|Appears in Collections:||Biological and Environmental Sciences Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Monitoring neonicotinoid exposure for bees in rural and peri-urban areas of the UK during the transition from pre- to post-moratorium|
Rotheray, Ellen L
Swain, Jennifer L
Hill, Elizabeth M
Osborne, Juliet L
|Citation:||Nicholls E, Botías C, Rotheray EL, Whitehorn P, David A, Fowler R, David T, Feltham H, Swain JL, Wells P, Hill EM, Osborne JL & Goulson D (2018) Monitoring neonicotinoid exposure for bees in rural and peri-urban areas of the UK during the transition from pre- to post-moratorium (Forthcoming/Available Online). Environmental Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b06573|
|Abstract:||Concerns regarding the impact of neonicotinoid exposure on bee populations recently led to an EU-wide moratorium on the use of certain neonicotinoids on flowering crops. Currently evidence regarding the impact, if any, the moratorium has had on bees’ exposure is limited. We sampled pollen and nectar from bumblebee colonies in rural and peri-urban habitats in three UK regions; Stirlingshire, Hertfordshire and Sussex. Colonies were sampled over three years; prior to the ban (2013), during the initial implementation when some seed-treated winter-sown oilseed rape was still grown (2014), and following the ban (2015). To compare species-level differences, in 2014 only, honeybee colonies in rural habitats were also sampled. Over half of all samples were found to be contaminated (n=408), with thiamethoxam being the compound detected at the highest concentrations in honeybee- (up to 2.29 ng/g in nectar in 2014, median≤0.1 ng/g, n=79) and bumblebee-collected pollen and nectar (up to 38.77 ng/g in pollen in 2013, median ≤0.12 ng/g, n=76). Honeybees were exposed to higher concentrations of neonicotinoids than bumblebees in 2014. While neonicotinoid exposure for rural bumblebees declined post-ban (2015), suggesting a positive impact of the moratorium, the risk of neonicotinoid exposure for bumblebees in peri-urban habitats remained largely the same between 2013 and 2015.|
|Rights:||This item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. This document is the Accepted Manuscript version of a Published Work that appeared in final form in Environmental Science and Technology, copyright © American Chemical Society after peer review and technical editing by the publisher. To access the final edited and published work see https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b06573|
|Notes:||Output Status: Forthcoming/Available Online|
|acs.est.7b06573.pdf||Fulltext - Accepted Version||699.14 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.