Bumblebees avoid sucrose solution containing high concentrations of Roundup.

IF 2.7 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY Ecotoxicology Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-31 DOI:10.1007/s10646-025-02878-9
Linzi Jay Thompson, Dara A Stanley, Marie Dacke, Lina Herbertsson
{"title":"Bumblebees avoid sucrose solution containing high concentrations of Roundup.","authors":"Linzi Jay Thompson, Dara A Stanley, Marie Dacke, Lina Herbertsson","doi":"10.1007/s10646-025-02878-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Herbicides are one of the most heavily applied groups of pesticides globally. Whilst research on herbicides in relation to bees is growing, we still have more to learn about how bees may interact with herbicides and the subsequent consequences for bee health. As herbicides are designed to kill the plants they are applied to, bees and other pollinators may interact with them in a different way to other pesticide groups which is important to understand in the context of evaluating hazard and risk. Here, we conducted both a choice and no-choice test, to determine if bumblebees would be deterred from foraging from feeders containing commercial formulations of Roundup (Ultra and Biactive, respectively) compared to controls. We found across both experiments that bees were deterred from foraging where feeders contained above field-realistic concentrations of Roundup formulation, and that on average colonies reduced their consumption from these feeders by ~50% despite lacking other food sources. This demonstrates that, when given no choice, bees can be deterred from sucrose containing Roundup Biactive, although above expected field concentrations, even to their own nutritional detriment. Separately, individual foragers were observed avoiding feeders containing field-realistic levels of Roundup Ultra compared to controls, showing a preference for uncontaminated feed when given a choice. As this was an experimental setup using high concentrations of Roundup with sucrose solution rather than real flowers, more work is needed to understand this phenomenon under field conditions. This work provides useful information and insights for future studies investigating the impacts of glyphosate in the form of both active substance and formulation on bees and could also be useful in identifying future mitigation strategies for field use.</p>","PeriodicalId":11497,"journal":{"name":"Ecotoxicology","volume":" ","pages":"845-852"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12254069/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecotoxicology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-025-02878-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Herbicides are one of the most heavily applied groups of pesticides globally. Whilst research on herbicides in relation to bees is growing, we still have more to learn about how bees may interact with herbicides and the subsequent consequences for bee health. As herbicides are designed to kill the plants they are applied to, bees and other pollinators may interact with them in a different way to other pesticide groups which is important to understand in the context of evaluating hazard and risk. Here, we conducted both a choice and no-choice test, to determine if bumblebees would be deterred from foraging from feeders containing commercial formulations of Roundup (Ultra and Biactive, respectively) compared to controls. We found across both experiments that bees were deterred from foraging where feeders contained above field-realistic concentrations of Roundup formulation, and that on average colonies reduced their consumption from these feeders by ~50% despite lacking other food sources. This demonstrates that, when given no choice, bees can be deterred from sucrose containing Roundup Biactive, although above expected field concentrations, even to their own nutritional detriment. Separately, individual foragers were observed avoiding feeders containing field-realistic levels of Roundup Ultra compared to controls, showing a preference for uncontaminated feed when given a choice. As this was an experimental setup using high concentrations of Roundup with sucrose solution rather than real flowers, more work is needed to understand this phenomenon under field conditions. This work provides useful information and insights for future studies investigating the impacts of glyphosate in the form of both active substance and formulation on bees and could also be useful in identifying future mitigation strategies for field use.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大黄蜂避免使用含有高浓度农达的蔗糖溶液。
除草剂是全球使用量最大的杀虫剂种类之一。尽管有关除草剂与蜜蜂关系的研究在不断增加,但对于蜜蜂如何与除草剂相互作用以及随后对蜜蜂健康造成的影响,我们仍有许多东西需要了解。由于除草剂的作用是杀死被施用的植物,蜜蜂和其他授粉者可能会以不同于其他农药的方式与除草剂发生作用,这对于评估危害和风险非常重要。在这里,我们进行了选择和非选择试验,以确定与对照组相比,熊蜂是否会被阻止从含有驱避剂(分别为 Ultra 和 Biactive)商业配方的饲喂器中觅食。我们在这两项实验中都发现,当喂食器中含有高于现场实际浓度的Roundup制剂时,蜜蜂就会停止觅食,尽管缺乏其他食物来源,但蜂群从这些喂食器中摄取的食物平均减少了约50%。这表明,在别无选择的情况下,蜜蜂可能会放弃含有驱避剂 Biactive 的蔗糖,尽管其浓度高于预期的田间浓度,甚至对其自身的营养造成损害。另外,与对照组相比,观察到个体觅食者会避开含有符合现场实际水平的 Roundup Ultra 的饲喂器,这表明在有选择的情况下,它们更喜欢无污染的饲料。由于这是一个使用高浓度驱避剂和蔗糖溶液的实验装置,而不是真实的花朵,因此需要做更多的工作来了解在田间条件下的这一现象。这项工作为今后调查草甘膦活性物质和制剂对蜜蜂影响的研究提供了有用的信息和见解,也有助于确定今后在田间使用的缓解策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ecotoxicology
Ecotoxicology 环境科学-毒理学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.70%
发文量
107
审稿时长
4.7 months
期刊介绍: Ecotoxicology is an international journal devoted to the publication of fundamental research on the effects of toxic chemicals on populations, communities and terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems. It aims to elucidate mechanisms and processes whereby chemicals exert their effects on ecosystems and the impact caused at the population or community level. The journal is not biased with respect to taxon or biome, and papers that indicate possible new approaches to regulation and control of toxic chemicals and those aiding in formulating ways of conserving threatened species are particularly welcome. Studies on individuals should demonstrate linkage to population effects in clear and quantitative ways. Laboratory studies must show a clear linkage to specific field situations. The journal includes not only original research papers but technical notes and review articles, both invited and submitted. A strong, broadly based editorial board ensures as wide an international coverage as possible.
期刊最新文献
Lead Contamination in the Ennore Estuary, India: Bioaccumulation, Biomagnification, Ecological and Human Health Risk Assessment. Photosynthetic modulation and oxidative stress in Raphidocelis subcapitata exposed to environmentally relevant concentrations of a ketoconazole based commercial formulation. Combined effect of polyethylene microplastics and Microcystis aeruginosa spent medium on Daphnia magna. Advancing environmental toxicology with lipidomics: from toxicity evaluation to mechanistic understanding. Dichlorvos toxicity on hemato-biochemical, histopathological, and behavioral parameters in the grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1