蜜蜂保护性杀虫剂缓解措施的证据基础薄弱。

IF 2.2 2区 农林科学 Q1 ENTOMOLOGY Journal of Economic Entomology Pub Date : 2023-10-10 DOI:10.1093/jee/toad118
Edward A Straw, Dara A Stanley
{"title":"蜜蜂保护性杀虫剂缓解措施的证据基础薄弱。","authors":"Edward A Straw,&nbsp;Dara A Stanley","doi":"10.1093/jee/toad118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pesticides help produce food for humanity's growing population, yet they have negative impacts on the environment. Limiting these impacts, while maintaining food supply, is a crucial challenge for modern agriculture. Mitigation measures are actions taken by pesticide users, which modify the risk of the application to nontarget organisms, such as bees. Through these, the impacts of pesticides can be reduced, with minimal impacts on the efficacy of the pesticide. Here we collate the scientific evidence behind mitigation measures designed to reduce pesticide impacts on bees using a systematic review methodology. We included all publications which tested the effects of any pesticide mitigation measure (using a very loose definition) on bees, at any scale (from individual through to population level), so long as they presented evidence on the efficacy of the measure. We found 34 publications with direct evidence on the topic, covering a range of available mitigation measures. No currently used mitigation measures were thoroughly tested, and some entirely lacked empirical support, showing a weak evidence base for current recommendations and policy. We found mitigation measure research predominantly focuses on managed bees, potentially failing to protect wild bees. We also found that label-recommended mitigation measures, which are the mitigation measures most often applied, specifically are seldom tested empirically. Ultimately, we recommend that more, and stronger, scientific evidence is required to justify existing mitigation measures to help reduce the impacts of pesticides on bees while maintaining crop protection.</p>","PeriodicalId":15632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Entomology","volume":" ","pages":"1604-1612"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10564266/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Weak evidence base for bee protective pesticide mitigation measures.\",\"authors\":\"Edward A Straw,&nbsp;Dara A Stanley\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jee/toad118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Pesticides help produce food for humanity's growing population, yet they have negative impacts on the environment. Limiting these impacts, while maintaining food supply, is a crucial challenge for modern agriculture. Mitigation measures are actions taken by pesticide users, which modify the risk of the application to nontarget organisms, such as bees. Through these, the impacts of pesticides can be reduced, with minimal impacts on the efficacy of the pesticide. Here we collate the scientific evidence behind mitigation measures designed to reduce pesticide impacts on bees using a systematic review methodology. We included all publications which tested the effects of any pesticide mitigation measure (using a very loose definition) on bees, at any scale (from individual through to population level), so long as they presented evidence on the efficacy of the measure. We found 34 publications with direct evidence on the topic, covering a range of available mitigation measures. No currently used mitigation measures were thoroughly tested, and some entirely lacked empirical support, showing a weak evidence base for current recommendations and policy. We found mitigation measure research predominantly focuses on managed bees, potentially failing to protect wild bees. We also found that label-recommended mitigation measures, which are the mitigation measures most often applied, specifically are seldom tested empirically. Ultimately, we recommend that more, and stronger, scientific evidence is required to justify existing mitigation measures to help reduce the impacts of pesticides on bees while maintaining crop protection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Entomology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1604-1612\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10564266/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Entomology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toad118\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENTOMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Entomology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toad118","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENTOMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

农药有助于为人类不断增长的人口生产粮食,但对环境有负面影响。限制这些影响,同时保持粮食供应,是现代农业面临的一项关键挑战。缓解措施是农药使用者采取的行动,可以改变对蜜蜂等非目标生物的施用风险。通过这些措施,可以减少农药的影响,对农药功效的影响最小。在这里,我们使用系统的审查方法,整理了旨在减少杀虫剂对蜜蜂影响的缓解措施背后的科学证据。我们纳入了所有测试任何杀虫剂缓解措施(使用非常宽松的定义)对蜜蜂影响的出版物,无论规模大小(从个体到种群),只要它们提供了该措施有效性的证据。我们发现了34份有直接证据的出版物,涵盖了一系列可用的缓解措施。目前使用的缓解措施都没有经过彻底测试,有些措施完全缺乏经验支持,这表明当前建议和政策的证据基础薄弱。我们发现,缓解措施研究主要集中在管理蜜蜂上,可能无法保护野生蜜蜂。我们还发现,标签推荐的缓解措施是最常用的缓解措施,很少经过实证检验。最终,我们建议需要更多、更有力的科学证据来证明现有的缓解措施是合理的,以帮助减少杀虫剂对蜜蜂的影响,同时保持作物保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Weak evidence base for bee protective pesticide mitigation measures.

Pesticides help produce food for humanity's growing population, yet they have negative impacts on the environment. Limiting these impacts, while maintaining food supply, is a crucial challenge for modern agriculture. Mitigation measures are actions taken by pesticide users, which modify the risk of the application to nontarget organisms, such as bees. Through these, the impacts of pesticides can be reduced, with minimal impacts on the efficacy of the pesticide. Here we collate the scientific evidence behind mitigation measures designed to reduce pesticide impacts on bees using a systematic review methodology. We included all publications which tested the effects of any pesticide mitigation measure (using a very loose definition) on bees, at any scale (from individual through to population level), so long as they presented evidence on the efficacy of the measure. We found 34 publications with direct evidence on the topic, covering a range of available mitigation measures. No currently used mitigation measures were thoroughly tested, and some entirely lacked empirical support, showing a weak evidence base for current recommendations and policy. We found mitigation measure research predominantly focuses on managed bees, potentially failing to protect wild bees. We also found that label-recommended mitigation measures, which are the mitigation measures most often applied, specifically are seldom tested empirically. Ultimately, we recommend that more, and stronger, scientific evidence is required to justify existing mitigation measures to help reduce the impacts of pesticides on bees while maintaining crop protection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
198
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Economic Entomology the most-cited entomological journal – publishes articles on the economic significance of insects and other arthropods and includes sections on apiculture & social insects, insecticides, biological control, household & structural insects, crop protection, forest entomology, and more. In addition to research papers, Journal of Economic Entomology publishes Reviews, interpretive articles in a Forum section, Short Communications, and Letters to the Editor. The journal is published bimonthly in February, April, June, August, October, and December.
期刊最新文献
Reviewers for Journal of Economic Entomology (November 2022–October 2023) 2-Methoxybenzaldehyde effectively repels ants Phenolic secondary metabolites from Acorus calamus (Acorales: Acoraceae) rhizomes: the feeding deterrents for Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Sampling Lasioderma serricorne (Coleoptera: Anobiidae) in 2 coffee bean warehouses in New Jersey. Biology and management of hemp russet mite (Acari: Eriophyidae).
×
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:481959085
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