An official website of the United States government
Abstract Over the last quarter century, increasing honey bee colony losses motivated standardized large-scale surveys of managed honey bees (Apis mellifera), particularly in Europe and the United States. Here we present the first large-scale standardized survey of colony losses of managed honey bees and stingless bees across Latin America. Overall, 1736 beekeepers and 165 meliponiculturists participated in the 2-year survey (2016–2017 and 2017–2018). On average, 30.4% of honey bee colonies and 39.6% of stingless bee colonies were lost per year across the region. Summer losses were higher than winter losses in stingless bees (30.9% and 22.2%, respectively) but not in honey bees (18.8% and 20.6%, respectively). Colony loss increased with operation size during the summer in both honey bees and stingless bees and decreased with operation size during the winter in stingless bees. Furthermore, losses differed significantly between countries and across years for both beekeepers and meliponiculturists. Overall, winter losses of honey bee colonies in Latin America (20.6%) position this region between Europe (12.5%) and the United States (40.4%). These results highlight the magnitude of bee colony losses occurring in the region and suggest difficulties in maintaining overall colony health and economic survival for beekeepers and meliponiculturists.
more »
« less
The Movement of Western Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.) Among U.S. States and Territories: History, Benefits, Risks, and Mitigation Strategies
Beekeeping is a cornerstone activity that has led to the human-mediated, global spread of western honey bees ( Apis mellifera L.) outside their native range of Europe, western Asia, and Africa. The exportation/importation of honey bees (i.e., transfer of honey bees or germplasm between countries) is regulated at the national level in many countries. Honey bees were first imported into the United States in the early 1600’s. Today, honey bee movement (i.e., transport of honey bees among states and territories) is regulated within the United States at the state, territory, and federal levels. At the federal level, honey bees present in the country (in any state or territory) can be moved among states and territories without federal restriction, with the exception of movement to Hawaii. In contrast, regulations at the state and territory levels vary substantially, ranging from no additional regulations beyond those stipulated at the federal level, to strict regulations for the introduction of live colonies, packaged bees, or queens. This variability can lead to inconsistencies in the application of regulations regarding the movement of honey bees among states and territories. In November 2020, we convened a technical working group (TWG), composed of academic and USDA personnel, to review and summarize the (1) history of honey bee importation into/movement within the United States, (2) current regulations regarding honey bee movement and case studies on the application of those regulations, (3) benefits associated with moving honey bees within the United States, (4) risks associated with moving honey bees within the United States, and (5) risk mitigation strategies. This review will be helpful for developing standardized best practices for the safe movement of honey bees between the 48 contiguous states and other states/territories within the United States.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1736019
- PAR ID:
- 10340094
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
- Volume:
- 10
- ISSN:
- 2296-701X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Honey bees are important pollinators of agricultural crops. Pathogens and other factors have been implicated in high annual losses of honey bee colonies in North America and some European countries. To further investigate the relationship between multiple factors, including pathogen prevalence and abundance and colony health, we monitored commercially managed migratory honey bee colonies involved in California almond pollination in 2014. At each sampling event, honey bee colony health was assessed, using colony population size as a proxy for health, and the prevalence and abundance of seven honey bee pathogens was evaluated using PCR and quantitative PCR, respectively. In this sample cohort, pathogen prevalence and abundance did not correlate with colony health, but did correlate with the date of sampling. In general, pathogen prevalence (i.e., the number of specific pathogens harbored within a colony) was lower early in the year (January—March) and was greater in the summer, with peak prevalence occurring in June. Pathogen abundance in individual honey bee colonies varied throughout the year and was strongly associated with the sampling date, and was influenced by beekeeping operation, colony health, and mite infestation level. Together, data from this and other observational cohort studies that monitor individual honey bee colonies and precisely account for sampling date (i.e., day of year) will lead to a better understanding of the influence of pathogens on colony mortality and the effects of other factors on these associations.more » « less
-
Abstract In temperate climates, honey bees rely on stored carbohydrates to sustain them throughout the winter. In nature, honey serves as the bees’ source of carbohydrates, but when managed, beekeepers often harvest honey and replace it with cheaper, artificial feed. The effects of alternative carbohydrate sources on colony survival, strength, and individual bee metabolic health are poorly understood. We assessed the impacts of carbohydrate diets (honey, sucrose syrup, high-fructose corn syrup, and invert syrup) on colony winter survival, population size, and worker bee nutritional state (i.e., fat content and gene expression of overwintered bees and emerging callow bees). We observed a nonsignificant trend for greater survival and larger adult population size among colonies overwintered on honey compared to the artificial feeds, with colonies fed high-fructose corn syrup performing particularly poorly. These trends were mirrored in individual bee physiology, with bees from colonies fed honey having significantly larger fat bodies than those from colonies fed high-fructose corn syrup. For bees fed honey or sucrose, we also observed gene expression profiles consistent with a higher nutritional state, associated with physiologically younger individuals. That is, there was significantly higher expression of vitellogenin and insulin-like peptide 2 and lower expression of insulin-like peptide 1 and juvenile hormone acid methyltransferase in the brains of bees that consumed honey or sucrose syrup relative to those that consumed invert syrup or high-fructose corn syrup. These findings further our understanding of the physiological implications of carbohydrate nutrition in honey bees and have applied implications for colony management.more » « less
-
For social animals, the genotypes of group members affect the social environment, and thus individual behavior, often indirectly. We used genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to determine the influence of individual vs. group genotypes on aggression in honey bees. Aggression in honey bees arises from the coordinated actions of colony members, primarily nonreproductive “soldier” bees, and thus, experiences evolutionary selection at the colony level. Here, we show that individual behavior is influenced by colony environment, which in turn, is shaped by allele frequency within colonies. Using a population with a range of aggression, we sequenced individual whole genomes and looked for genotype–behavior associations within colonies in a common environment. There were no significant correlations between individual aggression and specific alleles. By contrast, we found strong correlations between colony aggression and the frequencies of specific alleles within colonies, despite a small number of colonies. Associations at the colony level were highly significant and were very similar among both soldiers and foragers, but they covaried with one another. One strongly significant association peak, containing an ortholog of the Drosophila sensory gene dpr4 on linkage group (chromosome) 7, showed strong signals of both selection and admixture during the evolution of gentleness in a honey bee population. We thus found links between colony genetics and group behavior and also, molecular evidence for group-level selection, acting at the colony level. We conclude that group genetics dominates individual genetics in determining the fatal decision of honey bees to sting.more » « less
-
Abstract Marine aquaculture (mariculture) plays a relatively small role in the United States’ domestic seafood production, despite considerable scope for industry development and high volumes of imported farmed seafood resulting in a significant trade deficit. Currently, most mariculture in the United States occurs in nearshore waters or land‐based tanks and is regulated and guided using state‐level policy, with a relative absence of national coordinating mechanisms to link the patchwork of state policies. There is no comprehensive evaluation showing how different state policies may be enabling or impeding mariculture development. In response, we provide the first systematic overview of state‐level mariculture policy for the 23 coastal marine states in the United States. We compiled information for 16 aquaculture and mariculture policy attributes, including legislation, regulations and management characteristics, particularly those that could enable mariculture development. We found considerable heterogeneity in how states govern and regulate mariculture. As examples, 48% of states have an aquaculture development act, 35% have spatial zoning specifically for mariculture and only 26% have a government‐provided mariculture best management practices document. We examined the relationship between enabling policies and metrics of mariculture output (e.g. production value, number of farms), and while the effect of enabling policy is often equivocal, certain features stand out as important (e.g. government‐provided best management practices). Overall, this policy synthesis suggests approaches that may be influential in enabling mariculture development, which could inform new state‐level policies, an effective overarching federal policy in the United States, or policies in other countries seeking to support an expanded mariculture industry.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2022.850600
