IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlpse/v67y2021i6id135-2021-pse.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Findings of herbicide and fungicide residues in bee bread

Author

Listed:
  • Aneta Bokšová

    (Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Jan Kazda

    (Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Martina Stejskalová

    (Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Tomáš Šubrt

    (Department of Systems Engineering, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Leoš Uttl

    (Department of Food Analysis and Nutrition, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Petr Mráz

    (Department of Food Analysis and Nutrition, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Jan Bartoška

    (Department of Systems Engineering, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The honey bee is one of the insects that is significantly endangered by the application of pesticides in the cultivation of crops. Not only is acute toxicity dangerous, but the importance of chronic poisoning by low doses of pesticides in hives is growing. The behavior of bees can be affected not only by insecticide residues but also by herbicide and fungicide residues. In 2016-2018, samples of bee bread were analysed for pesticide content at 25 different localities from intensive agricultural production areas of the Czech Republic. Substances were extracted by QuEChERS and determined by liquid chromatography, together with mass spectrometric detection. We detected up to 18 pesticides in one sample. In total, during 2016-2018, we identified 53 active substances. Fifteen substances (31%) were herbicidal, 23 substances (47%) of fungicidal nature and 6 substances (12%) of insecticidal nature. The coefficient of variation showed large differences in the frequency of revealed pesticides between years. For substances sprayed outside period attractive for pollinators (mainly herbicides and some fungicides), the usual methodology cannot reliably determine the degree of contamination, and thus the actual contamination with these substances may be even higher than demonstrated in this study.

Suggested Citation

  • Aneta Bokšová & Jan Kazda & Martina Stejskalová & Tomáš Šubrt & Leoš Uttl & Petr Mráz & Jan Bartoška, 2021. "Findings of herbicide and fungicide residues in bee bread," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 67(6), pages 343-352.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlpse:v:67:y:2021:i:6:id:135-2021-pse
    DOI: 10.17221/135/2021-PSE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://pse.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/135/2021-PSE.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://pse.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/135/2021-PSE.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/135/2021-PSE?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard J. Gill & Oscar Ramos-Rodriguez & Nigel E. Raine, 2012. "Combined pesticide exposure severely affects individual- and colony-level traits in bees," Nature, Nature, vol. 491(7422), pages 105-108, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. PK Gupta, 2018. "An Assessment of Relative Risks to Human/Ecological Health Biotech Crops versus Other Human Activities," Current Investigations in Agriculture and Current Research, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 1(2), pages 51-62, February.
    2. Kleczkowski, Adam & Ellis, Ciaran & Hanley, Nick & Goulson, David, 2017. "Pesticides and bees: Ecological-economic modelling of bee populations on farmland," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 360(C), pages 53-62.
    3. Lauren C. Ponisio & Paul R. Ehrlich, 2016. "Diversification, Yield and a New Agricultural Revolution: Problems and Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Liu, Wenjing & Wang, Jingsheng & Li, Chao & Chen, Baoxiong & Sun, Yufang, 2019. "Using Bibliometric Analysis to Understand the Recent Progress in Agroecosystem Services Research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 293-305.
    5. Banks, H.T. & Banks, J.E. & Bommarco, Riccardo & Laubmeier, A.N. & Myers, N.J. & Rundlöf, Maj & Tillman, Kristen, 2017. "Modeling bumble bee population dynamics with delay differential equations," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 351(C), pages 14-23.
    6. Patricia A. Henríquez-Piskulich & Constanza Schapheer & Nicolas J. Vereecken & Cristian Villagra, 2021. "Agroecological Strategies to Safeguard Insect Pollinators in Biodiversity Hotspots: Chile as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-31, June.
    7. G. Kleftodimos & N. Gallai & Ch. Kephaliacos, 2021. "Ecological-economic modeling of pollination complexity and pesticide use in agricultural crops," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 297-323, October.
    8. Berthet, Elsa T. & Bretagnolle, Vincent & Gaba, Sabrina, 2022. "Place-based social-ecological research is crucial for designing collective management of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    9. A Strouhova & J Velisek & A Stara, 2023. "Selected neonicotinoids and associated risk for aquatic organisms," Veterinární medicína, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(8), pages 313-336.
    10. Patricia P.A. Henríquez‐piskulich & Constanza Schapheer & Nicolas Vereecken & Cristian Villagra, 2021. "Agroecological strategies to safeguard insect pollinators in biodiversity hotspots: Chile as a case study," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/328659, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Jean-Marc Bonmatin & L.P. Belzunces & Cyril Vidau & Amélie Bajolet & Elodie Nguyen, 2023. "Toxibees: Methodology For Scoring Molecules From The Toxibees Tool [Toxibees : Methodologie De Notation Des Molecules De L’Outil Toxibees]," Post-Print hal-04630350, HAL.
    12. Mack, G. & Finger, R. & Ammann, J. & El Benni, N., 2023. "Modelling policies towards pesticide-free agricultural production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    13. Ullrika Sahlin & Maj Rundlöf, 2017. "Differences in the strengths of evidence matters in risk–risk trade-offs," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(8), pages 988-994, August.
    14. Lauren Brzozowski & Michael Mazourek, 2018. "A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-25, June.
    15. Luciano Pilati & Mario Prestamburgo, 2016. "Sequential Relationship between Profitability and Sustainability: The Case of Migratory Beekeeping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, January.
    16. Caleb Kiplimo Bett, 2017. "Factors Influencing Quality Honey Production," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 7(11), pages 281-292, November.
    17. Daria Ilić & Boris Brkić & Maja Turk Sekulić, 2024. "Biomonitoring: Developing a Beehive Air Volatiles Profile as an Indicator of Environmental Contamination Using a Sustainable In-Field Technique," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-11, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlpse:v:67:y:2021:i:6:id:135-2021-pse. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.