Milkweed in agricultural field margins - A neonicotinoid exposure route for pollinators at multiple life stages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neonicotinoid insecticides move from targeted crops to wildflowers located in adjacent field margins, acting as a potential exposure source for wild pollinators and insect species of conservation concern, including monarch butterflies. Monarchs rely on milkweed over multiple life stages, including as a host plant for eggs and a food source for both larvae (leaves) and adults (flowers). Milkweeds, which are closely associated with field margins, can contain neonicotinoid residues, but previous assessments are constrained to a single plant tissue type. In 2017 and 2018, we sampled milkweeds from 95 field margins adjacent to crop fields (corn, soybean, hay, wheat, and barley) in agricultural landscapes of eastern Ontario, Canada. Milkweeds were sampled during the flower blooming period and leaves and flower tissues were analysed. The neonicotinoids acetamiprid, clothianidin, thiamethoxam, and thiacloprid were detected. Maximum concentrations in leaf samples included 10.30 ng/g of clothianidin in 2017, and 24.4 ng/g of thiamethoxam in 2018. Clothianidin and thiamethoxam percent detections in flowers (72 % and 61 %, respectively) were significantly higher than detections in leaves (24 % and 31 %, respectively). Thiamethoxam concentrations were significantly higher in paired flower samples than leaf samples (median 0.33 ng/g vs <0.07 ng/g) while clothianidin concentrations also trended higher in flowers (median 0.18-0.55 ng/g vs <0.18 ng/g). Only thiamethoxam showed significant differences between years, and we found no effect of crop type, with hay, soybean and corn fields all yielding 50-56 % detections in leaves. We found significantly higher concentrations in older milkweed flowers than young flowers or leaves (medians 0.87 ng/g vs <0.18 ng/g and 0.45 ng/g vs <0.07 ng/g for clothianidin and thiamethoxam, respectively). Our results highlight the importance of considering variation in milkweed tissue type and age of flowers in neonicotinoid exposure risk assessments. Efforts to increase milkweed availability in agricultural landscapes should consider how exposure to neonicotinoids can be mitigated.
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 | 0.001 | 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".