Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 26 Mar 2009 09:33:44 -0700 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>Recent data from Penn State on crabapple trees,
>is extremely concerning.
Why the extreme concern when no evidence of
insect death or other harm was found?
> After three weeks no imidacloprid was
> detected. However the next spring pollen samples
> from pollen sacs and anthers tested over 900 ppb
> combined Imidacloprid and 2 principal
> degradants: 5- hydroxe and olefin. In nectaries the
> combined number was 1,450 ppb.
Yes, but what, if any, harmful biological activity does
a 1,450 ppb insecticide residue in the nectaries have
after 6+ months exposure to an outdoor environment?
> the initial data raises questions about how imidacloprid
> is stored and translocated in woody plants, like fruit trees.
Why would it be important to have answers to these
questions if a 6+ month old, 1,450 ppb residue in the
nectaries is incapable of killing or harming pollinators
in actual real world field situations?
Paul Cherubini
El Dorado, Calif.
***********************************************
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
|
|
|