http://www.cornell.edu/video/?videoID=1685

Well, idagdag ang poncho tabi sa Movento na bilang isa pang Aleman na pananakot sa US National Security (kung mahalaga sa iyo tungkol sa Nations). Ay pagtataksil mag-aplay sa mga kaso ng kawalan ng kabagayan ng EPA? -DNR (ang Salamat Grist! Mahusay na trabaho, Mr Philpott)

ni Tom Philpott

10 Dis 2010 08:36 AM

Higit pa: pag-alaga sa mga pukyutan , bees , Negosyo , mais , EPA , Pagkain , Pulitika , pagkain katotohanan

It's not just the State and Defense departments that are reeling this month from leaked documents. Sundin ang mga honey: paninigarilyo bees ay gumagawa sa kanila mas baliw kapag ilipat mo ang mga ito, ngunit leaked mga EPA dokumento ay maaaring magkaroon ng kabaligtaran epekto Larawan:. Kris Fricke Ito ay hindi lamang ang mga kagawaran ng Estado at Defense na reeling ang buwan na ito mula sa leaked dokumento. Ang kapaligiran Protection Agency ngayon ay ilang mga nagpapaliwanag na gawin, masyadong. Sa lugar ng mga tuso pakikitungo sa mga dayuhang lider, ang kasong ito ay nagsasangkot ang Aleman agrichemical na higanteng Bayer; isang pestisidyo may isang unpronounceable pangalan, clothianidin na; at isang insekto species mahalaga sa produksyon ng pagkain (pati na rin ang isang tagagawa ng pagkain mismo), ang pukyutan. At sa halip ng isang Memo leaked sa isang globetrotting Australya, ito isa sa mga tampok ng isang dokumento na inihatid sa isang mahabang panahon ng Colorado beekeeper.All ng na, kasama ang aking mga paboritong crop sa fixate sa: pang-industriya na mais, na kung saan kumot 88 milyong acres ng bukiran sa buong bansa at gumagawa ng isang kapagbigayan ng protina-mayaman pollen kung saan mga honeybees mahal sa feast.It 'Ang Agency Sino Kicked bahay-pukyutan, tulad ng isinulat ni Jonathan Franzen ! pugad pakikipag-usap

Isang panloob na Memo EPA inilabas Miyerkules Kinukumpirma na ang ahensiya sisingilin sa pagprotekta ng kapaligiran ay hindi papansin ang mga babala ng sarili nitong mga siyentipiko tungkol clothianidin, isang-pestisidyo mula sa kung saan ng Bayer racked up 183,000,000 € (tungkol sa $ 262 milyon) sa mga benta sa 2009.

Clothianidin ay malawak na ginagamit sa mais, ang pinakamalaking crop US, mula noong 2003. Mga supplier nagbebenta ng mga buto pre-ginagamot dito. Tulad ng iba pang mga miyembro ng neonicotinoid pamilya ng mga pesticides, ay makakakuha ng clothianidin "kinuha up sa pamamagitan ng vascular sistema ng halaman at ipinahayag sa pamamagitan ng pollen at nektar," ayon sa pestisidyo Action Network ng North America (PANNA), na leaked ang dokumento kasama Lampas Pesticides. Na epekto ginagawang mataas na nakakalason sa mga pests isang crop - at din mapanganib sa pollen-pag-iimbak honeybees, na naranasan mahiwaga taunang napakalaking mamatay-off (na kilala bilang "isang kawan ng mga ibon pagbagsak disorder") dito sa Estados Unidos ng hindi bababa sa simula 2006.

Ang kolonya-pagbagsak kababalaghan ay kumplikado at hindi pa rin ganap na naiintindihan. Habang naroon ay tila hindi isang dahilan para sa mga taunang mamatay-off, tumataas puntos ebidensiya sa mga pesticides , at partikular neonicotinoids (nagmula mula sa nikotina), bilang isang mahalagang kadahilanan. At mga neonicotinoids ay isang relatibong bagong kadahilanan sa mga ecosystem madalas na binibisita sa pamamagitan ng mga honeybees - nagpasimula sa huli 1990s, ang mga systemic insecticides nagkamit steadily umaangat na bahagi ng buto-market ng paggamot. Hindi ito tila hindi patas na obserbahan na ang kalusugan ng populasyon ng laywan ay steadily tinanggihan sa parehong panahon.

Ayon sa PANNA, ang iba pang crops karaniwang itinuturing na may clothianidin isama canola, toyo, asukal beets, sunflowers, at trigo - lahat kasama ang pinaka-malawak nakatanim crops US. Ang Bayer ngayon petitioning ang ang EPA upang irehistro ito para sa paggamit sa koton at buto ng mustasa.

Ang dokumentong ng [PDF], na na leaked upang Colorado apikultor Tom Theobald, ay nagpapakita na ang EPA siyentipiko ipinahayag mahalagang tinanggihan ang mga natuklasan ng isang pag-aaral na isinasagawa sa ngalan ng Bayer na ang ahensiya ay ginagamit upang pawalang-sala ang registration ng clothianidin. At sila reiterated alalahanin na ang laganap na paggamit ng clothianidin imperils ang kalusugan ng mga honeybees sa bansa.

Sa Huwebes, tinanong ko ng isang tagapagsalita ng EPA pindutin sa pamamagitan ng email kung ang mga siyentipiko 'opinyon ay pukawin ang ahensiya upang alisin clothianidin mula sa merkado. Ang tagapagsalita, na tinanong hindi na pinangalanan ngunit na communicated sa record sa ngalan ng ahensiya, sumagot na clothianidin ay panatilihin ang registration nito at magagamit para sa paggamit sa tagsibol.

Wimpy watchdogging

Bago namin maghukay ng mas malalim sa ang leaked Memo, ito ay mahalaga na maunawaan ang paumanhin kuwento ng kung paano ang isang pamatay-insekto na kilala sa makapinsala ang lukot populasyon ay dumating sa kumot ng isang malaking swath ng US bukiran sa unang lugar. Ito ay halos imposible hindi upang basahin ang mga ito bilang isang kuwento ng isang pangunahing pampublikong asong tagapagbantay sa halip ng pagtagilid upang ang industriya na ito ay dapat na umayos.

Sa ang EPA ng pakikitungo sa Bayer sa ito partikular na pamatay-insekto, ang ahensiya sisingilin sa pagprotekta ng kapaligiran ay patuloy na ginawa industriya-friendly na desisyon na barahin ang konklusyon ng kanyang sariling siyentipiko - at takutin upang gawin dakila pinsala sa aming pagkain sistema sa pamamagitan ng wiping out nito key pollinators .

Ayon sa isang linya ng oras na ibinigay sa pamamagitan ng PANNA, ang sakim na kuwento ay nagsisimula kapag Bayer unang inilapat para sa rehistrasyon ng clothianidin noong 2003. (Ang lahat ng mga dokumento kung saan link ko sa ibaba ay ibinigay sa akin ng PANNA.) Sa pamamagitan ng 2003, ang US beekeepers ay pag-uulat ng mga paghihirap sa pagsunod sa pantal malusog na sa pamamagitan ng taglamig, ngunit hindi pa sa sukat ng isang kawan ng mga ibon pagbagsak disorder. Noong Pebrero ng taong ito, ang kapaligiran kapalaran ang EPA at Effects Division (EFED) na ay withheld registration ng clothianidin, deklarasyon na gusto higit pa na katibayan na hindi ito makapinsala sa populasyon abeha.

Sa isang Memo [PDF], isang EFAD na siyentipiko ay ipinaliwanag ang desisyon:

Ang posibilidad ng ng nakakalason exposure sa pollinators nontarget [hal, honeybees] sa pamamagitan ng translocation ng clothianidin residues na resulta mula sa paggamot ng buto (mais at canola) ay sinenyasan EFED na nangangailangan ng patlang ng pagsubok na maaaring suriin ang mga posibleng talamak na pagkakalantad sa pukyutan larvae at ang reyna. Upang ganap na suriin ang posibilidad ng ito nakakalason epekto, ang isang kumpletong abeha manggagawa buhay cycle pag-aaral (tungkol sa 63 araw) ay dapat isagawa, pati na rin bilang isang pagsusuri ng pagkakalantad sa reyna.

Kaya, walang nagbebenta clothianidin hanggang isang malapit na, ekspertong pagsusuri ng kung paano pollen na infused sa ito ay makakaapekto sa mga manggagawa bees at ang kanyang kamahalan ang reyna.

Muli, na noong Pebrero ng 2003. Ngunit sa buwan ng Abril ng taong iyon, ang dalawang buwan lamang mamaya, ang ahensiya backtracked. "Pagkatapos karagdagang pagsasaalang-alang," ang ahensiya ay nagsulat sa ibang Memo , ang EPA ay nagpasya na magbigay ng clothianidin "kondisyon registration" - ibig sabihin na Bayer ay libre upang magbenta ng ito, at kalahati ng processors ay libreng mag-aplay ang mga ito sa kanilang mga produkto. (Huwag makakuha ako nagsimula sa ang EPA ugali ng pagbibigay tuso kemikal "kondisyon registration," bago na nagpapahintulot sa kanilang mga unregulated paggamit para sa mga taon at kahit na dekada. Iyan ay isa pang kuwento.)

Sa isang kondisyon ng EPA masasalamin ang mga alalahanin ng kanyang mga siyentipiko tungkol sa kung paano ito makakaapekto sa honeybees: na Bayer makumpleto ang "talamak cycle sa buhay pag-aaral" ang ahensiya ay na hiniling sa pamamagitan ng Disyembre ng 2004. Ang mga siyentipiko tinadtad ng walang mga salita sa reiterating ang kanilang mga alalahanin. Sila ay tinatawag na clothianidin ng epekto "persistent" at "nakakalason sa honeybees" at nabanggit ang "potensyal na para sa expression sa pollen at nektar ng mga crops ng pamumulaklak."

Mga alalahanin sa tabi at "kondisyon registration" sa kamay, Bayer ipinakilala clothianidin sa ang US merkado sa tagsibol 2003. Magsasaka sa buong sinturon mais nakatanim mga buto itinuturing na may clothianidin, at bilyun-bilyong - kung hindi trillions - ng halaman ay nagsimulang paggawa pollen mayaman ang abeha-pagpatay bagay-bagay.

In March of 2004, Bayer requested an extension on its December deadline for delivering the life-cycle study. Abeha A ay ang kung ano ang pinakamahusay na - thankfully, hindi sa isang patlang ng mais Larawan: Purplekey Sa Marso ng 2004, Bayer hiniling ng isang extension sa Disyembre deadline para sa paghahatid ng buhay-cycle na pag-aaral. Sa isang Marso 11 Memo [PDF], ang EPA sumang-ayon, na nagbibigay ng kemikal higanteng hanggang Mayo 2005 upang makumpleto ang pananaliksik. Clothianidin patuloy umaagos mula sa mga pabrika ng Bayer ng at mula sa mais halaman sa pollen.

Ngunit ang EPA rin relayed ng isang mahalagang desisyon sa Memo: ipinagkaloob Bayer ang pahintulot na ito ay hinahangad upang magsagawa ng pag-aaral sa canola sa Canada, sa halip na sa kalyo sa Estados Unidos. Ang EPA justified ang desisyon bilang mga sumusunod:

[Canola] ay kaakit-akit sa abeha [tama] at magbibigay ang abeha exposure mula sa parehong pollen at nektar. Isang alternatibong crop, tulad ng mais, na kung saan ay mas kaakit-akit sa mga bees bilang isang i-crop ang manguha ng pagkain, ay magbigay ng exposure mula sa pollen, lamang.

Mga abeha eksperto sipiin tatlong problema sa desisyon na ito:

1. Papkorn gumagawa ng mas pollen kaysa ay canola;
2. ang pollen nito ay mas kaakit-akit sa mga bees honey; at
3. canola ay isang menor de edad na crop sa Estados Unidos, habang ang mais ay ang nag-iisang pinaka-malawak nakatanim crop.

Ano ang nangyari susunod ay ... hindi magkano. Bayer hayaan ang deadline para sa pagkumpleto sa pagdaan ng panahon ng pag-aaral; at ang EPA natin Bayer panatilihing ang pagbebenta clothianidin, na patuloy na deposited sa sampu-sampung milyon-milyong mga acres ng bukiran.

Hindi hanggang Agosto ng 2007, higit sa isang taon matapos ang deadline, ay Bayer maghatid ng kanyang pag-aaral. Sa isang Nobyembre 2007 Memo [PDF], EPA siyentipiko ipinahayag ang pag-aaral "scientifically sound," pagdagdag na ito, "satisfies sa mga iniaatas ng patnubay para sa mga patlang ng isang pagsubok ng toxicity sa honeybees."

Beeing at kawalang-halaga

Kaya kung ano ang mga detalye ng pag-aaral na, na kung saan ang kalusugan ng aming mga kaibigan ng kaunti pollinator depended?

Well, ang EPA una tumanggi upang palabasin ito sa publiko, pagdikta ng Freedom ng Impormasyon Act sa pamamagitan ng Natural Resources Defense Konseho. Kapag ang EPA pa rin tumangging upang palabasin ito, NRDC file suit sa tugon. Sa kalaunan, ang pag-aaral ay inilabas. Dito ito ay [PDF].

Handa para sa Bayer sa pamamagitan ng mga mananaliksik sa Canada sa University ng Guelph, ang pag-aaral ay isang bit ng isang sisti. Ang mga mananaliksik nilikha ilang 2.47-acre patlang na nakatanim sa clothianidin-itinuturing na mga buto at pagtutugma ng mga untreated control patlang, at inilagay ang mga pantal sa gitna ng bawat. Bees ay pinapayagang maggala malayang. Ang problema ay na bees manguha ng pagkain sa isang hanay ng mga 1.24-6.2 milya-kahulugan na ang mga pagsubok bees malamang-dined labas ng ang mga patlang ng pagsubok. Mas masahol pa, sa pagsubok at kontrol ng mga patlang ay nakatanim bilang malapit na bilang 968 piye hiwalay, ibig sabihin pagsubok at control bees ay may access sa bawat isa sa mga patlang.

Hindi nakakagulat, ang mga mananaliksik natagpuan "walang pagkakaiba sa mga ang abeha dami ng namamatay, kahabaan ng buhay ng manggagawa, o dibdibin unlad ang naganap sa pagitan ng control at paggamot group sa buong ang pag-aaral."

Sa Tom Theobald, ang Colorado apikultor na nakuha ang leaked Memo, tasahin ang pag-aaral sa malupit sa telepono sa akin Huwebes. "Isipin ikaw ay isang rantsero na sinusubukan upang malaman kung ang isang nakakalason na matanggal ay harming iyong cows," siya sinabi. "Kung ikaw planta ng magbunot ng damo sa dalawang acres at hayaan ang iyong mga mga cows paglagbay libreng sa higit sa 50 acres ng malabay Montana damo, hindi ka pagpunta upang malaman magkano ang tungkol sa na magbunot ng damo."

James Frazier, propesor ng aral ukol sa insekto sa Penn Estado, concurred. Frazier ay pag-aaral ng kolonya-pagbagsak disorder dahil 2006. "Kapag ako ay tumingin sa ang pag-aaral," siya sinabi sa akin sa isang pakikipanayam sa telepono, "naisip ko agad na ito ay hindi wasto."

Samantala, patuloy Bayer pagbebenta clothianidin sa ilalim nito kondisyon registration. Pagkatapos, sa Abril 22 ng taong ito, ang EPA sa wakas natapos na mahabang panahon clothianidin ng "kondisyon" purgatoryo - sa pamamagitan ng pagbibigay sa buong registration.

Ahensiya matalas ang abeha-pagpatay pestisidyo sa kanyang bagong katayuan tahimik; sa aking kaalaman, ang mga lamang pampublikong pagkilala sa mga ito ay dumating sa pamamagitan ng pagsisikap ng Theobald, na ay lubhang nag-aalala tungkol sa ang kapalaran ng kanyang sariling abeha-iingat negosyo sa mais bansa Colorado ay. Theobald forward sa akin ng isang email Nob 29 palitan sa Meredith Batas, ang kumikilos chief ng dibisyon ng pamatay halaman ang EPA sa Tanggapan ng mga Programa ng pestisidyo, sino ang gusto niya nakasulat upang magtanong tungkol sa pagpaparehistro katayuan clothianidin. Batas 'tugon ay nagkakahalaga ng quoting sa kabuuan nito:

Clothianidin ay nabigyan ng isang ganap na pagpaparehistro para sa paggamit bilang isang binhi na paggamot para sa mais at canola sa Abril 22, 2010. EPA ay bibigyan ng bagong paunawa ng registration, [ngunit] walang dokumento na Kinikilala ang pagbabago mula sa kondisyon na walang pasubali. Ito ay isang panganib na desisyon ng pamamahala batay sa katuparan ng mga data ng mga pangangailangan at mga review ng pagtanggap o tinatanggap ang submittal ng data.

Kaya, ang EPA ay nagbigay ng Bayer at ang kahina-hinala na pestisidyo ng isang buong pass nang walang kahit Iniistorbo upang hayaan ang pampublikong alam.

Lamang abeha napaka-ingat, mangyaring

Ngayon kami makakuha sa ang leaked Memo [PDF]. Ito ay may petsang Nob 2 - tatlong linggo bago ang Batas 'reply sa Theobald. Ito ay may kaugnayan sa Bayer ng pagsisikap upang palawakin ang ang naaprubahan paggamit clothianidin sa koton at mustasa. Authored sa pamamagitan ng dalawang mga siyentipiko sa kapaligiran kapalaran ang EPA at Effects Division - eksperto sa ekolohiya Joseph magsala at botika Michael Barrett - Memo ang nagpapahayag ng libingan alalahanin tungkol sa epekto ng clothianidin sa honeybees:

Ay ang mga pangunahing panganib Clothianidin ng alalahanin sa mga insekto nontarget (iyon ay, honey bees).

Clothianidin ay isang neonicotinoid na pamatay-insekto na parehong persistent at systemic. Matinding pag-aaral ng toxicity sa bees honey ipakita na clothianidin ay lubos na nakakalason sa parehong isang contact at isang bibig na batayan. Kahit EFED ay hindi magsagawa ng ... mga pagtasa ng panganib sa mga di-target ng mga insekto, impormasyon mula sa mga karaniwang mga pagsusulit at mga patlang ng pag-aaral, pati na rin insidente ulat na kinasasangkutan ng iba pang mga insecticides neonicotinoids (eg, imidacloprid) Iminumungkahi ang mga potensyal na para sa pangmatagalang nakakalason panganib sa honey bees at iba pang mga kapaki-pakinabang insekto.

Ang tunay na kabayong naninipa ay na ang mga mananaliksik sa mahalagang ay invalidated Bayer-pinondohan ng pag-aaral - ie, ang pag-aaral kung saan ang EPA based clothianidin ng rehistrasyon bilang isang ganap na nakarehistro na kemikal. Nagre-refer sa pestisidyo, ang mga may-akda sumulat:

Ang isang nakaraang pag-aaral ng patlang [ie, ang pag-aaral ng Bayer] sinisiyasat ang mga epekto ng clothianidin sa buong mga parameter ng ​​pugad at ay nauuri bilang katanggap-tanggap. Gayunpaman, pagkatapos ng isa pang pagsusuri ng mga patlang na ito ng pag-aaral sa liwanag ng karagdagang impormasyon, deficiencies ay nakilala na render ang pag-aaral pandagdag. hindi ito masiyahan ang guideline 850.3040, at isa pang pag-aaral ng patlang ay kinakailangan upang suriin ang mga epekto ng clothianidin sa bees pamamagitan nahawahan pollen at nektar. ng Exposure pamamagitan nahawahan pollen at nektar at mga potensyal na nakakalason epekto samakatuwid mananatiling isang walang katiyakan para sa mga pollinators. [diin minahan.]

Kaya, dito kami ay may mga mananaliksik EPA na tahasang invalidating ang pag-aaral na kung saan clothianidin nakakuha ng registration para sa mais. Ngunit bilang sinulat ko sa itaas, sa kabila na ginawa publiko ang impormasyon na ito, ang EPA ay signaled na ito ay walang mga plano upang baguhin ang katayuan ng kemikal.

Sa ang 2011 lumalago panahon, ang mga sampu-sampung milyon-milyong mga acres ng bukiran ay mamukadkad sa pollen clothianidin-laced - honeybees, at tunog ng agham, ay sinumpa.

Ngayon, sa aking sulat sa EPA, ang ahensiya ay tinanggihan na ang downgrading ng Bayer ang pag-aaral mula sa "katanggap-tanggap" sa "suplemento" ay ibig sabihin na ang ahensiya ay dapat napilitang clothianidin ng pag-apruba. Sa isang Huwebes email sa akin, ang ahensiya ay inihatid ng isang malata pagtatanggol ng Bayer ang pag-aaral, contradicting ang sarili nitong mga siyentipiko at Pagtugon sa wala ng critiques sa mga ito:

EPA sa pagsusuri ng pag-aaral na ang tinutukoy na ito ay naglalaman ng impormasyon na kapaki-pakinabang sa panganib pagtatasa ng ahensiya. Ang pag-aaral ang nagsiwalat ng karamihan ng mga pantal sinusubaybayan, kabilang ang mga na nailantad upang clothianidin sa panahon ng nakaraang panahon, survived ang over-namamahinga na panahon.

At ito ay downplayed kahalagahan ang pag-aaral sa Bayer ng application para magparehistro clothianidin: Ang pag-aaral sa tanong ay "hindi isang 'core' na pag-aaral para sa EPA bilang inaangkin," ang ahensiya insisted. "Ito ay hindi isang pag-aaral na regular na kinakailangan upang suportahan ang registration ng isang pestisidyo."

Tumakbo ko na tugon sa pamamagitan ng Jay Feldman ng Lampas Pesticides, ang grupo na collaborated sa PANNA sa publish ang leaked dokumento. "Mahanap ko ang EPA tugon alinman na misinformed o nakaliligaw na," Sinabi niya sa akin. "Ang bulaos ng papel na ito ay malinaw. Kami ay pakikipag-usap tungkol sa isang masamang pag-aaral na kinakailangan ng EPA [na gitnang] para sa pagpaparehistro ng mga kemikal na ito. "

Feldman ng pagtatasa ay lilitaw upang patunayan. Itinuturo niya sa akin pabalik sa sa itaas-linked na dokumento Nob 27 kung saan EPA orihinal na tinanggap ang Bayer pag-aaral. Doon, sa pahina 5, nakita namin ang pahayag:

Partikular, ang pagsubok ay isinasagawa sa tugon sa isang kahilingan sa pamamagitan ng sa Canadian PMRA ng [Pesticides at Peste Management Agency] at ang US EPA; bilang isang kondisyon para sa poncho @ ang [clothianidin] rehistro sa mga bansang ito, Ang Bayer CropScience ay tatanungin upang siyasatin ang pang- matagalang toxicity ng clothianidin-ginagamot ay canola sa paghahanap bees honey.

Kaya talaga, ang discredited Bayer pag-aaral ay kasinungalingan sa puso ng clothianidin ng pagtanggap. (Ako humiling ng isang pakikipanayam sa isang EPA opisyal na maaaring makipag-usap sa knowledgeably at sa rekord tungkol sa mga bagay, ang anonymous-by-kahilingan na tagapagsalita ay, sa oras ng publikasyon, pa rin naghahanap para sa "tamang tao," ay alam ko sa pamamagitan ng email.)

Isang nakatutuya pagtatasa

Sa pinakadulo kahit, mayroon kaming sapat na katibayan na ang EPA ay hindi papansin ang mga babala ng sarili nitong mga siyentipiko sa mga kawani at berdeng-lighting ang masa sa pagpa-andar ng isang malawak na nauunawaan ang kemikal upang makapinsala sa pollinators - sa isang oras kapag ang mga honeybees ay sa libingan hugis.

Ngunit bakit? Sa Tom Theobald, ang Colorado apikultor na sinira ang kuwentong ito, ventured ng isang sagot. "Ito ay corporatism, tingnan ang bahagi ng pasismo," siya sinabi. "Hindi ako laban sa korporasyon, tingin ko sila ng isang magandang modelo. Ngunit ang mga ito tulad ng mga bata - kami ay may upang bigyang-laya ang mga ito sa o makakuha sila ng mga kamay. Ang EPA ay dapat na gawin na. "

Kapag ang rehimen pagbabago dumating sa Washington sa 2008, marami sa atin na inaasahan na ang isang EPA sa ilalim ng Barack Obama ay maging isang mas mahusay na magulang. EPA Director Lisa Jackson minana pa ng gulo mula sa kanyang hinalinhan, at mukha niya ang napakabigat na hamon ng mga ipinaguutos greenhouse gases laban sa mabangis republikano at pagsalungat sa industriya.

Ngunit bilang mounts ng alalahanin - mula sa kanyang sariling mga kawani at sa ibang lugar - na clothianidin ay harming honeybees, walang dahilan para sa Jackson ng ahensiya upang mapanatili ang coddling Bayer. Frazier, ang mag-aaral ng insekto Penn Estado, ilagay ito sa akin tulad nito: ". Kung ang Bayer pag-aaral ay ang pangunahing pag-aaral ang EPA ginamit upang magrehistro clothianidin, pagkatapos ay doon ay walang batayan para sa pagrerehistro ito" Siya urged ang EPA upang bawiin rehistrasyon upang maiwasan ang mga hindi kailangang panganib sa isang kritikal na player sa aming mga ecosystem - tulad ng mayroon ang mga pamahalaan ng Alemanya, Pransya, Italya, at Slovenia.

New technology finds pathogens that may reconcile contradictory claims on Colony Collapse Disorder

by JAMES FISCHER

James Fischer ( james.fischer@gmail.com ) for
“The American Bee Journal ” ( http://www.american beejournal.com )
(Embargoed by the journal PLoS ONE until 10/06/2010 5pm EDT)

A multi-institutional team of researchers sifted through the ever-growing zoo of new invasive, exotic pathogens of bees, and consistently found the same two disease organisms in beehives suffering from Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) in samples collected from 2006 to 2009.

They discovered a new virus never seen before in North America, and found a well-known invasive variant of the intestinal bee disease Nosema. The overlooked virus may explain why prior studies presented mutually contradictory findings. This new evidence could create a basis for consensus among research teams who to date, lacked common ground in their conclusions.

Their paper appeared only minutes ago in the journal PLoS ONE ( http://dx.plos.org /10.1371/journal.pone.0013181 )

Ang papel na ang mga ulat sa isang multi-taon na pag-aaral ng Colony I-collapse disorder. Mga mananaliksik ginamit bagong teknolohiya at pamamaraan upang makita at unambiguously na makilala ang bawat pathogen sa collapsing ng mga pantal ng abeha, sa halip kaysa sa mas maliit na subset ng mga posibleng mga pathogens detectable sa pamamagitan ng iba pang paraan.

Isang Invertebrate Iridescent Virus ("IIV"), bagong-found sa North America, sa kumbinasyon na may Nosema ceranae, na dumating mula sa ibang bansa mas kamakailan-lamang, ay matatagpuan sa "halos lahat ng mga bees mula sa CCD colonies" sample mula sa malawak dispersed mga pantal USA mula sa 2006 sa pamamagitan ng 2009.

IIV ay hindi natagpuan sa mga bees mula sa mga pakete na-import mula sa Australia o sa mga bees mula sa isang ilang mga di-lipat na komersyal na operasyon ng pukyutan sa Montana, parehong site nakumpirma na libre ng mga CCD-tulad ng mga sintomas.

Bilang karagdagan, ang mga mananaliksik "sinusunod ang pagpapatuloy ng CCD sa isang collapsing kolonya ... pagkuha ng sample na abeha ... sa paglipas ng tatlong buwan na panahon, nagtatapos kapag lamang ng isang reyna at apat na manggagawa nanatili."

Karagdagang pa rin, ilang bees ay inoculated na may Nosema ceranae, habang ang iba pang mga bees ay inoculated sa ang "IIV ang-6" pilay ng virus IIV. Kanilang pagkakamatay ay pagkatapos kumpara sa mga bees inoculated sa parehong mga pathogens, at isang control group ibinigay placebo. Ang mga resulta "Matindi ang iminumungkahi na ang mga kumbinasyon ng mga ng N. ceranae at IIV ay kaugnay na may mas mataas na dami ng namamatay sa pukyutan."

Pa kahit karagdagang, ang pagsisikap na ang natuklasan ng dalawang karagdagang mga nagsasalakay kakaiba virus abeha hindi kailanman bago nakita sa North America, ngunit tinutukoy na hindi sila ay kasangkot sa CCD. Ang virus na natagpuan ay "ng Varroa Destructor-1 Virus" at "Kakugo Virus", parehong katutubong sa Asya.

Dr. Ng Jerry Bromenshenk ng U Montana nakabalangkas ang mga susunod na mga hakbang, "Mayroon kaming isang panukala na nakabinbin upang ihiwalay, makilala, at pagkatapos ay magbakuna ng mga bees sa mga tiyak na iridescent virus na nangyayari sa USA bees. Ito ay isang kritikal na hakbang, dahil ang virus ay hindi lilitaw upang maging anumang ng mga kilala sa mundo iridescent virus. Kapag kami ay may ang aktwal virus, maaari naming kumpletuhin ang mga pagsubok pagbabakuna na kinakailangan upang subukan kung tunay na namin natagpuan ang dahilan ng CCD. "

Proteomics - Ang isang maikling Buod
Ang teknolohiya na ginagamit sa pag-aaral na ito ay tila mainam para sa Pagtugon ng kailanman-lumalago listahan ng mga pathogens na isinasagawa sa kabuuan ng mga karagatan ng globalization ng kalakalan. Maaari itong makita ang mga mga pathogens sakit na kailangan hindi katulad sa anumang kilala pathogen. Na ito ay naglalarawan ng mga pangangailangan ng mga beekeepers malinaw, na ibinigay na ang bilang ng mga invasives na nagmula sa mameste ng mga bees sa pulot sa USA dahil ang unang bahagi ng 1980s.

"Mass Spectrometry-Mga Batay Proteomics" (MSP) ay nagsisimula sa 60 bees tossed sa isang blender, at halo-halong hanggang homogenous, pagkatapos ng filter. Ang mga cell ay sumambulat chemically, at proteins ay ilang mula sa Halo at "digested", paglabag sa kanila pababa sa peptides. Ang resultang na peptides ay tatakbo sa pamamagitan ng isang aparato na tinatawag na isang "ng Liquid Chromatograph" upang paghiwalayin ang mga ito sa pamamagitan ng density, na nagpapahintulot sa kanilang mga istraktura at sequence na tinutukoy sa pamamagitan ng isa pang hanay ng mga aparato, "magkasunod Mga Mass Spectrometers".

Bawat peptide sequence ay pagkatapos kumpara sa NIH ng National Center para sa Biotechnology (NCBI) database ng mga peptide sequences. Ang database na ginamit ay isang koleksyon ng mga peptides na natatangi sa mga partikular na organismo. Ito ay nangangahulugan na ang bawat tugma ng isang peptide sequence ay isang natatanging tugma sa isang solong organismo. Anumang peptide na ginamit sa higit sa isang organismo ay hindi magiging sa database.

Dr Charles mitsa ng US Army Edgewood kimikal Biyolohikal Center ipinaliwanag ang antas ng katiyakan kung saan ang virus ay natagpuan sa mga colonies nagpapakita ng mga sintomas ng CCD: "IIV ay may 18,900 mga natatanging peptides ... Kapag namin makita ang isang ilang sa mga ito, sabihin ang 50-100, kami walang sapat na katibayan para sa isang hindi malabo pagkakakilanlan. "

Ngunit kung paano sila gumawa ng kung ano ang Dr. Mitsa tinatawag na isang "hindi malabo pagkakakilanlan" ng isang virus na ay sinabi sa pamamagitan ng ang Dr Bromenshenk upang hindi maging "anumang ng mga kilala sa mundo iridescent virus"? Paano sinuman mahanap kung ano ang kailanman kahit nakita o nakilala bago ? Ang sagot ay na ang mga hindi kilalang organismo ay tumutugma sa pinakamalapit na organismo sa database, na kung saan Makipot ng mga bagay sa hindi bababa sa ang "pamilya" o "genus" na antas, kung hindi "species". Kaya, kahit na walang na sequenced ang partikular na pilay ng IIV ng interes, sapat na peptides tumugma sa IIV na pilay sa database upang kumpirmahin na kung ano ay natagpuan ay isang pilay ng IIV.

Bilang isang halimbawa ng malawak na net kast sa pamamagitan ng pamamaraan na ito, Nosema ay hindi mahusay na kinakatawan sa database NCBI, kaya nagkaroon ng kalabuan ang ilang sa pagkakakilanlan ng ang Nosema sa pamamagitan ng proteomics nag-iisa, na tumutugma ang genus Nosema na lamang. Ang species at pilay ay nakumpirma bilang Nosema ceranae gamit ang Chain reaksyon Polymerase (PCR) na mga pamamaraan.

Ang mga paghahabol Sa Espanya Maaari pangunahing Be Ipinaliwanag
Pananaliksik na humantong sa pamamagitan ng sa Mariano Higes ng ng abeha patolohiya Laboratory, ng Centro Apícola Regional sa Marchamalo, Espanya ay paulit-ulit na itinuturo sa Nosema ceranae bilang ang tanging malapit na dahilan ng mabilis na pagbagsak ng kolonya. Ito tila malamang na hindi sa mga mananaliksik sa ang USA at sa ibang lugar, tulad ng Nosema ay hindi lumitaw na maging lason sa labas ng Espanya. Ngunit ang bagong trabaho ay nagbibigay ng isang paliwanag na maaaring suportahan ang mga Higes ng trabaho na may wala nang higit pa kaysa ang karagdagan ng bagong-nakita IIV.

Tulad ng sa nakaraang mga pag-aaral ng US, walang isa sa Espanya ay may dahilan upang maghinala na ang isang DNA virus tulad IIV ay kasangkot, tulad ng karamihan ng mga virus ng abeha RNA virus. Kaya na sila pa upang tumingin para sa IIV sa Espanya, at hindi sila nagkaroon ng mas malawak na net ng MSP upang makita kung ano ay hindi na hinahangad. Ang magandang balita ay na Ang Dr Higes ay may kasaysayan halimbawa frozen. Dr Jerry Bromenshenk ulat na ang Higes koponan ay handa na umaakit sa isang pinagsamang pagsisikap sa screen ang mga Espanyol na halimbawa gamit MSP.

Ba ito Ipaliwanag CCD sa USA?
Ang mga halimbawa na nasuri sa pag-aaral na ito ay nagpakita ng isang malawak na hanay ng mga pathogens, sa kabilang Nosema, Invertebrate Iridescent Virus ("IIV"), Black Queen Cell Virus, ang matalas abeha paralisis Virus, ng Israeli matalas paralisis Virus, ang Deformed Wing Virus, ang bulsa humalimhim Virus, Kashmir pukyutan virus, Varroa Destructor-1 Virus, at Kakugo Virus. Wala ng mga pinaghihinalaan mga pathogens na pinangalanang sa pamamagitan ng iba pang mga pagsisikap ng pananaliksik ay nasagot, dalawang bago at nobelang pathogens ay natagpuan, at ang paggamit ng MSP nagpapahiwatig na walang mga pathogens ay overlooked. Kahit isang bagong, hindi alam, at walang pangalan pathogen ay nagresulta sa isang bahagyang pagtutugma ng peptide sa ilang iba pang mga bagay sa buhay.

Kaya, habang ang bilang o halo ng mga pathogens ay maaaring skewed sa pamamagitan ng isang sapat na bilang ng mga halimbawa, o pagkolekta ng mga halimbawa mula sa isang sapat na bilang ng mga operasyon, ito ay mahirap na isipin na may mga karagdagang mga pathogens pa ay matatagpuan na maaaring implicated sa CCD .

Buway Tungkol Biosecurity
Dahil ang 1980s, ang "Globalization" ay ay increasingly binubuo ng mga shipments ng mga kalakal mula sa mga Asyano na ports sa Western Shores. Ang pananaliksik na ito-uugnay sa mga ang tuldok sa pamamagitan ng patuloy na paghahanap ng mga tiyak na mga pathogens abeha katutubong sa Asya, hindi kilalang sa USA beekeepers sa unang bahagi ng 1980s, ngunit na dahil maging malayo masyadong pamilyar:

"Alam namin na sa Asian abeha honey, sa API ceranae, ng isang kumbinasyon ng mga parasites at pathogens co-umiiral na, kabilang ang: (1) Nosema ceranae, (2) isang iridescent virus, (3) parasitiko at mapanlupig mites, at (4) dalawang iba pang mga RNA-uri ng mga virus, ng Kashmir pukyot virus at virus ng Sacbrood. Kami ay nagkaroon ang parehong ng Kashmir pukyot virus at Nosema ceranae sa North America balik ng isang dekada o higit pa. Kailangan namin upang makita kung gaano magkakatulad ang CCD pilay ng iridescent virus ay sa IIV-24 pilay mula sa API ceranae. Ito ay posible na US bees ay nakuha IIV mula sa API ceranae kasama sa Nosema ceranae at Kashmir abeha virus. "

Habang unsubstantiated "palawit" paliwanag para sa CCD makapal, hanggang mula sa mga cell phone sa pesticides sa mga GMO na crops, ang mga karaniwang kadahilanan na mga pathogens dati natagpuan lamang sa Asya kumalat sa bansa kulang epektibong biosecurity, tulad ng sa Estados Unidos, ngunit hindi sa mga bansa na may higit matatag na approach sa biosecurity, tulad ng New Zealand. Ang koponan ng pananaliksik ay nagmumungkahi "Standard mga kuwarentenas kasanayan tulad ng pagsubok ng mga bees-import na bago sila ay idinagdag sa mga colonies, at pagdidisimpekta ng kagamitan ay malamang makatulong."

Mga praktikal implikasyon Para sa Beekeepers
Ang koponan ay may dalawang mga mungkahi ng interes sa beekeepers:

1. "Karamihan IIVs na magtiklop sa tungkol sa 21 C (70 F) at hindi magtiklop sa itaas 30-32 C (86 - 89 F). Mas mataas na temperatura ay maaaring pigilan ang mga virus sa pamamagitan ng pagtigil-tigil pagtitiklop, samantalang ang cool na panahon at mga mamasa-masa na kondisyon ay maaaring pabilisin ang pagtitiklop ng parehong IIV at Nosema. Maraming mga kaso ng CCD ay naganap pagsunod sa pinalawig na tagal ng cool na, mamasa-masa na panahon. Ang ilang mga beekeepers ay iniulat sa amin na mayroon silang higit pang mga problema sa mga bees sa mga lugar na may madalas fog o sa lugar ng burol na kung saan ang panahon ay palamigan. Paglalagay ng bees sa mainit-init, maaraw na mga lokasyon ay lilitaw upang makatulong. "
2. "Varroa maaaring kumilos bilang isang vector para sa pagpapakalat ng IIV sa mga pukyutan colonies. Varroa ay kilala upang madagdagan ang mga pinsala na dulot ng iba pang mga virus, at mga beekeepers sino ang hindi upang kontrolin ang varroa antas ay malamang na sang-ayunan ng mataas na pagkalugi ng kolonya. "

Ito ay maaaring hindi tunog tulad ng magkano, ngunit ito ay isang malawak na pagpapabuti sa dati malabo platitudes na namin na-kamay sa ibabaw at tungkol sa "pagpapanatili ng malakas na mga colonies" at "minimizing diin". Ito rin ups ang Ante sa edad-lumang debate sa beekeepers sa paglalagay ng mga pantal sa araw kumpara sa paglalagay ng mga pantal sa lilim.

Ang "Iridovirus at Microsporidian Linked sa Ang Honey Tanggihan pukyot Colony"
Jerry sa J. Bromenshenk, ng Colin B. Henderson, Charles H. mitsa, Michael F. Stanford, Alan W. Zulich, ang Rabih E. Jabbour, Samir V. Deshpande, Patrick E. McCubbin, Robert A. Seccomb, Phillip M. Welch, Trevor Williams, David R. Firth, ang Evan Skowronski, Margaret M. Lehmann, ang Shan L. Bilimoria, ang Joanna Gress, Kevin W. Wanner, Robert A. Cramer Jr

(2010) PLoS ISANG 5 (10): e13181. Doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013181

Jim Fischer ay nagpapanatili ng mga bees sa Manhattan, Brooklyn, at ang Bronx, at pag-asa na itaas ang queens sa Queens. Siya nagtuturo ang libreng 16-linggo full-semestro urban pag-alaga sa mga pukyutan klase sa Central Park sa New York para sa 846-miyembro ng non-profit Group nyc pag-alaga sa mga pukyutan ( http://meetup.com/nyc-beekeeping ) at tumutulong patakbuhin ang Honey Gotham City Co -op ( http://GothamCityBees.com ).

Higit pang mga katibayan. Ako masaya na dakilain ang mga artikulo na ito sa mas mataas na mambabasa. -DNR

http://environmentalresearchweb.org/cws/article/news/43568

Aug 27, 2010

Pamatay-kulisap implicated sa abeha pagtanggi
Honeybees, mga bumblebees at maraming iba pang mga insekto ay dahan-dahan poisoned sa kamatayan sa pamamagitan ng mga persistent insecticides na ginagamit upang protektahan ang agrikultura crops. Maliit na doses ng nakakalason kemikal maipon sa paglipas ng oras, ibig sabihin na walang ligtas na antas ng exposure. Iyan ang konklusyon mula sa kamakailang pananaliksik naghahanap sa pang-matagalang epekto ng isang karaniwang ginagamit na klase ng insecticides.

Bilang sila buzz mula sa bulaklak na bulaklak, ang mga bees, moths at hoverflies na dalhin ang isang mahalagang trabaho. Sa paligid ng isa ikatlo ng agrikultura crops pollinated sa pamamagitan ng mga abala na mga insekto, isang serbisyo na ay nagkakahalaga ng £ 440 nanay taon na ang ekonomiya ng United Kingdom nag-iisa.

Ngunit sa mga nakaraang taon ang mga mahalagang pollinators ay struggling, na may populasyon plummeting sa buong mundo. Honeybees sa partikular ay naghihirap, na may isang kawan ng mga ibon pagbagsak disorder (CCD) - isang palatandaan na kung saan ang mga bees disyerto ang pugad - nagiging mas karaniwang sa Europa at Hilagang Amerika.

Pagtalunan ay swirled paligid ang isyu, at ang lahat mula sa mga mobile phone sa gm crops ay blamed. Ngayon bagong pag-aaral ay nagpapahiwatig na ang mga insecticides ay naglalaro ng isang makabuluhang papel.

Ang pinakabagong pag-aaral nakalantad na isang pagkakaiba-iba ng mga insekto sa iba't ibang mga doses ng neonicotinoid insecticides sa katagal tagal ng panahon - 12 buwan o higit pa. Neonicotinoid insecticides ay malawak na ginagamit sa buong mundo; gumana sila sa pamamagitan ng kumikilos sa panggitnang sistema ng nerbiyos ng insekto. The chemicals have little affinity for vertebrate nervous systems, so they are much less toxic to mammals and birds.

The researchers found that the total dose of insecticide required to kill the insect was smaller if administered over a longer time period ( Ecotoxicology (2009) 18:343–354 ). In the case of honeybees, up to 6000 times less insecticide was required to kill them if it was administered in multiple tiny doses over a long time period.

According to Henk Tennekes, a researcher at Experimental Toxicology Services (ETS) in the Netherlands, these findings make perfect sense. “Start by considering a high exposure level,” he said. “It may cause an early effect, such as cancer or mortality. At a much lower exposure level you may get a late effect. However, as it turns out, in the latter case you need much less of the stuff (in total) to produce the effect.” Tennekes describes the findings in a forthcoming paper in Toxicology .

So how do these insecticides achieve such a powerful long-term effect? The answer lies in the way that they work. Neonicotinoids bind irreversibly to receptors in the central nervous system of insects. “An insect has a limited amount of such receptors,” explained Jeroen van der Sluijs, a scientist at Utrecht University in the Netherlands, who has also worked on the problem. “The damage is cumulative: with every exposure more receptors are blocked until the damage is so big that the insect cannot function anymore and dies.”

Even small doses over a short time period can cause serious problems. At low doses insects have been observed to become disorientated and less co-ordinated in their movements, making them easier prey for predators. Sub-lethal effects such as this weaken the insect; they particularly jeopardize social insects, which depend on the entire colony being healthy for survival.

Right now it still isn't possible to say if neonicotinoids are the sole cause of CCD in honeybees, but it seems likely that they play a significant role. “It explains the rapid increase in CCD since 2004, which coincides with the rapid growth in worldwide use of neonicotinoids – the most widely used class of insecticides,” said van der Sluijs.

Currently the insecticides are commonly used to coat seeds, regardless of whether there are many insect pests or not. They leach easily into soil and water and are taken up readily by plants, making the entire plant toxic to insects. And as the new research shows, even at very low levels they have the potential to cause huge damage to insect populations. “I think these insecticides need to be replaced by less long-lived alternatives that are less toxic to honeybees and less prone to leaching,” said Tennekes.

About the author

March 30, 2010 -The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Research Service , in conjunction with the Apiary Inspectors of America , is conducting a voluntary survey to determine the bee colony losses for the 2009/2010 winter. This survey is not just for beekeepers with huge numbers of hives, even small-scale beekeepers are encouraged to participate. The survey takes approximately two minutes, and is completely anonymous.

Data collection efforts such as this may be crucial to understanding bee-related diseases that affect colonies, including colony collapse disorder. The scope of this problem may be poorly understood. According to Peter Borst, a former New York State apiary inspector, no one really knows how many beehives are out there. USDA estimates of 2.6 million bee colonies in the US are derived from national surveys and farm surveys that don't count the thousands of small apiaries (fewer than five hives)

managed by hobby beekeepers. Based on Borst's local knowledge, as many as 90% of the local beekeepers may have elected to not register with the state — which is where the national surveys start for the data.

The more beekeepers who participate, the more data the USDA has to work with, which may help researchers get closer to understanding a perplexing problem in our agricultural world. Dr. Jeff Pettis, Research Leader at the USDA-ARS Bee Research Laboratory, notes that last year they surveyed beekeepers who managed about half a million colonies. Pettis hopes this year's response to be even greater. 1

If you know a beekeeper with one hive or one hundred, share this information with them. Good research requires good data.

Dear Beekeeper:

The Apiary Inspectors of America and the USDA-ARS Beltsville Bee Research Laboratory are seeking your help in tabulating the winter losses that occurred over the winter of 2009-2010. This continues the AIA/USDA survey efforts from the past 3 years which has been important in quantifying the losses of honey bees for government, media, and researchers.

This year's survey is faster, easier and does not require your time on the phone. It is all web based and automatic, just fill and click.

Please take a few moments to fill out our winter loss survey at: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/beeloss0910

This survey will be conducted until April 16th, 2010.

We would also appreciate it if you would forward this email to other beekeepers. The more responses the better. If you have any questions or concerns please email beeloss@gmail.com , or Honeybee.Survey@aphis.usda.gov .

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Jeff Pettis; USDA-ARS Beltsville Bee Research Laboratory
Dennis vanEngelsdorp; Penn State University
Jerry Hayes; Florida Department of Agriculture
Dewey Caron; University of Delaware and Oregon State University

What would Rachel Carson say to this story? The business publications are an echo-chamber of headlines reading “procedural issues” were what made spirotetramat illegal to sell, while other blogs and newspapers focus of the press release's spin (harm to bees). The monopoly market publications would like to tell their readers/advertisers that it wasn't banned because of proven harm to the pollinators and ecosystems (the same ecosystems that support the damned economy in the first place), no no… it was banned because the EPA and BayerCrop Science broke the laws , aka “procedures,” and got busted! Why don't they say “legal issues lead to ban of pesticide” or “secret law breaking discovered, leads to pesticide ban” or “NRDC and Xerces were watching while we tried to sell poison without EPA/public approval and they blew the whistle on behalf of science and public laws designed to protect the People from the Corporation”? (see evidence of eco-chamber ) This story reveals the fraud and deceit that is Bayer CropScience and revolving door EPA cronies. It's so easy to sell their poison and bio-warfare in China and Brazil, because those countries don't have public oversight like the USA has with the EPA - Environmental Protection Agency. It's time to review and renew our appreciation and understanding of our EPA . This story is really about the Xerces Society and National Resource Defense Council forcing the EPA to follow its own rules and public protection “procedures.” Had it not been for them, the EPA and Bayer CropScience would have simply violated the law in secrecy and ineptitude, exactly what Bare CrapScience wants to see happen, IMHO. Important to note that well-known commercial beekeepers Dave Hackenberg (and Dave Mendes?) worked with Bayer CropScience to field test the effects of spirotetramat on honeybees in Florida. Click image for PDF of report. Here's a nice footnote from the Judge Cote's ruling:

It is undisputed that the plaintiffs have standing to bring this case. See Connecticut v. Am. Elec. Power Co., 582 F.3d 309, 339 (2d Cir. 2009) (“An association has standing to bring suit on behalf of its members when: (a) its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (b) the interests it seeks to protect are germane to the organization's purpose; and (c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participation ofthe lawsuit.” (citation omitted)).

Judge Pulls Pesticide After Finding Impacts on Bees Inadequately Evaluated by EPA ( Beyond Pesticides , January 4, 2010) – A pesticide that could be dangerously toxic to America's honey bees must be pulled from store shelves as a result of a suit filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Xerces Society. In an order issued in December, a federal court in New York invalidated EPA's approval of the pesticide spirotetramat (manufactured by Bayer CropScience under the trade names Movento and Ultor) and ordered the agency to reevaluate the chemical in compliance with the law. The court's order goes into effect on January 15, 2010, and makes future sales of Movento illegal in the United States. “This sends EPA and Bayer back to the drawing board to reconsider the potential harm to bees caused by this new pesticide,” said NRDC Senior Attorney Aaron Colangelo. “EPA admitted to approving the pesticide illegally, but argued that its violations of the law should have no consequences. The Court disagreed and ordered the pesticide to be taken off the market until it has been properly evaluated. Bayer should not be permitted to run what amounts to an uncontrolled experiment on bees across the country without full consideration of the consequences.” In June 2008, EPA approved Movento for nationwide use on hundreds of different crops, including apples, pears, peaches, oranges, tomatoes, grapes, strawberries, almonds, and spinach. The approval process went forward without the advance notice and opportunity for public comment that is required by federal law and EPA's own regulations. In addition, EPA failed to evaluate fully the potential damage to the nation's already beleaguered bee populations or conduct the required analysis of the pesticide's economic, environmental, and social costs. Beekeepers and scientists have expressed concern over Movento's potential impact on beneficial insects such as honey bees. The pesticide impairs the insect's ability to reproduce. EPA's review of Bayer's scientific studies found that trace residues of Movento brought back to the hive by adult bees could cause “significant mortality” and “massive perturbation” to young honeybees (larvae). According to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), bees pollinate $15 billion worth of crops grown in America. USDA also claims that one out of every three mouthfuls of food in the typical American diet has a connection to bee pollination. Yet bee colonies in the United States have seen significant declines in recent years due to a combination of stressors, almost certainly including insecticide exposure. “This case underscores the need for us to re-examine how we evaluate the impact of pesticides and other chemicals in the environment,” said Mr. Colangelo. “In approving Movento, EPA identified but ignored potentially serious harms to bees and other pollinators. We are in the midst of a pollinator crisis, with more than a third of our colonies disappearing in recent years. Given how important these creatures are to our food supply, we simply cannot look past these sorts of problems.” View the court decision here . Read Beyond Pesticides' read factsheet: Pollinators and Pesticides: Escalating crisis demands action and Backyard Beekeeping: Providing pollinator habitat one yard at a time . See more information on threats to honey bees at NRDC .

Report on Bee Mortality and Bee Surveillance in Europe

from http://www.isaaa.org/kc/cropbiotechupdate/online/default.asp?Date=12/18/2009

AFSSA, the French Food Safety Agency completed a 218-page report on honey bee mortality and the ways that colony losses are monitored in Europe, December 8, 2009. The European Food Safety Authority commissioned the study and published the report. Initially, AFSSA set up a consortium of seven European bee disease research institutes in France, Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

The project covers 1) a description and critical analysis of surveillance programs that measured colony loss; 2) the collection and analysis of the epidemiological data sets on colony losses; and 3) a critical review and selection of relevant literature on the possible causes and risk factors of colony losses.

The researchers found that bee colony losses in Europe and the USA are multifactorial which include beekeeping and husbandy practices, environmental factors, biological agents as well as excessive use of pesticides. The interaction of these factors create stress, weaken bees' defense system allowing pests and pathogens to kill the colony.

3.2.3.3 Chemical agents

The debate on chemical agents is mainly concentrated on the agrochemicals used for crop treatments. Neonicotinoids are the focus of the greatest interest in the literature (imidacloprid, clothianidin and fipronil); other publications just mention “pesticides” in general, but certainly with an implicit consideration of neonicotinoids (Figure 75). Scientists are clearly divided on the role of these pesticides, as illustrated in Table 14. Although no involvement of pesticides has been proven for colony losses or CCD, a significant amount of pesticide residues are frequently found in the studies analysing bees, pollen and wax, usually at sublethal levels. A question arises, therefore, about the possibility for a conjunction of chemical residues present in the hive at sublethal concentrations, which may produce a lethal effect or clinical signs affecting the ability of colony to survive. Several authors mention these pesticides as factors contributing to stress or weakening of colonies which, once again, may “open the door” to other causative factors.

3.2.3.2 Biological agents

A significant number of biological agents are reported to be involved in colony losses. Viruses are the biological agents most frequently mentioned (Figure 73). As more than 15 different viruses are known to infect bees, often without any clinical symptoms and since, co-infection with several viruses is not uncommon, they are the subject of much research. Due to their frequent presence, they are found in many colony losses cases where it is very difficult to determine whether they are at the origin of the losses, or just co-factors. Of the eight viruses mentioned in the literature, IABPV is the most frequently mentioned, and some scientists consider it as a “marker” of CCD in the United States (Figure 74). Varroa, Nosema spp and Acarapis woodi infections are the three other most commonly mentioned biological factors. Some scientists consider them to be causative factors in a certain amount of colony losses (for Nosema mainly in Spain). Others consider that they are co- factors, contributing to the stress of the colony or contributing to the “expression” of colony mortality as causative factor of death for a colony already weakened by other stress factors. This is why the factors “multiple infection” and “unidentified disease” appear in the assumptions made by the authors. All these hypotheses open the floor to a debate on possible treatments to prevent or cure these infections. This links together these biological agents with chemical factors and beekeeping practices because beekeeping practices and chemical treatments are used to control infections. The debate on the involvement of the various biological agents is clearly expressed in the author's opinions summarised in Table 13 with a high rate of “possible involvement” and balanced reports between “unlikely” and “very likely”.

3.2.4 Conclusion and perspectives

The work package on literature review allowed the development of a specific methodology for literature search and analysis. The “priority 1″ references selected and reviewed validate the objectivity of the literature search which is expressed through the variability and the balanced topics included. The results of this work regarding risk and causative factors involved in colony losses have to be taken as a “snap shot” of the scientific community's opinion as they are today; these are also “time sensitive”, and evolving due to the amount of ongoing research which will likely lead to new findings and a better understanding of the factors involved in the coming months or years.

To summarise this picture, common consensus amongst the scientific community about the multi-factorial origin of colony losses in Europe and in the United States (in the two aspects of this term: combination of factors at one place and different factors involved according to place and period considered) suggests the following factors are important, namely: beekeeping practices (feeding, migratory beekeeping, colony husbandry, treatments applied and so forth), environmental factors (climate, available forage, biodiversity, etc.), chemical factors (pesticides) or biological agents (Varroa, Nosema spp, etc.) which together create stress, weaken bees' immune systems that then allow pests and pathogens to kill the colony (eg one or several parasites, viruses, etc.).

Figure78. Factors involved in colony losses

Questions remain about the sequence of events that lead to colony mortality, and future studies should be designed and conducted to address this:

- There are many inconsistencies in the ways in which “colony losses” are defined. Up to 17 different definitions for CCD in the literature. This means that involved persons may not always be referring to the same phenomenon, and this creates confusion when trying to explain the origin of what has been identified in the field. The described pathology is varied, with authors/using the same descriptions for different sets of circumstances. A specific study should be undertaken to clearly categorise and quantify the various expressions of colony losses in the field. This study will be closely linked to the strengthening of surveillance systems;

- High concentrations of pesticides have rarely been identified in relation to colony losses (CCD in USA and winter colony losses in Europe) although acute events of pesticide toxicity are well described during the production season (and clearly differentiated from CCD and winter colony losses). However, the questions of possible synergistic effects of various pesticides and the effect of chronic exposure to sublethal doses of pesticides remains, and requires further investigation;

- Biological agents such as parasites, viruses or bacteria, alone or in combination, have clearly been identified as important factors in colony losses. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of knowledge about the exact mechanisms and/or interactions involved, that must also be addressed;

- Even though the multifactorial origin of colony losses is well acknowledged, the respective role of each factor as a risk or causative agent is unknown, and no hierarchy of relative threat posed by each one has been established. These matters require further investigation using appropriate epidemiological studies (case control and longitudinal studies).

Conclusion

This bee surveillance project sought information on both the prevalence of honey bee colony losses, and the surveillance systems respectively in 27 European countries. Through a standardised questionnaire, each of the surveillance systems collecting these data was evaluated. In addition, a thorough literature search of the existing databases, as well as relevant grey literature about causes of colony losses was completed, and the literature evaluated.

The main conclusions from project activities can be summarised as follows:

• General weakness and high variability of most of the surveillance systems in the 25 systems investigated;
• Lack of representative data at country level and comparable data at EU level for colony losses;
• Common consensus of the scientific community about the multifactorial origin of colony losses in Europe and in the United States and insufficient knowledge of causative and risk factors for colony losses.

From these finding the consortium makes the following recommendations:

1. Implementation of a sustainable European network for coordination and follow-up of surveillance, and research on colony losses to underpin monitoring programmes;

2. Strengthen standardization at European level by harmonization of surveillance systems, data collected and by developing common performance indicators;

3. Build on the examples of best practice found in existing surveillance systems on communicable and notifiable diseases already present in some countries;

4. Undertake specific studies that build on the existing work in progress to improve the knowledge and understanding of factors that affect bee health (for example stress caused by pathogens, pesticides, environmental and technological factors and their interactions) using appropriate epidemiological studies (case control and longitudinal studies);

5. The set up of the coordination team at European level. This is a crucial issue and the coordination team should be organized in such a way so as to ensure its sustainability and to enable effective surveillance programme activities at the European level.

Complete report attached and also here: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/scdoc/27e.htm

When their link breaks, download the PDF here: Scientific Report on Bee Mortality and Bee Surveillance in Europe

Beekeeper: No need to kill bees for the Padres

Removing bees live is less dangerous than trying to kill them, a professional beekeeper writes.

An unidentified usher tries to move a swarm of bees as they cover a chair in left field during the ninth inning of the Padres game on Thursday. (AP Photo/Denis Poroy)

A honey bee swarm delayed an Astros-Padres' baseball game for 52 minutes on Thursday, while a “beekeeper” was called to exterminate them.

I was appalled that a swarm of bees was destroyed in front of thousands of baseball fans! How many more people, probably millions, that saw the incident on national TV now have the message that it is necessary or advisable to kill a swarm of bees this way?

I was disgusted and horrified. I remove swarms of honey bees alive every day. Beekeepers do not exterminate bees!

Something had to be done quickly at Petco Park of course. But exterminating them took as long as it would to collect them, and stirred the remaining bees into a frenzy. I contend that far from being the safe option, this was a risky one.

Benign swarm

Bees in a swarm are at their most benign. When a colony becomes too crowded, the workers create a new queen. Just before the new queen hatches, the old queen leaves the hive with a large proportion of the workers, headed for a new location. This is how new bee hives are created.

Before they depart the hive, the bees fill up with honey to sustain them until they can start foraging again. They're feeling pretty good, just as you do after a good meal.

They have no hive to defend so are very unlikely to sting anyone. In fact, since they are full of honey, it's physically difficult for them to sting.

This cluster of bees is called a swarm. They collect somewhere temporarily while the scout bees look for a permanent new location. This is what we saw at Petco Park on Thursday.

Urban myth of killer bees

I frequently collect swarms without any protective clothing. It shouldn't be necessary.

In more than 20 years of keeping bees, I have collected hundreds of swarms. I have never come across a credible story of anyone being attacked by a swarm of bees. I believe it is an urban myth.

Bees under threat

Honey bees are under a serious threat at the moment. Colonies have been mysteriously dying, not only in the US, but across most of Europe. Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) leaves the hive completely devoid of bees.

The cause is not known but it is very worrying. Bees account for much of the fresh food we eat by way of pollination.

A swarm of bees can be removed live. (Photo courtesy Geoff Kipps-Bolton)

Farmers, not known for throwing money about, spend billions of dollars annually to rent hives of bees from commercial beekeepers to pollinate crops.

Crops depend on honey bees

Who hasn't heard that bees are in trouble? We need honey bees. It has been said that one third of all food grown depends on honey bees for pollination. What kind of message does killing 20,000 bees on national television send to the public?

I know people were frightened. But if they had called a true beekeeper, not an exterminator, the bees would have been removed humanely, alive, without the risk of those stray bees, which remained after the exterminator sprayed them.

In some parts of the world it is illegal to exterminate bees unless a beekeeper has inspected the situation and been unable to remove them alive. This should be the case in the United States.

Padres' response

Richard Andersen, Executive VP, Ballpark Management & General Manager of PETCO Park, called me in response to an email I sent. He was very keen to get the facts and I'm sure in future they will try to take the socially responsible action. The Padres won an award.

Tom Garfinkel quipped that Luke Yoder, Padres' director of field and landscape maintenance, has a beekeeper on speed-dial. I say next time, call a professional beekeeper to do the right thing!

There is a network of true beekeepers who would respond straightaway in circumstances like these.

Geoff Kipps-Bolton is owner of San Diego Bees and www.bees-on-the-net.com.

http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2009-07-03/news/beekeeper-no-need-to-kill-bees-for-the-padres

Kim Flottum found out for us (thaaaaaank youuu!)

A year ago USDA CSREES (Cooperative State Research Extension Education Service) awarded a $4.1 million grant to a group of university researchers for the express purpose of solving the current honey bee health problems confronting the beekeeping industry. Without actually nailing it down, this was a project to look into the current Colony Collapse Disorder malady and, over four years, find out what was going on. But at the same time the grant was to fund an extensive education program for beekeepers, and to develop as much information as possible so beekeepers could keep their bees healthy, and had a place to go for questions … and answers. Moreover, 25% of the funds were to go to study non-apis pollinators, such as bumble bees, alfalfa leaf-cutting bees and the like. To date, this is the only government money to be distributed to beekeeping researchers to study this problem other than normal budgetary funds to keep the USDA projects up and running.

So what's happened in a year? I'm glad you asked, because I wanted to know too. So I ventured to the University of Georgia in Athens to visit with Dr. Keith Delaplane , the leader of this large and varied group studying this large and varied problem.

In this first year each of the cooperators in the program have hired the people they need to work with or brought on board the grad students who will do the work or the post-doc who will assist in the project. Probably the biggest accomplishment so far, said Dr. Delaplane, is the establishment of the seven stationary apiaries to monitor honey bee health and the environment. These apiaries, consisting of 30 colonies each, are in Maine, Florida, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Texas, Washington and California. Each is administered by one of the researchers and will be managed using the techniques particular to their respective locations … bees in Minnesota are not managed on the same calendar or with the same methods as those bees in Texas, for instance. But each area does have best management practices that reflect these differences, and those will be followed.

However, one constant is that each colony in each of these apiaries will be sampled once a month for the duration of the study to look at what's going on inside. Samples of bees, honey and wax will be taken, and measurements of bees and brood will all be taken routinely. The samples will go to a lab at Penn State to look for viruses and nosema disease, to the University of Minnesota to count nosema spores, and to the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station to look at the pollen and wax samples for residues of agricultural pesticides. At the same time, USDA scientists will be taking identical samples, and doing identical counts from a series of migratory beekeeping operations. Samples and data will be identical from each apiary and each migratory operation, and at the end the mountain of data will be easily comparable and very useful, said Delaplane.

Because this grant also covers non-apis bees (that is, bees that are not honey bees) identical samples will be taken from managed non-apis bees at each of the apiary sites. Scientists are looking for cross infections or other relationships.

Other non-apis projects include looking at increasing the efficiency and reducing the stress of managed bumblebees when used for pollination. The effects of the neonicitinoid pesticides on non-apis bees are also being studied, and especially the sub-lethal effects and any effects from residues. This should be interesting.

Meanwhile, the Extension and Education part of this has moved right along, and in July the USDA is launching its eXtension.org website. It is to be a one-stop shopping experience for agricultural information. The honey bee health section is housed and administered from the University of Kentucky in Lexington. All of the information that goes on this web page, the bee page included, is well-researched and well-refereed work, with oversight by a large team of honey bee scientists. There will be a Frequently Asked Questions section, an Ask The Expert question, Best Management Guides section and more. All coming from the Bee Health Community group. This effort will be federally supported, but all states will contribute with funds from their individual extension budgets. This will, over time I imagine, erode the personnel in each state's Extension core. Unfortunate, but at least there won't be a vacuum left behind.

Public release date: 4-Jun-2009

Contact: Dennis O'Brien
dennis.obrien@ars.usda.gov
301-504-1624
Public Library of Science

Bee-killing parasite genome sequenced

Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists have sequenced the genome of a parasite that can kill honey bees. Nosema ceranae is one of many pathogens suspected of contributing to the current bee population decline, termed colony collapse disorder (CCD). Researchers describe the parasite's genome in a study published June 5 in the open-access journal PLoS Pathogens .

In 2006, CCD began devastating commercial beekeeping operations, with some beekeepers reporting losses of up to 90 percent, according to the USDA. Researchers believe CCD may be the result of a combination of pathogens, parasites and stress factors, but the cause remains elusive. At stake are honey bees that play a valuable part in a $15 billion industry of crop farming in the United States.

The microsporidian Nosema is a fungus-related microbe that produces spores that bees consume when they forage. Infection spreads from their digestive tract to other tissues. Within weeks, colonies are either wiped out or lose much of their strength. Nosema apis was the leading cause of microsporidia infections among domestic bee colonies until recently when N. ceranae jumped from Asian honey bees to the European honey bees used commercially in the United States.

The ARS scientists used genetic tools and microscopic analysis at the ARS Bee Research Laboratory (BRL) in Beltsville, Maryland to examine N. ceranae . They collaborated with colleagues at the University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, Columbia University, New York, New York, and 454 Life Sciences, of Branford, Connecticut.

Sequencing the genome should help scientists trace the parasite's migration patterns, determine how it became dominant, and help resolve the spread of infection by enabling the development of diagnostic tests and treatments.

ARS is a scientific research agency in the US Department of Agriculture.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Supported by the USDA-ARS Administrator fund, www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usdahome (JDE, JC, JP), North America Pollinator Protection Campaign, www.pollinator.org (JE, JC), USDA-NRI grant # 2002-0256, www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usdahome (JE), Northeast Biodefense Center Grant # U54AI57158, www.nbc.columbia.edu (WIL), and Google.org Contract # 17-2008, www.google.org (WIL). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this paper is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the United States Department of Agriculture or the Agricultural Research Service of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.

COMPETING INTERESTS: ME, SH, and BD are employed by 454 Life Sciences/Roche Applied Sciences.

PLEASE ADD THIS LINK TO THE PUBLISHED ARTICLE IN ONLINE VERSIONS OF YOUR REPORT: http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1000464 (link will go live upon embargo lift)

CITATION: Cornman RS, Chen YP, Schatz MC, Street C, Zhao Y, et al. (2009) Genomic Analyses of the Microsporidian Nosema ceranae, an Emergent Pathogen of Honey Bees. PLoS Pathog 5(6): e1000466. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000466

Pagtatatuwa

This press release refers to an upcoming article in PLoS Pathogens . The release is provided by the article authors and/or their institutions. Any opinions expressed in these releases or articles are the personal views of the journal staff and/or article contributors, and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of PLoS. PLoS expressly disclaims any and all warranties and liability in connection with the information found in the releases and articles and your use of such information.

About PLoS Pathogens

PLoS Pathogens ( www.plospathogens.org ) publishes outstanding original articles that significantly advance the understanding of pathogens and how they interact with their host organisms. All works published in PLoS Pathogens are open access. Everything is immediately available subject only to the condition that the original authorship and source are properly attributed. Copyright is retained by the authors. The Public Library of Science uses the Creative Commons Attribution License.

About the Public Library of Science

The Public Library of Science (PLoS) is a non-profit organization of scientists and physicians committed to making the world's scientific and medical literature a freely available public resource. For more information, visit http://www.plos.org .

“If the EPA had sufficient concern about harm to bees that they would insist on other studies, it seemed unwise to approve it anyway and ask for research after the fact,” says Aaron Colangelo, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The EPA's job is to make a decision about whether a chemical is safe or not.”

Colangelo envisions a similar scenario in coming years. The EPA has announced it will review clothianidin and other chemicals in the same family, but not until 2012. In the meantime, there's nothing stopping the agency from approving the insecticides for use on new crops based on existing policies. In the end, Colangelo has little confidence the federal agency will bring a hammer down on the agribusiness giant. The EPA, he explains, often keeps its test results confidential for proprietary reasons at a company's request. As a consequence, it's unclear where gaps or discrepancies occur until a company makes a disclosure similar to Bayer's.

“They're not making decisions about whether the pesticide can be put on the market based on impacts to bees, no matter how much evidence of harm there is,” Colangelo says. “The EPA will just approve it anyway and put a warning label on the product.”

Halting the sale of pesticides, though, would be no mean task. Over 120 countries use imidacloprid under the Bayer label on more than 140 crop varieties, as well as on termites, flea collars and home garden landscaping. And the product's patent expired a few years ago, paving the way for it to be sold as a generic insecticide by dozens of smaller corporations. In California alone, imidacloprid is the central ingredient in 247 separate products sold by 50 different companies.

In a statement, the EPA says that before banning a pesticide, it “must find that an 'imminent hazard' exists. The federal courts have ruled that to make this finding, EPA must conclude, among other things, that there is a substantial likelihood that imminent, serious harm will be experienced from use of the pesticide.” The EPA did not clarify what is meant by “imminent hazard” and why the death of honeybees does not qualify.

As Mussen points out, though, a few million dead honeybees may be the cost of doing business. “If they didn't register products that were toxic to honeybees, there wouldn't be a lot of products on the market that were available for pest control.”

All the more reason to start taking the world's most ubiquitous insecticide off the market and invent a safer one, argues Walker, of the National Honeybee Advisory Board. “It's on every golf course, it's on every lawn. It's not just an agricultural product. There's really not one part of our lives it's not touching.”

YOUR HELP IS NEEDED TO SECURE FARM BILL FUNDING
FOR NATIVE AND MANAGED POLLINATOR RESEARCH

Please contact your Senators and ask them to sign on to a letter by Senator Boxer in support of vital research on agricultural pollinators. Please read below for additional information. The deadline for Senators to sign on to this letter is Wednesday, May 6.

Find the contact information for your Senator's office

Thank you,
Scott Hoffman Black
Executive Director, The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation

Providing funding for research into the causes and remedies of honey bee and native bee declines is a critical step in pollinator conservation. Please take a moment to call or write your Senator, let them know how important pollinators are, and ask them to 1) support this appropriation and 2) contact Senator Boxer's office to sign on to this important letter.

Senator Boxer has written a letter requesting that the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee allocate $20 million in Fiscal Year 2010 for pollinator research projects as authorized in the 2008 Farm Bill. These funds will increase the resilience and security of our farming systems by supporting vital research into Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) in managed honeybees and to promote the health of honey bees and native pollinators through habitat conservation and best management practices.

BACKGROUND
As you may know, the 2008 Farm Bill includes language authorizing $100 million over five years to further our scientific understanding of the essential agricultural services pollinators provide our nation. The letter only seeks to fully fund critical provisions that were recently signed into law through legislative consensus.

Managed and native pollinators, such as honey bees, bumble bees, and other native bees, are needed for the production of over $18 billion (and possibly as much as $27 billion) per year in agricultural products in the US These animals are required for 35 percent of the world's crop production. Yet, total pollinator spending at USDA in the 2008 Fiscal Year accounted for merely 0.01 percent of the agency's budget. Without pollinators, our current yields of alfalfa, almonds, apples, cherries, cranberries, blueberries, kiwifruit, strawberries, melons, squash, peppers, peaches, pears, plums, carrot, onion, and other seed crops, would not be possible.

Arising in 2006, the as yet unexplained phenomenon termed Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) diminished our nation's already dwindling honey bee colonies, and highlighted our relative ignorance of the complex systems that support animal pollinated food production. It is vitally important to conduct research to better understand and solve this problem.

Studies in other developed nations have well documented a diminished presence of honey bees and other vital pollinators in interdependent agricultural and ecological systems, but much information is lacking in the US A major conclusion of a comprehensive study by the National Academy of Sciences in 2007 found that for most North American pollinator species, long-term population data are lacking and knowledge of their basic ecology is incomplete.

Funding for pollinator research will protect the health, future, safety, and sustainability of our nation's most nutritional food crops. These funds will ensure that we base our sustainable future in agriculture on a more comprehensive understanding of the science that supports it.

Thank you for your help in this effort.

Read more about the 2008 Farm Bill Benefits to Crop Pollinators >>
Read more about the Xerces Society Agricultural Pollinator Conservation Program >>
Browse the Xerces Society Pollinator Conservation resources >>
Browse the Xerces Society Pollinator Conservation publications >>

ABOUT THE XERCES SOCIETY
The Xerces Society is an international, nonprofit organization that protects wildlife through the conservation of invertebrates and their habitat. For over three decades, the Society has been at the forefront of invertebrate conservation, harnessing the knowledge of scientists and the enthusiasm of citizens to implement conservation programs.

Ok. I'm finally done laughing at my headline. I came across the GrowBetterVeggies gardening blog while looking for bulbing fennel advice. Turns out to be a gardening resource worth pollinating! Not only does she prep her tomato transplant holes with fish heads, she's got a beekeeping class. There's a lot more: compost-heated greenhouse and essays from her gardening students , really nice stories. (I can't blog too much here about the regenerative revival in organic farming, the Greenhorns as some call them.) Also, if you want to see a well-monetized blog, this is it. (Sheesh) The photos and instruction are grade A. It's really a fantastic example of a well-purposed blog for a farm-to-restaurant business that in effect showcases their legacy. Cynthia Sandberg gets to be my mentor in the garden! Thanks. -DNR

Our “ anarchy apiary ” in New York appeared to lose about half of the hives wintered there. Some died recently of starvation, others had more squatter field mice who scampered out of the hive suckling babies stuck to their bellies. Eviction. No mysteries behind the losses. Several hives survived as well, from bees bred from local queens.

These pics were take last week, April 20th or so.

This is an UN-identified insect that I'd like comment on from an expert. What is it? Dragonfly nymph? (see comments for answer!)

Read a great New York Times column by Leon Kreitzman about the circadian rhythms of honeybees and Carl Linnaeus' floral clock idea . -DNR

I checked my hive in New York and discovered some furry squatters, to my deep dismay. Check out the galleries to see the story. The bees were installed in mid-June and may have run out of food stores throughout winter. Comment if you'd like. Now I'm swarm hunting soon … (The other top bar hives that Anarchy Apiaries has nearby are looking lively, though it's been chilly.)

With bad news, there's always good news… despite my loss, I've gained hope from the White House's Organic Garden and news of their choice of using varroa-resistant Russians in their beehive !