The obvious defect is this:

> Given the changes we observe at the RNA and lipid level, it is reasonable so suspect that the synthetic neonicotinoid-class of insecticides are a factor driving the global decline of pollinating insects. Species risk extinction if they fail to adjust effectively to the demands of a changing or new environment. We find evidence that dietary traces of the insecticide imidacloprid impacts physiology of larvae from bee colonies located in a typical British agricultural landscape.  

They begin with the notion that they are going to find a problem that neonics cause. That may be one way to do science, but it leans on the self-fulfilling prophecy a little too much for my taste. There are a lot of environmental toxins and any one of these could cause similar effects. They don't look for those effects. Without this we cannot know what the significance of neonics is *compared* to other toxins. They may be worse, less bad, who knows without looking? 

It is well known that honey bees are adversely affected in practically the same way by pesticides, viruses, even high doses of CO2. The effect is general neurological impairment, decreased efficiency, and suicidal behavior leading to disappearance from the colony (probably to minimize the impact such bees would have on the colony). Various non-bee researchers are all trying to make a name for themselves by finding the cause of bee decline. The cause of bee decline is environmental degradation in general, plus the continually mutating parasites that afflict them. 

To try to single out any one is an exercise in futility, they all have to be addressed. 

Peter Loring Borst
             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html