Environmental risks and challenges associated with neonicotinoid insecticides

Neonicotinoid use has increased rapidly in recent years, with a global shift toward insecticide applications as seed coatings rather than aerial spraying. While the use of seed coatings can lessen the amount of overspray and drift, the near universal and prophylactic use of neonicotinoid seed coatings on major agricultural crops has led to widespread detections in the environment (pollen, soil, water, honey). Pollinators and aquatic insects appear to be especially susceptible to the effects of neonicotinoids with current research suggesting that chronic sublethal effects are more prevalent than acute toxicity. Meanwhile, evidence of clear and consistent yield benefits from the use of neonicotinoids remains elusive for most crops. Future decisions on neonicotinoid use will benefit from weighing crop yield benefits versus environmental impacts to nontarget organisms and considering whether there are more environmentally benign alternatives

Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) interference with aquatic invertebrate traps

In field biology, interactions between wildlife and in situ equipment occur often. These interactions have the potential to induce a variety of behaviours in local fauna. Here, we note the destructive behaviour exhibited by the Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) following deployment of aquatic invertebrate traps for research purposes at 12 wetlands located in central Saskatchewan. Of 24 aquatic insect emergence traps used on seven wetlands in our study, 14 (58%) required recurring repairs. In addition, on several occasions, leaf litter bags and their anchoring stakes were torn or chewed. The recurring damage took place in wetlands with Muskrat lodges. We recommend structural modifications to aquatic invertebrate traps in wetland complexes densely inhabited by Muskrats and other semi-aquatic rodents

Field-level characteristics influence wild bee functional guilds on public lands managed for conservation

Throughout the Midwestern US, many public lands set aside for conservation engage in management activities (e.g., agriculture) that may act as stressors on wild bee populations. Several studies have investigated how wild bees respond to large-scale agriculture production; however, there has been limited assessment of how wild bees may be impacted by agricultural activity on public lands or how local variables may influence bee communities in these same areas. In this study, we assessed the abundance and richness of wild bee floral and nesting guilds at 30 agricultural field margins located on five Conservation Areas in Missouri. Generally, regardless of guild, bee abundance and richness was greater in field margins with more floral diversity and taller vegetation. Bee guilds responded negatively to agricultural production in Conservation Areas with fewer soil- and cavity-nesting bees collected in margins adjacent to annually cropped fields. Although fewer diet specialists were collected, specialist bee abundance and richness was greater in margins near fields that were uncropped (i.e., vegetated, but not row-cropped) during the previous year. Overall, the percentage of trees and shrubs within 800 m of study fields (i.e., “woodland”) was negatively associated with abundance and richness of bees, but specifically, reduced richness of soil-nesters and diet specialists. Our findings indicate agricultural management activities on public lands may lead to decreased abundance and richness of wild bee guilds. If public lands are to be managed for species diversity, including wild bees, maintaining diverse plant communities with taller vegetation (>100 cm) near cultivated fields and/or modifying agricultural production practices on public lands may greatly improve the conservation of local bee communities. Keywords: Bee guilds, Abundance, Richness, Conservation areas, Field margins, Agroecosystem

Widespread use and frequent detection of neonicotinoid insecticides in wetlands of Canada's Prairie Pothole Region.

Neonicotinoids currently dominate the insecticide market as seed treatments on Canada's major Prairie crops (e.g., canola). The potential impact to ecologically significant wetlands in this dominantly agro-environment has largely been overlooked while the distribution of use, incidence and level of contamination remains unreported. We modelled the spatial distribution of neonicotinoid use across the three Prairie Provinces in combination with temporal assessments of water and sediment concentrations in wetlands to measure four active ingredients (clothianidin, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid and acetamiprid). From 2009 to 2012, neonicotinoid use was increasing; by 2012, applications covered an estimated ∼11 million hectares (44% of Prairie cropland) with >216,000 kg of active ingredients. Thiamethoxam, followed by clothianidin, were the dominant seed treatments by mass and area. Areas of high neonicotinoid use were identified as high density canola or soybean production. Water sampled four times from 136 wetlands (spring, summer, fall 2012 and spring 2013) across four rural municipalities in Saskatchewan similarly revealed clothianidin and thiamethoxam in the majority of samples. In spring 2012 prior to seeding, 36% of wetlands contained at least one neonicotinoid. Detections increased to 62% in summer 2012, declined to 16% in fall, and increased to 91% the following spring 2013 after ice-off. Peak concentrations were recorded during summer 2012 for both thiamethoxam (range: <LOQ--1490 ng/L, canola) and clothianidin (range: <LOQ--3110 ng/L, canola). Sediment samples collected during the same period rarely (6%) contained neonicotinoid concentrations (which did not exceed 20 ng/L). Wetlands situated in barley, canola and oat fields consistently contained higher mean concentrations of neonicotinoids than in grasslands, but no individual crop singularly influenced overall detections or concentrations. Distribution maps indicate neonicotinoid use is increasing and becoming more widespread with concerns for environmental loading, while frequently detected neonicotinoid concentrations in Prairie wetlands suggest high persistence and transport into wetlands

Ecological and Landscape Drivers of Neonicotinoid Insecticide Detections and Concentrations in Canada’s Prairie Wetlands

Neonicotinoids are commonly used seed treatments on Canada’s major prairie crops. Transported via surface and subsurface runoff into wetlands, their ultimate aquatic fate remains largely unknown. Biotic and abiotic wetland characteristics likely affect neonicotinoid presence and environmental persistence, but concentrations vary widely between wetlands that appear ecologically (e.g., plant composition) and physically (e.g., depth) similar for reasons that remain unclear. We conducted intensive surveys of 238 wetlands, and documented 59 wetland (e.g., dominant plant species) and landscape (e.g., surrounding crop) characteristics as part of a novel rapid wetland assessment system. We used boosted regression tree (BRT) analysis to predict both probability of neonicotinoid analytical detection and concentration. BRT models effectively predicted the deviance in neonicotinoid detection (62.4%) and concentration (74.7%) from 21 and 23 variables, respectively. Detection was best explained by shallow marsh plant species identity (34.8%) and surrounding crop (13.9%). Neonicotinoid concentration was best explained by shallow marsh plant species identity (14.9%) and wetland depth (14.2%). Our research revealed that plant composition is a key indicator and/or driver of neonicotinoid presence and concentration in Prairie wetlands. We recommend wetland buffers consisting of diverse native vegetation be retained or restored to minimize neonicotinoid transport and retention in wetlands, thereby limiting their potential effects on wetland-dependent organisms

Results of generalized linear mixed model analyzing total neonicotinoid concentration in response to crop type and season.

<p>Total neonicotinoid concentration was measured repeatedly in up to 136 wetlands situated on 50 agricultural quarter sections in Saskatchewan during spring 2012 through spring 2013.</p

Mean total neonicotinoid water concentrations by crop type measured in wetlands in central Saskatchewan.

<p>Bars represent means (±SE) for each crop over all sampling periods in 2012–2013. Statistical comparisons (letters) of individual crops are relative to grasslands. Bars sharing the same letter (i.e. A, B) indicate no statistical difference in means.</p

Estimated total neonicotinoid distribution across Prairie Canada.

<p>Area of total agricultural land (millions of ha) using a neonicotinoid seed treatment and estimated total mass (kg) of active ingredient (AI) applied across the Canadian Prairie region from 2009 to 2012. Composite area and mass values include all predicted treated crop types and neonicotinoid active ingredients (clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam) based on extrapolation of mapped distribution.</p