Temperature sensitive effects of the neonicotinoid clothianidin on bumblebee (<i>Bombus terrestris</i>) foraging behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pollinating insects are an inherent part of most terrestrial ecosystems as they provide a crucial service for most angiosperms, including numerous important crops. A decrease in pollinator populations can therefore have severe consequences for both natural ecosystems and agricultural yields. Pesticide usage has been pointed out as one of the drivers behind pollinator declines. Globally, neonicotinoids are one of the most commonly used insecticides and studies have shown that exposure at sub-lethal levels can alter foraging behaviour, ultimately negatively affecting survival.Using a custom-made bumblebee colony monitoring system, we examined how the number and duration of foraging bouts of bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) on an individual level, and hive growth rate, was affected by exposure to low (6.5 µg/L) and high (10.6 µg/L) sub-lethal concentrations of the neonicotinoid clothianidin via nectar. We also examined possible interaction between clothianidin exposure and abiotic factors (temperature and precipitation), and its impact on foraging bout number and duration.Exposure to sublethal concentrations of clothianidin increased foraging bout duration in bumblebees. Furthermore, the foraging bout duration decreased with increasing temperature at both exposure concentrations, whereas the unexposed control group was not affected by temperature. Neither number of foraging bouts nor the daily rhythm of foraging bout duration was affected by clothianidin exposure or temperature. The foraging bout duration decreased with increasing precipitation in both exposed and non-exposed groups. However, we did not find any interaction between precipitation and exposure, suggesting that precipitation does not affect toxicity.Our study shows the importance of semi-natural experiments and accounting for ambient factors when assessing the risk that pesticide exposure may present to pollinators. We conclude that the effect of clothianidin exposure on bumblebee foraging behaviour is temperature sensitive and that local climatic conditions and future climate change scenarios should be considered in risk assessments of clothianidin and other insecticides.
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".