Background: Pesticide residue data for pollen and nectar are valuable for characterizing realistic exposure of pollinators, e.g. from agricultural crops, flowering margins. Interpretation of residues relies on comparing exposure with toxicity and the Hazard Quotient (HQ) is widely utilized. However, the HQ (threshold of concern 50) was only validated for foliar sprays, based on application rate as a proxy for exposure, not measured residues in bee-relevant matrices.
Results: A review of the literature showed a range of HQ approaches and thresholds of concern used to assess non-foliar applications and residues detected in bee-relevant matrices, mostly pollen. The use of the HQ thresholds to assess risks associated with residue data or non-foliar spray application methods is not validated, does not reflect realistic exposure and the conclusions reached differ substantially from current risk assessment approaches. Re-evaluation of residue data from the first published use of the concentration-based HQ (2013) and a recent paper (2021) reduced the proportion of pesticides where a conclusion of potential risk was reached from 30 to 7% and 28% to 3-6%, respectively.
Conclusions: An understanding of the applicability of the selected risk assessment approach to the available residue data is needed to enable robust conclusions to be drawn on the potential risk to bees. Use of the HQ approach to assess the risk posed by application methods other than foliar sprays or residues in nectar and pollen is likely to result in unreliable conclusions. An alternative approach should be used to assess the significance of measured residues.
Keywords: Hazard Quotient; exposure; honeybee; pesticide; risk assessment.
© 2021 Society of Chemical Industry.