Search for: All records

We present a novel system for the automatic video monitoring of honey bee foraging activity at the hive entrance. This monitoring system is built upon convolutional neural networks that perform multiple animal pose estimation without the need for marking. This precise detection of honey bee body parts is a key element of the system to provide detection of entrance and exit events at the entrance of the hive including accurate pollen detection. A detailed evaluation of the quality of the detection and a study of the effect of the parameters are presented. The complete system also integrates identification of barcode marked bees, which enables the monitoring at both aggregate and individual levels. The results obtained on multiple days of video recordings show the applicability of the approach for large-scale deployment. This is an important step forward for the understanding of complex behaviors exhibited by honey bees and the automatic assessment of colony health. 

Males in Hymenopteran societies are understudied in many aspects and it is assumed that they only have a reproductive function. We studied the time budget of male honey bees, drones, using multiple methods. Changes in the activities of animals provide important information on biological clocks and their health. Yet, in nature, these changes are subtle and often unobservable without the development and use of modern technology. During the spring and summer mating season, drones emerge from the hive, perform orientation flights, and search for drone congregation areas for mating. This search may lead drones to return to their colony, drift to other colonies (vectoring diseases and parasites), or simply get lost to predation. In a low percentage of cases, the search is successful, and drones mate and die. Our objective was to describe the activity of Apis mellifera drones during the mating season in Northwestern Argentina using three methods: direct observation, video recording, and radio frequency identification (RFID). The use of RFID tagging allows the tracking of a bee for 24 h but does not reveal the detailed activity of drones. We quantified the average number of drones’ departure and arrival flights and the time outside the hive. All three methods confirmed that drones were mostly active in the afternoon. We found no differences in results between those obtained by direct observation and by video recording. RFID technology enabled us to discover previously unknown drone behavior such as activity at dawn and during the morning. We also discovered that drones may stay inside the hive for many days, even after initiation of search flights (up to four days). Likewise, we observed drones to leave the hive for several days to return later (up to three days). The three methods were complementary and should be considered for the study of bee drone activity, which may be associated with the diverse factors influencing hive health. 

Abstract Honey bees are critical pollinators in ecosystems and agriculture, but their numbers have significantly declined. Declines in pollinator populations are thought to be due to multiple factors including habitat loss, climate change, increased vulnerability to disease and parasites, and pesticide use. Neonicotinoid pesticides are agonists of insect nicotinic cholinergic receptors, and sub-lethal exposures are linked to reduced honey bee hive survival. Honey bees are highly dependent on circadian clocks to regulate critical behaviors, such as foraging orientation and navigation, time-memory for food sources, sleep, and learning/memory processes. Because circadian clock neurons in insects receive light input through cholinergic signaling we tested for effects of neonicotinoids on honey bee circadian rhythms and sleep. Neonicotinoid ingestion by feeding over several days results in neonicotinoid accumulation in the bee brain, disrupts circadian rhythmicity in many individual bees, shifts the timing of behavioral circadian rhythms in bees that remain rhythmic, and impairs sleep. Neonicotinoids and light input act synergistically to disrupt bee circadian behavior, and neonicotinoids directly stimulate wake-promoting clock neurons in the fruit fly brain. Neonicotinoids disrupt honey bee circadian rhythms and sleep, likely by aberrant stimulation of clock neurons, to potentially impair honey bee navigation, time-memory, and social communication. 

We aimed to examine mechanistically the observed foraging differences across two honey bee, Apis mellifera , subspecies using the proboscis extension response assay. Specifically, we compared differences in appetitive reversal learning ability between honey bee subspecies: Apis mellifera caucasica (Pollman), and Apis mellifera syriaca (Skorikov) in a “common garden” apiary. It was hypothesized that specific learning differences could explain previously observed foraging behavior differences of these subspecies: A.m. caucasica switches between different flower color morphs in response to reward variability, and A.m. syriaca does not switch. We suggest that flower constancy allows reduced exposure by minimizing search and handling time, whereas plasticity is important when maximizing harvest in preparation for long winter is at a premium. In the initial or Acquisition phase of the test we examined specifically discrimination learning, where bees were trained to respond to a paired conditioned stimulus with an unconditioned stimulus and not to respond to a second conditioned stimulus that is not followed by an unconditioned stimulus. We found no significant differences among the subspecies in the Acquisition phase in appetitive learning. During the second, Reversal phase of the experiment, where flexibility in association was tested, the paired and unpaired conditioned stimuli were reversed. During the Reversal phase A.m. syriaca showed a reduced ability to learn the reverse association in the appetitive learning task. This observation is consistent with the hypothesis that A.m. syriaca foragers cannot change the foraging choice because of lack of flexibility in appetitive associations under changing contingencies. Interestingly, both subspecies continued responding to the previously rewarded conditioned stimulus in the reversal phase. We discuss potential ecological correlates and molecular underpinnings of these differences in learning across the two subspecies. In addition, in a supplemental experiment we demonstrated that these differences in appetitive reversal learning do not occur in other learning contexts.