Read on Twitter
For pollinator week, we’re releasing our 432-page risk-benefit analysis for neonicotinoid insecticides (see link below). A brief synopsis via this thread (1/18)…. https://pollinator.cals.cornell.edu/pollinator-research-cornell/neonicotinoid-report/
(2/18) Like many of you, we’ve been surprised by the lack of a comprehensive synthesis on this topic. A synthesis that quantifies risk to pollinators *and* benefits to farmers/applicators for each context in which neonics are used.
(3/18) So, we synthesized the benefits literature (>5,000 paired neonic/control field trials) and risk literature (>400 peer-reviewed studies regarding exposure or effects of neonics on pollinators), then performed quantitative economic benefits and pollinator risk analyses.
(4/18) What did we find? For risk, lots of exposure data exist for field crops, while less is known regarding neonicotinoid exposures in fruits, vegetables, turfgrass & ornamentals settings. This means we have better insight about risk in field crops compared to other settings.
(5/18) Taking a LOEC approach to quantifying risk (i.e., using least observable effects concentrations for neonic impacts on honey bees to set the bar for what’s defined as risk), this figure shows when risk occurs in each setting. All data above the red line indicate risk.
(6/18) In and near corn and soybean fields that are planted with neonicotinoid-treated seeds, 74% of exposures are likely to impact honey bee physiology, 58% of exposures are likely to impact honeybee behavior, and 37% of exposures are likely to impact honey bee reproduction.
(7/18) Risk can be high in other settings, but less data exist (i.e., there are fewer blue data points compared to field crops), so we have less confidence about those conclusions.
(8/18) What about economic benefits of neonics? This was the most surprising part of the report for us. As seen in this figure, neonicotinoid-treated corn seeds rarely provide yield benefits to farmers.
(9/18) Specifically, 87-93% of field trials find no increase (or a decrease) in corn yield compared to chemical alternatives or untreated controls when neonicotinoid-treated seeds are used in corn fields within the state, region, or North America.
(10/18) Even when compared to plots using no insecticides, 89% of field trials observe no increase in corn yield when neonicotinoid-treated seeds are used. These results for corn are similar to the results from soybean.
(11/18) Results for other application contexts showed clearer benefits of neonicotinoids in terms of yield, reductions in crop damage, or pest suppression.
(12/18) So the results with the most important implications from this report are that neonicotinoid-treated corn and soybean seeds benefit farmers infrequently, but their usage often results in risk to bees.
(13/18) Neonicotinoid seed treatments are used on nearly all field corn and the majority of soybean seeds in the U.S.
(14/18) This does not mean that neonicotinoid-treated seeds aren’t beneficial to individual corn or soybean producers. Neonicotinoid-treated seeds do protect some growers against unpredictable, potentially severe, losses from early-season pests.
(15/18) But the data show that those benefits currently exist for a small proportion of fields.
(16/18) Throughout the report, we make note of contexts in which IPM approaches, non-synthetic chemical insecticides (e.g., biocontrols, biopesticides or RNA-based approaches), and other pest control technologies are likely to be effective.
(17/18) This project was made possible with support from @NYSDEC @nyagandmarkets and the NYS Environmental Protection Fund via New York’s Pollinator Protection Plan.
(18/18) We hope the report is useful to researchers, extension folks, policy makers and others within and beyond New York. Thank you to our many collaborators at @CornellCALS and @NYSIPM who helped with many aspects of this report!
