Monitoring in-hive residues of neonicotinoids in relation to bee health status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A field study was done to search for residues of neonicotinoids in twelve honeybee hives in four apiaries in the corn and soybean growing area of southern Ontario, in Canada, and to determine if any bee loss or symptoms of stress were associated with such residues. Dead bees in front of the hive, and live forager bees at the hive entrance and inside the hive were collected. Pollen, honey and nectar were also sampled. Acetamiprid, clothianidin and thiamethoxam and the metabolite TZNG were included in the analysis, and extensive diagnostic tests were done to monitor mites and diseases. Clothianidin, thiamethoxam and TZNG were found in dead bees collected in front of the hives and forager bees from the hive entrance but not in bees from inside the hive. The concentrations found in bees and hive products were below the NOELs for bees, and were not associated with any evidence of stress or bee loss. Mite levels were low, but viruses were frequently found. The pattern of distribution of residues was parallel to what has been reported for other chemicals including chlorpyrifos. Implications of this pattern for the role of the eusocial behaviour of bees in allowing a bee colony to forage on plants bearing natural or xenobiotic toxins are discussed.Keywords: honeybee, colony loss, virus, neonicotinoid, resistance
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 | 0.001 | 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".