INRAE, Abeilles Et Environnement, Avignon, France.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2022 Dec;29(60):90328-90337. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-21969-2. Epub 2022 Jul 22.
Toxicological studies in honeybees have long shown that a single pesticide dose or concentration does not necessarily induce a single response. Inter-individual differences in pesticide sensitivity and/or the level of exposure (e.g., ingestion of pesticide-contaminated matrices) may explain this variability in risk posed by a pesticide. Therefore, to better inform pesticide risk assessment for honeybees, we studied the risk posed by pesticides to two behavioral castes, nurse, and forager bees, which are largely represented within colonies and which exhibit large differences in their physiological backgrounds. For that purpose, we determined the sensitivity of nurses and foragers to azoxystrobin (fungicide) and sulfoxaflor (insecticide) upon acute or chronic exposure. Azoxystrobin was found to be weakly toxic to both types of bees. However, foragers were more sensitive to sulfoxaflor than nurses upon acute and chronic exposure. This phenomenon was not explained by better sulfoxaflor metabolization in nurses, but rather by differences in body weight (nurses being 1.6 times heavier than foragers). Foragers consistently consumed more sugar syrup than nurses, and this increased consumption was even more pronounced with pesticide-contaminated syrup (at specific concentrations). Altogether, the stronger susceptibility and exposure of foragers to sulfoxaflor contributed to increases of 2 and tenfold for the acute and chronic risk quotients, respectively, compared to nurses. In conclusion, to increase the safety margin and avoid an under-estimation of the risk posed by insecticides to honeybees, we recommend systematically including forager bees in regulatory tests.
在蜜蜂的毒理学研究中,长期以来一直表明,单一的农药剂量或浓度不一定会引起单一的反应。个体之间对农药敏感性和/或暴露水平(例如,摄入受农药污染的基质)的差异可能解释了这种由农药引起的风险的可变性。因此,为了更好地为蜜蜂的农药风险评估提供信息,我们研究了农药对两种行为类型的蜜蜂(工蜂和采集蜂)的风险,这些蜜蜂在群体中大量存在,并且在生理背景方面存在很大差异。为此,我们确定了蜜蜂对嘧菌酯(杀菌剂)和噻虫嗪(杀虫剂)的急性和慢性暴露的敏感性。嘧菌酯对两种蜜蜂都有较弱的毒性。然而,与慢性暴露相比,急性暴露时采集蜂对噻虫嗪的敏感性高于工蜂。这种现象不能用工蜂更好地代谢噻虫嗪来解释,而是由于体重差异(工蜂比采集蜂重 1.6 倍)。采集蜂一直比工蜂消耗更多的糖水,而在含有农药的糖水中,这种消耗增加更为明显(在特定浓度下)。总的来说,与工蜂相比,采集蜂对噻虫嗪更强的敏感性和暴露导致急性和慢性风险比率分别增加了 2 倍和 10 倍。总之,为了增加安全边际并避免低估杀虫剂对蜜蜂的风险,我们建议系统地将采集蜂纳入监管测试中。