www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Author Correction: Chronic oral exposure to field‑realistic pesticide combinations via pollen and nectar: effects on feeding and thermal performance in a solitary bee Celeste Azpiazu , Jordi Bosch, Elisa Viñuela, Piotr Medrzycki, Dariusz Teper & Fabio Sgolastra Correction to: Scientific Reports https://​doi.​org/​10.​1038/​s41598-​019-​50255-4, published online 24 September 2019 The original version of this Article contained errors. In the Abstract, “We measured pollen and syrup consumption, longevity, ovary maturation and thermogenesis. Pesticide intake was three orders of magnitude higher via syrup than pollen. At the tested concentrations, no synergistic effects emerged, and we found no effects on longevity and ovary maturation.” now reads: “We measured pollen and syrup consumption, longevity, ovary maturation and thermogenesis. Although bees consumed larger amounts of syrup than pollen, pesticide intake via syrup and pollen were similar. At the tested concentrations, no synergistic effects emerged, and we found no effects on longevity and ovary maturation.” In the Results section, under subheading ‘Syrup and pollen consumption’, “The total amounts of pesticide ingested via syrup and pollen by bees of each treatment throughout the entire exposure are reported in Table 2. In all cases, exposure via syrup was three orders of magnitude higher than exposure via pollen.” now reads: “The total amounts of pesticide ingested via syrup and pollen by bees of each treatment throughout the entire exposure are reported in Table 2.” In the Discussion section, “However, because solitary bee adults consume much greater amounts of nectar than pollen (ca. 93% of total food weight consumed by bees in our study was via syrup), the amount of active ingredient ingested per bee in our study was about three orders of magnitude higher via syrup than pollen.” now reads: “However, because solitary bee adults consume much greater amounts of nectar than pollen (ca. 93% of total food weight consumed by bees in our study was via syrup), the amounts of active ingredient ingested per bee in our study were similar via pollen and via syrup.” Scientific Reports | (2021) 11:16469 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-95575-6 1 Vol.:(0123456789) www.nature.com/scientificreports/ And, “As a result, the dose of imidacloprid (alone and in mixtures) ingested by O. bicornis females throughout their life-span was ca. 1.5 ng. This amount is 10–20 times lower than the acute oral L ­ D50 reported in honey bees (13 ng ­bee−1 54) and bumblebees (27 ng ­bee−1 54). For the same reason, the amounts of acetamiprid and/or myclobutanil ingested by bees in A + I, I + M and A + I + M were also reduced by 80% when compared to treat- ments containing acetamiprid and myclobutanil but not imidacloprid (Table 2). Feeding suppression following exposure to this neonicotinoid has also been reported in A. mellifera29 and Bombus terrestris L.47,55,56. Because bees cannot taste ­neonicotinoids57, feeding suppression is likely to be due to the toxicity of the neonicotinoid rather than repellence. Kessler et al.57 found that honey bees and bumblebees preferred syrup containing imidacloprid to control solutions, even though ingestion of this compound caused them to eat less syrup overall. We found feeding suppression in O. bicornis exposed to imidacloprid at doses as low as 1.27–1.64 ng ­bee−1.” now reads: “As a result, the dose of imidacloprid (alone and in mixtures) ingested by O. bicornis females throughout their life-span was ca. 4–9 ng. This amount is 1.4–6.8 times lower than the acute oral ­LD50 reported in honey bees (13 ng ­bee−1 54) and bumblebees (27 ng ­bee−1 54). For the same reason, the amounts of acetamiprid and/or myclobutanil ingested by bees in A + I, I + M and A + I + M were also reduced by 80% when compared to treat- ments containing acetamiprid and myclobutanil but not imidacloprid (Table 2). Feeding suppression following exposure to this neonicotinoid has also been reported in A. mellifera29 and Bombus terrestris L.47,55,56. Because bees cannot taste ­neonicotinoids57, feeding suppression is likely to be due to the toxicity of the neonicotinoid rather than repellence. Kessler et al.57 found that honey bees and bumblebees preferred syrup containing imi- dacloprid to control solutions, even though ingestion of this compound caused them to eat less syrup overall. We found feeding suppression in O. bicornis exposed to imidacloprid at doses as low as 0.2–0.5 ng ­bee−1 ­day−1.” In addition, Table 2 contained errors. The values for ‘Period 1’, ‘Period 2’ and ‘Total’ were incorrectly given. The original Table 2 and accompanying legend appear below. Scientific Reports | (2021) 11:16469 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-95575-6 2 Vol:.(1234567890) www.nature.com/scientificreports/ Myclobutanil Acetamiprid (mean ng ­bee−1) Imidacloprid (mean ng ­bee−1) (mean ng ­bee−1) Pollen Pollen Body weight Treatment n bees (mean ± SE mg) Syrup Period 1 Period 2 Total Syrup Period 1 Period 2 Total Syrup A 20 70.67 ± 1.87 2.88 0.007 0.0003 2.8902 I 16 68.93 ± 1.58 1.63 0.008 0.0006 1.6375 M 17 71.09 ± 2.03 3.42 A+I 13 69.08 ± 2.85 0.58 0.005 0.00004 0.5883 1.40 0.004 0.00003 1.4002 A+M 16 72.31 ± 1.72 3.34 0.01 0.0003 3.3520 2.91 I+M 12 71.50 ± 2.37 1.59 0.008 0.0003 1.5999 0.58 A+I+M 14 66.72 ± 2.16 0.53 0.007 0.0002 0.5356 1.27 0.005 0.0001 1.2707 0.46 CONTROL 13 68.19 ± 3.01 Table 2.  Body weight and amount of active ingredient ingested via syrup and pollen in O. bicornis females exposed to various pesticide combinations (treatments) throughout their adult life span (chronic exposure). A: acetamiprid, I: imidacloprid, M: myclobutanil. Period 1: first week; Period 2: remainder of the bioassay. The original Article has been corrected. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creat​iveco​mmons.​org/​licen​ses/​by/4.​0/. © The Author(s) 2021 Scientific Reports | (2021) 11:16469 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-95575-6 3 Vol.:(0123456789)