Analysis and modelling of the COLOSS international data set 2010-2011

Colony Losses have been calculated for Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Austria, Denmark, Ireland and the UK. The following approach was used. Initial analysis was conducted using examination of the data and descriptive statistics. Some inconsistencies in the data were found, for further consideration. Using appropriate selection of cases, colony losses were calculated for the countries above individually and also overall, using overall proportion of loss, CDS type loss and loss due to queen problems, and also the mean/median of the individual loss rates per beekeeper. The proportions of beekeepers suffering any loss of any kind were also calculated. We both included and excluded Scotland as part of the UK. Differences between countries were found based on 95% confidence intervals for proportion of losses. Some suggestions are made in relation to data quality control and data modelling. Logistic regression/binomial-logit generalised linear modelling may be used to model the chance of any loss, any CDS loss, or loss due to queen problems

Results of colony loss monitoring in Scotland for the winters of 2007-2008 to 2011-2012

We began surveys of beekeepers in Scotland in 2006, using a geographically stratified approach and postal questionnaires. These have run in 2006, 2008, 2010, 2011 and 2012, with annual surveys beginning in 2010. In 2006 questions on colony loss related to unexplained losses. Since 2008 we have asked about any losses and have used stratified random sampling. We have recently examined winter loss rates based on our strata, using two different broad geographical splits, i.e. North-Central-South and East-West. These are of interest in relation to presence/absence of Varroa infestation, and different forage sources, both of which may have an association with loss rates. For the winters of 2009-2010 onwards, striking and statistically significant differences have been observed between winter loss rates between beekeepers in the east and the west of Scotland. Loss rates in the east are consistently higher. There was no significant difference in loss rates prior to that winter, and it appears that something changed between 2007-2008 and 2009-2010. Differences between the north, central Scotland and the south were not significant. Important management practices such as supplementary feeding going into winter, and Varroa treatment are unlikely to differ systematically between such large scale geographical areas, although they will differ between beekeepers. Considering possible reasons for the observed differences between areas, we are looking for factors that affect all or a large proportion of beekeepers in a given area. In Scotland two factors which have changed in recent years are the growing of Oil Seed Rape and its treatment, and also weather patterns. Examination of winter loss rates amongst beekeepers whose bees forage on OSR and those whose bees do not showed the loss rates in the former group to be significantly higher. The growing of OSR is strongly associated with area, and is much more common in the east of Scotland than the west. Investigation of possible risk factors associated with the different loss rates is ongoin

Experience and evaluation of colony loss monitoring in Scotland : survey methodology, response rates and degree of success

Surveys of beekeepers in Scotland have been running since 2006, with Scotland joining COLOSS Working Group 1 in 2010. Since 2008 these surveys have been based on stratified random sampling of the membership records of the Scottish Beekeepers’ Association (SBA), and have used a postal questionnaire with a covering letter. The surveys have run in late spring, after a small scale pilot run, and allowing 3 to 4 weeks for response to the main survey. Late returns are accepted and included where possible in the COLOSS return. A small prize draw has been possible in recent surveys as an incentive to participate, and a postal reminder is issued. The SBA has approximately 1100 members. Sample sizes were 100 beekeepers approached directly in the 2006 survey, 119 SBA members in 2008, and 200 hobbyist SBA members in the 2010 survey (plus 26 bee farmers), 200 SBA members in 2011 and 250 in 2012. Response rates were 77% in 2006, 42.0% (50; 44 beekeepers) in 2008, 68.5% (137, of which 116 were beekeepers; plus 9 bee farmers) in 2010, 47.0% (94; 64 beekeepers) in 2011, and 41.6% (104; 91 beekeepers) in 2012. Our main observation regarding the success of the questions is that questions relating to bee management lead to illogical results in a large proportion of cases. Our attempts to allow for all possibilities in the answers to these questions have not reduced the incidence of such unreliable results. We therefore use stated colony numbers at the start of winter and stated losses to calculate overall loss rates. As bee management is rare in Scottish winters, this should have little impact on conclusions. Summer losses are very low. For future surveys, we plan to operate an online questionnaire based on LimeSurvey (http://www.limesurvey.org/), for speed and ease of data collection and lower costs, possibly with a larger scale sample

Losses of bee colonies

Following the survey of SBA members in 2006, a second survey was carried out in the late spring of 2008 as was reported in this journal last November and December. This brief report on losses of colonies experienced by the respondents to that survey is the first of what is hoped will be a series of several articles covering particular topics of interest to members revealed by that survey. A full report of the whole findings of the survey will ultimately become available, probably through the SBA's web page, but it will clearly be too long a document for 'The Scottish Beekeeper'

Classification of ordered texture images using regression modelling and granulometric features

Structural information available from the granulometry of an image has been used widely in image texture analysis and classification. In this paper we present a method for classifying texture images which follow an intrinsic ordering of textures, using polynomial regression to express granulometric moments as a function of class label. Separate models are built for each individual moment and combined for back-prediction of the class label of a new image. The methodology was developed on synthetic images of evolving textures and tested using real images of 8 different grades of cut-tear-curl black tea leaves. For comparison, grey level co-occurrence (GLCM) based features were also computed, and both feature types were used in a range of classifiers including the regression approach. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of the granulometric moments over GLCM-based features for classifying these tea images

A survey of SBA members for 2010

This article is a survey of the Scottish Beekeepers Association members for 2010

Morphological granulometry for classification of evolving and ordered texture images.

In this work we investigate the use of morphological granulometric moments as texture descriptors to predict time or class of texture images which evolve over time or follow an intrinsic ordering of textures. A cubic polynomial regression was used to model each of several granulometric moments as a function of time or class. These models are then combined and used to predict time or class. The methodology was developed on synthetic images of evolving textures and then successfully applied to classify a sequence of corrosion images to a point on an evolution time scale. Classification performance of the new regression approach is compared to that of linear discriminant analysis, neural networks and support vector machines. We also apply our method to images of black tea leaves, which are ordered according to granule size, and very high classification accuracy was attained compared to existing published results for these images. It was also found that granulometric moments provide much improved classification compared to grey level co-occurrence features for shape-based texture images

Modeling of evolving textures using granulometries

This chapter describes a statistical approach to classification of dynamic texture images, called parallel evolution functions (PEFs). Traditional classification methods predict texture class membership using comparisons with a finite set of predefined texture classes and identify the closest class. However, where texture images arise from a dynamic texture evolving over time, estimation of a time state in a continuous evolutionary process is required instead. The PEF approach does this using regression modeling techniques to predict time state. It is a flexible approach which may be based on any suitable image features. Many textures are well suited to a morphological analysis and the PEF approach uses image texture features derived from a granulometric analysis of the image. The method is illustrated using both simulated images of Boolean processes and real images of corrosion. The PEF approach has particular advantages for training sets containing limited numbers of observations, which is the case in many real world industrial inspection scenarios and for which other methods can fail or perform badly. [41] G.W. Horgan, Mathematical morphology for analysing soil structure from images, European Journal of Soil Science, vol. 49, pp. 161–173, 1998. [42] G.W. Horgan, C.A. Reid and C.A. Glasbey, Biological image processing and enhancement, Image Processing and Analysis, A Practical Approach, R. Baldock and J. Graham, eds., Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 37–67, 2000. [43] B.B. Hubbard, The World According to Wavelets: The Story of a Mathematical Technique in the Making, A.K. Peters Ltd., Wellesley, MA, 1995. [44] H. Iversen and T. Lonnestad. An evaluation of stochastic models for analysis and synthesis of gray-scale texture, Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 15, pp. 575–585, 1994. [45] A.K. Jain and F. Farrokhnia, Unsupervised texture segmentation using Gabor filters, Pattern Recognition, vol. 24(12), pp. 1167–1186, 1991. [46] T. Jossang and F. Feder, The fractal characterization of rough surfaces, Physica Scripta, vol. T44, pp. 9–14, 1992. [47] A.K. Katsaggelos and T. Chun-Jen, Iterative image restoration, Handbook of Image and Video Processing, A. Bovik, ed., Academic Press, London, pp. 208–209, 2000. [48] M. K¨oppen, C.H. Nowack and G. R¨osel, Pareto-morphology for color image processing, Proceedings of SCIA99, 11th Scandinavian Conference on Image Analysis 1, Kangerlussuaq, Greenland, pp. 195–202, 1999. [49] S. Krishnamachari and R. Chellappa, Multiresolution Gauss-Markov random field models for texture segmentation, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 6(2), pp. 251–267, 1997. [50] T. Kurita and N. Otsu, Texture classification by higher order local autocorrelation features, Proceedings of ACCV93, Asian Conference on Computer Vision, Osaka, pp. 175–178, 1993. [51] S.T. Kyvelidis, L. Lykouropoulos and N. Kouloumbi, Digital system for detecting, classifying, and fast retrieving corrosion generated defects, Journal of Coatings Technology, vol. 73(915), pp. 67–73, 2001. [52] Y. Liu, T. Zhao and J. Zhang, Learning multispectral texture features for cervical cancer detection, Proceedings of 2002 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: Macro to Nano, pp. 169–172, 2002. [53] G. McGunnigle and M.J. Chantler, Modeling deposition of surface texture, Electronics Letters, vol. 37(12), pp. 749–750, 2001. [54] J. McKenzie, S. Marshall, A.J. Gray and E.R. Dougherty, Morphological texture analysis using the texture evolution function, International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 17(2), pp. 167–185, 2003. [55] J. McKenzie, Classification of dynamically evolving textures using evolution functions, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Strathclyde, UK, 2004. [56] S.G. Mallat, Multiresolution approximations and wavelet orthonormal bases of L2(R), Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 315, pp. 69–87, 1989. [57] S.G. Mallat, A theory for multiresolution signal decomposition: the wavelet representation, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 11, pp. 674–693, 1989. [58] B.S. Manjunath and W.Y. Ma, Texture features for browsing and retrieval of image data, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 18, pp. 837–842, 1996. [59] B.S. Manjunath, G.M. Haley and W.Y. Ma, Multiband techniques for texture classification and segmentation, Handbook of Image and Video Processing, A. Bovik, ed., Academic Press, London, pp. 367–381, 2000. [60] G. Matheron, Random Sets and Integral Geometry, Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1975

Colony losses in Scotland in 2004-2006 from a sample survey

In the early summer of 2006, a postal survey of beekeeping in Scotland was carried out on behalf of the Executive of the Scottish Beekeepers' Association (SBA), to obtain an overview of some general aspects of current beekeeping practice and experience in Scotland. Of particular interest were colony losses and also extent and impact of the parasitic mite Varroa destructor (Anderson and Trueman, 2000). The Scottish experience is of interest, as V. destructor is not yet universally present throughout the country

An update on recent colony losses in Scotland from a sample survey covering 2006-2008

Peterson et al. (2009) reported figures on honey bee colony losses from a postal survey of beekeepers in Scotland carried out in early summer 2006 on behalf of the Executive of the Scottish Beekeepers' Association (SBA). We now provide updated figures on Scottish colony losses and on the reasons for these losses, from a repeat survey in late spring 2008 and covering the period April 2006 to April 2008