Search

Context Beekeepers and honeybee queen breeders alike currently have few tools at their disposal for the management of genetic diversity inside their populations. Pedigree information is often absent, beekeepers cannot afford to genotype selection candidates due to costs, and acquisition of material for genotyping without risk to individual queen bees is difficult. However, in New World honeybee populations where import of additional genetic material to refresh the population is restricted (e.g. Australia) or impossible (e.g. New Zealand), management of genetic diversity is important for population sustainability. While the role of individual beekeepers in maintaining genetic resources becomes crucial under these circumstances, a more holistic approach to the management of genetic diversity is needed to allow for maximum impact of their contribution. Aims The establishment of affordable genotyping methodologies for successful strategies in managing honeybee genetic diversity, as well as the necessary delivery systems for the results to support the beekeeping community by providing interpretation in the context of the wider population. Methods Genotyping-by-sequencing of honeybee samples collected as part of a national survey were used as the basis for assessment of New Zealand’s honeybee genetic diversity and development of a tool with largely self-explanatory outputs that can be used directly by beekeepers. Key results It would appear that New Zealand’s honeybee population is sufficiently diverse to maintain population viability. However, both within regions and within companies, genetic diversity is significantly reduced, especially in the case of specialised queen breeders, indicating that active management will be necessary to achieve long-term sustainability. Conclusions Interactive tools are needed to help beekeepers understand their role in maintaining overall genetic diversity in the honeybee population as well as the potential impact of planned bee movement and queen acquisitions. Regular rounds of voluntary bee sampling can be used as the basis for management decisions without concentrating genotyping load on specific operators and restricting diversity assessments to subpopulations. Implications The described strategy is expected to both improve the outlook of New Zealand’s honeybee population as a whole and facilitate stringent genetic improvement programs by enabling queen breeders to make informed selection decisions and giving beekeepers confidence in the viability of their population.

The present paper provides an indication (using selection index theory) of the contribution of genetics to a reduction in methane emissions through the current selection for productivity traits (defined as the inherent rate). This is then compared with potential new approaches that incorporate measurements or estimates of methane production as selection criteria. The predicted value of the inherent reduction in methane at a price (all costs and prices are in Australian dollars) of $25/t carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e; methane × 25) is $0.38/cow mated per year. The direct value of the estimated annual genetic gain in productivity (about $3/cow mated) is about eight times the value of the savings in methane. The value of the carbon savings doubles to ~$0.75 if methane yield (methane per unit feed intake) is included in the index. This is due to a reduction in methane emissions of 0.78% of the mean (1.20 kg methane/cow mated per year at a carbon cost of $25/t CO2-e) which increases to 1.0% at $50/t CO2-e. If selection is on methane alone, the annual response is ~1.45%, which is valued at $1.39 at a price of $25/t CO2-e. However, adoption is less than 100% at the breeder level, so that realised gains will be less than predicted here.