> Lab studies are of use in the preliminary stages of pesticide testing 
> and regulation, but they do not compare the effects of pesticides 
> upon bees to those of natural plant metabolites in nectar and pollen, 
> nor the interactions.

Only under the tightly-controlled conditions of a lab study could such tiny changes in bee diet be introduced and tracked.
The lab study did compare the effects and interactions of nectar and pollen on pesticides, that was the specific purpose.

> It is only by seeing what actually happens in the field that we can make 
> informed decisions about the effects of a product upon bees.

The finding at hand would have never been detected in a field study.
Too much "noise" for such a tiny "signal".
"Lab work" allows conditions to be created and controlled, rather than merely observed.

But all this may turn out to have negligible impact on NOECs and LD50s, so we need yet another lab study. As the paper said Sporopollenin (in hard-to-digest outer wall of pollen grains) "is not readily digested by bees, so how much p-coumaric acid is actually consumed on a regular basis is difficult to estimate".

So, we still don't yet know if the upregulation is significant or not.
  

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