>According to the National Pesticide Information Center, imidacloprid
binding to insect ACh receptors is irreversible. Check it out.

I did, and then I checked their citation.  That citation simply stated it
as a fact, with no supporting documentation.  So I don't feel that that
citation adds anything to this discussion.

>If Dr. Casida told Randy that binding was reversible, I wonder what
> Randy's exact question was?  Perhaps it was a conversation held in the
> context of these types of competitive binding assays.


Christina, rather than speculate as to what I said, why don't you simply
ask?  Here is the exact correspondence:

"Dear Dr Casida,

A recent paper by Tennekes (attached) has sparked a debate.

I question whether Tennekes' model, which is based upon the irreversibility
of binding, would hold true for honey bees.  The data is very conflicting.
 I don't understand, if the binding is similar to that of nicotine, why all
cigarette smokers wouldn't die from nicotine toxicity.

Could you please help with your thoughts as to whether Tennekes' c x t
model would likely hold true for honey bees, or whether, as the Bayer
researchers feel, that exposure at the NOAEL would not likely have any
cumulative effects.

Dear Randy,

 The neonicotinoids bind reversibly to the insect nicotinic receptor. Once
the neonicotinoid source is removed (metabolism or no further exposure) the
receptor and animal will recover. I know of no evidence contrary to this
view for honeybees, people, or other organisms."

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

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