Slashdot Mirror
Pesticides Turn Bumblebees Into Poor Pollinators (acs.org)
MTorrice writes about a new study that suggests neonicotinoids, one of the most widely used insecticides in the world, turn bumblebees into poor pollinators, leading to lower yields of apples and other plants. Chemical & Engineering News reports: "Neonicotinoid pesticides have been blamed for declines in bee populations worldwide. The chemicals don't kill bees, instead neonicotinoids impair the insects' abilities to learn, navigate, forage for nectar, and reproduce, according to studies published over the past several years. Now, researchers report that bees exposed to the pesticides also become less effective pollinators for crops. The study is the first to demonstrate that neonicotinoids can decrease the quality of a food crop by affecting bee pollination. About 30% of our food comes from crops, including fruits, nuts, seeds, and oils, that depend on insect pollinators, according to Dara A. Stanley of Royal Holloway, University of London, who led the new study. 'Basically,' she says, 'you can't have a balanced diet without insect pollination.'"
From TFA:
“Until now, all of the focus has been on the impact of neonicotinoids on bees themselves,” she continues. “But obviously the reason why we’re interested in bees is because they provide pollination services.”
Rough translation, this study examines how neonicotinoids affect bee behaviour, and not just whether they kill or injure them.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Well, a bee can't drink a shot glass full of water in less than a second, but humans can, with no ill effects, so your argument doesn't really have much merit no matter how you want to look at it.
Smoke isn't "good" for bees. It just triggers behaviours that make them docile.
The smoke masks the scent produced by guard-bees, so a bee-keeper's intrusion produces less alarm. Also, the smoke tricks the bees into thinking the hive is on fire, so they gorge on the honey, and become distended and less able to sting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
With all due respect to farmers, they'll probably need some help with this. They know how to grow food, but not necessarily how to create better pesticides.
And what's with the claim of hype or exaggeration? The full context of what you quoted, in TFS and TFA, is:
About 30% of our food comes from crops, including fruits, nuts, seeds, and oils, that depend on insect pollinators, according to Dara A. Stanley of Royal Holloway, University of London, who led the new study. 'Basically,' she says, 'you can't have a balanced diet without insect pollination.'"
I see no hype or exaggeration here. Just rational and accurate communication.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
... I feel sorry for. They'll need plenty of financial compensation for this fuckup.
Because people want all food, cheap, unblemished in any way, all year round, no matter how tasteless or lacking in nutrition.
Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
Newsflash: chemicals used because of they harm insects end up harming insects.
If the pesticides are a problem, let's address it. There's no need to pretend we're in for a future "without insect pollination". If this phenomenon is a real problem that can be demonstrated, then why hype it up? .
Because I'm certain that we can find some scientist, probably paid by the industry making Neonicotinoid pesticides, who will deny a problem, and a whole lot of people will hop on that bandwagon, just like global warming deniers, vaccine deniers, evolution deniers, moon landing deniers, tobacco and lung cancer deniers, and all the other happy little deniers out there. In 21st century America, Opinion trumps science every time.
Teach the controversy!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
About 30% of our food comes from crops, including fruits, nuts, seeds, and oils, that depend on insect pollinators, according to Dara A. Stanley of Royal Holloway, University of London, who led the new study. 'Basically,' she says, 'you can't have a balanced diet without insect pollination.'"
I see no hype or exaggeration here. Just rational and accurate communication.
Truth can be hype to some folks.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Maybe you didn't pick up on the connection: neonicotinoids. But yes, "smoke" isn't good for the bees. The neonicotinoids impair their "abilities to learn, navigate, forage for nectar, and reproduce."
Maybe you didn't pick up on the connection: neonicotinoids.
LOL. Yes, I did miss that. Thanks.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
This is coming from the country that lifted a ban on neonictonoids... http://www.theguardian.com/env...
Silence is a state of mime.
Practical and direct, just great analysis.! https://www.facebook.com/julio...
It seems reasonable enough to me that bees that quit pollinating multiple times a day to take a smoke break would be less efficient than normal, upstanding, hard working, bees.
Some poisons are subtler than others; but ones that target the nervous system are good candidates for 'effects will be a pain in the ass to tease out; but probably start to show up at doses well below lethal'.
More specifically, a substance meant to poison insects, poisons insects.
Yeah, its just amazing how tasteless so much fruit is from "fresh food" super markets here in Australia (not sure if it's the same in the USA but I'm guessing yes)... The fruit *looks* great, but it tastes unripened/bitter or just not much flavonoids at all. :/
It was known in farming lore back in the 1990's. The Times country section had a comment by a farmer about how bees would become slow, dozy and crash into things just when bright yellow fields of crops were being sprayed with pesticide that gave a thick oily smell to the air.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
The implication is that we may someday be "without insect pollinators". We won't. It's hype - hyperbole - an exaggeration for effect -- to imply a future condition "without insect pollinators". Perhaps that's not what the scientist intended, but now the words have been quoted and re-quoted in a different context.
People who grow "fruits, nuts, seeds, and oils" know what they are doing. If they need insect pollinators, they'll make sure they have insect pollinators in the right quantity, with the right pollinating ability, to make their crop a success.
Especially if the robot drones are 3-D printed!!
I fully expect the truth to agree with the preconceived notions of the people who funded the study and/or employed the best expert witness(es).
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
If they need insect pollinators, they'll make sure they have insect pollinators in the right quantity, with the right pollinating ability, to make their crop a success.
I never knew that nut farmers had such godlike powers.
I wonder why they're not using those powers right now to bring the perfect amount of rain to California, though.
China's apple growers are hand pollinating apples
https://www.chinadialogue.net/...
Pears: http://thebeephotographer.phot...
Great Britians bee loss
http://www.collective-evolutio...
And on and on, and on.
I keep writing about it, but seriously, Humans cannot defy nature or physics just because we feel like it. Bee death denials
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Nobody has ever thought you could spray any insecticide, with ONE exception perhaps*, and not affect bees. While neonics are supposed to be less hazardous to bees than most everything else if you spray bees with it they'll drop dead instantly. They're not the most effective, but they'll kill 'em right quick. It says so right on the labels. Dinotefuran, imidicloprid, acetamprid, etc... they're all going to say do not use when bees are or will be present.
*: Bt would be the exception.
The apple maggot fly (AMF) lays eggs and little tiny larvae burrow through it leaving brown tracks. I have no problem eating those apples, but most of those apples fall off the tree before I get to them, and the remaining apples rot after a short time in storage.
Acetamiprid has allowed me to have a halfway decent apple harvest from a home orchard for two years now. It doesn't seem to kill the adult flies so the fruit is still blemished, but it appears to kill the larvae as there are many fewer brown tracks and the apples keep in my cool basement until mid winter.
The alternatives are organophosphates, which are nerve gas precursors or pyrethroids, which are much more bee toxic.
But the categorical dismissal of the use of pesticides in growing fruit along with the high moderation points -- have people around here ever tried to plant an apple tree and get usable amounts of fruit from it?
Actually, they've known for several years that minute quantities of neonicotinoids cause bees to 'dance' incorrectly; where the dance no longer correctly directs other bees to their discovery of nectar. The loss of food may be partly responsible for Colony Collapse Disorder. It's not surprising that this would also lead to reduced pollination.
John
Because neonicotinoids are among the safest overall pesticides that have ever been developed. They very effectively target insects, but have very minor effects on mammals. The LD50 of Safari is over 2000 mg/kg of body weight in rats. They're rated category III by the EPA, which means 'slightly toxic and/or slightly irritating.'
The big problem is with bees. Neonics are supposedly 150X more lethal to bees than to any other insect genera.
The EU has already banned neonics (possibly because population density is higher and bees may be more shared than in the US); the US is dragging their feet.
John
Yes. In Psychology, given the extreme stupidity of those that deny this effect.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Given that most humans today are already terminally stupid, I doubt we would see much effect. Then maybe, this is the effect...
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Correction: 100 % of our food comes from crops. What do you think that steak was eating before landing on your plate? Also, inefficient as hell, but steak does taste nice.
Who the hell would be denying that spraying bees with poison is going to have a negative impact? I don't think that I've heard anyone say that, not even stupid people online. Well, not seriously at any rate. I've probably seen someone say it sarcastically but I don't think anyone has ever made an actual attempted argument for such that I have seen. (Not to say it didn't happen but that I've never seen it.)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I - for one - salute our new asteroid-mined, 3d-printed robot drone bee overlords.
-- Make America hate again!
You got a citation for the lacking of nutrition part? You won't find one. Because every study ever done has shown no real difference (well not quite true, one or two have shown organic to be *worse* because of the presence of fungus) between modern farming, and organic or whatever flavour of the week it is for "better nutrition". Proper blind studies have shown people can't tell the difference in taste either. Again not quite true. Some have shown people believe the "freshest and tastiest" is the modern farmed stuff.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Bees is a small subset of insect pollinators.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Or you could you know look at the data. There is a lot more than just this study about this. Fact is the data is not nearly as clear cut as the summary claims. What is clear is how crops handle not using pesticide, they don't. You know organic crops use pesticide right? You think you can just ask all the insects to be nice to your crop just because you decided it organic?
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
because people like you deny there is a problem until its too late and just assume that 'the farmers' will fix it before its too late, when most 'farmers' are big corporations who care more about next quarter profit statements than the long term production of crops.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Pesticides harm pests. Bees are pests. Pesticides harm bees. And we're done.
Or you could you know look at the data. There is a lot more than just this study about this. Fact is the data is not nearly as clear cut as the summary claims. What is clear is how crops handle not using pesticide, they don't. You know organic crops use pesticide right? You think you can just ask all the insects to be nice to your crop just because you decided it organic?
So you are saying that an ihnsecticide won't harm bees? Or do we just give up and do like China is doing now, and have peopel pollinate crops?
And, you actually wrote"
What is clear is how crops handle not using pesticide, they don't. /p>
SRSLY? Are you just trying to lull me into complacency, laughing, by posting the stupidest comment on the web ever?
So plants did not exist until we invented insecticide?
Not much point in arguing with someone who would post that.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Are you volunteering not to have food year round?
No idea if this is germane to the discussion, but I'm reminded of the guy who cured himself of a lifelong autoimmune disease by intentionally giving himself a hookworm infestation. It was on "This American Life", if memory serves.
If you can't tell the difference in flavor between commercial strawberries or blueberries and fresh wild ones, then you're likely dead. Probably for more than 10 years.
I never knew that nut farmers had such godlike powers.
It's called a telephone. You call up the bee supplier. He arrives with bees. Hives are setup near your crops. Bees pollinate. Later, the bee supplier picks up the hives and invoices you for the bee rental.
I wonder why they're not using those powers right now to bring the perfect amount of rain to California, though.
This is called irrigation.
You must think farmers just have big plots of land and food crops just randomly happen to grow there.
I love the heavy dose of scientific evidence in this post.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Your funny. Also you didn't look at the data did you.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
You call up the bee supplier. He arrives with bees.
That works great.
Unless he doesn't have any god-damned bees any more. Have you been living under a rock for the past five years?
The bee supplier knows how bees make more bees. When he wants more bees, he raises more bees.
None of this is random chance.
Are you trying to be obtuse?
How does the bee supplier raise more bees if they have all been poisoned?
Some things don't require it. Serious. Do you require scientific evidence that if you let go of a rock suspended over your foot you're going to get hurt? If it makes you happier, I'd love to conduct a blind taste test, which I will get right EVERY SINGLE TIME. because you'd have to have literally lost ALL sense of taste to fail.
He makes a phone call to another bee supplier and gets bees. Bees reproduce more bees. With time and care, his hives end up full of bees.
I give up. You're as dense as a brick.
Nope. That's actually what would happen.
Farmers know what they are doing.