Currently, there is a growing interest in developing biopesticides and increasing their share in the plant protection market as sustainable tools in integrated pest management (IPM). Therefore, it is important that regulatory requirements are consistent and thorough in consideration of biopesticides’ unique properties. While microbial pesticides generally have a lower risk profile, they present special challenges in non-target organism testing and risk assessment since, in contrast to chemical pesticides, their modes of action include infectivity and pathogenicity rather than toxicity alone. For this reason, non-target organism testing guidelines designed for conventional chemical pesticides are not necessarily directly applicable to microbial pesticides. Many stakeholders have recognised the need for improvements in the guidance available for testing microbial pesticides with honey bees, particularly given the increasing interest in development and registration of microbial pesticides and concerns over risks to pollinators. This paper provides an overview of the challenges with testing and assessment of the effects of microbial pesticides on honey bees (Apis mellifera), which have served as a surrogate for both Apis and non-Apis bees, and provides a foundation toward developing improved testing methods.

The ongoing debate about glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) and their implications for beneficial arthropods gives rise to controversy. This research was carried out to cover possible sublethal GBH effects on the brood and colony development, adult survival, and overwintering success of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) under field conditions. Residues in bee relevant matrices, such as nectar, pollen, and plants, were additionally measured. To address these questions, we adopted four independent study approaches. For brood effects and survival, we orally exposed mini-hives housed in the “Kieler mating-nuc” system to sublethal concentrations of 4.8 mg glyphosate/kg (T1, low) and 137.6 mg glyphosate/kg (T2, high) over a period of one brood cycle (21 days). Brood development and colony conditions were assessed after a modified OECD method (No. 75). For adult survival, we weighed and labeled freshly emerged workers from control and exposed colonies and introduced them into non-contaminated mini-hives to monitor their life span for 25 consecutive days. The results from these experiments showed a trivial effect of GBH on colony conditions and the survival of individual workers, even though the hatching weight was reduced in T2. The brood termination rate (BTR) in the T2 treatment, however, was more than doubled (49.84%) when compared to the control (22.11%) or T1 (20.69%). This was surprising as T2 colonies gained similar weight and similar numbers of bees per colony compared to the control, indicating an equal performance. Obviously, the brood development in T2 was not “terminated” as expected by the OECD method terminology, but rather “slowed down” for an unknown period of time. In light of these findings, we suggest that chronic high GBH exposure is capable of significantly delaying worker brood development, while no further detrimental effects seem to appear at the colony level. Against this background, we discuss additional results and possible consequences of GBH for honey bee health.

Pollinating bees are stressed by highly variable environmental conditions, malnutrition, parasites and pathogens, but may also by getting in contact with microorganisms or entomopathogenic nematodes that are used to control plant pests and diseases. While foraging for water, food, or nest material social as well as solitary bees have direct contact or even consume the plant protection product with its active substance (e.g., viruses, bacteria, fungi, etc.). Here, we summarize the results of cage, microcolony, observation hive assays, semi-field and field studies using full-size queen-right colonies. By now, some species and subspecies of the Western and Eastern honey bee (Apis mellifera, A. cerana), few species of bumble bees, very few stingless bee species and only a single species of leafcutter bees have been studied as non-target host organisms. Survival and reproduction are the major criteria that have been evaluated. Especially sublethal effects on the bees' physiology, immune response and metabolisms will be targets of future investigations. By studying infectivity and pathogenic mechanisms, individual strains of the microorganism and impact on different bee species are future challenges, especially under field conditions. Overall, it became evident that honey bees, bumble bees and few stingless bee species may not be suitable surrogate species to make general conclusions for biological mechanisms of bee-microorganism interactions of other social bee species. Solitary bees have been studied on leafcutter bees (Megachile rotundata) only, which shows that this huge group of bees (∼20,000 species worldwide) is right at the beginning to get an insight into the interaction of wild pollinators and microbial plant protection organisms.

Various reports recently informed about the effects of contaminated or adulterated wax foundations as a main cause of poor brood and colony development. Beekeepers reported that affected colonies were showing a holey brood pattern and a decline in population size. Twenty-five samples of wax foundations were collected from different sources in Germany. Samples were analyzed using a multi-residue analysis for 147 insecticides, acaricides, and varroacides to investigate the actual load of contamination in beeswax. Furthermore, the effect of selected contaminated and/or adulterated wax foundations on colony and brood development of honeybees was evaluated under field conditions. Our results show that 38 active substances in total were found in the wax samples. Acaricides used in-hive were the most frequently detected contaminants at high concentrations. Trace concentrations of plant protection products and biocides were also found. In the field trials, a significant influence of stearin-adulterated wax on population size, the number of capped brood cells, and termination rate was found compared with the reference. No detectable effects of other treatments on the investigated parameters were observed.

Recent studies have reported interspecific differences in how bee species respond to various stressors. Evaluating the exposure and responses of different bee species to plant protection products is considered an essential part of their risk assessment. This study was conducted to assess the impacts of thiacloprid-prochloraz mixture on buff-tailed bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) and red mason bees (Osmia bicornis) in a worst-case scenario under semi-field conditions. Bumblebee colonies or solitary bee trap nests were confined in tunnels with flowering oilseed rape. The recommended maximum application rates of 72 g thiacloprid/ha and 675 g prochloraz/ha were applied as a tank mixture during bee flight in full flowering oilseed rape. Several parameters such as flight and foraging activity, population parameters, and exposure level were investigated. Our results show adverse effects of the combination of thiacloprid and prochloraz on the reproductive performance of red mason bees. The number of cocoons produced by O. bicornis was significantly reduced in the treatment compared to the control group. Regarding bumblebees, we found no effects of the thiacloprid-prochloraz mixture on any observed parameters of colony development. The maximum detected concentrations of both active substances three days after application were higher in O. bicornis pollen mass compared to B. terrestris stored pollen. We conclude that this worst-case scenario of thiacloprid-prochloraz exposure poses a high risk to solitary bees and thus the use of such mixture should be restricted.

To avoid potential adverse side effects of chemical plant protection products, microbial pest control products (MPCP) are commonly applied as biological alternatives. This study aimed to evaluate the biosafety of a MPCP with the active organism Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. aizawai (strain: ABTS-1857). An in-hive feeding experiment was performed under field-realistic conditions to examine the effect of B. thuringiensis (B. t.) on brood development and the bacterial abundance of the core gut microbiome (Bifidobacterium asteroids, Gilliamella apicola, the group of Lactobacillus and Snodgrasella alvi) in Apis mellifera worker bees. We detected a higher brood termination rate and a non-successful development into worker bees of treated colonies compared to those of the controls. For the gut microbiome, all tested core members showed a significantly lower normalized abundance in bees of the treated colonies than in those of the controls; thus, a general response of the gut microbiome may be assumed. Consequently, colony exposure to B. t. strain ABTS-1857 had a negative effect on brood development under field-realistic conditions and caused dysbiosis of the gut microbiome. Further studies with B. t.–based products, after field-realistic application in bee attractive crops, are needed to evaluate the potential risk of these MPCPs on honey bees.