Varroa mite is one of the biggest threats to honey bee colonies. In the UK, it was first discovered in 1992.
Given the mode of action of neonicotinoids, (Read this link - How do neonicotinoids work?) is it surprising if these insecticides hinder the ability of bees to develop this grooming ability?
Bayer Cropscience advertises the mechanism by which sub-lethal doses of imidacloprid, one of their neonicotinoids, kills colonies of Termites, which like bees, are social insects, and super-organisms, living in vast colonies.
is that disoriented social insects stop grooming and thus get infected with natural pathogens. Here is the quote from the
leaflet (download can be slow, and opens new window). Premise 200SC, is a Bayer product for Termites, which like bees, are social insects. The leaflet reads:
Could it be, then, that neonicotinoids interfere with grooming behaviour
in honey bees, making them more likely to succumb to Varroa mites and
the diseases they carry?
As stated, although this leaflet is particularly concerned with termites and not bees, nevertheless, termites, like bees, are social insects, and they engage in the act of grooming.
Imidacloprid is a neonicotinoid, and it is used on farmland, as well as being available for use in gardening, golf course and lawn care products.
In view of this information, I would like to know whether regulatory approval bodies considered the impact of these pesticides on crucial natural insect behaviours such as these.
Have they even requested data from Bayer Cropscience investigating the impact on grooming behaviour in honey bees?
Did Bayer submit such data, and if so, what steps are the regulatory bodies taking to ensure the data is independently scrutinised?
Are they requesting visibility of independent data?
Further evidence of the effects of neonicotinoids on
grooming behaviour has also been witnessed in beetles, including having
an impact on their larvae. This published study, titled
Synergism of imidacloprid and entomopathogenic nematodes against white grubs: the mechanism;
by Albrecht M. Koppenhöfer et al in 2000, states:
It seems to me that unless it is proven that neonicotinoids do not impair crucial grooming behaviour in honey bees and non-target insects, then this is further justification for a precautionary suspension.
It has also been demonstrated that the interaction between the microsporidia Nosema and a neonicotinoid (imidacloprid), significantly weakened honey bees.
This study by Alaux et al was published in Environmental Microbiology 2009: Interactions between Nosema microspores and a neonicotinoid weaken honeybees (Apis mellifera)
I shared this information with The Independent newspaper (I'm the 'Ms Williams' referred to in the article), and was grateful when they published it.
The Independent newspaper reported that in
response to the question of whether Bayer had tested for the effects of
neonicotinoids on grooming in honey bees, the reply was 'no':
Quote from the newspaper article:
See the article here (please copy and paste the article into a new window):
Meanwhile, what do patents for products containing neonicotinoids tell us? I think this is worth considering, and asking ourselves whether the claims that these chemicals kill nasty pests, but not beneficial/non target insects, is worthy of our confidence.