Hygeia AnalyticsLogo

Menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • About Hygeia
    Analytics
    • Dynamic Presentations
    • Keywords and Site Map
    • Hygeia Analytics – Who We Are
    • Why Hygeia?
    • Funding and “Sound Science”
    • Acronyms and Glossary
    • Sign-Up for Updates
  • Nutrition
    • Introduction and Nutrition 101
      • Good Fat Bad Fat
      • Fatty Acids
        • Primer on the Fatty Acids in Milk
      • Impact of Livestock Feeding
    • Antioxidants
      • Organic Farming Elevates Antioxidants
      • Maximizing Antioxidant Intake
    • Organic vs. Conventional Foods
      • Milk and Dairy Products
        • 2018 Grassmilk Paper
        • PLOS ONE Study
        • Dairy Meta-Analysis
      • Multi Food Meta-Analyses
        • Meat Products
        • Plant-Based Foods
        • Smith-Spangler et al.
        • Dangour et al.
        • The Organic Center Report
      • Food Specific Comparisons
        • General
        • Fruits and Vegetables
        • Wine and Wine Grapes
    • Considering Nutritional Quality
      • Impact of Genetics and Production Systems
      • New Tool for Food Security
      • Transforming Jane Doe’s Diet
      • Nutritional Quality Index
    • Nutrient Decline
    • Other Choices and Challenges
      • Human Health
      • Dietary Choices
  • Pesticides
    • Usage
      • Pesticide Use Data Sources
        • Pesticide Use Indicators
      • PUDS – The Pesticide Use Data System
    • Dietary Risks
      • The Dietary Risk Index (DRI)
    • Risk Assessment and Regulation
      • Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
      • Glyphosate/Roundup Case Study
      • The Lowdown on Roundup
      • Does Glyphosate/Roundup Cause Cancer?
      • 2019 Glyphosate Genotoxicity Paper
    • Impacts of GE on Pesticide Use
    • Environmental, Human Health, and Other Impacts of Pesticides
  • Ag Biotech
    • Key Historical Documents – Donald Duvick
    • Key Historical Documents – Arpad Pusztai
    • Herbicide Resistant Crops
    • Weed Resistance
    • Bt Transgenic Crops
    • Resistant Insects
    • Health Risks and Safety Assessments
    • Regulation of GE Crop Technology
    • Marketing, Economics, and Public Relations
    • Patenting and Intellectual Property Issues
    • Labeling
  • Other Issues
    • Animal Products
    • The Future of Food
    • Global Food Security
    • Natural Resources and Climate Change
    • Alternatives to Industrial Ag
    • Policy and Politics
    • Scientific Integrity
    • Soil Health
    • Yields
  • Recent Posts
    • Hot Science
    • In The News
    • Hygeia’s Blog
  • Special
    Coverage
    • Organic Apples in Washington State
    • Dicamba Drift Crisis
    • Organic Food Consumption Lowers Cancer Risk
    • Organic Integrity

Growing Evidence Tracks the Spread of Neonics Up and Through Branches on the Tree of Life

Posted on May 10, 2019 in Animals, Environmental Impacts, Hot Science, Pesticides | 732 Views

A Scientific American piece on neonicotinoid insecticides begins with a fascinating story about a wildlife rehab clinic in Montana. In the 1990s, a “bizarre trend” was noticed — an unusual number and diversity of birth defects in roadkill deer and other big game autopsied at the clinic.

Scientists at the clinic pondered what could have possibly changed enough to trigger such a dramatic change in birth defects. One possible explanation was exposures to the new neonic insecticides being applied in the area, a hypothesis published in a 2012 a paper.

The rehab clinic’s observations caught the eye of a research team at South Dakota State University, who conducted an experiment at their Wildlife and Fisheries Captive Facility on white-tail deer.  They dosed female deer and their fawns with imidacloprid, the most widely used of the new neonics, and compared birth outcomes to a control population that was not exposed to the insecticide.  They identified several health impacts in the dosed group, including diminished fawn survival, lower body and organ weight, and even reduced activity level in both females and fawns.

Also, the researchers were surprised to find that their control group also had detectable neonics in their bodies – even though they were never dosed.  The implication — this class of insecticides is becoming ubiquitous in the environment, and helps explain those initial observations from the rehab center in Montana.

Unfortunately, this all makes sense, as Scientific American reports, because “90 percent of corn and 50 percent of soybeans in the United States are treated with neonicotinoids” (Daley, 2019). The insecticides are soaked into the seeds, and then move systemically through the plant growing from treated seed. Delivering pesticides via seed treatments requires far less active ingredient per acre, and avoids most, above-ground non-target exposures.  But only a small amount – 2% to 20% – of the neonics applied as seed treatments ends up in the plant, so where does the rest of it go?

And then there is one more important piece to this scientific puzzle – the half-life of these chemicals is up to 1,400 days, long enough for it to bioaccumulate in the environment after repeated, annual applications.  This helps explain why research teams worldwide are publishing so many papers on the adverse impacts of neonicotinoids on deer, bees, birds, small mammals, and some large ones too.

While the European Union and some states are taking action to reduce reliance on neonics, the U.S. EPA is in a neonic holding pattern — neither approving major new uses, nor limiting existing ones. The pesticide industry stands firm by their assurances that neonics are the best, and safest alternative for control of a variety of above and below-ground insects.

Scientists are close to explaining at a mechanistic level how even very-low levels of neonic exposure to bees alters bee behavior and undermines hive integrity. Presumably, even the U.S. EPA will not stand idly by if both domestic and wild bee populations continue their 15-plus year decline.

Sources:

Berheim, E. H., Jenks, J. A., Lundgren, J. G., Michel, E. S., Grove, D., & Jensen, W. F., “Effects of Neonicotinoid Insecticides on Physiology and Reproductive Characteristics of Captive Female and Fawn White-tailed Deer,” Scientific Reports, 2019, 9(1), 4534. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-40994-9.

Daley, Jim, “As Pesticide Turns Up in More Places, Safety Concerns Mount,” Scientific American, Date published: 04/30/2019, Date accessed: 05/10/2019.

Posted in Animals, Environmental Impacts, Hot Science, Pesticides | Tagged Neonicotinoids, Pesticide Impacts, Seeds

Related Posts

Will This 9th Circuit Order Finally Get Chlorpyrifos Out of the Food Supply?→

Implications of EPA’s Decision to Renew Dicamba Registration for Over-the-Top Use→

Neonic Seed Treatments in the (Science) News→

Dr. Benbrook Testifies Before the Philadelphia City Council as they Consider Glyphosate Ban→

California Study Raises the Question: Are Monarchs the New Canary in the Coal Mine?→

Europe is Calling for a 50% Reduction in Pesticide Use by 2030, But Insect Advocates Say More is Needed→

Implications of the Big Dicamba Decision→

Appeals Court Rules EPA “Substantially Understated” Risks from Dicamba Use, Revokes Registration and Bans Sales of Some Dicamba Herbicides→

©2016 Hygeia-Analytics.com. All Rights Reserved.

Menu