Sublethal behavioral impacts of resource limitation and insecticide exposure reinforce negative fitness outcomes for a solitary bee

Island-wide removal of honeybees reveals exploitative trophic competition with strongly declining wild bee populations

High densities of managed honeybees (Apis mellifera) can threaten wild bees through exploitative competition, thus leading to population declines of the latter. Although reviews have outlined key steps to demonstrate these impacts-measuring resource overlap, changes in wild bee behavior, and population trends-studies that comprehensively address these aspects are virtually absent. We were granted access to the entire protected island of Giannutri (2.6 km2) and to the apiary (18 hives) located there during the early phase of coexistence between honeybees and wild bees. Using the island as an open-air laboratory, we experimentally manipulated honeybee pressure by closing the hives on selected days during the peak of the wild bee foraging period. In the plants most visited by pollinators, even short-term honeybee removals (11 h per day) increased nectar volume (∼60%) and pollen availability (∼30%). In the absence of honeybees, target wild bees (Anthophora dispar and Bombus terrestris) became dominant in the insect-plant visitation network, and the potential apparent competition significantly decreased. Accordingly, both species intensified their foraging activity and increased nectar suction time, a recognized proxy for the quantity of probed nectar, and Bombus terrestris also shortened the time of pollen searching. Transect monitoring revealed an alarming ∼80% decline in both species over 4 years, consistent with honeybee monopolization of floral resources, thus reducing availability for wild pollinators and altering their foraging budget. These findings underscore the risks of introducing high densities of honeybees into protected areas and emphasize the need for rigorous preventive ecological assessments.

Neonicotinoid and EBI fungicide in combination hazard the population of red mason bees under field conditions

Mixing several agrochemicals, e.g., insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides, is a common practice by farmers, enhancing the economic and efficacy of a single application. Their effects on non-target organisms are not routinely evaluated during the authorisation of single products. A field study was conducted in Germany to assess the performance and exposure level of red mason bees after application of a combination of products containing the insecticide thiacloprid and the fungicide prochloraz to winter oilseed rape. The number of offspring of exposed bees was significantly reduced by 49.8 % compared to unexposed bees. Lower residues of applied active substances were found in mud walls than in pollen provision. The maximum detected concentrations in pollen provisions were 129.95 µg/kg for thiacloprid and 149.96 µg/kg for prochloraz, whereas 4.70 µg/kg for thiacloprid and 65.83 µg/kg for prochloraz in mud walls. An application restriction during flowering will minimize exposure and mitigate the high risk.

A novel pesticide has lethal consequences for an important pollinator

Wild bees pollinate crops and wildflowers where they are frequently exposed to pesticides. Neonicotinoids are the most commonly used insecticide globally, but restrictions on their use and rising pest resistance have increased the demand for alternative pesticides. Flupyradifurone is a novel insecticide that has been licenced globally for use on bee-visited crops. Here, in a semi-field experiment, we exposed solitary bees (Osmia lignaria) to a commercial pesticide formulation (Sivanto Prime) containing flupyradifurone at label-recommended rates. We originally designed the experiment to examine sublethal effects, but contrary to our expectations, 100 % of bees released into pesticide-treated cages died within 3 days of exposure, compared to 0 % in control plots. Bees exposed to flupyradifurone a few days after the initial application survived but endured prolonged sublethal effects, including lower nesting success, impairment to foraging efficiency, and higher mortality. These results demonstrate that exposure to this novel insecticide poses significant threats to solitary bees and add to a growing body of evidence indicating that this pesticide can have negative impacts on wild bees at field-realistic concentrations. In the short-term, we recommend that commercial formulations containing flupyradifurone should be restricted to non-flowering crops while a reassessment of its safety can be conducted. In the long-term, environmental risk assessors should continue to develop risk assessments that are truly holistic and incorporate the ecological and life history traits of multiple pollinator species.

A novel insecticide impairs bumblebee memory and sucrose responsiveness across high and low nutrition

Wild bees are important pollinators of crops and wildflowers but are exposed to a myriad of different anthropogenic stressors, such as pesticides and poor nutrition, as a consequence of intensive agriculture. These stressors do not act in isolation, but interact, and may exacerbate one another. Here, we assessed whether a field-realistic concentration of flupyradifurone, a novel pesticide that has been labelled as 'bee safe' by regulators, influenced bumblebee sucrose responsiveness and long-term memory. In a fully crossed experimental design, we exposed individual bumblebees (Bombus impatiens) to flupyradifurone at high (50% (w/w)) or low (15% (w/w)) sucrose concentrations, replicating diets that are either carbohydrate rich or poor, respectively. We found that flupyradifurone impaired sucrose responsiveness and long-term memory at both sucrose concentrations, indicating that better nutrition did not buffer the negative impact of flupyradifurone. We found no individual impact of sugar deficiency on bee behaviour and no significant interactions between pesticide exposure and poor nutrition. Our results add to a growing body of evidence demonstrating that flupyradifurone has significant negative impacts on pollinators, indicating that this pesticide is not 'bee safe'. This suggests that agrochemical risk assessments are not protecting pollinators from the unintended consequences of pesticide use.

Impacts of neonicotinoid insecticides on bumble bee energy metabolism are revealed under nectar starvation

Bumble bees are an important group of insects that provide essential pollination services as a consequence of their foraging behaviors. These pollination services are driven, in part, by energetic exchanges between flowering plants and individual bees. Thus, it is important to examine bumble bee energy metabolism and explore how it might be influenced by external stressors contributing to declines in global pollinator populations. Two stressors that are commonly encountered by bees are insecticides, such as the neonicotinoids, and nutritional stress, resulting from deficits in pollen and nectar availability. Our study uses a metabolomic approach to examine the effects of neonicotinoid insecticide exposure on bumble bee metabolism, both alone and in combination with nutritional stress. We hypothesized that exposure to imidacloprid disrupts bumble bee energy metabolism, leading to changes in key metabolites involved in central carbon metabolism. We tested this by exposing Bombus impatiens workers to imidacloprid according to one of three exposure paradigms designed to explore how chronic versus more acute (early or late) imidacloprid exposure influences energy metabolite levels, then also subjecting them to artificial nectar starvation. The strongest effects of imidacloprid were observed when bees also experienced nectar starvation, suggesting a combinatorial effect of neonicotinoids and nutritional stress on bumble bee energy metabolism. Overall, this study provides important insights into the mechanisms underlying the impact of neonicotinoid insecticides on pollinators, and underscores the need for further investigation into the complex interactions between environmental stressors and energy metabolism.