Effects of fluvalinate on honey bee learning, memory, responsiveness to sucrose, and survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contaminants can affect organisms' behaviour and, as a consequence, survival. Tau-fluvalinate (hereafter fluvalinate) is the active ingredient in a pesticide commonly used in North America to control Varroa destructor mites in honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies. Fluvalinate's effects on honey bees are not well known. Honey bee cognitive and neural function can be assessed using the proboscis extension reflex (PER), which applies Pavlovian conditioning techniques. This study used PER to evaluate effects of fluvalinate on honey bee acquisition learning, (long-term) memory recall, responsiveness to sucrose, and mortality. We also evaluated how exclusion criteria for honey bees that did not exhibit PER during training and memory trials affected interpretation of results. Fluvalinate was administered both orally and dermally at high and low doses to mimic routes by which honey bees are exposed. We found negative effects of fluvalinate on honey bee learning, memory, responsiveness to sucrose, and survival, especially in high oral doses. We also found significant consequences to interpretation of results using different exclusion criteria. For example, almost 50% of individuals that failed to show evidence of learning subsequently showed evidence of memory. The latter results have important implications regarding traditional assessment of PER-based learning and memory; the former results suggest that evaluation of honey bee exposure to fluvalinate and attendant consequences warrants further investigation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".