Study Discounts Role of Pesticides in Pollinator Decline

[Paul Cherubini]

Do pathogen spillover, pesticide use, or habitat loss explain recent North American bumblebee declines? Nora D. Szabo, Sheila R. Colla, David L. Wagner, Lawrence F. Gall, Jeremy T. Kerr Conservation Letters, ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[Quoted for review purposes only]

> We consider pesticide use and habitat loss, other factors that have been proposed as potential causes of North American bumblebee declines (Colla & Packer 2008). If either were causing declines, we predict that species should generally have been lost from areas with high pesticide use or habitat loss, while persisting in areas with low pesticide use or habitat loss.

> We did not find significant relationships between losses and pesticide use or the relationships were in the opposite direction than predicted. We also did not detect significant relationships between losses and change in human population density for Bombus affinis or Bombus pensylvanicus.

> Although habitat loss and pesticides have well-established negative effects on bumblebees (Goulson et al. 2008; Williams & Osborne 2009), they are unlikely to be main drivers of recent North American declines. We did not find significant relationships between patterns of bumblebee losses and pesticide use, or the relationships were in the opposite direction than predicted.

> While pesticides have negative impacts on bumblebees at the individual or colony level (e.g., Morandin et al. 2005), our results suggest that pesticides are not a main contributor to declines of these species when their entire ranges are considered. Therefore, there remains an urgent need to identify other causes of North American bumblebee declines.

[Mona Miller]

Excerpts don't tell the whole story. This is how Paul tries to prove his point. He finds sentences or parts of sentences or paragraphs or parts of paragraphs that says what he wants people to hear. These paragraphs promote his Monsanto agenda.

Who sponsored the research for this article? Where is the complete article?

This is about bumble bee decline and should be placed in the "off topic" section.

[Paul Cherubini]

Excerpts don't tell the whole story. This is how Paul tries to prove his point. He finds sentences or parts of sentences or paragraphs or parts of paragraphs that says what he wants people to hear. These paragraphs promote his Monsanto agenda. Who sponsored the research for this article? Where is the complete article?

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... x/abstract

Abstract
Several North American bumblebee species have recently undergone dramatic declines. The use of managed, pathogen-carrying bumblebees for pollination of greenhouse crops began shortly before these declines, and wild bumblebees near greenhouses now have high pathogen loads.  This has led to speculation that pathogen spillover from commercial bumblebees caused declines of these species. We test this hypothesis using a large dataset of bumblebee occurrence records and agricultural census data.  We find support for the pathogen spillover hypothesis for two species but no evidence that pathogen spillover caused the near disappearance of the previously widespread Bombus affinis. Furthermore, we show that pesticide use and habitat loss are unlikely to be major causes of decline for any of the Bombus species examined. Collectively, our analyses underscore that there remains an urgent need to identify causes of pollinator population losses.

[Mona Miller]

I saw that online, but it still doesn't say who is sponsoring the research. Often, and it does happen very often, the chemical companies sponsor the research. The chemical companies also influence the outcome of the research. Do you think the chemical companies would continue to sponsor the research if the results proved that the chemicals were harmful?

It would be like us taking advice from you on organic methods when you are a pesticide and herbicide sales man. Why would you give that advice, you'd be losing money.

Who pays for the time you spend writing all this nonsense?

Definition for nonsense:

words or language having no meaning or conveying no intelligible ideas

language, conduct, or an idea that is absurd or contrary to good sense

things of no importance or value : trifles

[Paul Cherubini]

I saw that online, but it still doesn't say who is sponsoring the research.

Their paper was not a laborous field study, so may not have needed much funding. Take a look at the authors. Some have conservationist backgrounds.

Sheila R. Colla http://savethebumblebees.com/id12.html "I have worked with numerous organizations including the UN-FAO, IUCN, COSEWIC, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,Farms at Work, the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Can-Polin, Natureserve, Evergreen, Pollinator Partnership and NAPPC." 

Dave Wagner is an Associate Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Connecticut.http://hydrodictyon.eeb.uconn.edu/depar ... ofiles.htm

Larry Gall is a well known lepidopterist and has been employed by Yale University for decades. http://www.educause.edu/Community/MemDi ... Gall/77644

[Mona Miller]

This still does not give who is sponsoring the research. Just like who is funding your time to post all this nonsense.

You actually want me to take your word. Your word doesn't hold much value after all the nonsense you have posted.