title: Neonicotinoids impact bumblebee colony fitness in the field; a reanalysis of the UK's Food & Environment Research Agency 2012 experiment.
abstract: The causes of bee declines remain hotly debated, particularly the contribution of neonicotinoid insecticides. In 2013 the UK's Food & Environment Research Agency made public a study of the impacts of exposure of bumblebee colonies to neonicotinoids. The study concluded that there was no clear relationship between colony performance and pesticide exposure, and the study was subsequently cited by the UK government in a policy paper in support of their vote against a proposed moratorium on some uses of neonicotinoids. Here I present a simple re-analysis of this data set. It demonstrates that these data in fact do show a negative relationship between both colony growth and queen production and the levels of neonicotinoids in the food stores collected by the bees. Indeed, this is the first study describing substantial negative impacts of neonicotinoids on colony performance of any bee species with free-flying bees in a field realistic situation where pesticide exposure is provided only as part of normal farming practices. It strongly suggests that wild bumblebee colonies in farmland can be expected to be adversely affected by exposure to neonicotinoids.
authors.affiliation: School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex , Falmer, East Sussex , UK.
authors.forename: Dave
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Goulson
keywords: Bombus; Colony growth; Crop protection; Ecotoxicology; Insecticide; Pesticide; Pollination; Queen production
references.citation: Ecotoxicology. 2014 Apr;23(3):317-23
references.pmid: 24448674
references.citation: Science. 2012 Apr 20;336(6079):351-2
references.pmid: 22461500
references.citation: Environ Sci Technol. 2014 Aug 19;48(16):9762-9
references.pmid: 25010122
references.citation: J Anim Ecol. 2008 Mar;77(2):406-15
references.pmid: 17986207
references.citation: Ecotoxicology. 2012 Oct;21(7):1937-45
references.pmid: 22614036
references.citation: Ecotoxicology. 2012 May;21(4):973-92
references.pmid: 22350105
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2014 Jul 7;281(1786):null
references.pmid: 24850927
references.citation: Science. 2012 Apr 20;336(6079):348-50
references.pmid: 22461498
references.citation: Nature. 2012 Nov 1;491(7422):105-8
references.pmid: 23086150