The BEEHAVE model simulates the population dynamics and foraging activity of a single honey bee colony () in great detail. Although it still makes numerous simplifying assumptions, it appears to capture a wide range of empirical observations. It could, therefore, in principle, also be used as a tool in beekeeper education, as it allows the implementation and comparison of different management options. Here, we focus on treatments aimed at controlling the mite . However, since BEEHAVE was developed in the UK, mite treatment includes the use of a synthetic acaricide, which is not part of Good Beekeeping Practice in Germany. A practice that consists of drone brood removal from April to June, treatment with formic acid in August/September, and treatment with oxalic acid in November/December. We implemented these measures, focusing on the timing, frequency, and spacing between drone brood removals. The effect of drone brood removal and acid treatment, individually or in combination, on a mite-infested colony was examined. We quantify the efficacy of Varroa mite control as the reduction of mites in treated bee colonies compared to untreated bee colonies. We found that drone brood removal was very effective, reducing mites by 90% at the end of the first simulation year after the introduction of mites. This value was significantly higher than the 50-67% reduction expected by bee experts and confirmed by empirical studies. However, literature reports varying percent reductions in mite numbers from 10 to 85% after drone brood removal. The discrepancy between model results, empirical data, and expert estimates indicate that these three sources should be reviewed and refined, as all are based on simplifying assumptions. These results and the adaptation of BEEHAVE to the Good Beekeeping Practice are a decisive step forward for the future use of BEEHAVE in beekeeper education in Germany and anywhere where organic acids and drone brood removal are utilized.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9643073 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9456 | DOI Listing |
Vet Med Sci
January 2025
Department of Veterinary Science, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
Foods
July 2024
Meliponini and Apini Research Laboratory, Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Insects
June 2024
Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
Implementation of marker-assisted selection (MAS) in modern beekeeping would improve sustainability, especially in breeding programs aiming for resilience against the parasitic mite . Selecting honey bee colonies for natural resistance traits, such as brood-intrinsic suppression of varroa mite reproduction, reduces the use of chemical acaricides while respecting local adaptation. In 2019, eight genomic variants associated with varroa non-reproduction in drone brood were discovered in a single colony from the Amsterdam Water Dune population in the Netherlands.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInsects
May 2024
Laboratory of Molecular Entomology and Bee Pathology (L-MEB), Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Ghent University, Krijgslaan 281, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
The mechanisms of action behind decreased mite reproduction (DMR) are still unknown, but current hypotheses state that DMR is the result of brood-intrinsic and/or external disturbances in the -honey bee pupa signal interactions. For accurate and precise DMR phenotyping, sufficient single infested honey bee brood cells are required (e.g.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Insect Sci
May 2024
Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, 2475 TAMU, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.
The life cycle of Varroa destructor, the ectoparasitic mite of honey bees (Apis mellifera), includes a dispersal phase, in which mites attach to adult bees for transport and feeding, and a reproductive phase, in which mites invade worker and drone brood cells just prior to pupation to reproduce while their bee hosts complete development. In this study, we wanted to determine whether increased nurse bee visitations of adjacent drone and worker brood cells would increase the likelihood of Varroa mites invading those cells. We also explored whether temporarily restricting the nurses' access to sections of worker brood for 2 or 4 h would subsequently cause higher nurse visitations, and thus, higher Varroa cell invasions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!