Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Pest Manag Sci. 2011 May;67(5):541-7. doi: 10.1002/ps.2093. Epub 2011 Jan 11.
This study was undertaken to identify the potential side effects of the novel naturalyte insecticide spinetoram in comparison with spinosad on the bumblebee Bombus terrestris L. The potential lethal effects together with the ecologically relevant sublethal effects on aspects of bumblebee reproduction and foraging behaviour were evaluated. Bumblebee workers were exposed via direct contact with wet and dry residues under laboratory conditions to spinetoram at different concentrations, starting from the maximum field recommended concentration (MFRC) and then different dilutions (1/10, 1/100, 1/1000 and 1/10 000 of the MFRC), and compared with spinosad. In addition, the side effects via oral exposure in supplemented sugar water were assessed.
Direct contact of B. terrestris workers with wet residues of spinosad and spinetoram showed spinetoram to be approximately 52 times less toxic than spinosad, while exposure to dry residues of spinetoram was about 8 times less toxic than exposure to those of spinosad. Oral treatment for 72 h (acute) indicated that spinetoram is about 4 times less toxic to B. terrestris workers compared with spinosad, while exposure for a longer period (i.e. 11 weeks) showed spinetoram to be 24 times less toxic. In addition, oral exposure to the two spinosyns resulted in detrimental sublethal effects on bumblebee reproduction. The no observed effect concentration (NOEC) for spinosad was 1/1000 of the MFRC, and 1/100 of the MFRC for spinetoram. Comparison between the chronic exposure bioassays assessing the sublethal effects on nest reproduction, with and without allowing for foraging behaviour, showed that the respective NOEC values for spinosad and spinetoram were similar over the two bioassays, indicating that there were no adverse effects by either spinosyn on the foraging of B. terrestris workers.
Overall, the present results indicate that the use of spinetoram is safer for bumblebees by direct contact and oral exposure than the use of spinosad, and therefore it can be applied safely in combination with B. terrestris. Another important conclusion is that the present data provide strong evidence that neither spinosyn has a negative effect on the foraging behaviour of these beneficial insects. However, before drawing final conclusions, spinetoram and spinosad should also be evaluated in more realistic field-related situations for the assessment of potentially deleterious effects on foraging behaviour with the use of queenright colonies of B. terrestris.
本研究旨在比较新型天然杀虫剂 spinetoram 与 spinosad 对熊蜂(Bombus terrestris L.)的潜在副作用。评估了潜在的致死效应以及对熊蜂繁殖和觅食行为的生态相关亚致死效应。在实验室条件下,通过直接接触湿残留物和干残留物,让熊蜂工蜂接触不同浓度的 spinetoram,从最大田间推荐浓度(MFRC)开始,然后是不同的稀释浓度(MFRC 的 1/10、1/100、1/1000 和 1/10 000),并与 spinosad 进行比较。此外,还评估了通过补充糖水进行口服接触的副作用。
熊蜂工蜂直接接触 spinosad 和 spinetoram 的湿残留物表明,spinetoram 的毒性比 spinosad 低约 52 倍,而接触 spinetoram 的干残留物的毒性比接触 spinosad 的干残留物低约 8 倍。72 小时(急性)的口服处理表明,spinetoram 对熊蜂工蜂的毒性比 spinosad 低约 4 倍,而长期(即 11 周)的接触则表明 spinetoram 的毒性低 24 倍。此外,口服接触两种 spinosyn 对熊蜂的繁殖产生了有害的亚致死效应。spinosad 的无观察效应浓度(NOEC)为 MFRC 的 1/1000,spinetoram 的 NOEC 为 MFRC 的 1/100。评估巢繁殖的慢性暴露生物测定中,有无觅食行为的亚致死效应比较表明,spinosad 和 spinetoram 的相应 NOEC 值在这两种生物测定中相似,表明两种 spinosyn 对熊蜂工蜂的觅食均无不利影响。
总体而言,与 spinosad 相比,直接接触和口服接触使用 spinetoram 对熊蜂更安全,因此可以与熊蜂安全地联合使用。另一个重要的结论是,目前的数据提供了强有力的证据表明,这两种 spinosyn 都不会对这些有益昆虫的觅食行为产生负面影响。然而,在得出最终结论之前,还应该在更现实的与田间相关的情况下评估 spinetoram 和 spinosad,以评估使用熊蜂有蜂王的群体时,对觅食行为的潜在有害影响。