The Guardian says that “A series of high-profile scientific studies has linked neonicotinoids – the world’s most widely used insecticides – to huge losses in the number of queen bees produced and big rises in the numbers of “disappeared” bees – those that fail to return from foraging trips.”  Did they? When I read things like this, I begin to worry because the only studies that I saw that showed this were laboratory studies and limited field trials. Indeed, an extract from a FERA report says the following:

“Three recent studies in which bees were dosed with neonicotinoids showed sub-lethal effects on bees. The results from these studies contrast with a growing body of evidence from field studies that has failed to show an effect of neonicotinoids when bees are allowed to forage naturally in the presence of crops treated with neonicotinoids. The evidence suggests the reason for this difference is over-dosing of bees in the dosing studies; in all cases there is evidence that the doses of neonicotinoids presented to bees under laboratory or semi-field conditions were unrealistically high. The dosing studies therefore represented the extreme case in a field situation. In the only study in which dose was measured the dose was much greater than would have ever been experienced in a field situation.” 

The full report can be found here: http://www.fera.defra.gov.uk/scienceResearch/scienceCapabilities/chemicalsEnvironment/documents/reportPS2371Mar13.pdf

Now don’t get me wrong; I am all for ridding our lands of pesticides, but one of Rachel Carson’s central tenets was that it defeats the object of any anti pesticide campaign if the science involved is not seen to be fully evidence based. Unless this is the case, decision makers remain unconvinced and decisions made can have unintended consequences.   

The evidence against neonicotinoids is (so far) contradictory and the data that has been collected so far is mainly laboratory-based, not field-based. It would be a pity if a ban based on such evidence removed the focus on other possible causes of bee loss such as the rise of exotic diseases, viruses, beekeeping management (or mismanagement) practices, and most of all, loss of habitat. The ban trial-period during which much research and field observation can and should be carried out without possible contamination by these insecticides is a good idea, and perhaps bees will recover ground, but I think we must also remember to ask that now these insecticides are banned, what will replace them? Something old and horrible or something new and even more horrible, because something will! Perhaps we should be careful what we wish for.

The prototypes by researchers at Harvard University weigh 80 milligrams and have managed short controlled flights by flapping their mechanical wings while still tethered to a tiny power cable. For the moment, the power cable has to stay on until solutions can be found for a portable high energy-density fuel cell that is strong enough and light enough to sustain independent flight. The mini bees have two thin wings that flap at 120 times per second and flight tests have shown they can make basic manoeuvres, including hovering in place for about 20 seconds – before crashing.

Experts are studying real-world flies for clues on how to improve the robots. “Flies perform some of the most amazing aerobatics in nature using only tiny brains,” said Sawyer Fuller, a postdoctoral researcher and study co-author. “Their capabilities exceed what we can do with our robot, so we would like to understand their biology better and apply it to our own work.”

The process of getting the robots to fly has taken 12 years, and it’s really only because of this lab’s recent breakthroughs in manufacturing, materials, and design that researchers  have even been able to get this far. And it has worked, spectacularly well, so just imagine a swarm of the things.

There are a host of possible uses for the robotic insects, including military surveillance, search and rescue missions, exploration of hazardous environments, traffic surveillance, and weather and climate mapping. Unfortunately, though, it seems they won’t be taking over all of the bees’ regular duties.

For those interested, the robobees won’t sting but neither will they be able to produce honey. Their communication methods will probably be different as well and we are unlikely to see them dancing.  Oh! And there won’t be a queen either!

Take a look at one of these bees flying at: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2013/05/02/robot-bees-learn-to-fly/

Well a team of entomologists from the University of Illinois has found a possible link between the practice of feeding commercial honeybees high-fructose corn syrup and the collapse of honeybee colonies around the world. The team outlines their research and findings in a paper they’ve had published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (USA).

Since approximately 2006, groups that manage commercial honeybee colonies have been reporting what has become known as colony collapse disorder—whole colonies of bees simply died, of no apparent cause. As time has passed, the disorder has been reported at sites all across the world, even as scientists have been racing to find the cause, and a possible cure. To date, most evidence has implicated pesticides used to kill other insects such as mites. In this new effort, the researchers have found evidence to suggest the real culprit might be high-fructose corn syrup, which beekeepers have been feeding bees as their natural staple, honey, has been taken away from them. Commercial honeybee enterprises began feeding bees high-fructose corn syrup back in the 70′s after research was conducted that indicated that doing so was safe. Since that time, new pesticides have been developed and put into use and over time it appears the bees’ immunity response to such compounds may have become compromised. The researchers aren’t suggesting that high-fructose corn syrup is itself toxic to bees, instead, they say their findings indicate that by eating the replacement food instead of honey, the bees are not being exposed to other chemicals that help the bees fight off toxins, such as those found in pesticides.

Specifically, they found that when bees are exposed to the enzyme p-coumaric, their immune system appears stronger—it turns on detoxification genes. P-coumaric is found in pollen walls, not nectar, and makes its way into honey inadvertently via sticking to the legs of bees as they visit flowers. Similarly, the team discovered other compounds found in poplar sap that appear to do much the same thing. It all together adds up to a diet that helps bees fight off toxins, the researchers report. Taking away the honey to sell it, and feeding the bees high-fructose corn syrup instead, they claim, compromises their immune systems, making them more vulnerable to the toxins that are meant to kill other bugs.

But having said that, it appears that brute force rather than aerodynamic efficiency is the key to bumblebee flight. Oxford University scientists have discovered that aerodynamically-speaking bumblebee flight is surprisingly inefficient and one researcher even suggested that, ‘it’s as if the insect is ‘split in half’ as not only do its left and right wings flap independently but the airflow around them never joins up to help the bee slip through the air more easily.’

He went on to say that “our observations showed that, instead of the aerodynamic finesse found in most other insects, bumblebees have adopted a brute force approach powered by a huge thorax and fuelled by energy-rich nectar. This approach may be due to its particularly wide body shape, or it could have evolved to make bumblebees more manoeuvrable in the air at the cost of a less efficient flying style.” Professor Adrian Thomas of Oxford’s Department of Zoology who co-authored this research commented that “a bumblebee is a tanker-truck, its job is to transport nectar and pollen back to the hive. Efficiency is unlikely to be important for that way of life.” 

Reference: Richard James Bomphrey, Graham K. Taylor and Adrian L. R. Thomas. Smoke visualization of free-flying bumblebees indicates independent leading-edge vortices on each wing pair. Experiments in Fluids, 2009; 46 (5): 811 DOI: 10.1007/s00348-009-0631-8

Toxic or venomous animals, like bumblebees, are often brightly coloured to tell would-be predators to keep away. However scientists at Royal Holloway, University of London and Queen Mary, University of London have found a bumblebee’s defence could extend further than its distinctive colour pattern and may indeed be linked to their characteristic shape, flight pattern or buzzing sound. Dr Nigel Raine, from the School of Biological Sciences at Royal Holloway, explained that the first time a bird eats a brightly coloured bumblebee it gets a nasty surprise.

“Remembering the bee’s bright colours may help the bird to avoid making the same mistake again. We wanted to test the idea that bumblebee species in the same location converge on a similar appearance to enhance protection from local predators.

“The team compared the loss rates of bumblebee populations with different colour patterns in the same environment — in Sardinia, Germany and the UK. If the colour pattern is important, the researchers expected that predators would be more likely to eat bees which looked very different to those they had previously encountered in their local area. But this is not what they found. Predators didn’t seem to target the unusually coloured bees from the non-native populations they tested. Perhaps the bumbling way in which all bumblebees fly, or their distinctive deep buzzing are more important clues to help would-be predators avoid a nasty sting.

“Birds see the world very differently to humans, particularly their ability to see light in the ultraviolet range of the spectrum. The team compared the colour patterns of different bumblebee populations and showed that in addition to the bright bands we can see, the white tip of the bumblebee’s tail is very obvious to birds as it reflects strongly in ultraviolet light. Such signals are also important to bees which detect ultraviolet markings on flowers which are invisible to us.

“It seems that although birds can tell the difference between the colour patterns of the different bee populations in our experiments, they probably find it hard to tell them apart in the fraction of a second when a bee flies past. Perhaps it’s better for the bird to steer clear of all animals which look, sound, or fly like a bumblebee to avoid the danger of eating one.”

Article Source: The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Royal Holloway, University of London.

The team has called for greater action to help protect the species. Their study was carried out with the help of the Scottish Beekeepers Association. The scientists believe the presence of intensive agriculture and large areas of oilseed rape in the east could be linked to the poorer results for the area. However, they criticised the way data on pesticide use is gathered – or not  gathered – saying the current system makes it impossible to properly determine what is causing honey bees to die.

Dr Christopher Connolly, who led the research, said that “It could be that the lack of natural habitat is the cause. It may be that bees and other pollinators may not be getting such a balanced diet. What we do have in the east and not the west is intensive agriculture. In the west, it’s largely wild crops that they are feeding on, such as trees, heather and gorse. It could be that the intensive agriculture and intensive levels of pesticides are contributing to the failure of the bees.”

Dr Connolly believes that nicotine-based pesticides, neonicotinoids, may be contributing to the deaths of bees feeding on oilseed rape.

Oilseed rape is more commonly grown on the east of Scotland and is used by some beekeepers to rapidly “feed up” their insects in preparation for winter. All oilseed rape is treated with neonicotinoids, you can’t buy it without it being pre-treated with neonicotinoids.

Dr Adrian Dyer said previous studies had shown that flower colour evolved to attract bees as pollinators. Some flowers had evolved spectral signatures to suit bee pollinators, but the story for bird-pollinated flowers was not clear. Researchers from the Monash School of Biological Sciences collected spectral data from over 200 flowering plants and identified the pollinators as birds or insects. Then carried out phylogenetic analyses to identify how the flowers have evolved spectral signatures. They found that flowers exclusively pollinated by birds had initially evolved to suit insect vision, but more recently the spectral signature of bird-pollinated flowers had shifted towards longer wavelengths.  Mr The research showed that rather than just having any type of red reflection, bird-pollinated flowers targeted the specific wavelengths that best match the long wavelength tetrachromatic (four colour) vision of many Australian native birds.

Bird-pollinated flowers may have evolved red signals to be inconspicuousness to some insects that are poor pollinators, whilst also enhancing the discrimination of bird pollinators. The work has broad significance for understanding how flower colours have evolved to suit specific pollinators, and how colour may continue to evolve in particular environments depending upon the availability of effective pollinators.

The colour cues in Australian flowers would be easily detected by honeyeaters, the most important family of nectar feeding birds in Australia. Hummingbirds in the Americas have similar visual systems to honeyeaters, so we expect to find similar colour signals among American flowers. But in Asia and Africa, birds with a different type of colour vision are the primary avian pollinators. If flower colours in these regions are tuned to the specific capacities of their own birds, we would have strong evidence that we’ve cracked the code that plants use to communicate with birds.”

Article Source: Reprinted from materials provided by Monash University.

Journal Reference: Mani Shrestha, Adrian G. Dyer, Skye Boyd-Gerny, Bob B. M. Wong, Martin Burd. Shades of red: bird-pollinated flowers target the specific colour discrimination abilities of avian vision. New Phytologist, 2013; 198 (1): 301 DOI: 10.1111/nph.12135