MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401907443 · doi:10.1038/s41893-024-01413-8

Impact of pesticide use on wild bee distributions across the United States

2024· article· en· W4401907443 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Melissa Guzman, Elizabeth Elle, Lora A. Morandin, Neil S. Cobb, Paige Chesshire, Lindsie M. McCabe, Alice C. Hughes, Michael C. Orr, Leithen K. M’Gonigle

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Sustainability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollinationOccupancyBiodiversityPesticideNeonicotinoidEcologyBiologyPopulationEcosystem servicesPyrethroidEcosystemGeographyImidaclopridPollenDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decline of many wild bee species has major consequences for pollination in natural and agro-ecosystems. One hypothesized cause of the declines is pesticide use; neonicotinoids and pyrethroids in particular have been shown to have pernicious effects in laboratory and field experiments, and have been linked to population declines in a few focal species. We used aggregated museum records, ecological surveys and community science data from across the contiguous United States, including 178,589 unique observations from 1,081 bee species (33% of species with records in the United States) across six families, to model species occupancy from 1995 to 2015 with linked land use data. While there are numerous causes of bee declines, we discovered that the negative effects of pesticides are widespread; the increase in neonicotinoid and pyrethroid use is a major driver of changes in occupancy across hundreds of wild bee species. In some groups, high pesticide use contributes to a 43.3% decrease in the probability that a species occurs at a site. These results suggest that mechanisms that reduce pesticide use (such as integrative pest management) can potentially facilitate pollination conservation. Bees provide important pollination ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes, but the extent to which they are affected by pesticide use on a continental scale has yet to be explored. This study evaluates the impact of pesticide use on wild bee populations across the contiguous United States.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature SustainabilitySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207