Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30741934›Full record

ArticleNature communications2019

Clothianidin seed-treatment has no detectable negative impact on honeybee colonies and their pathogens.

Julia Osterman, Dimitry Wintermantel, Barbara Locke, Ove Jonsson, Emilia Semberg, Piero Onorati, Eva Forsgren, Peter Rosenkranz, Thorsten Rahbek-Pedersen, Riccardo Bommarco and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Do pesticide and pathogen interactions drive wild bee declines?International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Julia OstermanDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden. jul.osterman@googlemail.com.
Dimitry WintermantelDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6309-6319
Barbara LockeDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6083-9981
Ove JonssonDepartment of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Emilia SembergDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4040-2429
Piero OnoratiDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.
Eva ForsgrenDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8244-7265
Peter RosenkranzApicultural State Institute, University of Hohenheim, August-von-Hartmannstrasse 13, 70599, Stuttgart, Germany.
Thorsten Rahbek-PedersenSwedish Board of Agriculture, 511 82, Jönköping, Sweden.
Riccardo BommarcoDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8888-0476
Henrik G SmithDepartment of Biology, Lund University, 223 62, Lund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2289-889X
Maj RundlöfDepartment of Biology, Lund University, 223 62, Lund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3014-1544
Joachim R de MirandaDepartment of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 750 07, Uppsala, Sweden. joachim.de.miranda@slu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0335-0386

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interactions between multiple stressors have been implicated in elevated honeybee colony losses. Here, we extend our landscape-scale study on the effects of placement at clothianidin seed-treated oilseed rape fields on honeybees with an additional year and new data on honeybee colony development, swarming, mortality, pathogens and immune gene expression. Clothianidin residues in pollen, nectar and honeybees were consistently higher at clothianidin-treated fields, with large differences between fields and years. We found large variations in colony development and microbial composition and no observable negative impact of placement at clothianidin-treated fields. Clothianidin treatment was associated with an increase in brood, adult bees and Gilliamella apicola (beneficial gut symbiont) and a decrease in Aphid lethal paralysis virus and Black queen cell virus - particularly in the second year. The results suggest that at colony level, honeybees are relatively robust to the effects of clothianidin in real-world agricultural landscapes, with moderate, natural disease pressure.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacteriaBeesDicistroviridaeEnvironmental MonitoringGammaproteobacteriaGene ExpressionGuanidinesHoneyNeonicotinoidsPlant ExtractsPlant NectarPlant OilsPollenSeedsSwedenclothianidinGuanidinesNeonicotinoidsPlant ExtractsPlant NectarPlant OilsThiazoles

Identifiers

PMID30741934
PMCPMC6370849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.