ArticleThe Science of the total environment2024
Analysis of contaminant residues in honey bee hive matrices.
Article in The Science of the total environment, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pollinators provide ecological services essential to maintaining our food supply and propagating natural habitats. Populations are in decline due to environmental stressors including pesticides, pathogens, and habitat loss. To better understand the impacts of pesticide exposures on colony health, a field survey in Ohio, USA was conducted to monitor the potential contamination of honey bee colonies by pesticides. Apiaries (n = 10) were situated across an agricultural gradient and samples were collected over a 4-week period encompassing corn planting. Dead bees from entrance traps (DBT), pollen, and in-hive (IH) matrices including bee bread, honey, larvae, and nurse bees were analyzed for a whole suite of pesticides. Out of 210 pesticides targeted, 68 residues were quantified across 306 samples. Neonicotinoids, miticides, and fungicides were the dominant pesticide classes identified throughout all the matrix types. Neonicotinoids were detected at higher concentrations and at higher frequencies compared to fungicides, specifically in field pollen samples. DBT also contained high concentrations of these two contaminant classes, although detection frequencies for neonicotinoids were typically lower. Overall, herbicides and non‑neonicotinoid insecticides were found with low frequency and at low concentrations. For most pesticide classes, trends for the mean concentrations were DBT > IH nurse bees > field pollen > IH larvae > IH honey. Pesticides were detected in 100 % of samples with concentrations ranging from 0.01 ppb (diphenylamine) to 2790 ppb (clothianidin). All samples were contaminated with at least two pesticide residues, while 19 samples presented over ten detects and maximum detections of 20 in DBT. Pesticide residues were positively correlated with agricultural gradients across sites and sampling periods. These findings reveal that foraging leads to the exposure of the entire colony to a wide range of pesticides. Moreover, residues determined in DBT serve as an effective proxy for monitoring hive matrices with significantly less disturbance to active hives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.