The reason I mentioned Krischik is because she has spent more than a decade and a half trying to link imid with various problems, despite evidence to the contrary. In the same 1999 paper I quoted (about the ladybugs) she says:

> Imidacloprid, a chloronicotynol, works on a wider range of taxa than the more specific varieties of B. thuringiensis. Consequently, nontarget effects of imidacloprid may occur in a broad range of insect taxa. Sclar et al. (1998) showed nontarget effects of imidacloprid on the heteropteran O. tristicolor (White). Wallner et al. (1999) found that Phacelia tanacetifolia Bentham excrete 3-10 ppb of imidicloprid in the nectar after seed treatment with Gaucho (imidacloprid). 

> This concentration, however, had no effect on behavior or survivorship of the honey bee, Apis mellifera L. When sucrose containing imidacloprid at concentrations 20 ppb was fed to honey bees, it caused a reduction in foraging behavior and induced changes in the dancing behavior that discouraged bees that were not fed imidacloprid-treated sucrose from foraging.

* Of course, there is a potential that a new substance will cause more harm than good. It appears, however, that in the field, imid has not caused the harm that was anticipated. Widespread adoption of imid did not cause a catastrophe for ladybugs nor honey bees.

* That hasn't stopped researchers from trying to nail the neonics, though. Fast forward to 2014, Krischik writes

> Field studies on the effects of lower concentrations of neonicotinyl residue in pollen and nectar, similar to that found in seed treatments, usually showed no effects on colony health of honey bees and bumblebees. A study on queenright (containing the queen) colonies of B. terrestris for 4 weeks in the field near imidacloprid seed-treated sunflowers found no difference in worker or queen production. Honey bees exposed for 4 months to flowering canola grown from clothianidin-treated seed (maximum of 2.24 ppb in nectar and 2.59 ppb in pollen) showed no differences in mortality, worker longevity, brood development, colony weight, and honey yields compare to controls.

> However, some recent studies demonstrated that lower neonicotinyl concentrations alter bee colony health. The collective research data provide support that bee foraging is reduced by neonicotinyl insecticides and continued indiscriminate use of systemic, neonicotinyl insecticides, that last from a single application for months to years in pollen and nectar, will reduce bee numbers and reduce seed and fruit production, resulting in dramatic ecosystem consequences.

source: Chronic Exposure of Imidacloprid and Clothianidin Reduce Queen Survival, Foraging, and Nectar Storing in Colonies of Bombus impatiens. Jamison Scholer,  Vera Krischik PLOS Published: March 18, 2014

* Perhaps if you write a grant with the title "The role of imidacloprid systemic insecticide on colony collapse disorder of honey bees and decline of bumblebee pollinators" you will want to keep trying to find something to support that. 

* Especially telling is her bottom line: "continued indiscriminate use of systemic, neonicotinyl insecticides ... will reduce bee numbers and reduce seed and fruit production, resulting in dramatic ecosystem consequences."

* She was wrong about the ladybugs, and wrong about colony collapse disorder. 

PLB

             ***********************************************
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