A New Explanation for CCD

[Polyanwood]

Not me pointing the finger.....it is what this new research says. in 100% of samples Nosema C. and this new virus were present

So I still think we should take Nosema more seriously ... more of us should test and also treat prophylactically with thymolated syrup.

and Also that we should also urgently consider asking for a ban on bees and honey products from the USA. We have not found CCD here. We have not found IIV here either. We don't want them. CCD has been a disaster to some US beekeepers. We don't want it.

I'm no scientist though...

 

[BKF Admin]

here are two contributions this morning from Bee-L. I'd post a link instead but I doubt that it would survive here long.

Gavin ! whats that all about ?
The only links I remove are to the BBKA and members who post links to their own websites.

I expect better from you.

Admin.

 

[Hivemaker.]

I suppose you only find what you look for, but to me it means that we should be taking nosema, which is virtually endemic in colonies, more seriously than some of us do.

Yes we should Poly.....acarine and nosema used to be top of the hit parade before the varroa mite became the obsession to the almost total exclusion of any other problems.
I prefer my bee's not have nosema,especially ceranae, appears to do them no good at all,especially queens.

 

[Brosville]

"I'll never get you to open your eyes to what science is providing us with" - sadly I'm all too aware of the misuse and abuse of science by amoral multinationals in the pursuit of the dollar at all costs - to be frank, those who claim to be scientists should be deeply ashamed of the way "science" is abused and misused.
I note the usual water-muddying tactics from Gavin, let's just go straight round them, and state unequivocally that ANY organisation that purports to act for bees, or does research upon them which receives funding from any pesticide manufacturer is by that association "tainted", and one can reasonably suppose that the results may well be less than entirely unbiased ........ (especially if the truly atrocious previous behaviour of the companies and organisations involved is taken into account)

 

[gavin]

I seem to have misunderstood the link-posting rules, apologies for that.

Me, muddying the waters?!! Martin, the accusation that Bromenshenk was receiving funding from Bayer is a *lie* from a journalist determined to push the story that neonicotinoids must be at the root of CCD. It isn't me muddying the waters here.

You say that every organisation which receives funding from any pesticide manufacturer is tainted ... well then, the Suchail study that everyone loves to quote, the one that claims effects of imidacloprid at remarkably low levels - the one that most scientists believe to be just plain wrong - *that* study was part-financed by Bayer. Are you going to discount that one too?

This new study shows a remarkable correlation between a new virus, Nosema and CCD. It isn't saying that these are the only factors in CCD, but the implication of the work is that they are the main ones. Polyanwood is absolutely right - controlling Nosema should now be a higher priority. Nosema is present in imported queens at remarkably high levels, and as far as I am aware we have absolutely no idea what the international distribution of this new virus is. Really important things for the future.

By contrast, pesticides were initially high on the list of many researchers - including Jerry Bromenshenk - but studies are now showing that presence in bee hives and amounts in bee hives do not correlate with CCD. Did you read the Mullins paper?

all the best

Gavin

 

[Brosville]

"This new study shows a remarkable correlation between a new virus, Nosema and CCD" - and TOTALLY ignores the highly likely part that "icides" (particularly neonicotinoids) may well be playing.
My understanding of how valid science works is to take account of ALL possible contributory factors........... (not conveniently avoid certain areas, for whatever totally unconnected reasons)

 

[gavin]

This was a study that looked explicitly at pathogens. It found a remarkably high association between the two pathogens and CCD. One is a virus that is already known to cause colony losses and clustering in the hive in Apis cerana. Dramatic CCD-like collapses - and clustering of moribund bees in the colonies that still had bees present - were described by Dee Lusby on Bee-L. You can't get more pesticide-free than Dee Lusby, she's fundamentalist organic, keeps her bees where exposure to farm, garden and golf course pesticides is minimal, uses her own wax, never uses beekeeping chemicals .... and I'm utterly certain has never had any dealings with Bayer that might have been to her benefit. Yet that pedigree didn't stop her losing 200 out of 300 colonies in one of the areas she keeps her bees, and her bees showed the clustering that this virus causes.

You want studies that look at all factors? Dennis van Engelsdorp did one in the States in relation to CCD, there was another in Belgium that correlated winter problems with every factor they could think of, including proximity to arable land and actual pesticide residues in the hives. Nothing found that implicated pesticides, but the Belgians instead found higher levels of disease in apiaries with high losses. Except that the American study did find a *negative* association between coumaphos and CCD. In other words high levels of coumaphos may have helped prevent CCD somehow, if you can believe that. Don't get me wrong, the American study in particular showed alarming levels of pesticides in colonies, mostly beekeeper-applied chemicals, but there was no sign that they were causing bee losses.

Brosville, when presented with new facts, do you *ever* change your mind?

 

[Brosville]

Only if there's incontrovertible proof that I have been wrong - which as yet has not happened in this case - as you would say to me, where's the double-blind trials, why have ALL the possible factors not been eliminated? - I could turn it round and say "how come you're always siding with the chemical companies" - I will not allude to frankenspuds..........

 

[gavin]

There is almost nothing in this world that comes with incontrovertible proof. The best you'll ever get is overwhelming balance of probability, and that is what I think we have now.

There is no point implying that just because I'm a plant scientist then I have interests of some kind in agrochemical companies. I don't. But my background does help with understanding technical issues and gives me that drive to try to get at the truth of situations.

I'd have thought that Dee Lusby's experiences might have swung this one for you. Too bad I was wrong.

all the best

Gavin

 

[Brosville]

A perfectly reasonable interpretation of the "facts" as reported could well be that bees, weakened by GM crops and/or a cocktail of pesticides, Nosema and this "new" virus may result in CCD, as when and if it is possible to remove the GM crops and pesticides from the equation, THEN you can trumpet that a cause has been found - and not until!

"keeps her bees where exposure to farm, garden and golf course pesticides is minimal" - "minimal" is all that's needed if Bonmatin is to be believed - chuck in the "cocktail effect" you have a recipe for cream-crackered immune systems, prey to all sorts..........

Chapter and verse....... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2847190/,
and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2847190/pdf/emi0012-0774.pdf

 

[gavin]

Hi Brosville

Well done! You really have made me stop and think. I'm intrigued. However I still don't believe that Dee Lusby's bees were affected at all by neonicotinoids. She is too far away from the places you might find them.

On the French studies, do you know what the levels of 0.7, 7 and 70 microgrammes per kilo translate to in ppb terms?

G.

 

[Brosville]

from memory, roughly .7 ppb, 7ppb and 70ppb respectively (that is if we're referring to the short-changed US "Billion" with only 9 noughts, as opposed to the true UK billion with 12 noughts......)

 

[gavin]

Hi again Brosville

Thanks for that. Doh! I'd thought that the conversion to ppb may be more complex than that.

Before I begin, just wanted to point out that Jerry Bromenshenk is livid about that CNN Fortune article and has declared as plainly as you like that he has not received any grant from Bayer. It wouldn't surprise me if he turns to the courts, I would if I was him.

As I recall the levels of imidacloprid in France were around 1 or 2 ppb in sunflower and oilseed rape pollen and nectar. Not much more than the lowest of the three concentrations at 0.7ppb and miles away from the highest, 70ppb.

Surprisingly, the mortality of these caged bees was only slightly above the background for the lowest and highest concentrations, a bit more for the middle one for some reason. Nosema has a stronger effect on mortality. Add Nosema and imidacloprid together and the effect is worse still. But the high levels of imidacloprid on their own gave a mortality rate not much higher than controls.

The discussion in the paper gives a possible reason for the synergy: Nosema increases the intake of sugar solution, and this increases the toxic effect of the imidacloprid.

So, the conclusion is that adding stresses together adds to the mortality. Reasonable enough, and it adds to the concern over having imidacloprid aound bees.

However, in the case of American CCD, they did look for neonicotinoids in CCD colonies and they were relatively rare and not associated with CCD colonies any more than the non-CCD colonies. Also Dee Lusby keeps her bees away from land that could receive imidacloprid, so this really isn't a likely explanation.

In the Mullin paper (http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0009754), imidacloprid was detected in 1% of wax samples from commercial US beekeepers, 2.9% of pollen samples, and it was absent in bee samples. Contrast that with around 98% presence, and at very high levels, of beekeeper-applied pesticides.

In France though, and where imidacloprid is used more abundantly, I'll keep an open mind. OK?

I still think though that this new virus-Nosema combination could be the main cause of bees losses not just in the States but in Europe too. We'll probably find out as I'm sure that this is going to trigger more research.

Gavin

 

[Hombre]

from memory, roughly .7 ppb, 7ppb and 70ppb respectively (that is if we're referring to the short-changed US "Billion" with only 9 noughts, as opposed to the true UK billion with 12 noughts......)

Times they are a changing Bros . . .

 

[Hivemaker.]

From what i read in another place it's very likely that this PLOSone paper may be removed/pulled...so maybe not good for Jerry and co.

 

[gavin]

I saw that too - not a place I often visit but I had a peek.

OK, the study is not a water-tight proof that all CCD is down to these two pathogens, but it is basically a good study that doesn't really claim more than the results merit. I'd be amazed if the study does get pulled.

The writer of these comments seems to want all the i's dotted and t's crossed before it got published. This paper is just a step along the way to full understanding, but it is a big one.

G.

 

[Hivemaker.]

Thank you Gavin.....good to have the views of our own resident scientist/geneticist.
Did you read both threads?

 

[gavin]

More visiting than resident these days!

Yes, it was the longer thread I saw first. Some people will never be happy. Do you think WLC is the fellow from NYC who used to post a lot of Bee-L but fell out with Aaron?

G.

 

[chycarne]

Really interesting,
I would like further studies on comparing (American) static colonies with the more usual well moved around colonies. ie is there also a relationship with moved a lot to static hive. Also I would like a comparison between groups ie is there a strain difference some bee types more susceptable than others? and finally yes I think importing from diseased areas to healthier ones is showing poor judgement, it should always be the other way around. The study, for me, showed good understanding of the link between CCD and disease, BUT for me has only shown that where the CCD is the diseases are too. It did not show or explain away colonies that have both but even while weaked do recover. I think that as with ME in humans (virus + usually a chest infection + ?stress? = ME) there is another thing that is being missed the virus and the illnes may well cause the disease but what sets it off what is the "environmental" factor that stops the immune response?

 

[gavin]

There is certainly a lot more of this story yet to come out. The Dee Lusby experience suggests that you don't have to be migratory to catch it, but she may have caught it from migratory neighbours.

G.