>I believe neonic use should be more closely tailored to the specific
environment, and I dislike prophylactic applications as wasteful and costly.

I think that we can all agree on the above!

Thank you for the thoughtful reply Christina.  The question, IMHO, was not
whether you were an activist, but whether your speculation was indeed
founded on evidence that we can all understand.  Can we please continue
this educational discussion?

>
> >Degradation does not occur in the synapse.  It has to diffuse out of
> there first.
>

Could you please explain to us why that is? Why could a detox enzyme not
degrade the ligand while it was bound?

>
> >It only takes a few molecules of IMI to mess up a synapse
>

I've done the math and was surprised by how many molecules would be
expected per synapse.  That is why I am curious to understand whether the
binding is indeed irreversible.  When the C14 labeling of IMI rapidly
disappears from a bee's body, I would assume that it needs to have been
either excreted or exhaled as CO2.  The C14, as far as I understand, even
if it remained as a metabolite would still be detected if were still
present in the bee's body.  Thus, I'm not understanding why you are even
discussing metabolites.  Could you please explain?

Thank you in advance!

-- 
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