风险评估低估了杀虫剂对野生蜜蜂的威胁

IF 7.7 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Conservation Letters Pub Date : 2024-05-15 DOI:10.1111/conl.13022
René S. Shahmohamadloo, Mathilde L. Tissier, Laura Melissa Guzman
{"title":"风险评估低估了杀虫剂对野生蜜蜂的威胁","authors":"René S. Shahmohamadloo,&nbsp;Mathilde L. Tissier,&nbsp;Laura Melissa Guzman","doi":"10.1111/conl.13022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ecological risk assessments (ERAs) are crucial when developing national strategies to manage adverse effects from pesticide exposure to natural populations. Yet, estimating risk with surrogate species in controlled laboratory studies jeopardizes the ERA process because natural populations exhibit intraspecific variation within and across species. Here, we investigate the extent to which the ERA process underestimates the risk from pesticides on different species by conducting a meta-analysis of all records in the ECOTOX Knowledgebase for honey bees and wild bees exposed to neonicotinoids. We found the knowledgebase is largely populated by acute lethality data on the Western honey bee and exhibits within and across species variation in LD50 up to 6 orders of magnitude from neonicotinoid exposure. We challenge the reliability of surrogate species as predictors when extrapolating pesticide toxicity data to wild pollinators and recommend solutions to address the (a)biotic interactions occurring in nature that make such extrapolations unreliable in the ERA process.</p>","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/conl.13022","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk assessments underestimate threat of pesticides to wild bees\",\"authors\":\"René S. Shahmohamadloo,&nbsp;Mathilde L. Tissier,&nbsp;Laura Melissa Guzman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/conl.13022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Ecological risk assessments (ERAs) are crucial when developing national strategies to manage adverse effects from pesticide exposure to natural populations. Yet, estimating risk with surrogate species in controlled laboratory studies jeopardizes the ERA process because natural populations exhibit intraspecific variation within and across species. Here, we investigate the extent to which the ERA process underestimates the risk from pesticides on different species by conducting a meta-analysis of all records in the ECOTOX Knowledgebase for honey bees and wild bees exposed to neonicotinoids. We found the knowledgebase is largely populated by acute lethality data on the Western honey bee and exhibits within and across species variation in LD50 up to 6 orders of magnitude from neonicotinoid exposure. We challenge the reliability of surrogate species as predictors when extrapolating pesticide toxicity data to wild pollinators and recommend solutions to address the (a)biotic interactions occurring in nature that make such extrapolations unreliable in the ERA process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":157,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Letters\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/conl.13022\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.13022\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Letters","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.13022","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生态风险评估(ERA)在制定国家战略以管理农药接触对自然种群的不利影响时至关重要。然而,在受控实验室研究中使用替代物种来估计风险会危及ERA过程,因为自然种群内部和不同物种之间存在种内差异。在此,我们通过对 ECOTOX 知识库中所有蜜蜂和野蜂暴露于新烟碱类农药的记录进行荟萃分析,研究ERA 过程在多大程度上低估了农药对不同物种造成的风险。我们发现,该知识库的大部分内容都是关于西方蜜蜂的急性致死率数据,并显示出新烟碱类药物暴露的半数致死剂量在物种内和物种间的差异高达 6 个数量级。在将农药毒性数据外推至野生授粉昆虫时,我们对替代物种作为预测因子的可靠性提出了质疑,并提出了解决方案,以解决自然界中发生的(a)生物相互作用问题,这种相互作用使得ERA过程中的外推不可靠。
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

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
Risk assessments underestimate threat of pesticides to wild bees

Ecological risk assessments (ERAs) are crucial when developing national strategies to manage adverse effects from pesticide exposure to natural populations. Yet, estimating risk with surrogate species in controlled laboratory studies jeopardizes the ERA process because natural populations exhibit intraspecific variation within and across species. Here, we investigate the extent to which the ERA process underestimates the risk from pesticides on different species by conducting a meta-analysis of all records in the ECOTOX Knowledgebase for honey bees and wild bees exposed to neonicotinoids. We found the knowledgebase is largely populated by acute lethality data on the Western honey bee and exhibits within and across species variation in LD50 up to 6 orders of magnitude from neonicotinoid exposure. We challenge the reliability of surrogate species as predictors when extrapolating pesticide toxicity data to wild pollinators and recommend solutions to address the (a)biotic interactions occurring in nature that make such extrapolations unreliable in the ERA process.

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
Conservation Letters
Conservation Letters BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
13.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
70
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Conservation Letters is a reputable scientific journal that is devoted to the publication of both empirical and theoretical research that has important implications for the conservation of biological diversity. The journal warmly invites submissions from various disciplines within the biological and social sciences, with a particular interest in interdisciplinary work. The primary aim is to advance both pragmatic conservation objectives and scientific knowledge. Manuscripts are subject to a rapid communication schedule, therefore they should address current and relevant topics. Research articles should effectively communicate the significance of their findings in relation to conservation policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Kleptoparasitism in seabirds—A potential pathway for global avian influenza virus spread Moving beyond simplistic representations of land use in conservation Not all conservation “policy” is created equally: When does a policy give rise to legally binding obligations? Identifying Pareto-efficient eradication strategies for invasive populations Genetic variation and hybridization determine the outcomes of conservation reintroductions
×
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