Concurrent Parasitism Alters Thermoregulation in Honey Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Winter Clusters

Thermoregulation is crucial for honey bee, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae), colony survival in temperate regions, but possible interference by parasites is currently unknown. The small hive beetle, Aethina tumida Murray (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae), and the ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor Anderson & Trueman are honey bee parasites and both overwinter in host colonies. The efficiency of thermoregulation might thus be affected in infested host winter clusters, due to altered worker activity. Here, we show for the first time that parasites can alter honey bee thermoregulation. Moreover, the data suggest that only combined infestations with V. destructor and A. tumida result in higher thermal maxima in the winter clusters, whereas infestations with one parasite alone had no significant effect compared with the controls. Due to the ubiquitous mite V. destructor combined infestations with parasites or combined infections with pathogens are almost inevitable. Therefore, our data indicate that an altered thermoregulation due to multiple infestations might be another widespread factor contributing to winter losses of honey bee colonie

Small hive beetle, Aethina tumida , as a potential biological vector of honeybee viruses

The small hive beetle (SHB, Aethina tumida) is a parasite and scavenger of honeybee colonies. Here, we conducted laboratory experiments to investigate the potential of SHB as a vector of honeybee viruses. Using RT-PCR methods, Deformed Wing Virus (DWV) was detected in adult SHBs that: (1) were fed with dead workers with deformed wings, (2) were fed with DWV-positive brood, and (3) were associated with DWV-contaminated wax. SHB became significantly more often infected through feeding on virus infected workers, brood and the virus contaminated wax compared to pollen and the controls, where no infections were found. DWV was also detected in adult SHB after trophallaxis with infected workers. Further, among SHBs identified as DWV-positive, 40% of beetles carried negative stranded RNA of DWV, indicating virus replication. Our results suggest that SHB can be infected with honeybee viruses via food-borne transmission and have the potential of being a biological vector of honeybee viruse

Land use in the Northern Great Plains region of the U.S. influences the survival and productivity of honey bee colonies

The Northern Great Plains region of the US annually hosts a large portion of commercially managed U.S. honey bee colonies each summer. Changing land use patterns over the last several decades have contributed to declines in the availability of bee forage across the region, and the future sustainability of the region to support honey bee colonies is unclear. We examined the influence of varying land use on the survivorship and productivity of honey bee colonies located in six apiaries within the Northern Great Plains state of North Dakota, an area of intensive agriculture and high density of beekeeping operations. Land use surrounding the apiaries was quantified over three years, 2010–2012, and survival and productivity of honey bee colonies were determined in response to the amount of bee forage land within a 3.2-km radius of each apiary. The area of uncultivated forage land (including pasture, USDA conservation program fields, fallow land, flowering woody plants, grassland, hay land, and roadside ditches) exerted a positive impact on annual apiary survival and honey production. Taxonomic diversity of bee-collected pollen and pesticide residues contained therein varied seasonally among apiaries, but overall were not correlated to large-scale land use patterns or survival and honey production. The predominant flowering plants utilized by honey bee colonies for pollen were volunteer species present in unmanaged (for honey bees), and often ephemeral, lands; thus placing honey bee colonies in a precarious situation for acquiring forage and nutrients over the entire growing season. We discuss the implications for land management, conservation, and beekeeper site selection in the Northern Great Plains to adequately support honey bee colonies and insure long term security for pollinator-dependent crops across the entire country

Linking Measures of Colony and Individual Honey Bee Health to Survival among Apiaries Exposed to Varying Agricultural Land Use

We previously characterized and quantified the influence of land use on survival and productivity of colonies positioned in six apiaries and found that colonies in apiaries surrounded by more land in uncultivated forage experienced greater annual survival, and generally more honey production. Here, detailed metrics of honey bee health were assessed over three years in colonies positioned in the same six apiaries. The colonies were located in North Dakota during the summer months and were transported to California for almond pollination every winter. Our aim was to identify relationships among measures of colony and individual bee health that impacted and predicted overwintering survival of colonies. We tested the hypothesis that colonies in apiaries surrounded by more favorable land use conditions would experience improved health. We modeled colony and individual bee health indices at a critical time point (autumn, prior to overwintering) and related them to eventual spring survival for California almond pollination. Colony measures that predicted overwintering apiary survival included the amount of pollen collected, brood production, and Varroa destructor mite levels. At the individual bee level, expression of vitellogenin, defensin1, and lysozyme2 were important markers of overwinter survival. This study is a novel first step toward identifying pertinent physiological responses in honey bees that result from their positioning near varying landscape features in intensive agricultural environments

Linking Measures of Colony and Individual Honey Bee Health to Survival among Apiaries Exposed to Varying Agricultural Land Use

We previously characterized and quantified the influence of land use on survival and productivity of colonies positioned in six apiaries and found that colonies in apiaries surrounded by more land in uncultivated forage experienced greater annual survival, and generally more honey production. Here, detailed metrics of honey bee health were assessed over three years in colonies positioned in the same six apiaries. The colonies were located in North Dakota during the summer months and were transported to California for almond pollination every winter. Our aim was to identify relationships among measures of colony and individual bee health that impacted and predicted overwintering survival of colonies. We tested the hypothesis that colonies in apiaries surrounded by more favorable land use conditions would experience improved health. We modeled colony and individual bee health indices at a critical time point (autumn, prior to overwintering) and related them to eventual spring survival for California almond pollination. Colony measures that predicted overwintering apiary survival included the amount of pollen collected, brood production, and Varroa destructor mite levels. At the individual bee level, expression of vitellogenin, defensin1, and lysozyme2 were important markers of overwinter survival. This study is a novel first step toward identifying pertinent physiological responses in honey bees that result from their positioning near varying landscape features in intensive agricultural environments

Quo vadis Aethina tumida? Biology and control of small hive beetles

Small hive beetles (SHBs) are generalists native to sub-Saharan Africa and reproduce in association with honeybees, bumblebees, stingless bees, fruits and meat. The SHB has recently become an invasive species, and introductions have been recorded from America, Australia, Europe and Asia since 1996. hile SHBs are usually considered a minor pest in Africa, they can cause significant damage to social bee colonies in their new ranges. Potential reasons for differential impact include differences in bee behaviour, climate and release from natural enemies. Here, we provide an overview on biology, distribution, pest status, diagnosis, control and prevention to foster adequate mitigation and stimulate future research. SHBs have become a global threat to both apiculture and wild bee populations, but our knowledge of this pest is still limited, reating demand for more research in all areas of its biology

Genomic survey of the ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor, a major pest of the honey bee Apis mellifera

Background: The ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor has emerged as the primary pest of domestic honey bees (Apis mellifera). Here we present an initial survey of the V. destructor genome carried out to advance our understanding of Varroa biology and to identify new avenues for mite control. This sequence survey provides immediate resources for molecular and population-genetic analyses of Varroa-Apis interactions and defines the challenges ahead for a comprehensive Varroa genome project. Results: The genome size was estimated by flow cytometry to be 565 Mbp, larger than most sequenced insects but modest relative to some other Acari. Genomic DNA pooled from similar to 1,000 mites was sequenced to 4.3x coverage with 454 pyrosequencing. The 2.4 Gbp of sequencing reads were assembled into 184,094 contigs with an N50 of 2,262 bp, totaling 294 Mbp of sequence after filtering. Genic sequences with homology to other eukaryotic genomes were identified on 13,031 of these contigs, totaling 31.3 Mbp. Alignment of protein sequence blocks conserved among V. destructor and four other arthropod genomes indicated a higher level of sequence divergence within this mite lineage relative to the tick Ixodes scapularis. A number of microbes potentially associated with V. destructor were identified in the sequence survey, including similar to 300 Kbp of sequence deriving from one or more bacterial species of the Actinomycetales. The presence of this bacterium was confirmed in individual mites by PCR assay, but varied significantly by age and sex of mites. Fragments of a novel virus related to the Baculoviridae were also identified in the survey. The rate of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the pooled mites was estimated to be 6.2 x 10(-5)per bp, a low rate consistent with the historical demography and life history of the species. Conclusions: This survey has provided general tools for the research community and novel directions for investigating the biology and control of Varroa mites. Ongoing development of Varroa genomic resources will be a boon for comparative genomics of under-represented arthropods, and will further enhance the honey bee and its associated pathogens as a model system for studying host-pathogen interactions

A national survey of managed honey bee 2012-2013 annual colony losses in the USA : results from the Bee Informed Partnership

For the past six years in which overwintering mortality of honey bee colonies has been surveyed in the USA, estimates of colony loss have fluctuated around one-third of the national population. Here we report on the losses for the 2012-2013 seasons. We collected data from 6,482 US beekeepers (6,114 backyard, 233 sideline, and 135 commercial beekeepers) to document overwintering mortality rates of honey bee colonies for the USA. Responding beekeepers reported a total 30.6% (95% CI: 30.16-31.13%) loss of US colonies over the winter, with each beekeeper losing on average 44.8% (95% CI: 43.88-45.66%) of their colonies. Total winter losses varied across states (range: 11.0% to 54.7%). The self-reported level of acceptable winter loss was 14.6%, and 73.2% of the respondents had mortality rates greater than this level. The leading self-identified causes of overwintering mortality were different according to the operation type; backyard beekeepers generally self-identified “manageable” factors (e.g., starvation, weak colony in the fall), while commercial beekeepers generally identified non-manageable factors (e.g., queen failure, pesticides) as the main cause of losses. For the first time in this series of surveys, we estimated mortality during the summer (total loss = 25.3% (95% CI: 24.80-25.74%), average loss = 12.5% (95% CI: 11.92-13.06%)). The entire 12-months period between April 2012 and April 2013 yielded a total loss of 45.2% (95% CI: 44.58-45.75%), and an average loss of 49.4% (95% CI: 48.46-50.43%). While we found that commercial beekeepers lost fewer colonies than backyard beekeepers in the winter (30.2% (95% CI: 26.54-33.93% vs 45.4% (44.46-46.32%) respectively), the situation was reversed in the summer where commercial beekeepers reported higher average losses than backyard beekeepers (21.6% (95% CI: 18.4-24.79%) vs 12.1% (11.46-12.65%)). These findings demonstrate the ongoing difficulties of US beekeepers in maintaining overall colony heath and survival.Keywords: Colony losses, Overwinter, USA, 2012-13, Honey bee, Mortalit

A national survey of managed honey bee 2011-12 winter colony losses in the United States: results from the Bee Informed Partnership

Estimates of winter loss for managed honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies are an important measure of honey bee health and productivity. We used data from 5,500 US beekeepers (5,244 backyard, 189 sideline and 67 commercial beekeepers) who responded to the April 2012 Bee Informed Partnership Winter Colony Loss Survey and calculated loss as the difference in the number of colonies between October 1, 2011 and April 1, 2012, adjusting for increases and decreases over that period. In the US, the total colony loss was 22.5% for the 2011-12 winter; 45.1% (n = 2,482) of respondents reported no colony loss. Total loss during 2011-12 was substantially lower than loss during 2010-11 (29.9%). Of the 4,484 respondents who kept bees in 2010-11 and 2011-12, 72.0% reported that the loss during 2011-12 was smaller or similar to the loss during 2010-11. There was substantial variation in total loss by state (range 6.2% to 47.7%). The average loss per beekeeping operation was 25.4%, but the average loss was not significantly different by operation type (backyard, sideline, commercial). The average self-reported acceptable loss per respondent was 13.7%; 46.8% (n = 2,259) of respondents experienced winter colony losses in excess of the average acceptable loss. Of beekeepers who reported losing at least one colony during 2011-12, the leading self-identified causes of mortality were weak condition in the fall and queen failure. Respondents who indicated poor wintering conditions, CCD, or pesticides as a leading cause of mortality suffered a higher average loss when compared to beekeepers who did not list these as potential causes.Keywords: Mortality, Colony losses, USA, Honey bee, Overwinter, 2011-1