Data from: Risk of potential pesticide use to honeybee and bumblebee survival and distribution: a country-wide analysis for The Netherlands

Aim: Bees play an important role in natural ecosystems and the world’s food supply. In the past decades, bee abundance and diversity have declined globally. This has resulted in decreased pollination services for natural ecosystems and the agricultural sector at the field scale. One of the causes of the decline in bee abundance and diversity is the use of pesticides. Linking pesticide use, land use and bee presence could provide crucial insights into areas and pesticides that pose a significant threat to the abundance and diversity of bees. Obtaining actual figures of farmer pesticide use is rarely possible. Therefore, we designed a method to study the effects of potential pesticide use on the survival and distribution of honey- and bumblebees. Location: The Netherlands. Methods: A pesticide risk model was implemented incorporating a hazard quotient as the risk assessment. The number of allowed pesticide active ingredients per crop that could pose a risk to honeybees and bumblebees were linked to the Dutch crop parcel locations for 2015 and 2016. The potential pesticide risk maps were analyzed using honeybee colony survival and bumblebee presence data. Results: Non-significant negative effects of potential pesticide risk on honeybee colony survival and bumblebee presence were found. A significant negative effect of greenhouses was identified for both honeybees and bumblebees. The most important factors in the models predicting honeybee colony survival and bumblebee presence were urban land areas and natural grasslands respectively, both showing a positive effect. Main conclusions: Here, the first attempt to estimate and map pesticide risk to bees in the Netherlands in a country-wide manner is presented. The results could provide crucial high-resolution insights for bee conservation action and facilitate the increase of pollination services in natural ecosystems and the agricultural sector on a local and country-wide scale

Incorrect application of the KDIGO acute kidney injury staging criteria

Background: Recent research demonstrated substantial heterogeneity in the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) acute kidney injury (AKI) diagnosis and staging criteria implementations in clinical research. Here we report an additional issue in the implementation of the criteria: the incorrect description and application of a stage 3 serum creatinine (SCr) criterion. Instead of an increase in SCr to or beyond 4.0 mg/dL, studies apparently interpreted this criterion as an increase in SCr by 4.0 mg/dL. Methods: Using a sample of 8124 consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, we illustrate the implications of such incorrect application. The AKI stage distributions associated with the correct and incorrect stage 3 SCr criterion implementations were compared, both with and without the stage 3 renal replacement therapy (RRT) criterion. In addition, we compared chronic kidney disease presence, ICU mortality rates and hospital mortality rates associated with each of the AKI stages and the misclassified cases. Results: Where incorrect implementation of the SCr stage 3 criterion showed a stage 3 AKI rate of 29%, correct implementation revealed a rate of 34%, mainly due to shifts from stage 1 to stage 3. Without the stage 3 RRT criterion, the stage 3 AKI rates were 9% and 19% after incorrect and correct implementation, respectively. The ICU and hospital mortality rates in cases misclassified as stage 1 or 2 were similar to those in cases correctly classified as stage 1 instead of stage 3. Conclusions: While incorrect implementation of the SCr stage 3 criterion has significant consequences for AKI severity epidemiology, consequences for clinical decision making may be less severe. We urge researchers and clinicians to verify their implementation of the AKI staging criteria