[Pollinator] Can you help with evidence that the commercial bumble bee is spreading disease?

Thu Jan 14 13:55:28 PST 2010

A few questions have arisen regarding the link between diseases from 
commercial bumble bees and the decline of wild bumble bees, in regard to 
the recent petition submitted to the USDA-APHIS by the Xerces Society 
/et al./ and some media stories about that petition. Unfortunately, some 
of the media stories contained misleading information.

Two recent studies have been published that provide a direct link 
between diseases in commercial bumble bees and the health of wild bumble 
bees:

Otterstatter, M.C., and J.D. Thomson. 2008. Does Pathogen Spillover from 
Commercially Reared Bumble Bees Threaten Wild Pollinators? /PLoS One./ 
Available online at http://www.plosone.org/doi/pone.0002771

Colla, S.R., M.C. Otterstatter, R.J. Gegear, and J.D. Thomson. 2006. 
Plight of the Bumblebee: Pathogen Spillover from Commercial to Wild 
Populations. /Biological Conservation/ 129: 461-467.

Otterstatter and Thomson note, in the Discussion section of their 2008 
paper:

"Based on our model, and our observations near greenhouses, it is 
probable that destructive pathogens have been spilling over into wild 
bee populations since the collapse of commercial /B. occidentalis/ 
during the late 1990s, and this has contributed to the ongoing collapse 
of wild /Bombus/ sensu stricto."

These studies show that wild bumble bees near greenhouses have higher 
pathogen loads (of /Crithidia bombi/ and /Nosema bombi/) than bumble 
bees farther away from greenhouses. While these studies demonstrate the 
mechanism by which pathogens can be transferred from commercial bumble 
bees in greenhouses to wild bumble bees, they do not prove that disease 
from commercially reared bumble bees caused the precipitous decline that 
has been observed in /Bombus affinis, Bombus franklini, Bombus terricola 
/and/ Bombus occidentalis/. Dr. Robbin Thorp's hypothesis that these 
species were infected by a selectively virulent strain of /Nosema bombi/ 
that originated in Europe is currently being tested by Dr. Sydney 
Cameron, Dr. Lee Solter, Dr. Jamie Strange, and others. Regardless of 
whether or not their work identifies a "smoking gun," the Xerces Society 
asserts that diseases from commercially transported bumble bees present 
a significant risk to wild, native bumble bees, and this risk warrants 
new regulations. We support the development of federal regulations that 
take a precautionary approach to safeguarding our wild, native 
pollinators. In fact, the USDA-APHIS conducted their own risk assessment 
in the 1990s and concluded that the risks to wild, native bumble bees 
were too great to allow /Bombus impatiens/ to be shipped outside of its 
native range (west of the Rockies). For various reasons, they stopped 
regulating the interstate transport of this species -- we're asking that 
they reinstate that old regulation and develop some disease 
certification standards.

I'd also like to point out that there is no evidence demonstrating that 
moving bumble bees outside of their native ranges is safe for wild 
bumble bees. Because there are no federal regulations in place regarding 
the interstate transport of bumble bees, commercial bumble bees are 
currently not inspected for diseases when they're moved between states. 
Dr. Paul Williams and Dr. Juliet Osborne, in their 2009 review paper 
"Bumble bee vulnerability and conservation worldwide/" /(published in 
/Apidologie/), recommend: "Until proven safe, we recommend that live 
bumblebees should not be moved across continents or oceans for 
commercial pollination." As an aside, APHIS does not allow bumble bees 
to be imported from other countries (except Canada) - we support that 
regulation.

In a recent post on the BOMBUS and POLLINATOR listservs, Marilyn Steiner 
brought up the issue of habitat loss affecting bumble bees. The Xerces 
Society recognizes that there are many issues that may negatively impact 
wild bumble bees, including disease, habitat loss, and pesticide use. 
The USDA-APHIS does not have the regulatory authority to address habitat 
loss or pesticide use threats, and thus our petition did not address 
those two issues. We do recognize that those issues may be important 
factors contributing to the decline of wild bumble bees, and we have 
been addressing them through our other pollinator conservation work.

Best,
Sarina Jepsen

___________________________________________
*The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation*

The Xerces Society is an international, nonprofit
organization that protects wildlife through the
conservation of invertebrates and their habitat.
To join the Society, make a contribution, or read
about our work, please visit www.xerces.org

Sarina Jepsen
Endangered Species Program Director
4828 SE Hawthorne Blvd. Portland, OR 97215
tel: 503-232-6639 fax: 503-233-6794
email: sarina at xerces.org
___________________________________________

ladadams at aol.com wrote:
> We have been asked several questions about the recent articles that 
> have appeared on the LISTSERV, particularly the following quote from 
> the NY Times article,
>  
> "The groups said Tuesday that four species of bumblebees once common 
> in the United States have seen drastic declines -- *and the evidence 
> points to diseases spreading out of greenhouses that use domesticated 
> bumblebees. '*
>  
> It is clear that there have been (at least) four species of bumble 
> bees in decline, but* does anyone know of a published study that 
> provides evidence to support that this is the result of diseases 
> spreading out of greenhouses using domesticated bumble bees?*
> ** 
> *Thanks.*
>  
>  
>
>
>
>
>
> Laurie Davies Adams
> Executive Director
> *Pollinator Partnership *
> 423 Washington Street, 5th floor
> San Francisco, CA 94111
> 415-362-1137
> LDA at pollinator.org
>
> *www.pollinator.org <http://www.pollinator.org/>*
> www.nappc.org <http://www.nappc.org/>
>
> */National Pollinator Week is June 21-27, 2010.
> Beecome involved at www.pollinator.org <http://www.pollinator.org/>/*
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus 
> signature database 4772 (20100114) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pollinator mailing list
> Pollinator at lists.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/pollinator
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4772 (20100114) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sonic.net/pipermail/pollinator/attachments/20100114/c2e39d51/attachment.html>