Search for: All records

Abstract The effects of acute sublethal doses of coumaphos, an acaricide used againstVarroa destructorinfestation in beekeeping, on the locomotor activities of four native honeybee subspecies of Türkiye including two ecotypes (Carniolan honeybee -A. m. carnica, Syrian honeybee -A. m. syriaca, Caucasian honeybee-A. m. caucasica, and Muğla and Yığılca ecotypes of Anatolian honeybeeA. m. anatoliaca) were investigated using an individual locomotor activity monitoring system. Analysis of locomotor activity data in the first 12-h, last 12-h, and 24-h time periods showed that bees fromcaucasicaandcarnicasubspecies were not affected by coumaphos at all three acute doses (1, 2, and 5 μg coumaphos in 10 μl sucrose syrup for each bee). In contrast, bees fromA. m. syriacasubspecies showed significantly elevated locomotor activity levels at 2 and 5 μg coumaphos doses within the first 12 h. Bees from both Muğla and Yığılca ecotypes ofanatoliacasubspecies also showed elevated locomotor activity levels at 5 μg coumaphos dose but the magnitude of increase was lower in these ecotypes compared to that seen insyriacasubspecies in the first 12-h period. In general, increasing doses of coumaphos resulted in increased locomotor activity (locomotor activity), with differences in sensitivity across honeybee populations. Possible mechanisms underlying this variance and suggestions for further studies are discussed. 

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.