Different toxic and hormetic responses of <i>Bombus impatiens</i> to <i>Beauveria bassiana, Bacillus subtilis</i> and spirotetramat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pollinator exposure to pesticides is a concern in agricultural systems that depend on pollinators for crop production. However, not all pesticides elicit toxic effects, and response to a pesticide will vary depending on dose and exposure route. The effects of biopesticide formulations of Bacillus subtilis and Beauveria bassiana and of the tetramic acid insecticide spirotetramat on the common eastern bumblebee, Bombus impatiens, were evaluated. Microcolonies of bees were exposed to field-rate or lower concentrations, and data were collected over 60 days. RESULTS: When ingested, field rates of spirotetramat caused high mortality after 10 days, and B. subtilis significantly reduced drone production, number of days to oviposition and number of days to drone emergence. Converse to effects observed following ingestion, topical applications of B. subtilis at concentrations less than the recommended field rate resulted in a hormetic response, with significantly increased drone production. Topical application of spirotetramat and oral or topical application of B. bassiana had no effects on bees. CONCLUSIONS: Spirotetramat and B. subtilis can induce adverse effects on B. impatiens, but hormetic effects following B. subtilis treatment can also occur, depending on exposure route. Additional experiments are required to determine whether similar toxic or hormetic effects occur under more realistic field conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".