Honey bee exposure scenarios to selected residues through contaminated beeswax

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145533Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Risk posed by residues in beeswax was assessed based on three exposure scenarios.

  • Maximum concentrations were calculated in order to protect honey bee health.

  • Provisional action limits were proposed for marketed beeswax for beekeeping.

Abstract

Twenty-two pesticides and veterinary drugs of which residues were detected in beeswax in Europe were selected according to different criteria. The risk to honey bee health posed by the presence of these residues in wax was assessed based on three exposure scenarios. The first one corresponds to the exposure of larvae following their close contact with wax constituting the cells in which they develop. The second one corresponds to the exposure of larvae following consumption of the larval food that was contaminated from contact with contaminated wax. The third one corresponds to the exposure of adult honey bees following wax chewing when building cells and based on a theoretical worst-case scenario (= intake of contaminants from wax). Following these three scenarios, maximum concentrations which should not be exceeded in beeswax in order to protect honey bee health were calculated for each selected substance. Based on these values, provisional action limits were proposed. Beeswax exceeding these limits should not be put on the market.

Introduction

Within the colony, wax is secreted by worker honey bees (Apis mellifera) and its production reaches a maximum when they are 10–18 days old (Hepburn et al., 2014). Beeswax is essential to the colony. Within the hive, beeswax is used by worker honey bees to build combs consisting of hexagonal cells that will serve to store food resources, beebread (pollen added with honey, nectar and honey bee secretions) and honey, and to shelter brood (eggs, larvae and pupae of honey bees) during its development.

Beeswax can be contaminated by residues of veterinary drugs applied by beekeepers to treat beehives, notably to control the parasite Varroa destructor (e.g. Bogdanov et al., 1998; Boi et al., 2016; Calatayud-Vernich et al., 2017; Kast et al., 2020; Lozano et al., 2019; Martel et al., 2007; Rosenkranz et al., 2010). Over time, repeated application of varroacides can result in accumulation of residues in beeswax given that they are mostly fat-soluble and non-volatile (Johnson et al., 2010; Lozano et al., 2019; Thompson, 2012; Wallner, 1999). From their environment, honey bees themselves are likely to bring pesticide residues, in particular of plant protection products used in agriculture, back to hives through pollen, nectar, water, honeydew and/or propolis they collect (e.g. Böhme et al., 2018; Calatayud-Vernich et al., 2018; Daniele et al., 2018; Mullin et al., 2010; Piechowicz et al., 2018; Simon-Delso et al., 2014; Tong et al., 2018; Traynor et al., 2016). Within the hive, both types of residues can end up in beeswax of the existing combs (e.g. Chauzat and Faucon, 2007; Herrera López et al., 2016; Ostiguy et al., 2019; Perugini et al., 2018; Ravoet et al., 2015).

Throughout their lives, honey bees can be affected by many stressors, different in nature and origin (ANSES, 2015; Rortais et al., 2017). Next to biotic stressors, and in particular the ectoparasitic V. destructor mite (Boecking and Genersch, 2008), but also Nosema ceranae (Microsporidia) (Higes et al., 2009), viruses (e.g. Black queen cell virus (BQCV) or Deformed wing virus (DWV) (Cornman et al., 2012)), and/or predators (e.g. Asian hornet Vespa velutina (Rortais et al., 2010)), honey bees can also be exposed to abiotic stressors like the residues of a broad range of chemicals that affect the honey bee (colony) health (Johnson et al., 2010; Sánchez-Bayo and Goka, 2014).

This study focuses on the assessment of honey bee health risk posed by the presence of pesticide and veterinary drug residues in beeswax and, to prevent and/or control this potential health risk, aimed to calculate maximum concentrations for several residues following a three-scenario analysis. Beeswax exceeding the provisional action limits based on these maximum concentrations should not be put on the market.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

Wilmart et al. (2016) listed pesticides and veterinary drugs of which residues were detected in beeswax in Europe. This list was then completed with results of more recent studies (Herrera López et al., 2016; Calatayud-Vernich et al., 2017; Daniele et al., 2018; Perugini et al., 2018; Lozano et al., 2019; Shimshoni et al., 2019; El Agrebi et al., 2019, El Agrebi et al., 2020a, El Agrebi et al., 2020b). Table 1 summarizes, for each of these chemical substances, (contact/oral) acute median lethal

Calculation

Honey bee's exposure to each of these twenty-two selected residues through beeswax was then assessed following a three-scenario analysis:

  • -

    Scenario 1 corresponds to the exposure of worker larvae following their close contact with wax constituting the cells in which they develop;

  • -

    Scenario 2 corresponds to the exposure of worker larvae following consumption of the larval food that was contaminated from contact with contaminated wax;

  • -

    Scenario 3 corresponds to the exposure of adult worker honey bees

Results

The maximum concentrations calculated following the three scenarios considered above for the 22 selected active substances are shown in Table 2, Table 3, Table 4 respectively. The maximum concentrations calculated following scenario 1 range from 0.056 mg/kg wax for cyfluthrin to 19218 mg/kg wax for piperonyl butoxide. The maximum concentrations calculated following scenario 2 range from 0.122 mg/kg wax for fipronil to 7534 mg/kg wax for piperonyl butoxide. The maximum concentrations calculated

Discussion

When we compare the proposed provisional action limits (Table 5) to actual residue levels found by El Agrebi et al., 2019, El Agrebi et al., 2020b in beeswax samples from Belgian apiaries (Table 6), we see that most of these limits are met on average. Only for cypermethrin, the mean concentration of 2.34 mg/kg determined in brood comb wax samples (El Agrebi et al., 2020b) exceeds the provisional action limit of 0.150 mg/kg. Compared to other recent European studies (Table 6), the proposed

Conclusions

Twenty-two pesticides and veterinary drugs of which residues were detected in beeswax in Europe have been selected according to different criteria. The risk to honey bee health posed by the presence of these substances in wax was assessed based on three exposure scenarios. Following these scenarios, maximum concentrations which should not be exceeded in beeswax in order to protect honey bee health were calculated for each selected substance. Based on these values, provisional action limits were

Abbreviations

    FASFC

    Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain

    Oral/contact LD50 (median lethal dose)

    is a statistically derived single dose of a substance that can cause death in 50 per cent (50%) of animals when administered by the oral route (OECD, 1998a)/per contact (OECD, 1998b). The LD50 value is expressed in mg of test substance per bee

    PPDB

    Pesticide Properties DataBase (http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/aeru/ppdb/en/index.htm)

    VSDB

    Veterinary Substances DataBase (http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/aeru/vsdb/index.htm)

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Olivier Wilmart: Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Anne Legrève: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation. Marie-Louise Scippo: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation. Wim Reybroeck: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation. Bruno Urbain: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation. Dirk C. de Graaf: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation. Pieter Spanoghe: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation. Philippe Delahaut: Conceptualization, Methodology,

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgment

The authors acknowledge the members of the working group (SciCom, 2018) for their collaboration and of the Scientific Committee of the FASFC for their supervision and validation of the approach on which this study is based.

Funding sources

None.

References (80)

  • H. Rembold et al.

    Biologically active substances in royal jelly

    Vitam. Hormones

    (1966)
  • A. Rortais et al.

    Risk assessment of pesticides and other stressors in bees: principles, data gaps and perspectives from the European Food Safety Authority

    Sci. Total Environ.

    (2017)
  • P. Rosenkranz et al.

    Biology and control of Varroa destructor

    J. Invertebr. Pathol.

    (2010)
  • F. Sánchez-Bayo et al.

    Are bee diseases linked to pesticides? — a brief review

    Environ. Int.

    (2016)
  • J. Shi et al.

    Exposure to acetamiprid influences the development and survival ability of worker bees (Apis mellifera L.) from larvae to adults

    Environ. Pollut.

    (2020)
  • D.A. Tavares et al.

    Exposure of larvae to thiamethoxam affects the survival and physiology of the honey bee at post-embryonic stages

    Environ. Pollut.

    (2017)
  • H.V.V. Tomé et al.

    Frequently encountered pesticides can cause multiple disorders in developing worker honey bees

    Environ. Pollut.

    (2020)
  • Z. Tong et al.

    A survey of multiple pesticide residues in pollen and beebread collected in China

    Sci. Total Environ.

    (2018)
  • Y. Wang et al.

    Interaction patterns and combined toxic effects of acetamiprid in combination with seven pesticides on honey bee (Apis mellifera L.)

    Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf.

    (2020)
  • J.Y. Wu et al.

    Honey bees (Apis mellifera) reared in brood combs containing high levels of pesticide residues exhibit increased susceptibility to Nosema (Microsporidia) infection

    J. Invertebr. Pathol.

    (2012)
  • ANSES

    Co-exposition des abeilles aux facteurs de stress. Avis de l'ANSES. Rapport d'expertise collective. Saisine n° 2012-SA-0176. ANSES (Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l'alimentation, de l'environnement et du travail)

  • P. Aupinel et al.

    Improvement of artificial feeding in a standard in vitro method for rearing Apis mellifera larvae

    Bull. Insectol.

    (2005)
  • D. Babendreier et al.

    Pollen consumption in honey bee larvae: a step forward in the risk assessment of transgenic plants

    Apidologie.

    (2004)
  • D. Bauer et al.

    Hexagonal comb cells of honeybees are not produced via a liquid equilibrium process

    Naturwissenschaften.

    (2013)
  • O. Boecking et al.

    Varroosis – the ongoing crisis in bee keeping

    J. Verbr. Lebensm.

    (2008)
  • S. Bogdanov

    Royal Jelly, Bee Brood: Composition, Health, Medicine: A Review

    (2017)
  • S. Bogdanov et al.

    Acaricide residues in some bee products

    J. Apic. Res.

    (1998)
  • F. Böhme et al.

    Pesticide residue survey of pollen loads collected by honeybees (Apis mellifera) in daily intervals at three agricultural sites in South Germany

    PLoS One

    (2018)
  • M. Boi et al.

    A 10 year survey of acaricide residues in beeswax analysed in Italy

    Pest Manag. Sci.

    (2016)
  • R. Brodschneider et al.

    Nutrition and health in honey bees

    Apidologie.

    (2010)
  • G. Charpentier et al.

    Lethal and sub-lethal effects of thymol on honeybee (Apis mellifera) larvae reared in vitro

    Pest Manag. Sci.

    (2014)
  • M.P. Chauzat et al.

    Pesticide residues in beeswax samples collected from honey bee colonies (Apis mellifera L.) in France

    Pest Manag. Sci.

    (2007)
  • M.-E. Colin et al.

    Evidence of synergy between prochloraz and deltamethrin in Apis mellifera L.: a convenient biological approach

    Pestic. Sci.

    (1992)
  • R.S. Cornman et al.

    Pathogen webs in collapsing honey bee colonies

    PLoS One

    (2012)
  • K. Crailsheim et al.

    Standard methods for artificial rearing of Apis mellifera larvae

    J. Apic. Res.

    (2013)
  • P. Dai et al.

    Acute toxicity of five pesticides to Apis mellifera larvae reared in vitro

    Pest Manag. Sci.

    (2017)
  • P. Dai et al.

    Chronic toxicity of amitraz, coumaphos and fluvalinate to Apis mellifera L. larvae reared in vitro

    Sci. Rep.

    (2018)
  • P. Dai et al.

    Chronic toxicity of clothianidin, imidacloprid, chlorpyrifos, and dimethoate to Apis mellifera L. larvae reared in vitro

    Pest Manag. Sci.

    (2019)
  • G. Daniele et al.

    Exposure assessment of honeybees through study of hive matrices: analysis of selected pesticide residues in honeybees, beebread, and beeswax from French beehives by LC-MS/MS

    Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.

    (2018)
  • EFSA

    Risk assessment of beeswax adulterated with paraffin and/or stearin/stearic acid when used in apiculture and as food (honeycomb)

    EFSA Support. Publ.

    (2020)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text