4.7 Article

Exposure to acetamiprid influences the development and survival ability of worker bees (Apis mellifera L.) from larvae to adults

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION
Volume 266, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115345

Keywords

Apis mellifera; Acetamiprid; Development; Survival; Gene expression

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31760714]
  2. Outstanding Young Talent Program of Jiangxi Province [20162BCB23029]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In most cases, honey bees experience pesticide pollution in a long-term period through direct or indirect exposure, such as the development process from larvae to the pre-harvest stage. At present, little is known about how honey bees respond to pesticide stresses during the continuous development period. This study aims to examine effects of long-term acetamiprid exposure on the development and survival of honey bees, and further present the expression profile in larvae, 1-day-old, and 7-day-old adult worker bees that related to immune, detoxification, acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and memory. Honey bees from 2-day-old larvae to 14-day-old adults except the pupal stage were continuously fed with different acetamiprid solutions (0, 5, and 25 mg/L). We found that acetamiprid over 5 mg/L disturbed the development involving birth weight and emergence rate of newly emerged bees, and reduced the proportion of capped cells of larvae at 25 mg/L; gene expression related to immune and detoxification of worker bees exposed to acetamiprid was roughly activated, returned and then inhibited from larval to emerged and to the late adult stage, respectively. Moreover, lifespans of bees treated with acetamiprid at 25 mg/L were significantly reduced. The present study reflects the potential risk for honey bees continuously exposed to acetamiprid in the development stage. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available