97 compounds, mainly fungicides, but insecticides and acaricides showed the highest toxicity. Fifteen % of the pollen samples had medium-high or high levels of PHQ, which could pose serious threats to honey bees. Fungicides showed a nearly constant PHQ throughout the season, while herbicides and insecticides and acaricides showed higher PHQ values in spring and early summer. Also, PHQ increased with increasing cover of agricultural and urban areas from April to July, while it was low and independent of landscape composition at the end of the season. The cover of perennial crops, i.e., fruit trees and vineyards, but not of annual crops, increased PHQ of pollen samples. Our work highlighted that the potential toxicity of pollen collected by honey bees was modulated by complex interactions among pesticide category, seasonality, and landscape composition. Due to the large number of compounds detected, our study should be complemented with additional experimental research on the potential interactive effects of multiple compounds on honey bee health.

Sublethal Effects of Four Insecticides Targeting Cholinergic Neurons on Partner and Host Finding in the Parasitic Wasp Nasonia vitripennis

Lethal and sublethal effects of pesticides on nontarget organisms are one of the causes of the current decline of many insect species. However, research in the past decades has focused primarily on pollinators, although other beneficial nontarget organisms such as parasitic wasps may also be affected. We studied the sublethal effects of the four insecticides acetamiprid, dimethoate, flupyradifurone, and sulfoxaflor on pheromone-mediated sexual communication and olfactory host finding of the parasitic wasp Nasonia vitripennis. All agents target cholinergic neurons, which are involved in the processing of chemical information by insects. We applied insecticide doses topically and tested the response of treated wasps to sex pheromones and host-associated chemical cues. In addition, we investigated the mating rate of insecticide-treated wasps. The pheromone response of females surviving insecticide treatment was disrupted by acetamiprid (≥0.63 ng), dimethoate (≥0.105 ng), and flupyradifurone (≥21 ng), whereas sulfoxaflor had no significant effects at the tested doses. Olfactory host finding was affected by all insecticides (acetamiprid ≥1.05 ng, dimethoate ≥0.105 ng, flupyradifurone ≥5.25 ng, sulfoxaflor ≥0.52 ng). Remarkably, females treated with ≥0.21 ng dimethoate even avoided host odor. The mating rate of treated N. vitripennis couples was decreased by acetamiprid (6.3 ng), flupyradifurone (≥2.63 ng), and sulfoxaflor (2.63 ng), whereas dimethoate showed only minor effects. Finally, we determined the amount of artificial nectar consumed by N. vitripennis females within 48 h. Considering this amount (∼2 µL) and the maximum concentrations of the insecticides reported in nectar, tested doses can be considered field-realistic. Our results suggest that exposure of parasitic wasps to field-realistic doses of insecticides targeting the cholinergic system reduces their effectiveness as natural enemies by impairing the olfactory sense. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:2400-2411. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Sulfoxaflor effects depend on the interaction with other pesticides and Nosema ceranae infection in the honey bee (Apis mellifera)

Honey bees health is compromised by many factors such as the use of agrochemicals in agriculture and the various diseases that can affect them. Multiple studies have shown that these factors can interact, producing a synergistic effect that can compromise the viability of honey bees. This study analyses the interactions between different pesticides and the microsporidium Nosema ceranae and their effect on immune and detoxification gene expression, sugar consumption and mortality in the Iberian western honey bee (Apis mellifera iberiensis). For this purpose, workers were infected with N. ceranae and subjected to a sugar-water diet with field concentrations of the pesticides sulfoxaflor, azoxystrobin and glyphosate. Increased sugar intake and altered immune and cytochrome P450 gene expression were observed in workers exposed to sulfoxaflor and infected with N. ceranae. None of the pesticides affected Nosema spore production in honey bee gut. Of the three pesticides tested (alone or in combination) only sulfoxaflor increased mortality in honey bees. Taken together, our results suggest that the effects of sulfoxaflor were attenuated in contact with other pesticides, and that Nosema infection leads to increase sugar intake in sulfoxaflor-exposed bees. Overall, this underlines the importance of studying the interaction between different stressors to understand their overall impact not only on honey bee but also on wild bees health.

Neither sulfoxaflor, Crithidia bombi, nor their combination impact bumble bee colony development or field bean pollination

Many pollinators, including bumble bees, are in decline. Such declines are known to be driven by a number of interacting factors. Decreases in bee populations may also negatively impact the key ecosystem service, pollination, that they provide. Pesticides and parasites are often cited as two of the drivers of bee declines, particularly as they have previously been found to interact with one another to the detriment of bee health. Here we test the effects of an insecticide, sulfoxaflor, and a highly prevalent bumble bee parasite, Crithidia bombi, on the bumble bee Bombus terrestris. After exposing colonies to realistic doses of either sulfoxaflor and/or Crithidia bombi in a fully crossed experiment, colonies were allowed to forage on field beans in outdoor exclusion cages. Foraging performance was monitored, and the impacts on fruit set were recorded. We found no effect of either stressor, or their interaction, on the pollination services they provide to field beans, either at an individual level or a whole colony level. Further, there was no impact of any treatment, in any metric, on colony development. Our results contrast with prior findings that similar insecticides (neonicotinoids) impact pollination services, and that sulfoxaflor impacts colony development, potentially suggesting that sulfoxaflor is a less harmful compound to bee health than neonicotinoids insecticides.

Effect of fungicidal contamination on survival, morphology, and cellular immunity of Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Pesticide residues have been reported in hive-stored products for long periods. Larvae of honey bees experience oral or contact exposure to these products during their normal growth and development inside the cells. We analyzed various toxicological, morphogenic, and immunological effects of residue-based concentrations of two fungicides, captan and difenoconazole, on the larvae of worker honey bees, Apis mellifera. Selected concentrations (0.08, 0.4, 2, 10, and 50 ppm) of both fungicides were applied topically at a volume of 1 µL/larva/cell as single and multiple exposures. Our results revealed a continuous, concentration-dependent decrease in brood survival after 24 h of treatment to the capping and emergence stages. Compared to larvae with a single exposure, the multiply exposed youngest larvae were most sensitive to fungicidal toxicity. The larvae that survived higher concentrations, especially multiple exposures, showed several morphological defects at the adult stage. Moreover, difenoconazole-treated larvae showed a significantly decreased number of granulocytes after 1 h of treatment followed by an increase after 24 h of treatment. Thus, fungicidal contamination poses a great risk as the tested concentrations showed adverse effects on the survival, morphology, and immunity of larval honey bees.

The fungicide azoxystrobin causes histopathological and cytotoxic changes in the midgut of the honey bee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Apis mellifera is an important bee pollinating native and crop plants but its recent population decline has been linked to the use of pesticides, including fungicides that have been commonly classified as safe for bees. However, many pesticides, in addition to direct mortality cause sublethal effects, including damage to target selective honey bee organs. The midgut is the organ responsible for the digestion and absorption of nutrients and the detoxification of ingested substances, such as pesticides. This study evaluated the histopathological and cytotoxic changes in the midgut of A. mellifera workers caused by the pesticide azoxystrobin. The limit-test was performed, and a 100 µg a.i./bee dose was administered orally and midgut analyzed with light and transmission electron microscopies after 24 h and 48 h of pesticide exposure. The midgut of the control bees has a single layer of digestive cells, with spherical nuclei, nests of regenerative cells, and the lumen coated with the peritrophic matrix. The bees fed on azoxystrobin showed morphological changes, including intense cytoplasm vacuolization and cell fragments released into the gut lumen. The protein detection test showed greater staining intensity in the nests of regenerative cells after 24 h of exposure to azoxystrobin. The occurrence of damage to the midgut in A. mellifera exposed to azoxystrobin indicates that although this fungicide has been classified as low toxicity for bees, it has sublethal effects in the midgut, and effects in other organs should be investigated.

Effects of chronic exposure to the new insecticide sulfoxaflor in combination with a SDHI fungicide in a solitary bee

The recent EU ban of the three most widely used neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, thiamethoxam and clothianidin) to all outdoors applications has stimulated the introduction of new insecticides into the market. Sulfoxaflor is a new systemic insecticide that, like neonicotinoids, acts as a modulator of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. In agro-environments, bees can be exposed to this compound via contaminated pollen and nectar for long periods of time. Therefore, it is important to assess the potential effects of chronic exposure to sulfoxaflor, alone and in combination with fungicides, on pollinators. In this study, we tested the effects of chronic exposure to two field concentrations of sulfoxaflor (20 and 100 ppb) alone and in combination with four concentrations of the fungicide fluxapyroxad (7500, 15,000, 30,000 and 60,000 ppb) on syrup consumption and longevity in females of the solitary bee Osmia bicornis L. Exposure to 20 ppb of sulfoxaflor, alone and in combination with the fungicide, stimulated syrup consumption, but did not affect longevity. In contrast, syrup consumption decreased in bees exposed to 100 ppb, all of which died after 2-6 days of exposure. We found no evidence of synergism between the two compounds at any of the two sulfoxaflor concentrations tested. Comparison of our findings with the literature, confirms that O. bicornis is more sensitive to sulfoxaflor than honey bees. Our results highlight the need to include different bee species in risk assessment schemes.

Bees under interactive stressors: the novel insecticides flupyradifurone and sulfoxaflor along with the fungicide azoxystrobin disrupt the gut microbiota of honey bees and increase opportunistic bacterial pathogens

The gut microbiome plays an important role in bee health and disease. But it can be disrupted by pesticides and in-hive chemicals, putting honey bee health in danger. We used a controlled and fully crossed laboratory experimental design to test the effects of a 10-day period of chronic exposure to field-realistic sublethal concentrations of two nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist insecticides (nACHRs), namely flupyradifurone (FPF) and sulfoxaflor (Sulf), and a fungicide, azoxystrobin (Azoxy), individually and in combination, on the survival of individual honey bee workers and the composition of their gut microbiota (fungal and bacterial diversity). Metabarcoding was used to examine the gut microbiota on days 0, 5, and 10 of pesticide exposure to determine how the microbial response varies over time; to do so, the fungal ITS2 fragment and the V4 region of the bacterial 16S rRNA were targeted. We found that FPF has a negative impact on honey bee survival, but interactive (additive or synergistic) effects between either insecticide and the fungicide on honey bee survival were not statistically significant. Pesticide treatments significantly impacted the microbial community composition. The fungicide Azoxy substantially reduced the Shannon diversity of fungi after chronic exposure for 10 days. The relative abundance of the top 10 genera of the bee gut microbiota was also differentially affected by the fungicide, insecticides, and fungicide-insecticide combinations. Gut microbiota dysbiosis was associated with an increase in the relative abundance of opportunistic pathogens such as Serratia spp. (e.g. S. marcescens), which can have devastating consequences for host health such as increased susceptibility to infection and reduced lifespan. Our findings raise concerns about the long-term impact of novel nACHR insecticides, particularly FPF, on pollinator health and recommend a novel methodology for a refined risk assessment that includes the potential effects of agrochemicals on the gut microbiome of bees.

Intra-specific variation in sensitivity of Bombus terrestris and Osmia bicornis to three pesticides

There is growing evidence that pesticides may be among the causes of worldwide bee declines, which has resulted in repeated calls for their increased scrutiny in regulatory assessments. One recurring concern is that the current frameworks may be biased towards assessing risks to the honey bee. This paradigm requires extrapolating toxicity information across bee species. Most research effort has therefore focused on quantifying differences in sensitivity across species. However, our understanding of how responses to pesticides may vary within a species is still very poor. Here we take the first steps towards filling this knowledge gap by comparing acute, lethal hazards in sexes and castes of the eusocial bee Bombus terrestris and in sexes of the solitary bee Osmia bicornis after oral and contact exposure to the pesticides sulfoxaflor, Amistar (azoxystrobin) and glyphosate. We show that sensitivity towards pesticides varies significantly both within and across species. Bee weight was a meaningful predictor of pesticide susceptibility. However, weight could not fully explain the observed differences, which suggests the existence of unexplored mechanisms regulating pesticide sensitivity across bee sexes and castes. Our data show that intra-specific responses are an overlooked yet important aspect of the risk assessment of pesticides in bees.

Decreased efficiency of pollen collection due to Sulfoxaflor exposure leads to a reduction in the size of bumble bee workers in late European summer

Bumble bees (Bombus terrestris) are important pollinators of wild and crop plants. Despite their importance in the process of fruit and seed production on crop sites, their activity may be impaired due to exposure to pesticides. This species has a yearly life cycle and colony success may rely on effective foraging of workers on ruderal plants late in summer when most crops are no longer flowering. In the current study, we investigated the effect of chronic exposure to Sulfoxaflor on aspects of the foraging behavior of bumble bees and whether Sulfoxaflor influences the body size of workers of B. terrestris in a crop landscape. We found that 2 weeks of continuous exposure to Sulfoxaflor influenced workers’ foraging dynamics and collection of resources. However, there was no evidence that the 5 ppb dose of the pesticide impacted the ability of bees to handle flowers with different traits. Workers from colonies exposed to Sulfoxaflor were smaller. The effect on worker size may be explained as a consequence of the reduced pollen income per unit of worker foraging. Thus, if the effects of Sulfoxaflor applied directly to crops had the same effect as that observed on commercial bumble bees after our chronic exposure, it might negatively impact colony success due to the impact on pollen collection and the reduction in the size of workers.

Sub-lethal doses of sulfoxaflor impair honey bee homing ability

Agricultural intensification has increased the number of stressors that pollinators are exposed to. Besides increasing landscape fragmentation that limit the supply of flower resources, intensive agricultural practices relying on the use of pesticides to control agricultural pests also affect non-target organisms like honey bees. The use of most pesticides containing neonicotinoids has been severely restricted in the European Union, leaving pesticides containing acetamiprid as the only ones that are still authorized. In the meantime, new substances like sulfoxaflor, that have a similar mode of action acting on the insect's nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR), have been approved for agricultural use. In Europe and USA, the use of pesticides containing this active ingredient is limited due to toxic effects already reported on bees, but no restrictions regarding this matter were applied in other countries (e.g., Brazil). In this study, homing ability tests with acetamiprid and sulfoxaflor were performed, in which honey bees were fed with three sub-lethal doses from each substance. After exposure, each honey bee was equipped with an RFID chip and released 1 km away from the colony to evaluate their homing ability. No significant effects were detected in honey bees fed with 32, 48 and 61 ng of acetamiprid while a poor performance on their homing ability, with only 28% of them reaching the colony instead of 75%, was detected at a 26 ng/a.s./bee dose of sulfoxaflor. Although, both pesticides act on the nAChR, the higher sulfoxaflor toxicity might be related with the honey bees detoxifying mechanisms, which are more effective on cyano-based neonicotinoids (i.e., acetamiprid) than sulfoximines. With this study we encourage the use of homing ability tests to be a suitable candidate to integrate the future risk assessment scheme, providing valuable data to models predicting effects on colony health that emerge from the individual actions of each bee.

Impairments in learning and memory performances associated with nicotinic receptor expression in the honeybee Apis mellifera after exposure to a sublethal dose of sulfoxaflor

Sulfoxaflor is a new insecticide which acts on the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChRs) in a similar way to neonicotinoids. However, sufloxaflor (SFX) is thought to act in a different manner and is thus proposed as an alternative in crop protection. The goal of this study is to evaluate the toxicity of SFX and its sublethal effect on the honeybee Apis mellifera after acute exposure. In toxicological assay studies, the LD50 value and sublethal dose (corresponding to the NOEL: no observed effect level) were 96 and 15 ng/bee, respectively. Using the proboscis extension response paradigm, we found that an SFX dose of 15 ng/bee significantly impairs learning and memory retrieval when applied 12 h before conditioning or 24 h after olfactory conditioning. SFX had no effect on honeybee olfactory performance when exposure happened after the conditioning. Relative quantitative PCR experiments performed on the six nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunits demonstrated that they are differently expressed in the honeybee brain after SFX exposure, whether before or after conditioning. We found that intoxicated bees with learning defects showed a strong expression of the Amelβ1 subunit. They displayed overexpression of Amelα9 and Amelβ2, and down-regulation of Amelα1, Amelα3 and Amelα7 subunits. These results demonstrated for the first time that a sublethal dose of SFX could affect honeybee learning and memory performance and modulate the expression of specific nAChR subunits in the brain.

Dissipation rates, residue distribution, degradation products, and degradation pathway of sulfoxaflor in broccoli

Broccoli was selected as the research object in this paper to reveal the dissipation, distribution, and degradation pathway of sulfoxaflor under greenhouse and open-field cultivation conditions for the ecological risk assessment of sulfoxaflor. Results showed that the dissipation of sulfoxaflor in broccoli leaves, flowers, stems, roots, and the whole broccoli was in accordance with the first-order kinetic equation. The sulfoxaflor concentration in broccoli roots reached the maximum value after 1 day of application and then gradually decreased. The degradation half-lives of sulfoxaflor in the roots, leaves, flowers, stems, and whole broccoli were between 2.3 and 19.8 days. The longest degradation half-life of sulfoxaflor was in Heilongjiang under greenhouse cultivation. The terminal residue of sulfoxaflor in broccoli was in the range of 0.005-0.029 mg/kg, and the proportion of sulfoxaflor residue in broccoli leaves was the largest. Thirteen transformation products were separated and identified by ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry, and their kinetic evolution was studied. The cleavage of the N = S bond, C-S bond, C-O bond, and cyanide, as well as glucosylation, hydroxylation, SO extrusion, elimination, sulfhydrylation, ketonization, defluorination, and rearrangement, was inferred as the mechanism. Overall, these results can provide guidance for the supervision of the safe application of sulfoxaflor.

Flowering resources modulate the sensitivity of bumblebees to a common fungicide

Bees are exposed to various stressors, including pesticides and lack of flowering resources. Despite potential interactions between these stressors, the impacts of pesticides on bees are generally assumed to be consistent across bee-attractive crops, and regulatory risk assessments of pesticides neglect interactions with flowering resources. Furthermore, impacts of fungicides on bees are rarely examined in peer-reviewed studies, although these are often the pesticides that bees are most exposed to. In a full-factorial semi-field experiment with 39 large flight cages, we assessed the single and combined impacts of the globally used azoxystrobin-based fungicide Amistar® and three types of flowering resources (Phacelia, buckwheat, and a floral mix) on Bombus terrestris colonies. Although Amistar is classified as bee-safe, Amistar exposure through Phacelia monocultures reduced adult worker body mass and colony growth (including a 55% decline in workers and an 88% decline in males), while the fungicide had no impact on colonies in buckwheat or the floral mix cages. Furthermore, buckwheat monocultures hampered survival and fecundity irrespective of fungicide exposure. This shows that bumblebees require access to complementary flowering species to gain both fitness and fungicide tolerance and that Amistar impacts are flowering resource-dependent. Our findings call for further research on how different flowering plants affect bees and their pesticide tolerance to improve guidelines for regulatory pesticide risk assessments and inform the choice of plants that are cultivated to safeguard pollinators.

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.

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.

Sulfoxaflor and nutritional deficiency synergistically reduce survival and fecundity in bumblebees

A range of anthropogenic factors are causing unprecedented bee declines. Among these drivers the usage of pesticides is believed to be crucial. While the use of key bee-harming insecticides, such as the neonicotinoids, has been reduced by regulatory authorities, novel, less studied substances have occupied their market niche. Understanding the threat of these chemicals to bees is, therefore, crucial to their conservation. Here we focus on sulfoxaflor, a novel insecticide, targeting the same neural receptor as the neonicotinoids. In stark contrast to the growing concerns around its negative impacts on bee health, a recent assessment has resulted in the extension of its authorisations across the USA. However, such assessments may underestimate risks by overlooking interactive impacts of multiple stressors. Here we investigated co-occurring, lethal and sublethal risks of sulfoxaflor and a dietary stress for bumblebees (Bombus terrestris), a key pollinator. Specifically, we employed a novel microcolony design, where, for the first time in bees, pesticide exposure mimicked natural degradation. We orally exposed workers to sulfoxaflor and a sugar-deficient diet in a fully factorial design. Field realistic, worst-case sulfoxaflor exposure caused a sharp increase in bee mortality. At sublethal concentrations, sulfoxaflor negatively affected bee fecundity, but not survival. Nutritional stress reduced bee fecundity and synergistically or additively aggravated impacts of sulfoxaflor on bee survival, egg laying and larval production. Our data show that non-mitigated label uses of sulfoxaflor may have major, yet severely neglected effects on bumblebee health, which may be exacerbated by nutritional stress. By unravelling mechanistic interactions of synergistic risks, our study highlights the need to overcome inherent limitations of Environmental Risk Assessment schemes, which, being based on a "single stressor paradigm", may fail to inform policymakers of the real risks of pesticide use.

Co-formulant in a commercial fungicide product causes lethal and sub-lethal effects in bumble bees

Pollinators, particularly wild bees, are suffering declines across the globe, and pesticides are thought to be drivers of these declines. Research into, and regulation of pesticides has focused on the active ingredients, and their impact on bee health. In contrast, the additional components in pesticide formulations have been overlooked as potential threats. By testing an acute oral dose of the fungicide product Amistar, and equivalent doses of each individual co-formulant, we were able to measure the toxicity of the formulation and identify the ingredient responsible. We found that a co-formulant, alcohol ethoxylates, caused a range of damage to bumble bee health. Exposure to alcohol ethoxylates caused 30% mortality and a range of sublethal effects. Alcohol ethoxylates treated bees consumed half as much sucrose as negative control bees over the course of the experiment and lost weight. Alcohol ethoxylates treated bees had significant melanisation of their midguts, evidence of gut damage. We suggest that this gut damage explains the reduction in appetite, weight loss and mortality, with bees dying from energy depletion. Our results demonstrate that sublethal impacts of pesticide formulations need to be considered during regulatory consideration, and that co-formulants can be more toxic than active ingredients.