Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Robyn Rose is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Robyn Rose.


Nature Biotechnology | 2008

Assessment of risk of insect-resistant transgenic crops to nontarget arthropods

Jörg Romeis; Detlef Bartsch; Franz Bigler; Marco P. Candolfi; Marco Gielkens; Susan E. Hartley; Richard L. Hellmich; Joseph E. Huesing; Paul C. Jepson; Raymond J. Layton; Hector Quemada; Alan Raybould; Robyn Rose; Joachim Schiemann; Mark K. Sears; Anthony M. Shelton; Jeremy Sweet; Zigfridas Vaituzis; Jeffrey D. Wolt

An international initiative is developing a scientifically rigorous approach to evaluate the potential risks to nontarget arthropods (NTAs) posed by insect-resistant, genetically modified (IRGM) crops. It adapts the tiered approach to risk assessment that is used internationally within regulatory toxicology and environmental sciences. The approach focuses on the formulation and testing of clearly stated risk hypotheses, making maximum use of available data and using formal decision guidelines to progress between testing stages (or tiers). It is intended to provide guidance to regulatory agencies that are currently developing their own NTA risk assessment guidelines for IRGM crops and to help harmonize regulatory requirements between different countries and different regions of the world.


PLOS ONE | 2013

Crop Pollination Exposes Honey Bees to Pesticides Which Alters Their Susceptibility to the Gut Pathogen Nosema ceranae

Jeffery S. Pettis; Elinor M. Lichtenberg; Michael Andree; Jennie Stitzinger; Robyn Rose; Dennis vanEngelsdorp

Recent declines in honey bee populations and increasing demand for insect-pollinated crops raise concerns about pollinator shortages. Pesticide exposure and pathogens may interact to have strong negative effects on managed honey bee colonies. Such findings are of great concern given the large numbers and high levels of pesticides found in honey bee colonies. Thus it is crucial to determine how field-relevant combinations and loads of pesticides affect bee health. We collected pollen from bee hives in seven major crops to determine 1) what types of pesticides bees are exposed to when rented for pollination of various crops and 2) how field-relevant pesticide blends affect bees’ susceptibility to the gut parasite Nosema ceranae. Our samples represent pollen collected by foragers for use by the colony, and do not necessarily indicate foragers’ roles as pollinators. In blueberry, cranberry, cucumber, pumpkin and watermelon bees collected pollen almost exclusively from weeds and wildflowers during our sampling. Thus more attention must be paid to how honey bees are exposed to pesticides outside of the field in which they are placed. We detected 35 different pesticides in the sampled pollen, and found high fungicide loads. The insecticides esfenvalerate and phosmet were at a concentration higher than their median lethal dose in at least one pollen sample. While fungicides are typically seen as fairly safe for honey bees, we found an increased probability of Nosema infection in bees that consumed pollen with a higher fungicide load. Our results highlight a need for research on sub-lethal effects of fungicides and other chemicals that bees placed in an agricultural setting are exposed to.


Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2001

Assessing the impact of Cry1Ab-expressing corn pollen on monarch butterfly larvae in field studies

Diane E. Stanley-Horn; Galen P. Dively; Richard L. Hellmich; Heather R. Mattila; Mark K. Sears; Robyn Rose; Laura C.H. Jesse; John E. Losey; John J. Obrycki; Les Lewis

Survival and growth of monarch larvae, Danaus plexippus (L.), after exposure to either Cry1Ab-expressing pollen from three Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn (Zea mays L.) events differing in toxin expression or to the insecticide, λ-cyhalothrin, were examined in field studies. First instars exposed to low doses (≈22 grains per cm2) of event-176 pollen gained 18% less weight than those exposed to Bt11 or Mon810 pollen after a 5-day exposure period. Larvae exposed to 67 pollen grains per cm2 on milkweed leaves from within an event-176 field exhibited 60% lower survivorship and 42% less weight gain compared with those exposed to leaves from outside the field. In contrast, Bt11 pollen had no effect on growth to adulthood or survival of first or third instars exposed for 5 days to ≈55 and 97 pollen grains per cm2, respectively. Similarly, no differences in larval survivorship were observed after a 4-day exposure period to leaves with 504–586 (within fields) or 18–22 (outside the field) pollen grains per cm2 collected from Bt11 and non-Bt sweet-corn fields. However, survivorship and weight gain were drastically reduced in non-Bt fields treated with λ-cyhalothrin. The effects of Bt11 and Mon810 pollen on the survivorship of larvae feeding 14 to 22 days on milkweeds in fields were negligible. Further studies should examine the lifetime and reproductive impact of Bt11 and Mon810 pollen on monarchs after long-term exposure to naturally deposited pollen.


Journal of Apicultural Research | 2013

Miscellaneous standard methods for Apis mellifera research

Hannelie Human; Robert Brodschneider; Vincent Dietemann; Galen P. Dively; James D. Ellis; Eva Forsgren; Ingemar Fries; Fani Hatjina; Fuliang Hu; Rodolfo Jaffé; Annette Bruun Jensen; Angela Köhler; Josef P Magyar; Asli Özkýrým; Christian Walter Werner Pirk; Robyn Rose; Ursula Strauss; Gina Tanner; David R. Tarpy; Jozef van der Steen; Anthony Vaudo; Fleming Vejsnæs; Jerzy Wilde; Geoffrey R. Williams; Huo-Qing Zheng

Summary A variety of methods are used in honey bee research and differ depending on the level at which the research is conducted. On an individual level, the handling of individual honey bees, including the queen, larvae and pupae are required. There are different methods for the immobilising, killing and storing as well as determining individual weight of bees. The precise timing of developmental stages is also an important aspect of sampling individuals for experiments. In order to investigate and manipulate functional processes in honey bees, e.g. memory formation and retrieval and gene expression, microinjection is often used. A method that is used by both researchers and beekeepers is the marking of queens that serves not only to help to locate her during her life, but also enables the dating of queens. Creating multiple queen colonies allows the beekeeper to maintain spare queens, increase brood production or ask questions related to reproduction. On colony level, very useful techniques are the measurement of intra hive mortality using dead bee traps, weighing of full hives, collecting pollen and nectar, and digital monitoring of brood development via location recognition. At the population level, estimation of population density is essential to evaluate the health status and using beelines help to locate wild colonies. These methods, described in this paper, are especially valuable when investigating the effects of pesticide applications, environmental pollution and diseases on colony survival.


Environmental Entomology | 2004

Effects on Monarch Butterfly Larvae (Lepidoptera: Danaidae) After Continuous Exposure to Cry1Ab-Expressing Corn During Anthesis

Galen P. Dively; Robyn Rose; Mark K. Sears; Richard L. Hellmich; Diane E. Stanley-Horn; Dennis D. Calvin; Joseph M. Russo; Patricia L. Anderson

Abstract Effects on monarch butterfly, Danaus plexippus L., after continuous exposure of larvae to natural deposits of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) and non-Bt pollen on milkweed, were measured in five studies. First instars were exposed at 3–4 and 6–7 d after initial anthesis, either directly on milkweed plants in commercial cornfields or in the laboratory on leaves collected from milkweeds in corn plots. Pollen exposure levels ranging from 122 to 188 grains/cm2/d were similar to within-field levels that monarch butterfly populations might experience in the general population of cornfields. Results indicate that 23.7% fewer larvae exposed to these levels of Bt pollen during anthesis reached the adult stage. A risk assessment procedure used previously was updated with a simulation model estimating the proportion of second-generation monarch butterflies affected. When considered over the entire range of the Corn Belt, which represents only 50% of the breeding population, the risk to monarch butterfly larvae associated with long-term exposure to Bt corn pollen is 0.6% additional mortality. Exposure also prolonged the developmental time of larvae by 1.8 d and reduced the weights of both pupae and adults by 5.5%. The sex ratio and wing length of adults were unaffected. The ecological significance of these sublethal effects is discussed relative to generation mortality and adult performance.


Apidologie | 2007

Effects of Bt corn pollen on honey bees: emphasis on protocol development*

Robyn Rose; Galen P. Dively; Jeff Pettis

Laboratory feeding studies showed no effects on the weight and survival of honey bees feeding on Cry1 Ab-expressing sweet corn pollen for 35 days. In field studies, colonies foraging in sweet corn plots and fed Bt pollen cakes for 28 days showed no adverse effects on bee weight, foraging activity, and colony performance. Brood development was not affected by exposure to Bt pollen but significantly reduced by the positive insecticide control. The number of foragers returning with pollen loads, pollen load weight, and forager weight were the most consistent endpoints as indicators of foraging activity. Using variances of measured endpoints, experimental designs required to detect a range of effect sizes at 80% statistical power were determined. Discussed are methods to ensure exposure to pollen, duration of exposure, positive controls, and appropriate endpoints to consider in planning laboratory and field studies to evaluate the non-target effects of transgenic pollen.ZusammenfassungDer Kontakt mit Pollen von CryIAb-exprimierenden Maispflanzen, die Gene des Bodenbakteriums Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) enthalten, kann direkte oder indirekte Auswirkungen auf Honigbienen haben. Wir führten Labor- und Feldstudien durch, um mögliche Effekte von Pollen von Bt-Süssmais auf verschiedene Indikatoren der Fitness und Volksleistung von Honigbienen zu erfassen. Die Laborstudien Hessen keine Effekte auf das Lebendgewicht und die Überlebensraten von Bienen erkennen, die Bt-Pollen aufgenommen hatten (Abb. 1, 2). Der Zusatz von Honig erhöhte die Aufnahme von Pollen unter Laborbedingungen. Auch in den Feldstudien war weder nach Aufnahme von Pollen in Bt-Süssmaisparzellen noch nach Verzehr von Bt-Pollenkuchen über 28 Tage hinweg eine negative Auswirkung auf das Gewicht der Bienen, ihr Sammelverhalten oder auf die Kolonieleistung zu erkennen. Die beständigsten Endpunktindikatoren für das Sammelverhalten waren der Prozentsatz der mit Pollenhöschen zurückkehrenden Sammlerinnnen, das Gewicht der Pollenhöschen und das Gewicht der Sammlerinnen. Eine Reduktion in diesen Endpunkten um 40 % im Vergleich zu den Kontrollen hätte bei den in dieser Feldstudien zugrundegelegten Wiederholungen mit einer Wahrscheinlichkeit von 80 % erkennbar sein müssen (Abb. 3). Die Völksgrösse und die Messungen der Pollen- und Honigvorräte waren hingegen mit ziemlichen Schwankungen verbunden und lieferten weniger verlässliche Indikatoren für die Völksleistung. Unter den dieser Studie zugrundegelegten Wiederholungen wären nur Unterschiede von über 75 % in den entsprechenden Pollen- und Honigvorräten mit einer Wahrscheinlichkeit von 80 % zu erkennen gewesen. Der Kontakt mit Bt-Pollen zeigte keine Effekte auf die Brutentwicklung. Diese war jedoch in den positiven Kontrollen mit Insektizidkontakt (Imidacloprid) signifikant reduziert (Abb. 4). Angesichts der Unterschiede in der Brutnestgrösse sollten Experimente, die die Beurteilung von Auswirkungen auf die Brut zum Ziel haben, mit mindestens vier Völkern in jeder der sechs Replikaparzellen durchgeführt werden, wenn ein Unterschied von 50 % im Vergleich zu Kontrollen erkennbar sein soll (Abb. 5). Wir diskutieren Methoden, die dazu beitragen sollen den Kontakt mit Pollen, die Kontaktdauer, die positiven Kontrollen, sowie die angemessenen Endpunkte abzusichern. Diese sollten für die Planung von Labor- und Feldstudien zu Auswirkungen von transgenem Pollen auf Nicht-Zielorganismen von Nutzen sein.


Journal of Apicultural Research | 2015

Encuesta nacional sobre la pérdida anual de colmenas de abejas manejadas durante 2014–2015 en los EEUU

Nicola Seitz; Kirsten S. Traynor; Nathalie Steinhauer; Karen Rennich; Michael Wilson; James D. Ellis; Robyn Rose; David R. Tarpy; Ramesh R. Sagili; Dewey Caron; Keith S. Delaplane; Juliana Rangel; Kathleen Lee; Kathy Baylis; James T. Wilkes; John A. Skinner; Jeffery S. Pettis; Dennis vanEngelsdorp

Declines of pollinators and high mortality rates of honey bee colonies are a major concern, both in the USA and globally. Long-term data on summer, winter, and annual colony losses improve our understanding of forces shaping the viability of the pollination industry. Since the mass die-offs of colonies in the USA during the winter of 2006–2007, generally termed “Colony Collapse Disorder” (CCD), annual colony loss surveys have been conducted. These surveys gage colony losses among beekeepers of all operation sizes, recruited to participate via regional beekeeping organizations, phone calls, and postal mail. In the last three years, these surveys include summer and annual losses in addition to winter losses. Winter losses in this most recent survey include 5,937 valid participants (5,690 backyard, 169 sideline, and 78 commercial beekeepers), collectively managing 414,267 colonies on 1 October 2014 and constituting 15.1% of the estimated 2.74 million managed colonies in the USA. Annual losses are typically higher than either winter or summer losses, as they calculate losses over the entire year. Total reported losses were 25.3% [95% CI 24.7–25.9%] over the summer, 22.3% [95% CI 21.9–22.8%] over the winter, and 40.6% [95% CI 40.0–41.2%] for the entire 2014–2015 beekeeping year. Average losses were 14.7% [95% CI 14.0–15.3%] over the summer, 43.7% [95% CI 42.8–44.6%] over the winter, and 49.0% [95% CI 48.1–50.0%] over the entire year. While total winter losses were lower in 2014–2015 than in previous years, summer losses remained high, resulting in total annual colony losses of more than 40% during the survey period. This was the first year that total losses were higher in the summer than in the winter, explained in large part by commercial beekeepers reporting losses of 26.2% of their managed colonies during summer, compared to 20.5% during winter. Self-identified causes of overwintering mortality differed by operation size, with smaller backyard beekeepers generally indicating colony management issues (e.g., starvation, weak colony in the fall), in contrast to commercial beekeepers who typically emphasize parasites or factors outside their control (e.g., varroa, nosema, queen failure). More than two-thirds of all beekeepers (67.3%) had higher colony losses than they deemed acceptable.


Journal of Economic Entomology | 2013

A Rapid Survey Technique for Tropilaelaps Mite (Mesostigmata: Laelapidae) Detection

Jeffery S. Pettis; Robyn Rose; Elinor M. Lichtenberg; Panuwan Chantawannakul; Ninat Buawangpong; Weeraya Somana; Prachaval Sukumalanand; Dennis vanEngelsdorp

ABSTRACT Parasitic Tropilaelaps (Delfinado and Baker) mites are a damaging pest of European honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) in Asia. These mites represent a significant threat if introduced to other regions of the world, warranting implementation of Tropilaelaps mite surveillance in uninfested regions. Current Tropilaelaps mite-detection methods are unsuitable for efficient large scale screening. We developed and tested a new bump technique that consists of firmly rapping a honey bee brood frame over a collecting pan. Our method was easier to implement than current detection tests, reduced time spent in each apiary, and minimized brood destruction. This feasibility increase overcomes the tests decreased rate of detecting infested colonies (sensitivity; 36.3% for the bump test, 54.2% and 56.7% for the two most sensitive methods currently used in Asia). Considering this sensitivity, we suggest that screening programs sample seven colonies per apiary (independent of apiary size) and 312 randomly selected apiaries in a region to be 95% sure of detecting an incipient Tropilaelaps mite invasion. Further analyses counter the currently held view that Tropilaelaps mites prefer drone bee brood cells. Tropilaelaps mite infestation rate was 3.5 ± 0.9% in drone brood and 5.7 ± 0.6% in worker brood. We propose the bump test as a standard tool for monitoring of Tropilaelaps mite presence in regions thought to be free from infestation. However, regulators may favor the sensitivity of the Drop test (collecting mites that fall to the bottom of a hive on sticky boards) over the less time-intensive Bump test.


PLOS ONE | 2017

Chemical and cultural control of Tropilaelaps mercedesae mites in honeybee (Apis mellifera) colonies in Northern Thailand

Jeffery S. Pettis; Robyn Rose; Veeranan Chaimanee

At least two parasitic mites have moved from Asian species of honeybees to infest Apis mellifera. Of these two, Varroa destructor is more widespread globally while Tropilaelaps mercedesae has remained largely in Asia. Tropilaelaps mites are most problematic when A. mellifera is managed outside its native range in contact with Asian species of Apis. In areas where this occurs, beekeepers of A. mellifera treat aggressively for Tropilaelaps and Varroa is either outcompeted or is controlled as a result of the aggressive treatment regime used against Tropilaelaps. Many mite control products used worldwide may in fact control both mites but environmental conditions differ globally and thus a control product that works well in one area may be less or ineffective in other areas. This is especially true of volatile compounds. In the current research we tested several commercial products known to control Varroa and powdered sulfur for efficacy against Tropilaelaps. Additionally, we tested the cultural control method of making a hive division to reduce Tropilaelaps growth in both the parent and offspring colony. Making a split or nucleus colony significantly reduced mite population in both the parent and nucleus colony when compared to un-manipulated control colonies. The formic acid product, Mite-Away Quick Strips®, was the only commercial product that significantly reduced mite population 8 weeks after initiation of treatment without side effects. Sulfur also reduced mite populations but both sulfur and Hopguard® significantly impacted colony growth by reducing adult bee populations. Apivar® (amitraz) strips had no effect on mite or adult bee populations under the conditions tested.


Apidologie | 2015

A national survey of managed honey bee 2013-2014 annual colony losses in the USA

Kathleen Lee; Nathalie Steinhauer; Karen Rennich; Michael Wilson; David R. Tarpy; Dewey Caron; Robyn Rose; Keith S. Delaplane; Kathy Baylis; Eugene J. Lengerich; Jeff Pettis; John A. Skinner; James T. Wilkes; Ramesh R. Sagili; Dennis vanEngelsdorp

Collaboration


Dive into the Robyn Rose's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jeffery S. Pettis

Agricultural Research Service

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David R. Tarpy

North Carolina State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dewey Caron

Oregon State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

James T. Wilkes

Appalachian State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jeff Pettis

Agricultural Research Service

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Zigfridas Vaituzis

United States Environmental Protection Agency

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge