↓ Skip to main content

Field realistic doses of pesticide imidacloprid reduce bumblebee pollen foraging efficiency

Overview of attention for article published in Ecotoxicology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#5 of 1,566)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
25 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
214 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
378 Mendeley
Title
Field realistic doses of pesticide imidacloprid reduce bumblebee pollen foraging efficiency
Published in
Ecotoxicology, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10646-014-1189-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah Feltham, Kirsty Park, Dave Goulson

Abstract

Bumblebees and other pollinators provide a vital ecosystem service for the agricultural sector. Recent studies however have suggested that exposure to systemic neonicotinoid insecticides in flowering crops has sub-lethal effects on the bumblebee workforce, and hence in reducing queen production. The mechanism behind reduced nest performance, however, remains unclear. Here we use Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology to test whether exposure to a low, field realistic dose (0.7 ppb in sugar water and 6 ppb in pollen) of the neonicotinoid imidacloprid, reduces worker foraging efficiency. Whilst the nectar foraging efficiency of bees treated with imidacloprid was not significantly different than that of control bees, treated bees brought back pollen less often than control bees (40 % of trips vs 63 % trips, respectively) and, where pollen was collected, treated bees brought back 31 % less pollen per hour than controls. This study demonstrates that field-realistic doses of these pesticides substantially impacts on foraging ability of bumblebee workers when collecting pollen, and we suggest that this provides a causal mechanism behind reduced queen production in imidacloprid exposed colonies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 378 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
United States 3 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Unknown 364 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 80 21%
Student > Bachelor 61 16%
Researcher 53 14%
Student > Master 48 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 5%
Other 61 16%
Unknown 57 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 209 55%
Environmental Science 51 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 2%
Chemistry 7 2%
Other 24 6%
Unknown 65 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 119. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 October 2022.
All research outputs
#355,619
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Ecotoxicology
#5
of 1,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,354
of 323,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecotoxicology
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,566 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,667 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.