Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survivaL October 2021
Introduction
I
t is no secret that our pollinator species are in trouble. For more than a decade scientific study after scientific study has shown alarming declines in bees, butterflies, other pollinators and insect species in general. This is huge cause for alarm, not only in terms of the loss of biodiversity but also in terms of the pollination services that these species provide.
It has been estimated that the value of insect pollination to the UK economy is somewhere in the region of £690 million per year. 20% of UK crops are pollinated by insects including the 250 plus species of wild bees. The crops they help pollinate include tomatoes, strawberries and apples. If the UK were to lose its pollinators the cost of artificial pollination has been estimated at £1.8 billion per year.1 Even a 30% decline in pollinator species has been estimated to lead to a reduction in yield that would cost the UK over £188 million per year.2 The losses of bees and pollinators are not insignificant. According to a recent study, every square kilometre in the UK has lost an average of 11 species of bee and hoverfly between 1980 and 2013.3 In the East of England alone 17 bee species have become extinct, and an estimated 25 additional species of bee are currently at risk of extinction in the same area.4 Whilst multiple factors are involved in pollinator declines, there is widespread consensus that the use of pesticides is one of the most significant drivers. However, the focus to date has almost solely been on the impact of insecticides, and in particular on one class of insecticide known as neonicotinoids. This is perhaps not surprising. After all, insecticides kill insects – that is what they are designed to do. And, as with any pesticide, they do not just limit their impact on
those species that are targeted as pests but also affect non-target species, many of which are pollinators. However, even with the clear understanding that insecticides kill non-target species, plus the numerous scientific studies showing the impact of neonicotinoids on honeybees, it still took over ten years for their use to be restricted in the UK. Meanwhile, outside of Europe their use continues largely unabated. Many assumed that with the banning of neonicotinoids in the EU and UK, bees and pollinators would now be safe from harms caused by pesticides. However, this view ignores the impacts that ongoing, widespread use of other pesticides continues to have on bees and other pollinator species. In fact, numerous studies have shown that other classes of pesticides, and in particular herbicides, can harm pollinators both directly and indirectly. Pollinators are also often exposed to more than one active substance at a time, and interactions between different pesticides can cause more harm than exposure to the individual chemicals – a phenomenon known as the ‘cocktail effect’. In addition, habitats and food sources can be poisoned or destroyed by the use of herbicides which, while often not posing an immediate threat to pollinators in terms of acute toxicity, do remove the natural resources they rely upon, ultimately threatening their existence. So while the banning of neonicotinoids has removed one of the key pesticide threats to pollinators, at least in the UK and EU, there remain significant threats to pollinators from a wide variety of other pesticides. It’s vital that decision-makers broaden their current narrow focus on a small group of insecticides and take action to protect pollinators from the harmful impacts of all pesticides and, in particular, pay more attention to the impact of herbicides.
1
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
Herbicides: What are they and how do they work
H
erbicides are used to kill plants, weeds and other vegetation that is considered to be interfering with the growing of crops or that in other ways presents some kind of a risk to human health or the built environment. They are the most widely used class of pesticides globally5 and their use is not confined to agriculture but also encompasses the amenity sector (for example urban areas and sports pitches) as well as home gardening. At time of writing, the UK approves 97 active substances classified as herbicides and 352 products containing herbicide active substances.6, 7
Herbicides work in a range of ways and can be broadly grouped into the following classifications:
66 Selective herbicides – these control particular types of plants while not affecting others. They are most commonly used to control broadleaf weeds while not affecting grasses. Examples of selective herbicides include clopyralid and 2,4-D
66 Non-selective herbicides – this type of herbicide will act against any vegetation and are often
employed for completely clearing a site of vegetation. Examples of non-selective herbicides include aclonifen and glyphosate.
66 Contact herbicides – these work by “burning off” any foliage with which they come into contact. They are in general non-residual which means they have a very limited period of activity) and non-selective. Examples include pelargonic acid and carfentrazone-ethyl.
66 Systemic herbicides – these work by being absorbed into the plant. They destroy the entire plant rather than just the areas with which they come into contact. They are generally slower acting than contact herbicides, are residual and can be both selective and non-selective. Examples of systemic herbicides include glyphosate and dicamba. The most widely used herbicides in the UK and beyond are glyphosate-based weedkillers. However, a variety of other herbicides are in use in the UK (such as 2,4-D and clopyralid), many of these have been shown to drive both human health and environmental problems.
Urban pesticide use The use of pesticides in our towns and cities is a fraction of that used in UK agriculture and yet it still has an impact on our bees and pollinators. In fact, as the farmed environment becomes more hostile to a wide variety of species, including bees and pollinators, we increasingly find them seeking refuge in our urban centres. However, the ingrained desire for ‘neat and tidy’ public spaces often means that herbicides are used to strip our towns and cities of diverse vegetation that could support and enhance urban biodiversity. The vast majority of pesticides used in towns and cities are herbicides (98.8% according to the most recent Government figures). Glyphosate-based products make up 77% of the total.33 In recent years, there has been a growing realisation that we can manage our urban spaces in a more biodiversity-friendly way and many towns and cities across the UK and beyond have already ended their use of herbicides. Instead, local councils and other land managers have adopted safer and more sustainable nonchemical alternatives for clearing those areas that require it, while allowing nature to take its course where possible. Given the nature emergency, it’s crucial that we make our urban centres into appealing places in which bees and pollinators are able to thrive. Reducing and stopping the use of herbicides is key to achieving this, along with a mind-set that moves away from neat and tidy and towards an appreciation of nature. The benefits of this approach are multiple and not confined solely to biodiversity issues. Human health and the public purse can all benefit from going herbicide-free.
2
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
Herbicides: Increases in usage in UK agriculture
W
hile over the last thirty years there has been an overall decrease in the total weight of all herbicides used in the UK, there has been a significant increase in the area of agricultural land treated with herbicides which rose by 60% from 14.4 million hectares in 1990 to 23 million hectares in 2016 (the latest date for which Government data is available).8
In addition, the use of a number of specific herbicides have experienced dramatic rises since 1990. For example, the amount of pendimethalin applied increased from 341,419kg in 1990 to 1,357,629kg in 2016, an increase of 297%. Pendimethalin is a selective herbicide used for controlling annual grasses and some broadleaf weeds. Whilst not directly toxic to bees, it is highly toxic to some fish, aquatic invertebrates and aquatic plant species.9
Given the ubiquity of glyphosate both in the UK and globally, it is by far the most widely studied herbicide and there is therefore more evidence to refer to than for any other active substance. As a result of this, and the fact that glyphosate remains the most widely used herbicide in all UK sectors, the remainder of this report will focus largely on its effects. But many of the impacts identified – especially indirect ones – apply to other herbicides.
While some herbicides have been banned because of their potential to harm human health or the environment, in most of these instances other herbicides have stepped in to take their place – most notably glyphosate. The amount of glyphosate used in UK agriculture increased from 227,000kg in 1990 to 2.24 million kg in 2016. This represents an increase of nearly 900%.10 One of the main contributing factors in the huge increase in the amount of glyphosate applied has been its use as a pre-harvest desiccant. Pre-harvest desiccation is where a crop is sprayed with a substance, in this case an herbicide, to kill it and dry it in order to make it easier to harvest. There is debate about both the need for and the efficacy of pre harvest desiccation. In the UK, 78% of oil seed rape crop is desiccated but in Germany this figure is just 4%.11 The use of glyphosate as a desiccant has led not only to an increase in the amount of glyphosate being sprayed into the environment, but has also led to rises in glyphosate residues in grain based food items such as bread.12 During the debate about the relicensing of glyphosate in the European Union there were calls to ban its use as a desiccant. However, this was not made mandatory and so the UK continues to use it for that purpose, adding to the environmental glyphosate burden.
Bumblebee on teasel. Credit Pixabay
3
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
Herbicides: Indirect effects on bees and pollinators
H
abitat loss and decreasing plant diversity are perhaps the most significant and obvious indirect effects of herbicides impacting on bee and pollinator species in the UK.
The intensification of agriculture and creation of monocultures which rely upon high levels of herbicide use has led to massive declines in native wild plant species in terms of both abundance and diversity.13 The knock on impact means that bees and pollinators have smaller areas on which to forage and a much more limited and less-varied choice of plants to rely upon for both food and habitat. It is estimated that since 1945 the UK has lost 97% of its wildflower meadows.14 20% of British wildflowers are under serious threat of extinction.15 Arable species such as the corn buttercup, both a source of food and shelter for solitary bees, have faced severe declines as a result of herbicide use.16 As with any class of pesticide, the effects are not only felt on the particular target species. Herbicides are no different in this respect and they tend to kill many plants beyond just those ‘weeds’ at which they
are aimed. A study published in 2020 shows this to be the case, noting that the use of herbicides on fallow fields significantly reduced plant diversity over the long-term. Of perhaps greater concern, it also concluded that doses of herbicides at levels below the Recommended Field Application Concentration (RFAC) had an even greater impact in reducing diversity than using the same herbicides at the actual RFAC.17 While much of the justification for herbicide use centres around eliminating weeds in order to help increase crop yield, a 2016 study examining wheat production in France showed that there was no correlation between herbicide use and increased yields. What it did show, however, was that herbicide use reduced the prevalence of wild and rare plants rather than dealing with the abundant weed species.18 If we are to reverse bee and pollinator declines, then it is crucial that we protect the plant species upon which they depend by significantly reducing herbicide use in both agriculture and the amenity sector.
Combatting herbicide resistance Herbicide resistance is a growing problem in many areas of agriculture. In the UK, black grass, Italian rye grass and wild oats are particularly problematic species that have developed resistance to a variety of different herbicides. In 2018, resistance to glyphosate was reported for the first time in the UK when a study showed that some populations of sterile brome in Oxfordshire were starting to develop resistance.34 Herbicide resistance is a major issue for agriculture in the UK and elsewhere and is due almost entirely to the overuse of herbicides. Strategies for avoiding resistance include; reducing the use of herbicides; using a more diverse range of herbicides; instead of spraying herbicides apply spot treatments to only the most problematic weeds; increasing crop rotations; and changing or diversifying the type of crop that is grown. It is possible to combat resistance issues in ways which do not harm bees and pollinators. Instead of diversifying the number of herbicides that are used, it is far better to try a combination of actions such as varying crop rotations and growing more pollinator-friendly plants that could outcompete those species considered ‘weeds’. It also requires a mind-set shift – it’s crucial to remember that the aim is not for zero weeds, it’s about keeping weeds at levels below which they do not threaten the economic viability of the crop. Therefore, accepting more ‘weediness’ in crops is a key part of helping to fight resistance issues while protecting pollinators.
4
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
Herbicides: Direct impacts on bees and pollinators
W
hile the indirect impact of habitat loss has long been accepted as a significant factor in bee and pollinator declines, a growing body of evidence is starting to show that herbicides (and glyphosate in particular) can have harmful direct impacts on the health of bees and pollinators. It should be noted that much of this evidence focusses solely on impacts to honeybees which are farmed and can therefore essentially be thought of as ‘livestock’. As a result of this economic imperative, populations of honeybees are monitored much more closely than their wild counterparts. However, we know from the example of neonicotinoids, that when populations of honeybees plummet it is reasonable to assume that wild bees are also being negatively impacted. Whilst not as directly harmful to bees as neonicotinoids and other insecticides, it is becoming clear that glyphosate in particular can directly impact bees in more subtle ways.
Of particular concern are the effects of glyphosate on the gut bacteria of bees. Interfering with these bacteria can make bees more susceptible to the harmful effects of certain pathogens which cause the bee to die. Glyphosate works by targeting an enzyme that plants use to grow – destroy the enzyme, destroy the plant. Defenders of glyphosate have often stated that this will only effect plant species and does not translate to other non-plant species such as bees and humans. However, several recent studies, such as that by Blot N, Veillat L, Rouzé R, Delatte H (2019),19 have shown that this enzyme is used by some key bacteria and other organisms that work in bees’ guts. Exposure to glyphosate disrupts the functioning of this enzyme and subsequently impacts on the workings of bees’ digestive systems. The effects of this disruption have been documented by research from the University of Texas which has shown that young worker bees exposed to glyphosate at levels commonly found in the environment were more likely to die from infections.20 Further studies in Argentina by Walter M. Farina, and M. Sol Balbuena et.al, have shown that glyphosate can be assimilated into hives and disrupt the normal workings and organisational abilities of young worker bees. In their paper published in 2019, they found that glyphosate exposure affected the ability of bees to detect and remember the location of food sources
because their ability to navigate was negatively impacted. They stated that exposure to relatively low levels of glyphosate “impairs the cognitive capacities needed to retrieve and integrate spatial information for a successful return to the hive.”21 A Hawaiian study published in 2019 by Carl J. Berg, H. Peter King et.al,22 clearly showed that concentrations of glyphosate residues in honey were affected by the proximity of large scale agriculture to the hives, with higher levels found in those hives closer to treated fields. The presence of glyphosate residues in honey is a clear indicator that bees are being exposed to high levels of glyphosate via their daily foraging in agricultural areas. Luo, QH., Gao, J., Guo, Y. et al. in China published findings showing that glyphosate exposure can lower the weight of bee larvae and subsequently their survival rate in the hive, in some instances by up to 60%.23 The same research also reconfirmed that the herbicide interferes with bees’ gut bacteria, reducing their resilience and leaving them vulnerable to the lethal effects of a variety of diseases and pathogens.24 A meta-analysis of glyphosate toxicity on bees, published in May 202125, identified 16 papers containing 34 data sets relating to bee mortality and exposure to glyphosate. It concluded that exposure to glyphosate via ingestion or contact resulted in higher bee mortality rates. The authors also pointed out that there is a scarcity of studies that look specifically at this issue, particularly when considering wild and solitary bee species. While various studies have looked closely at the effects of glyphosate on bees, a study published in February 2021 by Straw, Carpentier and Brown26 showed that high levels of bee mortality can be linked to the extra ingredients that go into pesticide products (known as ‘co-formulants’). Their research revealed higher mortality rates for bumblebees when exposed to certain formulations, suggesting that the co-formulants with which glyphosate is mixed have the effect of heightening the risk to pollinators. Their research also showed that formulations (the whole pesticide product) can be more toxic to bees than the active substance alone. This is especially concerning given that the UK pesticide regime is designed to
5
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
test just one active substance at a time and the end product, which can include numerous co-formulants, is never tested, despite it being put out into the natural environment. Because the effects of glyphosate on bees are mostly sub-lethal they have been, until recently, overlooked by researchers and continue to be largely ignored by regulators. However, these more subtle impacts could be as harmful in the long-term as those of neonicotinoids and other insecticides.
Glyphosate is not the only herbicide that bees and other pollinators are exposed to but it is the only one that has any significant studies on its impacts. As a paper published in 2020 pointed out “Despite the extensive knowledge of the sublethal effects of neonicotinoids, research on other pesticide classes is underrepresented, with a notable absence in work on fungicides and herbicides.”27
Black and yellow longhorn beetle. Credit Shutterstock
6
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
Herbicides and the cocktail effect
T
conduct research into whether the negative impacts of glyphosate and other herbicides on pollinators are being amplified by interacting with other classes of pesticides.31
However, this is not the way in which organisms are exposed to pesticides in real world situations. In fact, bees and other pollinators are likely to come into contact with multiple pesticides in a wide range of different combinations while out foraging. Research undertaken by the University of Sussex has clearly shown that bumblebees foraging on wildflower strips around arable fields in the UK consume pollen that is contaminated with residues of multiple pesticides that have been applied to adjacent crops.28
In recognition of the threat posed to pollinators by pesticide cocktails, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is currently working on a new methodology that will make it possible to assess synergistic and cumulative effects of complex pesticide mixtures on honeybees. The ApisRAM project moves beyond the current approach of assessing just one pesticide at a time to look at the complex environments in which bees live.32 The project has potential to be particularly relevant to herbicides because it aims to capture chronic, sub-lethal and colony level effects of pesticide mixtures.
he effects of pesticides are for the most part looked at in isolation. Scientific studies tend to explore the impacts of a single chemical on a particular species, while the regulatory system sets safety limits and most other protective measures for just one pesticide at a time.
There is a growing body of evidence showing that different pesticides can combine to become more toxic (a phenomenon known as the ‘cocktail effect’), yet relatively little is known about how these combinatory effects might amplify, or present new and unexpected threats, to the health of bees and pollinators. However, a study published in 2019 in the USA, one of just a handful available, shows that the interaction of a so called ‘bee safe’ insecticide and a commonly used fungicide in field realistic doses harmed both bee behaviour and survival rates. The bees studied suffered higher mortality rates and exhibited abnormal behaviour, including poor coordination, apathy and hyperactivity.29 Pollen and honey taken from hives tends to show the presence of mixtures of pesticides. For example, a study of 19 hives undertaken in Europe revealed residues of both insecticides and fungicides, with a quarter of hives also testing positive for the presence of herbicides.30 What little research there is regarding the effects of pesticide cocktails on bees and pollinators has been focussed on the interactions between insecticides and fungicides. Herbicides have been largely ignored up until now, despite their ubiquity in the natural environment, meaning we have little understanding of how they are interacting with other pesticides to impact pollinators. It is therefore both crucial, and urgent, to
Common blue butterfly. Credit Pixabay
7
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
Reversing the harms – what can be done to better protect bees and pollinators from the impacts of herbicides
I
f the UK wants to halt – and reverse – declining pollinator numbers and biodiversity losses in general, it must take action on a number of fronts to reduce herbicide use. It is clear that herbicide use in agriculture is a significant driver of insect declines and supporting farmers to reduce usage must be a key focus. If efforts to halt, and ultimately reverse, pollinator declines are to be successful then the problem must be tackled in a truly cross-sectoral way with a mixture of legislative, practical and financial measures supported by decision-makers, farmers, retailers, academics and the public. Halting biodiversity loss is not a ‘nice to have’ it is an essential part of ensuring a thriving sustainable future for the UK and beyond. Full Recommendations The UK Government, and devolved administrations where appropriate, should take the following actions:
66 Follow through on commitments made in the draft revised UK National Action Plan35 for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (NAP) to introduce pesticide risk reduction targets by 2022. The targets should be ambitious and time bound and lead to a reduction in both overall pesticide use and toxicity. Including a focus on cutting overall use is particularly important for herbicides to ensure that indirect and poorly understood impacts (such as combinatory effects) are reduced. Meanwhile, including a measure of toxicity to humans and wildlife will ensure that pesticides known to be most directly harmful are reduced first and fastest.
66 Introduce a strong package of support designed to help farmers reduce their pesticide use and adopt comprehensive Integrated Pest Management systems in which chemical pesticides are used only as a last resort, if at all. The package of support should include but not be limited to:
®® Payments for farmers via the Environment Land Management Scheme for reducing pesticide usage and adopting IPM techniques. IPM actions should be included in all levels of all relevant Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) standards from 2022 onwards.
8
®® Creation of an independent advice and
research facility for farmers and agronomists, to include an increase in funding for research into agroecological farming systems (including organic farming), in order to provide farmers with an alternative and reduce the reliance on chemicals.
®® Adoption of a clear definition of what constitutes IPM and what practices cannot be counted as IPM.
66 Introduce a ban on all non-agricultural herbicide use, most notably in the amenity sector and by home gardeners.
66 Continue to support the National Pollinator Strategy (NPS) and increase its focus on the effects of pesticides on pollinators, ensuring to look beyond insecticides to also take account of herbicides and other classes of pesticides. Given the make-up of the advisory board and its potential reach, the NPS could be the perfect facilitating agency for greater research into the impact of herbicide use on pollinators.
66 Introduce a ban on pre-harvest desiccation of arable crops. Indications show that there is already clear public support for this policy, as demonstrated by concerns regarding high levels of glyphosate residues in end products such as bread.
66 Incorporate into the UK pesticide approval system mandatory testing of impacts on pollinators for all pesticides, including herbicides. This must include direct and indirect impacts and lethal and sub-lethal effects on a range of pollinator species, not limited solely to the honey bee.
66 Ensure that products are tested and that the constituent ingredients of pesticide products are studied for their impact on pollinators, both individually and in combination
66 Support and disseminate research into the development of non-chemical strategies to avoid and combat herbicide resistance issues.
66 Support research into the effects of herbicides on a range of pollinators that goes beyond the current focus on honeybees to fill the evidence gap.
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
Research should focus on the impact of herbicides on wild pollinators and include but not be limited to:
®® ®® ®® ®® ®®
Direct and indirect effects The impact of reduced plant diversity Acute and chronic effects Lethal and sub-lethal effects The combinatory effects of herbicides with other classes of pesticide such as fungicides and insecticides
®® The impact of adjuvants and additives in herbicide products UK supermarkets and other retailers should take the following actions:
66 Prohibit the use of herbicides (and other pesticides) shown to be directly harmful to bees and pollinators in their global supply chains.
66 Support their suppliers to reduce herbicide use and adopt genuine Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approaches.
66 Stop selling home and garden herbicides and all other synthetic pesticides in store and online.
66 Provide support such as training, guidance documents and advice to all suppliers to adopt pollinator-friendly practices such as leaving field margins uncultivated.
66 Require suppliers to monitor pollinator activity and provide data to the company.
66 Support research on the effect of herbicides on pollinators, pollinator-health on suppliers’ farms and alternative non-chemical practices.
Members of the public can take the following actions:
66 If you are lucky enough to have access to a garden or even a window box, stop using herbicides, learn to love ‘weeds’ and create pollinator-friendly habitats. For tips and advice, check PAN UK’s Guide to Gardening Without Pesticides: www.pan-uk.org/gardening-without-pesticides/
66 Make your local area pesticide-free by calling on your local council to end its use of herbicides. Find out more about the Pesticide-Free Towns Campaign: www.pan-uk.org/make-my-town-pesticide-free
66 Ask your local supermarket or garden centre to end the sale of synthetic pesticide products. Farmers can take the following actions: PAN UK is pushing for a strong package of Government support to encourage and help farmers reduce pesticide use. Only with state support will it be possible to drive the kind of pesticide reductions required across the UK agriculture sector. Here are a few examples of actions that farmers could undertake to reduce herbicide use and better protect pollinators:
66 Adopt IPM management practices that will reduce the use of herbicides, including choices of crop species, rotations, mechanical weeding and supporting increased levels of ‘weediness’ in field.
66 Create greater habitats for pollinators including field margins and through-field wildflower strips.
66 Adopt herbicide resistance strategies that promote non-herbicide based control measures.
66 Create forums to bring farmers together to share tips and advice on protecting pollinators.
66 Refuse to accept grain products that have been treated with herbicides as a pre-harvest desiccant.
66 Allow their suppliers to grow varieties that are more resistant to weeds, thereby enabling them to reduce herbicide usage.
66 Engage in the process around the UK Government’s National Pollinator Strategy.
9
Herbicides: A threat to bee and pollinator survival
References 1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10. 11. 12. 13.
14. 15.
16. 17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
The British Bee Coalition, the Importance of Insect Pollinators, https://www. britishbeecoalition.org/importance University of Reading, Pollinator Monitoring More Than Pays for Itself (08/10/2020) https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/10/201008083801.htm BBC News, Bees: Many British pollinating insects in decline, study shows (26/03/2019) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47698294 I News, 17 bee species have been lost from the East of England (08/10/2020) https://inews.co.uk/news/environment/17-bee-species-have-been-lost-fromeast-of-england-292883 Foodprint, Pesticides in our food system, https://foodprint.org/issues/ pesticides/?cid=263 UK Health and Safety Executive, The GB Pesticides Approval Register, https:// www.hse.gov.uk/pesticides/pesticides-registration/uk-active-substances.htm UK Health and Safety Executive, Pesticide Products Approvals database, https:// secure.pesticides.gov.uk/pestreg/ProdSearch.asp FERA Science, Pesticide Usage Statistics, https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/ pusstats/surveys/index.cfm US EPA, Pendimethalin analysis of risks to endangered and threatened salmon and steelhead (20/12/2004) https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/endanger/ litstatus/effects/pendimeth/analysis.pdf FERA Science, Pesticide Usage Statistics, https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/ pusstats/surveys/index.cfm Earth, Wind and Fire, Desiccant = you don’t eat it https://www.earthwindandfire. biz/?p=3280 AHDB, Pre-harvest glyphosate use in cereals and oilseed rape https://www. nfuonline.com/is64-pre-harvest-glyphosate-use-in-cereals-and-oilseed-rape/ Country Life, State of Nature; Britain’s biodiversity is under threat but it can yet be saved (09/10/2019) https://www.countrylife.co.uk/news/state-naturebritains-biodiversity-threat-can-yet-saved-205064 Plantlife, Real action needed to save our vanishing meadows https://www.plantlife. org.uk/uk/about-us/news/real-action-needed-to-save-our-vanishing-meadows The Independent, The vanishing flowers of Britain; one in five species faces extinction (23/09/2015) https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/the-vanishingflowers-of-britain-one-in-five-species-faces-extinction-5345219.html Plantlife, Species Identification Guide: Corn Buttercup https://www.plantlife.org. uk/application/files/1915/3932/9953/Ranunculus_arvensis_-_Corn_buttercup.pdf Qi, Y., Li, J., Guan, X. et al. Effects of herbicides on non-target plant species diversity and the community composition of fallow fields in northern China. Sci Rep 10, 9967 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67025-2 https:// www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-67025-2 Gaba, S., Gabriel, E., Chadœuf, J. et al. Herbicides do not ensure for higher wheat yield, but eliminate rare plant species. Sci Rep 6, 30112 (2016). https://doi. org/10.1038/srep30112 https://www.nature.com/articles/srep30112 Nicolas Blot, Lois Veillat, Regis Rouze, Helene Delat, Glyphosate but not its metabolite AMPA, alters the honey honeybee gut biota (16/04/2019) https:// journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215466 Erick V. S. Motta, Kasie Raymann, and Nancy A. Moran, Glyphosate perturbs the gut microbiota of honey bees (24/09/2018) https://www.pnas.org/ content/115/41/10305.short Farina, W. M., Balbuena, M. S., Herbert, L. T., Mengoni Goñalons, C., & Vázquez, D. E. (2019). Effects of the Herbicide Glyphosate on Honey Bee Sensory and Cognitive Abilities: Individual Impairments with Implications for the Hive. Insects, 10(10), 354. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10100354 https://www. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6835870/
Pesticide Action Network UK PAN UK is based in Brighton. We are the only UK charity focused solely on addressing the harm caused by chemical pesticides. We work tirelessly to apply pressure on governments, regulators, policy makers, industry and retailers to reduce the impact of harmful pesticides. Find out more about our work at: www.pan-uk.org
22. Carl J. Berg , H. Peter King , et al, Glyphosate residue concentrations in honey attributed through geospatial analysis to proximity of large-scale agriculture and transfer off-site by bees (11/07/2018) https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ article/authors?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0198876 23. Vázquez, D. E., Ilina, N., Pagano, E. A., Zavala, J. A., & Farina, W. M. (2018). Glyphosate affects the larval development of honey bees depending on the susceptibility of colonies. PloS one, 13(10), e0205074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0205074 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6177133/ 24. Luo, QH., Gao, J., Guo, Y. et al. Effects of a commercially formulated glyphosate solutions at recommended concentrations on honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) behaviours. Sci Rep 11, 2115 (2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-02080445-4 25. Lucas Battisti, Michele Potrich, Amanda Roberta Sampaio, Nédia de Castilhos Ghisi, Fabiana Martins Costa-Maia, Raiza Abati, Claudia Bueno dos Reis Martinez, Silvia Helena Sofia, Is glyphosate toxic to bees? A meta-analytical review, Science of The Total Environment, Volume 767, (2021) https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721004654 26. Edward A. Straw, Edward N. Carpentier, Mark J. F. Brown, Roundup causes high levels of mortality following contact exposure in bumble bees (06/04/2021) https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1365-2664.13867 27. Chmiel John A., Daisley Brendan A., Pitek Andrew P., Thompson Graham J., Reid Gregor, Understanding the Effects of Sublethal Pesticide Exposure on Honey Bees: A Role for Probiotics as Mediators of Environmental Stress (2020) https:// www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2020.00022/full 28. David, Arthur, Botias, Cristina, Abdul-Sada, Alaa, Nicholls, Elizabeth, Rotheray, Ellen L, Hill, Elizabeth M and Goulson, Dave Widespread contamination of wildflower and bee-collected pollen with complex mixtures of neonicotinoids and fungicides commonly applied to crops. (2016) Environment International, 88. pp. 169-178. ISSN 0160-4120 http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/59217/ 29. Belsky Joseph, Joshi Neelendra K. Effects of Fungicide and Herbicide Chemical Exposure on Apis and Non-Apis Bees in Agricultural Landscape (2020) https:// www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2020.00081/full 30. Friedle, C., Wallner, K., Rosenkranz, P. et al. Pesticide residues in daily bee pollen samples (April–July) from an intensive agricultural region in Southern Germany. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 22789–22803 (2021) https://link.springer.com/ article/10.1007/s11356-020-12318-2 31. Merissa G. Cullen, Linzi J. Thompson , James. C. Carolan, Jane C. Stout, Dara A. Stanley. Fungicides, herbicides and bees: A systematic review of existing research and methods (10/12/2019) https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0225743 32. European Food Safety Authority, EFSA is working to protect bees and shape the future of environmental risk assessment (January 2021) https://efsa. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.e190101 33. FERA Science, Pesticide Usage Statistics, https://www.gov.uk/government/ statistics/pesticide-usage-survey-amenity-pesticides-in-the-uk-2016 34. Davies, L. R., Hull, R. I., Moss, S. R. and Neve, P. 2018. The first cases of evolving glyphosate resistance in UK poverty brome (Bromus sterilis) populations. Weed Science. 67 (1), pp. 41-47. (2018) https://repository.rothamsted.ac.uk/ item/84vq2/the-first-cases-of-evolving-glyphosate-resistance-in-uk-povertybrome-bromus-sterilis-populations 35. UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Consultation on the ‘Revised National Action Plan for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products)’(December 2020) https://consult.defra.gov.uk/ pesticides-future-strategy/sustainable-use-of-pesticides-national-actionplan/supporting_documents/NAPConsultationDocument.pdf
The Green Hub The Brighthelm Centre North Road Brighton BN1 1YD Telephone: 01273 964230 Email: admin@pan-uk.org