Hummingbirds and bumble bees exposed to neonicotinoid and organophosphate insecticides in the Fraser Valley, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To measure exposure to neonicotinoid and other pesticides in avian pollinators, we made novel use of cloacal fluid and fecal pellets from rufous (Selasphorus rufus) and Anna's (Calypte anna) hummingbirds living near blueberry fields in the Fraser River Valley and Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. To examine on-farm exposure to pesticides in invertebrate pollinators, we also collected bumble bees native to Canada (Bombus mixtus, Bombus flavifrons, and Bombus melanopygus), their pollen, and blueberry leaves and flowers from within conventionally sprayed and organic blueberry farms. By sites and sample type, the results reported in the present study represent pooled samples (n = 1). In 2015 to 2016, the combined concentration of the neonicotinoid insecticides imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, and clothianidin detected in hummingbird cloacal fluid from sites near conventionally sprayed blueberry fields was 3.63 ng/mL (ppb). Among the 18 compounds measured in fecal pellets, including one neonicotinoid (imidacloprid), only piperonyl butoxide was detected (1.47-5.96 ng/g). Piperonyl butoxide is a cytochrome P450 inhibitor applied with some insecticides to increase their toxic efficacy. Only diazinon was detected in bumble bees (0.197 ng/g), whereas diazinon (1.54-1.7 ng/g) and imidacloprid (up to 18.4 ng/g) were detected in pollen collected from bumble bees including the bees from organic sites located near conventionally sprayed blueberry farms. Imidacloprid was also detected at 5.16 ng/g in blueberry flowers collected 1 yr post spray from 1 of 6 conventionally sprayed blueberry farms. Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:2143-2152. © 2018 SETAC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".