15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Neonicotinoid detection in wild turkeys ( Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) in Ontario, Canada

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The use of neonicotinoid insecticides in agriculture is now recognized for the health risks it poses to non-target wildlife, with associated honey bee mortality especially concerning. Research directed toward the presence and effects of these pesticides on terrestrial vertebrates that consume neonicotinoid-coated seeds, such as wild turkeys ( Meleagris gallopavo silvestris), is lacking. This study used liquid chromatography attached to a tandem mass spectrometer to assess the liver from 40 wild turkeys for neonicotinoid and other pesticide residues and compared detected levels of these contaminants across the southern Ontario, Canada. Nine (22.5%) wild turkeys had detectible levels of neonicotinoid residues—clothianidin in eight, and thiamethoxam in three. Two (5.0%) of these turkeys had detectable levels of both clothianidin and thiamethoxam. Fuberidazole was detected in two (5.0%) wild turkeys. The highest level of thiamethoxam detected was 0.16 ppm, while clothianidin was detected at 0.12 ppm, and fuberidazole at 0.0094 ppm. Knowledge of exposure in free-ranging wildlife is critical for better understanding the effects of neonicotinoids on wildlife health; thus, these data help establish baseline data for southern Ontario wild turkeys and provide context for reference values in future analyses.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Overview of the status and global strategy for neonicotinoids.

          In recent years, neonicotinoid insecticides have been the fastest growing class of insecticides in modern crop protection, with widespread use against a broad spectrum of sucking and certain chewing pests. As potent agonists, they act selectively on insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), their molecular target site. The discovery of neonicotinoids can be considered as a milestone in insecticide research and greatly facilitates the understanding of functional properties of the insect nAChRs. In this context, the crystal structure of the acetylcholine-binding proteins provides the theoretical foundation for designing homology models of the corresponding receptor ligand binding domains within the nAChRs, a useful basis for virtual screening of chemical libraries and rational design of novel insecticides acting on these practically relevant channels. Because of the relatively low risk for nontarget organisms and the environment, the high target specificity of neonicotinoid insecticides, and their versatility in application methods, this important class has to be maintained globally for integrated pest management strategies and insect resistance management programs. Innovative concepts for life-cycle management, jointly with the introduction of generic products, have made neonicotinoids the most important chemical class for the insecticide market.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Seed coating with a neonicotinoid insecticide negatively affects wild bees.

            Understanding the effects of neonicotinoid insecticides on bees is vital because of reported declines in bee diversity and distribution and the crucial role bees have as pollinators in ecosystems and agriculture. Neonicotinoids are suspected to pose an unacceptable risk to bees, partly because of their systemic uptake in plants, and the European Union has therefore introduced a moratorium on three neonicotinoids as seed coatings in flowering crops that attract bees. The moratorium has been criticized for being based on weak evidence, particularly because effects have mostly been measured on bees that have been artificially fed neonicotinoids. Thus, the key question is how neonicotinoids influence bees, and wild bees in particular, in real-world agricultural landscapes. Here we show that a commonly used insecticide seed coating in a flowering crop can have serious consequences for wild bees. In a study with replicated and matched landscapes, we found that seed coating with Elado, an insecticide containing a combination of the neonicotinoid clothianidin and the non-systemic pyrethroid β-cyfluthrin, applied to oilseed rape seeds, reduced wild bee density, solitary bee nesting, and bumblebee colony growth and reproduction under field conditions. Hence, such insecticidal use can pose a substantial risk to wild bees in agricultural landscapes, and the contribution of pesticides to the global decline of wild bees may have been underestimated. The lack of a significant response in honeybee colonies suggests that reported pesticide effects on honeybees cannot always be extrapolated to wild bees.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A review of the direct and indirect effects of neonicotinoids and fipronil on vertebrate wildlife

              Concerns over the role of pesticides affecting vertebrate wildlife populations have recently focussed on systemic products which exert broad-spectrum toxicity. Given that the neonicotinoids have become the fastest-growing class of insecticides globally, we review here 150 studies of their direct (toxic) and indirect (e.g. food chain) effects on vertebrate wildlife—mammals, birds, fish, amphibians and reptiles. We focus on two neonicotinoids, imidacloprid and clothianidin, and a third insecticide, fipronil, which also acts in the same systemic manner. Imidacloprid and fipronil were found to be toxic to many birds and most fish, respectively. All three insecticides exert sub-lethal effects, ranging from genotoxic and cytotoxic effects, and impaired immune function, to reduced growth and reproductive success, often at concentrations well below those associated with mortality. Use of imidacloprid and clothianidin as seed treatments on some crops poses risks to small birds, and ingestion of even a few treated seeds could cause mortality or reproductive impairment to sensitive bird species. In contrast, environmental concentrations of imidacloprid and clothianidin appear to be at levels below those which will cause mortality to freshwater vertebrates, although sub-lethal effects may occur. Some recorded environmental concentrations of fipronil, however, may be sufficiently high to harm fish. Indirect effects are rarely considered in risk assessment processes and there is a paucity of data, despite the potential to exert population-level effects. Our research revealed two field case studies of indirect effects. In one, reductions in invertebrate prey from both imidacloprid and fipronil uses led to impaired growth in a fish species, and in another, reductions in populations in two lizard species were linked to effects of fipronil on termite prey. Evidence presented here suggests that the systemic insecticides, neonicotinoids and fipronil, are capable of exerting direct and indirect effects on terrestrial and aquatic vertebrate wildlife, thus warranting further review of their environmental safety.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                519.993.3366 , amacdo21@uoguelph.ca
                Journal
                Environ Sci Pollut Res Int
                Environ Sci Pollut Res Int
                Environmental Science and Pollution Research International
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0944-1344
                1614-7499
                27 April 2018
                27 April 2018
                2018
                : 25
                : 16
                : 16254-16260
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8198, GRID grid.34429.38, Department of Pathobiology, Ontario Veterinary College, , University of Guelph, ; Guelph, ON NIG 2W1 Canada
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8198, GRID grid.34429.38, Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative, Ontario Veterinary College, , University of Guelph, ; Guelph, ON NIG 2W1 Canada
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2184 7612, GRID grid.410334.1, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Science and Technology Branch, National Wildlife Research Center, ; Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Canada
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 738X, GRID grid.213876.9, Present Address: Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study, , University of Georgia, ; Athens, GA 30602 USA
                Author notes

                Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

                Article
                2093
                10.1007/s11356-018-2093-0
                5984634
                29704179
                04883f8f-2f3e-43d7-885e-d5446860f163
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 8 February 2018
                : 20 April 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007079, Ontario Ministry of Food and Agriculture;
                Award ID: 2013-1530
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (CA)
                Categories
                Short Research and Discussion Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

                General environmental science
                bioaccumulation,birds,insecticides,neonicotinoids,non-target species,pesticides,treated seeds,wild turkey

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content322

                Cited by12

                Most referenced authors211