Search

The honey bee microbiota is involved in several important functions, and alterations in the composition could have a severe effect on honey bee health. Among the bacteria identified in the honey bee microbiome are a group of non‐pathogenic honey bee‐specific lactic acid bacteria (hbs‐LAB) that have been shown to inhibit the growth of bacterial pathogens such as Paenibacillus larvae, the causative agent of American foulbrood (AFB). While P. larvae only causes disease in larvae and not in adult honey bees, there are reports of the pathogen causing changes in the microbiota composition of the adults. The aim of this study was to investigate how AFB in the colony affect the hbs‐LAB composition in adult honey bees. Adult bees were collected from colonies with and without AFB during three outbreaks of AFB in Sweden. The hbs‐LAB was analyzed using qPCR to detect and quantify the number of ten hbs‐LAB (five Lactobacilli, two Apilactobacilli, one Bombilactobacilli, and two Bifidobacterium). The hbs‐LAB composition was compared between AFB outbreaks and depending on the AFB status of the honeybee colony at the time of sampling. The data analyses revealed differences in the abundance of individual hbs‐LAB between outbreaks and an overall difference in bacterial community composition depending on AFB status. Also, a higher hbs‐LAB diversity was observed in samples that were P. larvae culture positive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

European foulbrood (EFB) is a severe disease of honey bee (Apis mellifera) larvae caused by the bacterium Linnaeus [Hymenoptera: Apidae]) Melissococcus plutonius (ex White) Bailey and Collins (Lactobacillales: Enterococcaceae). Many beekeepers in North America report severe EFB following blueberry pollination, but it is not clear what factors during pollination are related to clinical disease. Additionally, the impact that other factors such as viral load and hygienic behavior have on EFB has not been studied. In Spring of 2020 we enrolled 60 commercial honey bee colonies in a prospective cohort study. Colonies were inspected 3 times over the season with hive metrics and samples taken for viral testing. Each colony was tested for hygienic behavior twice and the score was averaged. Viral loads were determined by qPCR for deformed wing virus (DWV) A and B. We found no statistical difference in the EFB prevalence or severity between the 2 yards at any timepoint; 50% (n  = 16) of the colonies in the holding yard and 63% (n  = 17) in blueberry developed moderate to severe EFB over the study period. When colonies from both yards were pooled, we found no relationship between viral load or hygienic behavior and development of EFB. These results suggest that other factors may be responsible for driving EFB virulence and hygienic behavior is not likely helpful in managing this disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The nutritional needs and foraging behavior of managed bees often lead to pollen collection from flowers other than the focal crop during crop pollination. To understand the pollen needs and preferences of managed bees during blueberry pollination, we identified pollen collected by Apis mellifera Linnaeus, 1758 (Hymenoptera: Apidae) and Bombus impatiens Cresson, 1863 (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies across two years. Bumble bees collected a wider diversity of pollens compared to honey bees, whereas honey bees were more focused on abundant resources. Despite blueberries being the most abundant resource in the landscape, it was not the most collected pollen by either bee species in 2018. However, it was the most collected pollen by bumble bees in 2019 and they collected substantially more blueberry pollen than honey bees in both years. In 2018, buckthorn, Rhamnus L. (Rosales: Rhamnaceae) or Frangula Mill. (Rosales: Rhamnaceae), and willow, Salix L. (Malpighiales: Salicaceae), pollens were abundantly collected by both bee species. In 2019, cherry, Prunus L. (Rosales: Rosaceae), and willow (Salix) pollens were collected at high proportions by both species. Brambles, Rubus L. (Rosales: Rosaceae), and white clover, Trifolium repens L. (Fabales: Fabaceae), were also common pollen sources for honey bees, whereas oak, Quercus L. (Fagales: Fagaceae), was collected by bumble bees. Landscape analyses also revealed that certain land cover types were positively correlated with the collection of preferred pollen types. Herbaceous wetlands were associated with collection of buckthorn (Rhamnus/Frangula), willow (Salix), and cherry (Prunus) pollen, which were primary pollen resources for both bee species. There was no correlation between landscape diversity and pollen diversity, suggesting that colonies forage based on nutritional requirements rather than resource availability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: From landscape variables to weather, multiple environmental factors affect honey bees and other pollinators. Detailed honey bee colony assessments in a variety of landscape and weather conditions offer the opportunity to develop a mechanistic understanding of how landscape composition, configuration, and weather are associated with colony nutrition, demography, and productivity. Objectives: Our objective was to test if weather and landscape characteristics (e.g., agricultural versus forested land use) are associated with different honey bee colony outcomes (foraged nectar mass, foraged pollen mass, pupal population size, and adult population size change). Methods: We collected detailed colony measurements on over 450 honey bee colonies over four years across an agricultural-to-forested land use gradient in Michigan, USA. Results: We found that higher than normal precipitation in the preceding spring and fall was negatively correlated with colony size change and with foraged nectar mass, respectively. Sites surrounded by less agricultural land and more forested land also had fewer pupae by the end of summer. Conclusions: These inter-dependent colony metrics offer insights into environmental-plant-pollinator dynamics. Our finding that extreme weather events, associated with climate change, are negatively correlated with colony performance point to likely lagged effects of weather on pollinator floral resources. Landscapes managed with climate-resilient, temporally continuous floral resources are likely to support pollinators. Capturing extreme weather phenomena in field studies is a valuable way to investigate the associations between land use, climate change and biological systems. However, caution should be taken in overinterpreting observational studies, so further research is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1977, a sample of diseased adult honeybees (Apis mellifera) from Egypt was found to contain large amounts of a previously unknown virus, Egypt bee virus, which was subsequently shown to be serologically related to deformed wing virus (DWV). By sequencing the original isolate, we demonstrate that Egypt bee virus is in fact a fourth unique, major variant of DWV (DWV-D): more closely related to DWV-C than to either DWV-A or DWV-B. DWV-A and DWV-B are the most common DWV variants worldwide due to their close relationship and transmission by Varroa destructor. However, we could not find any trace of DWV-D in several hundred RNA sequencing libraries from a worldwide selection of honeybee, varroa and bumblebee samples. This means that DWV-D has either become extinct, been replaced by other DWV variants better adapted to varroa-mediated transmission, or persists only in a narrow geographic or host range, isolated from common bee and beekeeping trade routes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When managed bee colonies are brought to farms for crop pollination, they can be exposed to pesticide residues. Quantifying the risk posed by these exposures can indicate which pesticides are of the greatest concern and helps focus efforts to reduce the most harmful exposures. To estimate the risk from pesticides to bees while they are pollinating blueberry fields, we sampled blueberry flowers, foraging bees, pollen collected by returning honey bee and bumble bee foragers at colonies, and wax from honey bee hives in blooming blueberry farms in southwest Michigan. We screened the samples for 261 active ingredients using a modified QuEChERS method. The most abundant pesticides were those applied by blueberry growers during blueberry bloom (e.g., fenbuconazole and methoxyfenozide). However, we also detected highly toxic pesticides not used in this crop during bloom (or other times of the season) including the insecticides chlorpyrifos, clothianidin, avermectin, thiamethoxam, and imidacloprid. Using LD50 values for contact and oral exposure to honey bees and bumble bees, we calculated the Risk Quotient (RQ) for each individual pesticide and the average sample RQ for each farm. RQ values were considered in relation to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency acute contact level of concern (LOC, 0.4), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) acute contact LOC (0.2) and the EFSA chronic oral LOC (0.03). Pollen samples were most likely to exceed LOC values, with the percent of samples above EFSA's chronic oral LOC being 0% for flowers, 3.4% for whole honey bees, 0% for whole bumble bees, 72.4% for honey bee pollen in 2018, 45.4% of honey bee pollen in 2019, 46.7% of bumble bee pollen in 2019, and 3.5% of honey bee wax samples. Average pollen sample RQ values were above the EFSA chronic LOC in 92.9% of farms in 2018 and 42.9% of farms in 2019 for honey bee collected pollen, and 46.7% of farms for bumble bee collected pollen in 2019. Landscape analyses indicated that sample RQ was positively correlated with the abundance of apple and cherry orchards located within the flight range of the bees, though this varied between bee species and landscape scale. There was no correlation with abundance of blueberry production. Our results highlight the need to mitigate pesticide risk to bees across agricultural landscapes, in addition to focusing on the impact of applications on the farms where they are applied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The long‐term health of pollinators is a critical issue for the functioning of natural habitats and for agricultural production. In response to widespread public concern about the future of these ecologically and economically important animals, in 2015 the US Government released a national strategy to support pollinators, including research priorities, directives for funding, and timelines for achieving three overarching goals. Five years after this strategic plan was released, we evaluate progress toward the national targets for improved honey bee (Apis mellifera) overwintering survival, expanded pollinator habitat, and larger monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) populations, and find that the three goals of the plan have not yet been reached. Our research and extension programs to improve the health of honey bees, wild bees, and monarch butterflies in the US state of Michigan are described, providing opportunities to contribute to the national pollinator goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1977, a sample of diseased adult honeybees (Apis mellifera) from Egypt was found to contain large amounts of a previously unknown virus, Egypt bee virus, which was subsequently shown to be serologically related to deformed wing virus (DWV). By sequencing the original isolate, we demonstrate that Egypt bee virus is in fact a fourth unique, major variant of DWV (DWV-D): more closely related to DWV-C than to either DWV-A or DWV-B. DWV-A and DWV-B are the most common DWV variants worldwide due to their close relationship and transmission by Varroa destructor. However, we could not find any trace of DWV-D in several hundred RNA sequencing libraries from a worldwide selection of honeybee, varroa and bumblebee samples. This means that DWV-D has either become extinct, been replaced by other DWV variants better adapted to varroa-mediated transmission, or persists only in a narrow geographic or host range, isolated from common bee and beekeeping trade routes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agriculturally important commercially managed pollinators including honey bees (Apis mellifera L., 1758) and bumble bees (Bombus impatiens Cresson, 1863) rely on the surrounding landscape to fulfill their dietary needs. A previous study in Europe demonstrated that managed honey bee foragers and unmanaged native bumble bee foragers are associated with different land uses. However, it is unclear how response to land use compares between managed honey bees and a managed native bumble bee species in the United States, where honey bees are an imported species. Furthermore, to our knowledge, no such direct comparisons of bee responses to land use have been made at the colony level. To better understand how two different social bees respond to variation in land use, we monitored the weights of A. mellifera and B. impatiens colonies placed in 12 apiaries across a range of land use in Michigan, United States in 2017. Bombus impatiens colonies gained more weight and produced more drones when surrounded by diverse agricultural land (i.e., non-corn/soybean cropland such as tree fruits and grapes), while honey bee colonies gained more weight when surrounded by more grassland/pasture land. These findings add to our understanding of how different bee species respond to agricultural landscapes, highlighting the need for further species-specific land use studies to inform tailored land management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bees are critical for crop pollination, but there is limited information on levels and sources of pesticide exposure in commercial agriculture. We collected pollen from foraging honey bees and bumble bees returning to colonies placed in blooming blueberry fields with different management approaches (conventional, organic, unmanaged) and located across different landscape settings to determine how these factors affect pesticide exposure. We also identified the pollen and analyzed whether pesticide exposure was correlated with corbicular load composition. Across 188 samples collected in 2 years, we detected 80 of the 259 pesticide active ingredients (AIs) screened for using a modified QuEChERS method. Detections included 28 fungicides, 26 insecticides, and 21 herbicides. All samples contained pesticides (mean = 22 AIs per pollen sample), with pollen collected from bees on conventional fields having significantly higher average concentrations (2019 mean = 882.0 ppb) than those on unmanaged fields (2019 mean = 279.6 ppb). Pollen collected by honey bees had more AIs than pollen collected by bumble bees (mean = 35 vs. 19 AIs detected at each farm, respectively), whereas samples from bumble bees had higher average concentrations, likely reflecting differences in foraging behavior. Blueberry pollen was more common in pollen samples collected by bumble bees (25.9% per sample) than honey bees (1.8%), though pesticide concentrations were only correlated with blueberry pollen for honey bees. Pollen collected at farms with more blueberry in the surrounding landscape had higher pesticide concentrations, mostly AIs applied for control of blueberry pathogens and pests during bloom. However, for honey bees, the majority of AIs detected at each farm are not registered for use on blueberry at any time (55.2% of AIs detected), including several highly toxic insecticides. These AIs therefore came from outside the fields and farms they are expected to pollinate. For bumble bees, the majority of AIs detected in their pollen are registered for use on blueberry during bloom (56.9% of AIs detected), though far fewer AIs were sprayed at the focal farm (16.7%). Our results highlight the need for integrated farm and landscape-scale stewardship of pesticides to reduce exposure to pollinators during crop pollination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]