Unfortunately, the doses of glyphosate used were crazy high, and any negative effect was only observed at the extreme highest dose applied, and only by an n of 1-3 bees. Since actual field application rates are at a MUCH lower concentration, these findings may not have much practical application.
I was curious as to how the claim could be made that it was a negative effect? It refers tot eh time to reorient, and the process of locations. When I looked at the actual time chart, it appears there is zero differences in the amount of time it took to return, only a minute interoperation of how.
What I took from it was heavy ingestion made the bees seem "drunk" and take a different path home.
As you mentioned the dosage was high, but what was 2 assumptions One that increased usage (due in part to restiance) was therefore increasing levels of exposure. One does not mean the other, and in this case is actually IMO absurd. Plant absorption and sunlight breakdown of Gly is extremely rapid. In fact applicators will tell you letting it sit in a tank for 12 hours(mixed) renders it useless.
The second (quoted)
"As a result, honeybees
continued foraging at our feeding station and thus also on plants that
expose bees to similar GLY concentrations, and the contaminated
nectar or pollen could be brought back by honeybees to the hive and
would then accumulate there. Rubio and co-workers (2014) found
traces of glyphosate in both organic (26–93 ppb, mean 50 ppb) and
non-organic (17–163 ppb, mean 66 ppb) honey samples from
several countries. Moreover, they found the presence of GLY traces
in honey samples made by bees feeding on wild and melliferous
flora. Although the amounts they reported are lower than the GLY
concentration that we used in this study, it does not mean that this
was representative of those concentrations the forager bees are
exposed to in the field."
The claim that it does not mean they were representative, which is again IMO nonsense. Its exactly what that report DID mean. (that was actually a great report IMO) They want you to assume the bees are exposed to roundup continually. Hardly anywhere near the truth. Nectar producing plants that are sprayed, are completely worthless to a bee within 48 hours. I would bet Nectar production actually stops quicker than that. The other key is roundup is a "once and done" application
Farming requires the plant to canopy and thereby crowd out weeds. (true for both corn and beans, and cotton) the goal is to knock back the other vegetation long enough for the Crop to get established.
In the real world the exposure is short and very limited. While we view a lot of acres as sprayed, very few are actually containing forage type plants in bloom.
Her in the Midwest we run into huge crops of winter annuals, and even Canola that is sprayed in bloom with GLY and other desiccants bees adapt very quickly. While its heart breaking to watch 200 acres of yellow rocket burned down (term we use) I am glad that the Roundup, and Roundup ready seeds made it possible to get the 2 weeks of forage from it to start with. The good here is outweighing the bad. That may not be true everywhere, but I am darn sure it is here in most of the Midwest. Here in IL alone I would estimate we get probably around 10 million acres of good usable winter annuals (hensbit, mustard, yellow rocket, dandylions, onions, and a few others) that gets to bloom for 2-6 weeks in the spring. I am sure that far outweighs the small cost.
Charles
***********************************************
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
|
