Introducing the INSIGNIA project: environmental monitoring of pesticide use through honey bees

INSIGNIA aims to design and test an innovative, non-invasive, scientifically proven citizen science environmental monitoring protocol for the detection of pesticides by honey bees. It is a 30-month pilot project initiated and financed by the EC (PP-1-1-2018; EC SANTE). The study is being carried out by a consortium of specialists in honey bees, apiculture, statistics, analytics, modelling, extension, social science and citizen science from twelve countries. Honey bee colonies are excellent bio-samplers of biological material such as nectar, pollen and plant pathogens, as well as non-biological material such as pesticides or airborne contamination. Honey bee colonies forage over a circle of 1 km radius, increasing to several km if required, depending on the availability and attractiveness of food. All material collected is accumulated in the hive.The honey bee colony can provide four main matrices for environmental monitoring: bees, honey, pollen and wax. Because of the non-destructive remit of the project, for pesticides, pollen is the focal matrix and used as trapped pollen and beebread in this study. Although beeswax can be used as a passive sampler for pesticides, this matrix is not being used in INSIGNIA because of its polarity dependent absorbance, which limits the required wide range of pesticides to be monitored. Alternatively, two innovative non-biological matrices are being tested: i) the “Beehold tube”, a tube lined with the generic absorbent polyethylene-glycol PEG, through which hive-entering bees are forced to pass, and ii) the “APIStrip” (Absorbing Pesticides In-hive Strips) with a specific pesticide absorbent which is hung between the bee combs.Beebread and pollen collected in pollen traps are being sampled every two weeks to be analysed for pesticide residues and to record foraging conditions. Trapped pollen provides snapshots of the foraging conditions and contaminants on a single day. During the active season, the majority of beebread is consumed within days, so beebread provides recent, random sampling results. The Beehold tube and the APIStrips are present throughout the 2-weeks sampling periods in the beehive, absorbing and accumulating the incoming contaminants. The four matrices i.e. trapped pollen, beebread, Beehold tubes and APIStrips will be analysed for the presence of pesticides. The botanical origin of trapped pollen, beebread and pollen in the Beehold tubes will also be determined with an innovative molecular technique. Data on pollen and pesticide presence will then be combined to obtain information on foraging conditions and pesticide use, together with evaluation of the CORINE database for land use and pesticide legislation to model the exposure risks to honey bees and wild bees. All monitoring steps from sampling through to analysis will be studied and rigorously tested in four countries in Year 1, and the best practices will then be ring-tested in nine countries in Year 2. Information about the course of the project, its results and publications will be available on the INSIGNIA website www.insignia-bee.eu and via social media: on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/insigniabee.eu/); Instagram insignia_bee); and Twitter (insignia_bee). Although the analyses of pesticide residues and pollen identification will not be completed until December 2019, in my talk I will present preliminary results of the Year 1 sampling.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Introducing the INSIGNIA project: Environmental monitoring of pesticides use through honey bees

INSIGNIA aims to design and test an innovative, non-invasive, scientifically proven citizen science environmental monitoring protocol for the detection of pesticides via honey bees. It is a pilot project initiated and financed by the European Commission (PP-1-1-2018; EC SANTE). The study is being carried out by a consortium of specialists in honey bees, apiculture, chemistry, molecular biology, statistics, analytics, modelling, extension, social science and citizen science from twelve countries. Honey bee colonies are excellent bio-samplers of biological material such as nectar, pollen and plant pathogens, as well as non-biological material such as pesticides or airborne contamination. Honey bee colonies forage over a circle of about 1 km radius, increasing to several km if required depending on the availability and attractiveness of food. All material collected is concentrated in the hive, and the honey bee colony can provide four main matrices for environmental monitoring: bees, honey, pollen and wax. For pesticides, pollen and wax are the focal matrices. Pollen collected in pollen traps will be sampled every two weeks to record foraging conditions. During the season, most of pollen is consumed within days, so beebread can provide recent, random sampling results. On the other hand wax acts as a passive sampler, building up an archive of pesticides that have entered the hive. Alternative in-hive passive samplers will be tested to replicate wax as a “pesticide-sponge”. Samples will be analysed for the presence of pesticides and the botanical origin of the pollen using an ITS2 DNA metabarcoding approach. Data on pollen and pesticides will be then be combined to obtain information on foraging conditions and pesticide use, together with evaluation of the CORINE database for land use and pesticide legislation to model the exposure risks to honey bees and wild bees. All monitoring steps from sampling through to analysis will be studied and tested in four countries in year 1, and the best practices will then be ring-tested in nine countries in year 2. Information about the course of the project and its results and publications will be available in the INSIGNIA website www.insignia-bee.eu.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Beekeeping and honey bees: a conceptual framework for the classification of beekeeping management practices implemented in Europe

eekeeping is an important sector of the European agriculture generating employment and increasing incomes in rural areas. The role of the beekeeper is considered fundamental for maintaining the health status of a managed honey bee colony and, if intended, ensure its productivity. Several monitoring projects highlighted the direct and/or indirect role of the beekeeper for ensuring healthy honey bee colonies. However, a clear overview on the main actions carried out by beekeepers and their role for the successful management of honey bee colonies is missing. In this study, we aim at providing a generalized framework of classification for the Beekeeping Management Practices (BMPs) carried out by the European beekeepers and their influence on honey bees. Six BMPs were selected for their relevance at European level and their influence on a honey bee colony. Based on an extensive literature review each BMP was characterized in relation to i) the elements guiding their application, ii) the potential impacts on a honey bee colony and iii) the scenario-based variables that might influence their application and/or effectiveness. Knowledge gaps were filled through an Expert Knowledge Elicitation procedure. This work represents the first attempt to condense and further elaborate the knowledge available on the actions carried out by European beekeepers and quantify their influence on a honey bee colony. This work might support the development of realistic scenarios of beekeeping in Europe and the implementation of knowledge-based risk management actions

Widespread dispersal of the microsporidian Nosema ceranae, an emergent pathogen of the western honey bee, Apis mellifera

v2007o

Summer brood interruption as integrated management strategy for effective Varroa control in Europe

Most Varroa induced colony losses occur during the autumn or winter season as a consequence of an elevated Varroa infestation level and an insufficient health status of the adult bees. Even with an initial low Varroa infestation in early spring, critical mite and virus infection levels can be reached before winter if colonies continuously rear brood throughout the whole season. To overcome this challenge, beekeepers can artificially interrupt brood production by suitable management procedures, depending on their type of beekeeping operation. To assess their efficacy, associated workload, and impact on colony development, different methods for brood interruption (queen caging with the combination of oxalic acid treatment, total brood removal, trapping comb technique) were tested during two seasons in 11 locations on 370 colonies in 10 European countries. A protocol was developed to standardize the methods' application across different environmental conditions. The efficacy of queen caging depended on the mode of oxalic acid application and ranged from 48.16% to 89.57% mite removal. The highest efficacies were achieved with trickling a 4.2% solution (89.57%) and with the sublimation of 2 g of oxalic acid (average of 88.25%) in the broodless period. The efficacy of the purely biotechnical, chemical-free trapping comb and brood removal methods did not differ significantly from the queen caging groups. We conclude that a proper application of one of the described brood interruption methods can significantly contribute to an efficient Varroa control and to the production of honey bee products meeting the highest quality and food-safety standards