ABC New: Bee Colony Collapse tied to...
- Thread starter Cool_Breeze
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
ScienceDaily (Apr. 5, 2012) The likely culprit in sharp worldwide declines in honeybee colonies since 2006 is imidacloprid, one of the most widely used pesticides, according to a new study from Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH).
Characteristics of common wasps and bees
The authors, led by Alex Lu, associate professor of environmental exposure biology in the Department of Environmental Health, write that the new research provides "convincing evidence" of the link between imidacloprid and the phenomenon known as Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), in which adult bees abandon their hives.
The study will appear in the June issue of the Bulletin of Insectology.
"The significance of bees to agriculture cannot be underestimated," says Lu. "And it apparently doesn't take much of the pesticide to affect the bees. Our experiment included pesticide amounts below what is normally present in the environment."
Pinpointing the cause of the problem is crucial because bees -- beyond producing honey -- are prime pollinators of roughly one-third of the crop species in the U.S., including fruits, vegetables, nuts, and livestock feed such as alfalfa and clover. Massive loss of honeybees could result in billions of dollars in agricultural losses, experts estimate.
Lu and his co-authors hypothesized that the uptick in CCD resulted from the presence of imidacloprid, a neonicotinoid introduced in the early 1990s. Bees can be exposed in two ways: through nectar from plants or through high-fructose corn syrup beekeepers use to feed their bees. (Since most U.S.-grown corn has been treated with imidacloprid, it's also found in corn syrup.)
In the summer of 2010, the researchers conducted an in situ study in Worcester County, Mass. aimed at replicating how imidacloprid may have caused the CCD outbreak. Over a 23-week period, they monitored bees in four different bee yards; each yard had four hives treated with different levels of imidacloprid and one control hive. After 12 weeks of imidacloprid dosing, all the bees were alive. But after 23 weeks, 15 out of 16 of the imidacloprid-treated hives -- 94% -- had died. Those exposed to the highest levels of the pesticide died first.
The characteristics of the dead hives were consistent with CCD, said Lu; the hives were empty except for food stores, some pollen, and young bees, with few dead bees nearby. When other conditions cause hive collapse -- such as disease or pests -- many dead bees are typically found inside and outside the affected hives.
Strikingly, said Lu, it took only low levels of imidacloprid to cause hive collapse -- less than what is typically used in crops or in areas where bees forage.
Scientists, policymakers, farmers, and beekeepers, alarmed at the sudden losses of between 30% and 90% of honeybee colonies since 2006, have posed numerous theories as to the cause of the collapse, such as pests, disease, pesticides, migratory beekeeping, or some combination of these factors.
"In Situ Replication of Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder," Chensheng Lu, Kenneth M. Warchol, Richard A. Callahan, Bulletin of Insectology, June 2012
Characteristics of common wasps and bees
The authors, led by Alex Lu, associate professor of environmental exposure biology in the Department of Environmental Health, write that the new research provides "convincing evidence" of the link between imidacloprid and the phenomenon known as Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), in which adult bees abandon their hives.
The study will appear in the June issue of the Bulletin of Insectology.
"The significance of bees to agriculture cannot be underestimated," says Lu. "And it apparently doesn't take much of the pesticide to affect the bees. Our experiment included pesticide amounts below what is normally present in the environment."
Pinpointing the cause of the problem is crucial because bees -- beyond producing honey -- are prime pollinators of roughly one-third of the crop species in the U.S., including fruits, vegetables, nuts, and livestock feed such as alfalfa and clover. Massive loss of honeybees could result in billions of dollars in agricultural losses, experts estimate.
Lu and his co-authors hypothesized that the uptick in CCD resulted from the presence of imidacloprid, a neonicotinoid introduced in the early 1990s. Bees can be exposed in two ways: through nectar from plants or through high-fructose corn syrup beekeepers use to feed their bees. (Since most U.S.-grown corn has been treated with imidacloprid, it's also found in corn syrup.)
In the summer of 2010, the researchers conducted an in situ study in Worcester County, Mass. aimed at replicating how imidacloprid may have caused the CCD outbreak. Over a 23-week period, they monitored bees in four different bee yards; each yard had four hives treated with different levels of imidacloprid and one control hive. After 12 weeks of imidacloprid dosing, all the bees were alive. But after 23 weeks, 15 out of 16 of the imidacloprid-treated hives -- 94% -- had died. Those exposed to the highest levels of the pesticide died first.
The characteristics of the dead hives were consistent with CCD, said Lu; the hives were empty except for food stores, some pollen, and young bees, with few dead bees nearby. When other conditions cause hive collapse -- such as disease or pests -- many dead bees are typically found inside and outside the affected hives.
Strikingly, said Lu, it took only low levels of imidacloprid to cause hive collapse -- less than what is typically used in crops or in areas where bees forage.
Scientists, policymakers, farmers, and beekeepers, alarmed at the sudden losses of between 30% and 90% of honeybee colonies since 2006, have posed numerous theories as to the cause of the collapse, such as pests, disease, pesticides, migratory beekeeping, or some combination of these factors.
"In Situ Replication of Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder," Chensheng Lu, Kenneth M. Warchol, Richard A. Callahan, Bulletin of Insectology, June 2012
Thanks for posting this. I have been following the research on the decline of the honeybee population.
Hi salemgold.
It seems the current neonicotinoids are less detremental to mammals then were the earlier versions, thus the 'neo-.'
It seems the current neonicotinoids are less detremental to mammals then were the earlier versions, thus the 'neo-.'
I'm a science junkie. Thanks for the news. And Monsanto can surely be tied to responsibility, never profit. They can put the small farmer out of business, but profit wasn't the aim, right? Um... So far as to buy a researching firm ... WTH? Cover up the science, because money is to be made, to the point of buying out the research firm????? Astounding.
Last edited:
I saw this report when it first came out, and I am skeptical. The pesticide they are blaming has been around for years, so why did it only start to cause damage, and quite suddenly, just a short time ago?
I smell an agenda.
It's truly unfortunate that science has become so politicized.
I smell an agenda.
It's truly unfortunate that science has become so politicized.
It also needs to be pointed out that attaching any significance between imidacloprid and nicotine is a little silly.
I wonder how many of you realize that you can't survive without nicotinic acid. It's so important, they put it in vitamin tablets. It's called "niacin".
Get a grip.
I wonder how many of you realize that you can't survive without nicotinic acid. It's so important, they put it in vitamin tablets. It's called "niacin".
Get a grip.
Weird how a similar chemical name can sound beneficial or deadly .
The river here is extremely polluted with dihydrogen monoxide, and it seems people don't even care.
The river here is extremely polluted with dihydrogen monoxide, and it seems people don't even care.
What does this thread have to do with electronic cigarettes,anyway?
Monsanto buys the research, then genetically engineers a honey bee resistant to Monsantos neonicotinoids poisoning, then Monsanto sues people because genetically engineered bees are found pollinating on your lawn or hay fields without a permit. My bad! LOL You gotta watch Monsanto. bnrk
Neo-nicotinoids are probably a synthetic variant and not related to nicotine except by some molecular similarity, and the name/origin of the molecule design.
It's most likely cheaper to make than extracting organic nicotine, and more toxic to pests. Any other consideration is likely to be hogwash, these are the things that matter.
It's most likely cheaper to make than extracting organic nicotine, and more toxic to pests. Any other consideration is likely to be hogwash, these are the things that matter.
All points are well taken.
In the general public, many concepts are lumped together. Negetive press regarding sutstances which might seem related to nicotine (in ABC's case, sort of sounding like 'something-nicotananium') in some people's minds might reinforce negetive associations of nicotine and thus not help us with our public concerns.
Some posters may have seen the OP and following comments as raising alarm about a dubious relationship, yet none was intended other than as how it might 'play in Peoria.'
I'd like to end this thread with a link to Wikipedia.
Neonicotinoid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the general public, many concepts are lumped together. Negetive press regarding sutstances which might seem related to nicotine (in ABC's case, sort of sounding like 'something-nicotananium') in some people's minds might reinforce negetive associations of nicotine and thus not help us with our public concerns.
Some posters may have seen the OP and following comments as raising alarm about a dubious relationship, yet none was intended other than as how it might 'play in Peoria.'
I'd like to end this thread with a link to Wikipedia.
Neonicotinoid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Monsanto is right up there with big pharma.... screw them. This coincides RIGHT with the FDA wanting to propose deeming regulations, I bet they're really doing this to get concentrated nicotine banned as an insecticide so they can eliminate loopholes in regulating ALL forms of nicotine. of course I wouldn't want that crap in my e-cig considering it's probably not just nicotine but some other stuff that -- even if you diluted it to where the nicotine would be consumable -- you still wouldn't want
So what do you suggest? lets say hypothetically nicotine was in fact causing the bee issue. You'd rather it be ignored or covered up for the sake of how e-cigarettes are perceived? That seem to be what's implied. I think sometimes the pro-stance is taken a bit far. Just because we enjoy nicotine doesn't really make it a wonderful substance. It is a natural insecticide.
Agreed. Based on what's written there the effect seems quiet quick. It should have materialized with in 1 or two seasons of the use of this chemical. Also everything on Natural Society should be taken with a huge grain of salt. They over sensationalize everything to a ridiculous extent often beyond the facts and beyond the science.
Your second sentence is a splendid illustration of the effect we have been discussing.
Even if we pretend the study is 100% correct, nicotine is still not related to the bee problem in any meaningful way. And yet, in your mind you have firmly connect Colony Collapse Disorder with nicotine, and that is (presumably) after you have read some superficial debunking right here in the same thread to which you just added your comments.
People have been trained for 50+ years to think that nicotine is an evil substance. This is not lost on those who would capitalize on that training to pursue their own agenda.
I think you misunderstood and missed my point.
I didn't say let's pretend the study is 100% correct - I said let's pretend nicotine is what is causing it.
To address what you're saying more directly, I have no preconception of evil or good substances. Nicotine is ultimately a toxic poisonous substance. This was exactly my point, the pro stance is overcoming some rational thinking to a degree as a defensive retaliation.
I don't suggest anything other than as a point of information and offer the suggestion that it may reinforce public disdain for nicotine related matters.
Not everything posted in a forum need be seen as something to either agree or disagree with...support or attack. I'm not suggesting nictoine is a "wonderful substance." It is something that many of us live with and would prefer not to have our habit, for lack of a term that no one might take issue with, messed with, be that through general misunderstanding or the facts regarding nicotine.
That having been said, I'm dropping this thread from my subscribed list.
Monsanto wasn't just "up there with big pharma", they were "small" big pharma back around the turn of the century. They got gobbled up when the big kick came through to make BP even bigger. As I recall they merged together with Upjohn and Pharmacia (which was created out of an earlier merger). Eventually the new company kept all the pharma products and created the "new" Monsanto that is becoming the big bad wolf in our food supply.
In my 18 years in the business, we gobbled 3, maybe 4 smaller pharma cos., then after I retired we got chewed up by Pfizer. It's a dog eat dog world out there. all done for our benefit. RIGHT
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
