Cassandra Letta

10/28/16
The Sustainably of the Worlds Best Pollinators
NYE Natural Resources and Environment

Humans have begun to cause, population decrease, of one of earths most valuable pollinators.
Over 70% of fruits, vegetables, and seed crops are pollinated by bees in North America (Ollerton, 1996).
That can account for over one third of what we eat. Apples, mangos, almonds, strawberries, and even
onions are just a few foods that would be impacted by their decline (Bayer, 2016). Bee declines would
contribute to a decrease in plant diversity and, hamper the farming industry as farmers would need to look
for alternative pollinators to grow their crops. The nations bee keepers have lost 44% of their bee
colonies from April 2015 to April 2016. (Bayer, 2016) Bee colony losses, specifically in the summer, are
increasing rapidly, which is a cause for concern as bees are supposed to be at their healthiest state in the
summer time. With an average of 30% colony losses each year. The rapid decline has been named Colony
Collapse Disorder (CCD) CCD is a disorder characterized by disappearance of worker bees of a colony,
leaving behind the queen and only a few immature bees to fend for themselves. The global transportation
of goods, plants, and animals can expose the fragile bee to fungi, mites, and other parasites. Moreover,
bees might be affected by pesticides and fungicides that are often coated onto commercial seeds. In the
U.S., the bee population is suffering from the threat of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) which in turn
could affect many of our stable crops from lack of bee pollination (VanEngelsdorp, et al.,2009). Conflict
has arisen in the cause of CCD as news articles blame the powerful pesticides used in agriculture and the
environment such as clothianidin and neonicotinoids, others like the EPA focus on the Varroa mite as the
cause and disagree lowering pesticide use. However, the bees are declining due to a comprehensive list of
human factors, and a solution must cover a wide range of environmental issues such as: pathogens,
parasites, pesticides, monoculture, and flowerless landscapes.
Numerous pathogens and parasites appear to contribute to bee colony declines. Nosemosis or
Nosma is a fungus parasitic disease that is found in honey bee colonies (Colla, and Packer, 2008). Honey
bees accidentally ingest these pathogens when eating or simply cleaning the hive. After infected, an adult
honey bee suffers from a decrease in their metabolism making it hard to find food for itself and the
colony. This particular pathogen is widespread in both the eastern honey bee (Apis cerana) and the

western honey (Apis mellifera) bee in America and can account for high losses of bees since 2005.
Nosemosis is noticed mostly in the spring during periods of bad weather or inadequate pollen supply.
Contaminated beekeeper equipment is a notable cause of the spreading of this disease. Another pathogen
is the American foulbrood which affect honey bees larva through spores that are ingested and then
multiply within the larvaes tissue until the larvae dies. The disease is spread by direct contact and it is
very difficult to stop unless the infected larvae is found. The disease spreads easily between colonies due
to the interaction of worker bees. Another disease that affects bee larvae is the chalkbrood caused by the
fungus Ascosphaera apis. The fungus penetrates the larvae and infects it before dying. Its spores are then
distributed and continue to affect the colonies larva (Colla, and Packer, 2008). This pathogen is
particularly dangerous because it can remain for up to 15 years if a colony is not treated and paired with
other pathogens and environmental situations a colony can easily collapse once infected for over a year
Varroa destructor. Parasites can also be deadly to a colonies health and survive. The small hive beetle
(Aethina tumida), for example, is a deadly pest to bees. It can infest a colony in a short period of time and
completely demolish it. They swarm a bees colony demolishing its structure and eating its food leaving it
with nothing (Bayer, 2016). However, the most well-known bee parasite is known as the Varroa mite
(Varroa destructor). It was introduced to America in the 1980s and it has caused negative effects ever
since (Bayer, 2016). The Varroa mite attacks both adult and young bees by sucking blood from their
bodies. The mites have flat bodies allowing them to penetrate a bee and obtain its nutrients. Affected
larvae can emerge with missing legs and wings. If left untreated, they can grow in numbers and
eventually kill an entire colony. Early detection is vital for a colonys survival. Since the mites are
relatively big compared to pathogens or fungi, they are easier to detect. Apistan is a product made to kill
the mites and if detection is found early enough in a commercial bee colony the strips of Apistan can be
hanged to treat the infection. However, Apistan cannot be used in colonies where honey is currently being
obtained for human consumption. Therefore, late fall and early spring are the best times to treat for the
Varroa mite (Bayer, 2016).

Many people blame pesticides for CCD, and demand our agricultural industry to reduce use.
Considering the many different pesticides we use on our crops, it is understandable. Neonicotinoids,
pyrethroids, insect growth regulations, organophosphates and, organochlorines are just a few that the
American agricultural system use (VanEngelsdorp, et al.,2009). In addition, a plethora of fungicides and
herbicides are used on top of that. Although, it seems inevitable that pesticides are used so commonly due
to the number of crops farmers are required to produce each year. Pesticide use has been increasing due
to the increasing number of people to feed, and with that, an increasing amount of side effects continue
coming to light. One side effect contributes to many bee suffering from CCD. Since bees pollinate over
one third of all food we eat this could be a huge problem for our agricultural industry and all that depend
on its food. (Pettis, 2012) Many different pesticides affect bees differently. Some kill them directly, other
affect its larvae, and others contribute to a gradual death of a colony preventing working bees from
travelling back to its colony. Pesticides can also affect honey products by contamination. Researchers
have found the neonicotinoids and coumaphos do the most damage to the brain and nervous system of
bees (Bayer, 2016). Neonicotinoids are one of the most widely used pesticide in the US. This particular
pesticide is painted onto a crops seed coat, thereby, spreading to the entire plant including nectar and
pollen ingested by bees. Coumaphos tries to target the Varroa mite which was mentioned above, but it
also causes damage to a bees brain and renders it unable to collect food and many are found to produce
fewer offspring (VanEngelsdorp, et al.,2009).
Monoculture and flowerless landscape is the final major component contributing to the decrease
in bee population. Worker bees have been tasked with the job to bring back nutritious nectar and pollen
for the hive. However, Famers have drastically changed their farming practices and it has had a negative
effect on bees health. Since World War II, farming practices have changed to accommodate a greater
human population. Farmers will plant acres and acres of one type of crop (Tapparo, et al., 2011). A crop
that will yield the most food and money. Although, that one crop will only bloom for a certain amount of
time. After time passes, bees will have nothing else to eat and must travel much further to obtain food.

This is similar to a human only eating an apple for an entire month then had to run a marathon. Therefore,
some bee keeper and farmers will truck their bees around across states just to allow bees to pollinate other
crops. Bees are then under stress of moving and are malnourished. Not to mention extensive travel will
can introduce them to more parasites and pathogens, while poor nutrition can make them more vulnerable
to pesticides.
Analysis of Solutions
If we consider all the above research, its obvious that there is no single cause for bee decline
like many are implying. The reason for bee decline and Colony Collapse Disorder is a comprehensive list
of human interferences that all react together to plunge the number of bee colonies down (VanEngelsdorp,
et al., 2009). First, bees will ingest parasites and can either damage their brain or nervous system or make
them susceptible to other agents like pathogens or parasites. When affected by a pathogen or parasite, a
surviving bee will need access to a healthy variety of pollen and nectar to keep them strong. This is hard
to find due to acres of monoculture by farmers and many urban settings that have a flowerless landscape.
Causing bees to travel miles to find food and an already sickly bee would not survive all of this.
Commercial bees also are forced to travel hundreds of miles putting them under stress from frequent
travel. This could lead to numerous bees to be introduced to pathogens and parasites and then being
allowed to travel around and spread these diseases further (Ellis, et. Al, 2010). The bee crisis does not
have a simple solution. Instead a solution must account for all of the factors that are currently affecting
bees: parasites, pathogens, pesticides, monoculture, and a flowerless landscape.
An emphasis on ecological farming rather than chemical intensive economic based farming is the
most logical solution to the bee crisis. The current American agricultural system needs to change to be
more ecologically sensitive rather than pure economics. Firstly, Farmers should focus on planting
multiple crops rather than just one staple and avoid monoculture altogether. This will allow bees to collect
nectar and pollen from numerous sources. It will also give them the diet they need to combat different

pathogens and parasites (Ollerton, 1996). In addition, bees will not need to be carted around from state to
state. Farmers can let bees naturally pollinate a large area and let them roam free. This will also stop the
spread of disease as bees will not be under the stress of moving and travelling gives them more
opportunities to be introduced to different pathogens and parasites. The next part of ecological farming is
keeping powerful pesticides and fungicides in check. Many pesticides need to be regulated very carefully
as too not affect bees and other wildlife. For instance, pesticide application should be done only at night
time. Bees mostly go foraging for food during the day or intense sunlight (Kennedy, et. Al, 2013). If
pesticides are sprayed at night, then then it will have less residual activity the next day. Additionally,
many crops have flowers the bloom for a short period of time like melons, cucumbers, pumpkins, and
squash. Their flowers only open up for one day at a time so farmers should take this into account and not
spray pesticides on those days (Ellis, et. Al, 2010). Pesticides are also less poisonous if they are used in
liquid form (Pettis, 2012). Moreover, the locations of every bee hive near a farm should be located and
pesticides should be sprayed at a reasonable distance (Kennedy, et. Al, 2013). Finally, more research
should be done on neonicotinoids and other pesticides that are coated onto the seed of the plant as it
seems they are affecting bees and other wildlife in a very negative way. Farmers should be aware of what
seeds they are buying to plant as some sales practices can be deceitful. Use of neonicotinoids should
decrease at a substantial level or cease being used altogether. This solution would benefit the entire
environment not just bees (Pettis, 2012). However, the drawback to this solution is the cost of transition
and the loss of economic profit. Currently farmers utilize monoculture and pesticides to maximize profit
and crop yield, but even though it provides lots of economic funding, it is not a long term sustainable
agricultural plan. Changing our practices to be eco-friendly will not only help bees but all generations that
come after us.
My second solution to the sustainability of bees is to educate communities on plant diversity to
help combat flowerless landscapes Everyone can help save the bees, even if we cant influence an entire
industry. Getting communities to plant bee friendly flowers will help improve their health even if they are

still being affect by parasites and pathogens. The public can plant flowers on roadsides, schools, and even
their own backyard. Communities can establish youth groups that can help carry out projects aimed at bee
protection. These youth groups can be run by schools or community centers, and can provide students
with opportunities to learn more about environmental suitability while helping the bee population. Over
development, habitat destruction, and diminishing of plant diversity are all things that can be helped if
communities are inspired to help the bees. The strengths of this plans is that it would not require a lot of
money to implement. Its a fairly easy solution, but its weaknesses are that its overall effectiveness of
working to help bee population are unknown.
Conclusion
Overall, the solution best for the bees is to change farming practices to include additional
ecological factors which in turn would improve sustainability. The two solutions differ in the likelihood of
completion. The preferred solution is a massive switch for farmers and the agricultural industry as a
whole. While public outreach is much easier to complete and have success with, because it is less costly.
However, if a solution would be implemented it would have to recognize all factors of bee decline. For
instance, a solution that only regulated pesticide usage would not work because the issues of monoculture
and parasites still exist. To further analyze this topic, researchers should evaluate other countries
agricultural plans and their bee populations to find an agricultural setup that would work best for
America. The UK, for example, has banned neonicotinoid yet they are still widely used in America.
Researching how other countries with sustainable agricultural practices can help format a specific one to
America which will not only help the bees, but all species for future sustainability.

Works Cited
Bayer. 2016. Bee Pests and Pathogens. Accessed online October 16, 2016:
[Link]
Bayer. 2016 Facts and Figures. Accessed online November 1, 2016: [Link]
Colla, S. and Packer, L. 2008. Evidence for decline in eastern North American bumblebees
(Hymenoptera: Apidae), with special focus on Bombus Affinis Cresson. Biodiversity and Conservation.
17: 1379
VanEngelsdorp, D and Evans, J. and Saegerman, C. and Mullin, C. and Haubruge, E. and Nguyen, B. and
Frazier, M. and Cox-Foster, D. Chen, Y. Underwood, R. and Tarpy, D. and Pettis, J. 2009. Colony
Collapse Disorder: A Descriptive Study. 1:122-135.
Ellis, J. and Evans, J. and Pettis, J. 2010. Colony losses, managed colony population decline, and Colony
Collapse Disorder in the United States. Journal of Apicultural Research. 49: 134-136.
Kennedy, C. and Lonsdorf, E. and Neel, M. and Williams, N. and Ricketts, T. and Winfree, R. and
Brittain, C. and Burley, A. and Cariveau, A. and Carvalheiro, L. and Chacoff, N. and Cunningham, S. and
Danforth, B. and Dudenhoffer, J. and Elle, E. and Gaines, H. and Garibaldi, L. and Gratton, C. and
Holzschuh, A. and Javorek, S. and Jha, S. and Klein, A. and Krewnka, K. and Mandelik, Y. and Mayfield,
M. 2013. A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in
agroecosystems. Ecology Letters. 16: 584-599.
Ollerton, J. 1996. Reconciling Ecological Processes with Phylogenetic Patterns: The Apparent Paradox of
Plant- Pollinator Systems. Journal of Ecology. 84: 767-769
Pettis, J. and Detaplane, K. 2010. Coordinated responses to honey bee decline in the USA. Apidologie.
41:256-263
Pettis, J. and Vanengelsdorp, D. and Johnson, J. and Dively, G. 2012. Pesticide exposure in honey bees
results in increased levels of the gut pathogen Nosema. Naturwissenschaften. 99:153-158
Tapparo, A. and Giorio, C. and Marzaro, M. and Marton, D. and Solda, L. and Girolami, V. 2011. Rapid
analysis of neonicotinoid insecticides in guttation drops of corn seedlings obtained from coated seeds. J.
Environ. Monit. 13: 1564-1568