Comparative Sublethal Toxicity of Three Neonicotinoids in Red-Winged Blackbirds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Seed-eating birds that use agricultural areas could be exposed to neonicotinoids through several pathways, including ingestion of treated seeds. Previous studies in birds have found sublethal exposure to neonicotinoids can reduce body mass and fat stores, but the underlying mechanism is not clear. We hypothesized that neonicotinoids reduce body mass principally by acting as an appetite suppressant rather than increasing energy consumption. Red-winged blackbirds ( Agelaius phoeniceus ) were exposed to an oral dose of one of three neonicotinoids at concentrations that could realistically be consumed by seed-eating birds (0, 10, 20, or 30 mg/kg bw of imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, or clothianidin) or were given a moderate or high food-restricted diet ( n = 9 or 10 birds per treatment) and were then monitored for 3 days. Imidacloprid caused neurotoxic symptoms and rapid reductions in food consumption and body mass that persisted for >48 h. Food restriction had similar effects on body mass and biochemical indicators of energetic state (plasma triglycerides, uric acid, and β-hydroxybutyrate), which suggests appetite suppression was the main driver of mass loss in imidacloprid-exposed birds. Single doses of clothianidin and thiamethoxam altered food consumption and biochemical markers, but effects were less severe than for imidacloprid, and neither compound caused overt neurotoxicity. This study confirms that acute neonicotinoid exposures can affect behavior, appetite, mass, and energetic state in seed-eating songbirds, with potential consequences for survival.
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".