Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, 202 CIPS, 578 Wilson Road, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA; Pollinating Insect-Biology, Management, Systematics Research Unit, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, 1410 N 800 E, Logan, UT 84341, USA.
Department of Entomology, Cornell University, 4129 Comstock Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
Sci Total Environ. 2024 Apr 20;922:171248. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.171248. Epub 2024 Feb 24.
Wildflower plantings adjacent to agricultural fields provide diverse floral resources and nesting sites for wild bees. However, their proximity to pest control activities in the crop may result in pesticide exposure if pesticides drift into pollinator plantings. To quantify pesticide residues in pollinator plantings, we sampled flowers and soil from pollinator plantings and compared them to samples from unenhanced field margins and crop row middles. At conventionally managed farms, flowers from pollinator plantings had similar exposure profiles to those from unenhanced field margins or crop row middles, with multiple pesticides and high and similar risk quotient (RQ) values (with pollinator planting RQ: 3.9; without pollinator planting RQ: 4.0). Whereas samples from unsprayed sites had significantly lower risk (RQ: 0.005). Soil samples had overall low risk to bees. Additionally, we placed bumble bee colonies (Bombus impatiens) in field margins of crop fields with and without pollinator plantings and measured residues in bee-collected pollen. Pesticide exposure was similar in pollen from sites with or without pollinator plantings, and risk was generally high (with pollinator planting RQ: 0.5; without pollinator planting RQ: 1.1) and not significant between the two field types. Risk was lower at sites where there was no pesticide activity (RQ: 0.3), but again there was no significant difference between management types. The insecticide phosmet, which is used on blueberry farms for control of Drosophila suzukii, accounted for the majority of elevated risk. Additionally, analysis of pollen collected by bumble bees found no significant difference in floral species richness between sites with or without pollinator plantings. Our results suggest that pollinator plantings do not reduce pesticide risk and do not increase pollen diversity collected by B. impatiens, further highlighting the need to reduce exposure through enhanced IPM adoption, drift mitigation, and removal of attractive flowering weeds prior to insecticide applications.
在农田附近种植野花可以为野生蜜蜂提供多样的花卉资源和筑巢地点。然而，如果杀虫剂飘移到传粉植物种植区，它们与作物病虫害防治活动相邻，可能会导致传粉者暴露在农药中。为了量化传粉植物种植区的农药残留，我们从传粉植物种植区采集花朵和土壤样本，并将其与未增强的田间边缘和作物行间的样本进行比较。在常规管理的农场中，传粉植物种植区的花朵与未增强的田间边缘或作物行间的花朵具有相似的暴露特征，存在多种农药和高且相似的风险商数（RQ）值（有传粉植物种植区的 RQ：3.9；无传粉植物种植区的 RQ：4.0）。而未喷洒的样本的风险显著较低（RQ：0.005）。土壤样本对蜜蜂总体风险较低。此外，我们在有和没有传粉植物种植区的作物田间的田间边缘放置了大黄蜂（Bombus impatiens）的殖民地，并测量了蜜蜂采集的花粉中的残留。有或没有传粉植物种植区的花粉中的农药暴露情况相似，风险通常较高（有传粉植物种植区的 RQ：0.5；无传粉植物种植区的 RQ：1.1），并且在两种田间类型之间没有显著差异。在没有农药活动的地点风险较低（RQ：0.3），但在管理类型之间也没有显著差异。在蓝莓农场用于防治果蝇的杀虫剂 phosmet 是导致风险升高的主要原因。此外，对大黄蜂采集的花粉进行分析发现，有或没有传粉植物种植区的花朵物种丰富度没有显著差异。我们的研究结果表明，传粉植物种植并不能降低农药风险，也不能增加大黄蜂采集的花粉多样性，这进一步强调了通过采用增强的 IPM、减少漂移和在施药前清除有吸引力的开花杂草来减少暴露的必要性。
