Research Article

Comparative toxicity of two neonicotinoids and a pyrethroid to forager honeybees (Apis mellifera L., 1758) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) by different exposure methods

Volume: 44 Number: 1 March 1, 2020
  • Riaz Shah *
  • Asma S. A. Al Maawalı
  • Ali Al Raeesı
EN TR

Comparative toxicity of two neonicotinoids and a pyrethroid to forager honeybees (Apis mellifera L., 1758) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) by different exposure methods

Abstract

Honeybees are exposed to insecticides by direct contact with spray droplets or residues on plant, or through ingestion of contaminated pollen or nectar. Direct contact with foliar spray might be the most common exposure route and contact bioassays are preferred as they better simulate field situation. Bioassays were conducted during 2018 at Sultan Qaboos University, Oman. The acute contact and oral toxicity of commercial formulations of deltamethrin 2.5 EC, thiamethoxam 25 WG and acetamiprid 20 SL to Apis mellifera subsp. lamarckii Cockerell 1906 (Hymenoptera: Apidae) foragers were measured by three exposure methods (contact by a 1-µL droplet on thorax, contact by Potter spray tower and oral ingestion). Potter tower exposure gave significantly higher mortality at lower concentration of deltamethrin than contact exposure by single droplet on thorax. Thiamethoxam showed significantly higher mortality through oral exposure at all concentrations. HQoral values were also calculated. Acetamiprid did not give more than 50% mortality even with the highest concentration. Potter tower produced fine droplets (0.286±0.071 µm) and a total of 0.829 µL was deposited on a single honeybee. Forager honeybees are more likely be exposed to the very fine droplets in field and toxicological results obtained by Potter tower or similar devices will be more realistic than a single droplet on thorax.

Keywords

References

  1. Abbott, W. S., 1925. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. Journal of Economic Entomology, 18: 265-267.
  2. Carvalho, S. M., L. P. Belzunces, G. A. Carvalho, J. L. Brunet & A. B. Beneteau, 2013. Enzymatic biomarkers as tools to assess environmental quality: a case study of exposure of the honeybee Apis mellifera to insecticides. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 32 (9): 2117-2124.
  3. Chauzat, M. P., A. C. Martel, N. Cougoule, P. Porta, J. Lachaize, S. Zeggane, M. Aubert, P. Carpentier & J. P. Faucon, 2011. An assessment of honeybee colony matrices, Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) to monitor pesticide presences in continental France. Environmental Toxicology Chemistry, 30: 103-111.
  4. Cunha, J. P. A. R., A. C. Farnese & J. J. Olivet, 2013. Computer programs for analysis of droplets sprayed on water sensitive papers. Planta Daninha, 31 (3): 715-720.
  5. Decourtye, A. & J. Devillers, 2010. “Ecotoxicity of Neonicotinoid Insecticides to Bees, 85-95”. In: Insect Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors (Ed. S. H. Thany). Springer Science + Business Media, LLC, New York, USA, 115 pp.
  6. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2013. EFSA guidance document on the risk assessment of plant protection products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees). EFSA Journal, 11 (7): 268.
  7. Free, J. B., 1993. Insect Pollination of Crops. 2nd Ed. Academic, London, UK, 684pp.
  8. Gallai, N., J. M. Salles, J. Settele & B. E. Vaissière, 2009. Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecological Economics, 68: 810-821.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

-

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

March 1, 2020

Submission Date

September 12, 2019

Acceptance Date

December 5, 2019

Published in Issue

Year 2020 Volume: 44 Number: 1

APA
Shah, R., Al Maawalı, A. S. A., & Al Raeesı, A. (2020). Comparative toxicity of two neonicotinoids and a pyrethroid to forager honeybees (Apis mellifera L., 1758) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) by different exposure methods. Turkish Journal of Entomology, 44(1), 111-121. https://doi.org/10.16970/entoted.619263

Cited By