Pesticide exposures can have detrimental impacts on bee pollinators, ranging from immediate mortality to sub-lethal impacts. Flupyradifurone is the active ingredient in Sivanto^™ and sulfoxaflor is the active ingredient in Transform^®. They are both relatively new insecticides developed with an intent to reduce negative effects on bees, when applied to bee-attractive crops. With the growing concern regarding pollinator health and pollinator declines, it is important to have a better understanding of any potential negative impacts, especially sub-lethal, of these pesticides on bees. This study reports novel findings regarding physiological stress experienced by bees exposed to field application rates of these two insecticides via a Potter Tower sprayer. Two contact exposure experiments were conducted—a shorter 6-hour study and a longer 10-day study. Honey bee mortality, sugar syrup and water consumption, and physiological responses (oxidative stress and apoptotic protein assays) were assessed in bees exposed to Sivanto^™ and Transform^®, and compared to bees in control group. For the longer, 10-day contact exposure experiment, only the Sivanto^™ group was compared to the control group, as high mortality recorded in the sulfoxaflor treatment group during the shorter contact exposure experiment, made the latter group unfeasible to test in the longer 10-days experiment. In both the studies, sugar syrup and water consumptions were significantly different between treatment groups and controls. The highest mortality was observed in Transform^® exposed bees, followed by the Sivanto^™ exposed bees. Estimates of reactive oxygen/nitrogen species indicated significantly elevated oxidative stress in both pesticide treatment groups, when compared to controls. Caspase-3 protein assays, an indicator of onset of apoptosis, was also significantly higher in the pesticide treatment groups. These differences were largely driven by post exposure duration, indicating sub-lethal impacts. Further, our findings also emphasize the need to revisit contact exposure impacts of Sivanto^™, given the sub-lethal impacts and mortality observed in our long-term (10-day) contact exposure experiment.

Honey bees provision glandular secretions in the form of royal jelly as larval nourishment to developing queens. Exposure to chemicals and nutritional conditions can influence queen development and thus impact colony fitness. Previous research reports that royal jelly remains pesticide-free during colony-level exposure and that chemical residues are buffered by the nurse bees. However, the impacts of pesticides can also manifest in quality and quantity of royal jelly produced by nurse bees. Here, we tested how colony exposure to a multi-pesticide pollen treatment influences the amount of royal jelly provisioned per queen and the additional impacts on royal jelly nutritional quality. We observed differences in the metabolome, proteome, and phytosterol compositions of royal jelly synthesized by nurse bees from multi-pesticide exposed colonies, including significant reductions of key nutrients such as 24-methylenecholesterol, major royal jelly proteins, and 10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid. Additionally, quantity of royal jelly provisioned per queen was lower in colonies exposed to pesticides, but this effect was colony-dependent. Pesticide treatment had a greater impact on royal jelly nutritional composition than the weight of royal jelly provisioned per queen cell. These novel findings highlight the indirect effects of pesticide exposure on queen developmental nutrition and allude to social consequences of nurse bee glandular degeneration.

There is an important role for indigenous and local knowledge in a Multiple Evidence Base to make decisions about the use of biodiversity and its management. This is important both to ensure that the knowledge base is complete (comprising both scientific and local knowledge) and to facilitate participation in the decision making process. We present a novel method to gather evidence in which we used a peer-to-peer validation process among farmers that we suggest is analogous to scientific peer review. We used a case-study approach to trial the process focussing on pollinator decline in India. Pollinator decline is a critical challenge for which there is a growing evidence base, however, this is not the case world–wide. In the state of Orissa, India, there are no validated scientific studies that record historical pollinator abundance, therefore local knowledge can contribute substantially and may indeed be the principle component of the available knowledge base. Our aim was to collate and validate local knowledge in preparation for integration with scientific knowledge from other regions, for the purpose of producing a Multiple Evidence Base to develop conservation strategies for pollinators. Farmers reported that vegetable crop yields were declining in many areas of Orissa and that the abundance of important insect crop pollinators has declined sharply across the study area in the last 10–25 years, particularly Apis cerana, Amegilla sp. and Xylocopa sp. Key pollinators for commonly grown crops were identified; both Apris cerana and Xylocopa sp. were ranked highly as pollinators by farmer participants. Crop yield declines were attributed to soil quality, water management, pests, climate change, overuse of chemical inputs and lack of agronomic expertise. Pollinator declines were attributed to the quantity and number of pesticides used. Farmers suggested that fewer pesticides, more natural habitat and the introduction of hives would support pollinator populations. This process of knowledge creation was supported by participants, which led to this paper being co-authored by both scientists and farmers

The decline in populations of insect pollinators is a global concern. While multiple factors are implicated, there is uncertainty surrounding the contribution of certain groups of pesticides to losses in wild and managed bees. Nanotechnology-based pesticides (NBPs) are formulations based on multiple particle sizes and types. By packaging active ingredients in engineered particles, NBPs offer many benefits and novel functions, but may also exhibit different properties in the environment when compared with older pesticide formulations. These new properties raise questions about the environmental disposition and fate of NBPs and their exposure to pollinators. Pollinators such as honey bees have evolved structural adaptations to collect pollen, but also inadvertently gather other types of environmental particles which may accumulate in hive materials. Knowledge of the interaction between pollinators, NBPs, and other types of particles is needed to better understand their exposure to pesticides, and essential for characterizing risk from diverse environmental contaminants. The present review discusses the properties, benefits and types of nanotechnology-based pesticides, the propensity of bees to collect such particles and potential impacts on bee pollinators.

Pollinator nutrition is a highly complex subject that we are just starting to unravel, from the multidimensional nature of bee forage (pollen and nectar) to how the abiotic environment can affect the resources available to bees. Doing so is of utmost importance, as improving pollinator resource availability and nutrition is one of the proposed mechanisms to improve populations and pollinator health. However, landscape change has changed the resources naturally available for pollinators. Farmland and cropping systems create a unique nutritional landscape for pollinators, with agroecosystems typically containing few crops dominating a landscape along with natural corridors containing noncrop plants. The types of crops planted and the surrounding landscape will ultimately affect the nutritional landscape bees have access to. Even the management practices in agriculture and how pests are controlled will, directly and indirectly, affect bee health and nutrition. Hence, a better understanding of bee nutrition in agricultural ecosystems is warranted. This review synthesizes research on bee nutritional ecology and the agricultural landscapes to advance our understanding of bee health in agriculture.