The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Combined pesticide exposure severely affects individual- and colony-level traits in bees
Open accessAbstract
Reported widespread declines of wild and managed insect pollinators have serious consequences for global ecosystem services and agricultural production. Bees contribute approximately 80% of insect pollination, so it is important to understand and mitigate the causes of current declines in bee populations . Recent studies have implicated the role of pesticides in these declines, as exposure to these chemicals has been associated with changes in bee behaviour and reductions in colony queen production. However, the key link between changes in individual behaviour and the consequent impact at the colony level has not been shown. Social bee colonies depend on the collective performance of many individual workers. Thus, although field-level pesticide concentrations can have subtle or sublethal effects at the individual level, it is not known whether bee societies can buffer such effects or whether it results in a severe cumulative effect at the colony level. Furthermore, widespread agricultural intensification means that bees are exposed to numerous pesticides when foraging, yet the possible combinatorial effects of pesticide exposure have rarely been investigated. Here we show that chronic exposure of bumblebees to two pesticides (neonicotinoid and pyrethroid) at concentrations that could approximate field-level exposure impairs natural foraging behaviour and increases worker mortality leading to significant reductions in brood development and colony success. We found that worker foraging performance, particularly pollen collecting efficiency, was significantly reduced with observed knock-on effects for forager recruitment, worker losses and overall worker productivity. Moreover, we provide evidence that combinatorial exposure to pesticides increases the propensity of colonies to fail.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Safeguarding pollinators and their values to human well-being
Potts, S. G., Imperatriz-Fonseca, V., Ngo, H. T., Aizen, M. A., Biesmeijer, J. C., Breeze, T. D., Dicks, L. V., Garibaldi, L. A., Hill, R., Settele, J., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature20588 · Cited by 2,138
Declines in insectivorous birds are associated with high neonicotinoid concentrations
Hallmann, C. A., Foppen, R. P. B., van Turnhout, C. A. M., de Kroon, H., & Jongejans, E. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13531 · Cited by 1,052
Wildlife Ecotoxicology of Pesticides: Can We Track Effects to the Population Level and Beyond?
Köhler, H.-R., & Triebskorn, R. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1237591 · Cited by 911
Diversification practices reduce organic to conventional yield gap
Ponisio, L. C., M'Gonigle, L. K., Mace, K. C., Palomino, J., de Valpine, P., & Kremen, C. (2015) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.1396 · Cited by 871
Authority, E. F. S. (2013) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3295 · Cited by 587
Metadata
- Authors
- Gill, R. J., Ramos-Rodriguez, O., & Raine, N. E.
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2012-10-21
- Volume
- 491
- Issue
- 7422
- Pages
- 105-108
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W2000432942
- Cited by
- 998
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 69.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combined pesticide exposure severely affects individual- and colony-level traits in bees. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nature11585
- The paper
- Gill, R. J., Ramos-Rodriguez, O., & Raine, N. E. (2012). Combined pesticide exposure severely affects individual- and colony-level traits in bees. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11585
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.