scholarly journals Monitoring of Bee Colonies’ Activity During the Major Gatherings in 2017

2017 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 92
Author(s):  
Silvia PĂTRUICĂ ◽  
Daniel Severus DEZMIREAN ◽  
Marian BURA ◽  
Robert JURCOANE ◽  
Alex SPOREA
Keyword(s):  
Low Temperatures ◽  
Heavy Rainfall ◽  
Meteorological Factors ◽  
Weather Conditions ◽  
Honey Production ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Acacia Honey ◽  
Honey Bee Colony ◽  
Bee Colonies

The assessment of the meteorological factors, in direct correlation with the nectar release and honey production, helps beekeepers with the organization of the technological activities within the apiary (determination of the pastoral schedule, supplementary feedings, reproduction of bee colonies, honey harvest, etc.). The study was carried out between 14th of April and 20th of July 2017, on 20 Apis mellifera carpatica bee colonies, maintained in multi-layer and Dadant beehives. The bee colonies were transported in field for rape, acacia and sunflower gathering and monitored with the help of the BeeWatch Professional device. The rape and acacia gatherings were negatively influenced by low temperatures and heavy rainfall, which impeded the capitalization of the melliferous potential. The bee colonies gathered only 5 kg rape honey and 3.9 kg acacia honey/bee colony/period. As regards the sunflower, the weather conditions were optimal for gathering, and the bee colonies gathered the supplies necessary for winter and also 5 kg honey extra. The honey production obtained by the bee colonies studied was not influenced by the beehive type; it was strongly influenced by the environmental factors, temperature and humidity.

Effect of Lactobacillus johnsonii CRL1647 on different parameters of honeybee colonies and bacterial populations of the bee gut

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 687-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.C. Audisio ◽  
D.C. Sabaté ◽  
M.R. Benítez-Ahrendts
Keyword(s):  
Lactobacillus Johnsonii ◽  
Bacterial Populations ◽  
Honey Production ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Enterococcus Spp ◽  
Colony Performance ◽  
Genus Lactobacillus ◽  
Bacillus Spp ◽  
Bee Colonies ◽  
Administration Schedules

Lactobacillus johnsonii CRL1647, isolated from the intestinal tract of a worker-bee in Salta, Argentina, was delivered to Apis mellifera L. honey bee colonies according to two different administration schedules: 1×105 cfu/ml every 15 days (2011) or monthly (2012). The effect of each treatment on the bee-colony performance was monitored by measuring honey production, and the prevalence of varroasis and nosemosis. Worker bees from each assay were randomly captured 3 days after administration and assayed for the following intestinal culturable and defined bacterial populations: total aerobic microorganisms, Bacillus spp. spores, Lactobacillus spp., Enterococcus spp. and enterobacteria. Interestingly, both treatments generated a similar increase in honey production in treated colonies compared to controls: 36.8% (every 15 days) and 36.3% (monthly). Nosema index always exhibited a reduction when lactobacilli were administered; in turn, Varroa incidence was lower when the lactobacilli were administered once a month. Moreover, the administration of L. johnsonii CRL1647 every 15 days produced an increase in the total number of aerobic microorganisms and in bacteria belonging to the genera Lactobacillus and Enterococcus; at the same time, a decrease was observed in the number of total spores at the end of the treatment. The number of enterobacteria was constant and remained below that of control hives at the end of the assay. On the other hand, the delivery of lactobacilli once a month only showed an increase in the number of bacteria belonging to the genus Lactobacillus; meanwhile, viable counts of the remaining microorganisms assayed were reduced. Even though it seems that both treatments were similar, those bee colonies that received L. johnsonii CRL1647 every 15 days became so strong that they swarmed.

scholarly journals Florida Beekeeping Management Calendar

EDIS ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
James D. Ellis ◽  
Mary C. Bammer ◽  
William H. Kern Jr.
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bee ◽  
Plant Communities ◽  
South Florida ◽  
Floral Resources ◽  
North Central ◽  
Colony Management ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Honey Bee Colony ◽  
Bee Colonies

Climate, plant communities, and timing of floral resources differ significantly across Florida, which means that management of European honey bee colonies in Florida differs as well. This 8-page fact sheet written by James D. Ellis, Mary C. Bammer, and William H. Kern and published by Department of Entomology and Nematology outlines a management calendar created for Florida beekeepers. It is specific to region (north, central, and south Florida) and month and includes recommendations for major management considerations like when to treat for parasites or pathogens and when to feed colonies or harvest honey. This management calendar, while not exhaustive, is a valuable reference or starting point for honey bee colony management in Florida. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/in848

scholarly journals No apparent correlation between honey bee forager gut microbiota and honey production

PeerJ ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. e1329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa A. Horton ◽  
Randy Oliver ◽  
Irene L. Newton
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bee ◽  
Function Analysis ◽  
Amplicon Sequencing ◽  
Microbial Composition ◽  
Library Size ◽  
Honey Production ◽  
16S Rrna Amplicon Sequencing ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Bee Colonies ◽  
Colony Productivity

One of the best indicators of colony health for the European honey bee (Apis mellifera) is its performance in the production of honey. Recent research into the microbial communities naturally populating the bee gut raise the question as to whether there is a correlation between microbial community structure and colony productivity. In this work, we used 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing to explore the microbial composition associated with forager bees from honey bee colonies producing large amounts of surplus honey (productive) and compared them to colonies producing less (unproductive). As supported by previous work, the honey bee microbiome was found to be dominated by three major phyla: the Proteobacteria, Bacilli and Actinobacteria, within which we found a total of 23 different bacterial genera, including known “core” honey bee microbiome members. Using discriminant function analysis and correlation-based network analysis, we identified highly abundant members (such asFrischellaandGilliamella) as important in shaping the bacterial community; libraries from colonies with high quantities of theseOrbaceaemembers were also likely to contain fewerBifidobacteriaandLactobacillusspecies (such as Firm-4). However, co-culture assays, using isolates from these major clades, were unable to confirm any antagonistic interaction betweenGilliamellaand honey bee gut bacteria. Our results suggest that honey bee colony productivity is associated with increased bacterial diversity, although this mechanism behind this correlation has yet to be determined. Our results also suggest researchers should not base inferences of bacterial interactions solely on correlations found using sequencing. Instead, we suggest that depth of sequencing and library size can dramatically influencestatistically significantresults from sequence analysis of amplicons and should be cautiously interpreted.

scholarly journals Exploitation of Rape Flow by Bee Colonies in Stationary and Migratory Apiary

2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dariusz Teper ◽  
Piotr Skubida ◽  
Piotr Semkiw ◽  
Wojciech Skowronek
Keyword(s):  
Brassica Napus ◽  
Weather Conditions ◽  
Winter Rape ◽  
Palynological Analysis ◽  
Percentage Content ◽  
Pollen Loads ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Pollen Traps ◽  
Bee Colonies

Summary The aim of the study conducted in 2009 - 2011 was to estimate the differences in the nectar and pollen oilseed rape flow exploitation by bee colonies kept in the stationary apiary (permanently located on the rape field) and in the migratory apiary. The migratory apiary was transferred to the rape field at the appropriate time and situated on the same area as the stationary apiary. Every study year, 8 bee colonies per apiary, in two apiaries of different types (stationary and migratory apiary), were prepared. The colonies from the migratory apiary were placed on the rape field when about 10% of rape flowers were blooming. During that time, bottom pollen traps were inserted into the hives of both apiaries. The pollen loads were collected every day, separately from each colony. After the end of the flow season, honey was extracted separately from each colony. The honey was weighed and samples were taken for the palynological analysis. The weather conditions were monitored during the whole study period. The average harvest of pollen loads from one bee colony during one day, was similar in both apiaries. The content of Brassica napus pollen was significantly higher in the pollen loads harvested from the migratory apiary. Despite the fact that the amounts of honey extracted from both apiaries were similar, the microscopic pollen analysis showed significantly higher percentage content of rape pollen in the honey from the migratory apiary. The results confirmed that placing the migratory apiary in the winter rape field at the time when about 10% of flowers were blooming resulted in a better exploitation of the rape flow by the bee colonies from this apiary in comparison to the colonies from the stationary apiary.

scholarly journals An Economic Approach to Assess the Annual Stock in Beekeeping Farms: The Honey Bee Colony Inventory Tool

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (21) ◽  
pp. 9258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Vercelli ◽  
Luca Croce ◽  
Teresina Mancuso
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bee ◽  
Climate Trend ◽  
Monetary Value ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Queen Replacement ◽  
Varroa Mites ◽  
Honey Bee Colony ◽  
Mite Infestations ◽  
Bee Colonies ◽  
Economic Size

For beekeepers, the beehive stock represents a fundamental means of ensuring the continuity of their activity, whether they are professionals or hobbyists. The evaluation of this asset for economic purposes requires knowledge of the rhythms and adaptations of honey bee colonies during the annual seasons. As in any breeding activity, it is necessary to establish the numerical and economic size of the species bred. Beekeepers are interested in this evaluation to monitor beehive stock. For keeping economic accounts of stock, a specific tool has been developed and proposed, here called the “Honey Bee Colony Inventory (HBCI)”. The HBCI can be used as either a final or preventive scheme to assess the numbers of honey bee colonies and nuclei, and the mortality rate, in order to calculate the monetary value. This tool allows the strength of honey bee colony stocks to be monitored, including fluctuations throughout the year, and will prove useful for determining solutions to maintain or increase how long stocks last. Data can be registered in countries such as Italy where the veterinary authorities request data on the stock owned and its variations. Due to widespread Varroa mite infestations, in recent years, beekeepers have experimented with a range of different biotechniques that have included queen caging as well as drone and total brood removal. To verify its effectiveness for gathering honey bee colony data, the HBCI was used in nine beekeeping farms applying different biotechniques to control Varroa mites: chemical treatment, total brood removal, queen caging and old queen replacement by royal cell insertion. The results are compared and discussed. Out of the nine farms, seven showed negative monetary value according to the HBCI, as expected, due to multiple factors such as the unfavorable climate trend of 2017 in the studied area. The positive aspect is that the application of this tool will allow farmers to monitor, manage and maintain their beehive stocks.

scholarly journals Monitoring of Honey Bee Colony Losses: A Special Issue

Diversity ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 403
Author(s):  
Aleš Gregorc
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bee ◽  
Abiotic Factors ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Colony Losses ◽  
Colony Management ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Honey Bee Colony ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Bee Colonies ◽  
Honey Bee Colony Losses

In recent decades, independent national and international research programs have revealed possible reasons for the death of managed honey bee colonies worldwide. Such losses are not due to a single factor, but instead are due to highly complex interactions between various internal and external influences, including pests, pathogens, honey bee stock diversity, and environmental change. Reduced honey bee vitality and nutrition, exposure to agrochemicals, and quality of colony management contribute to reduced colony survival in beekeeping operations. Our Special Issue (SI) on ‘’Monitoring of Honey Bee Colony Losses’’ aims to address specific challenges facing honey bee researchers and beekeepers. This SI includes four reviews, with one being a meta-analysis that identifies gaps in the current and future directions for research into honey bee colonies mortalities. Other review articles include studies regarding the impact of numerous factors on honey bee mortality, including external abiotic factors (e.g., winter conditions and colony management) as well as biotic factors such as attacks by Vespa velutina and Varroa destructor.

scholarly journals The effect of oxalic acid applied by sublimation on honey bee colony fitness: a comparison with amitraz

2016 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-260
Author(s):  
Ivana Papežíková ◽  
Miroslava Palíková ◽  
Stanislav Navrátil ◽  
Radka Heumannová ◽  
Michael Fronc
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effect ◽  
Apis Mellifera ◽  
Oxalic Acid ◽  
Honey Bee ◽  
Varroa Destructor ◽  
Treated Group ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Colony Fitness ◽  
Honey Bee Colony ◽  
Bee Colonies

Oxalic acid is one of the organic acids used for controlling Varroa destructor, a mite parasitizing the honey bee (Apis mellifera). The aim of this work was to examine the effect of oxalic acid applied by sublimation on honey bee colony fitness, and to compare it with the effect of amitraz, a routinely used synthetic acaricide. Bee colonies of equal strength were randomly divided into two groups. In December 2014, one group was treated with amitraz in the form of aerosol, and the second group was treated with oxalic acid applied by sublimation. The colonies were monitored over winter. Dead bees found at the bottom of the hive were counted regularly and examined microscopically for infection with Nosema sp. (Microsporidia). At the end of March 2015, living foragers from each hive were sampled and individually examined for Nosema sp. infection. Colony strength was evaluated at the beginning of April. No adverse effect of oxalic acid on colony strength was observed despite the fact that the total number of dead bees was non-significantly higher in the oxalic acid-treated group. Examination of dead bees for Nosema infection did not reveal significant differences in spore numbers between the experimental groups. There was a substantial difference in living individuals, however, with a significantly higher amount of spores per bee found in the amitraz-treated colonies compared to the oxalic acid-treated colonies. Compared to amitraz, oxalic acid applied by sublimation showed no adverse effects on bee colony fitness or on successful overwintering.

scholarly journals Factors Associated with Honey Bee Colony Losses: A Mini-Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hristov ◽  
Rositsa Shumkova ◽  
Nadezhda Palova ◽  
Boyko Neov
Keyword(s):  
Honey Bee ◽  
Agricultural Practices ◽  
Climatic Conditions ◽  
Daily Routine ◽  
Colony Losses ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Main Factors ◽  
Honey Bee Colony ◽  
Bee Colonies ◽  
Honey Bee Colony Losses

The Western honey bee (Apis mellifera L., Hymenoptera: Apidae) is a species of crucial economic, agricultural and environmental importance. In the last ten years, some regions of the world have suffered from a significant reduction of honey bee colonies. In fact, honey bee losses are not an unusual phenomenon, but in many countries worldwide there has been a notable decrease in honey bee colonies. The cases in the USA, in many European countries, and in the Middle East have received considerable attention, mostly due to the absence of an easily identifiable cause. It has been difficult to determine the main factors leading to colony losses because of honey bees’ diverse social behavior. Moreover, in their daily routine, they make contact with many agents of the environment and are exposed to a plethora of human activities and their consequences. Nevertheless, various factors have been considered to be contributing to honey bee losses, and recent investigations have established some of the most important ones, in particular, pests and diseases, bee management, including bee keeping practices and breeding, the change in climatic conditions, agricultural practices, and the use of pesticides. The global picture highlights the ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor as a major factor in colony loss. Last but not least, microsporidian parasites, mainly Nosema ceranae, also contribute to the problem. Thus, it is obvious that there are many factors affecting honey bee colony losses globally. Increased monitoring and scientific research should throw new light on the factors involved in recent honey bee colony losses. The present review focuses on the main factors which have been found to have an impact on the increase in honey bee colony losses.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the honey and pollen yield of Melipona interrupta bee colonies in the Amazon region

2020 ◽  
pp. 455-461
Author(s):  
Adcleia P. PIRES ◽  
Aline PACHECO ◽  
Lucieta G. MARTORANO ◽  
Jonival M. NETO ◽  
José Reinaldo da Silva Cabral de MORAES ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Native Bees ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Rainy Period ◽  
Honey Production ◽  
Bee Colony ◽  
Statistical Analysis System ◽  
Analysis System ◽  
One Year ◽  
The City ◽  
Bee Colonies

The objective of this research was to evaluate the productivity of honey and pollen of Melipona interrupta (Jandaíra) colonies during a one-year period. This study was conducted in meliponiculture production colonies located in community of Coroca in the City of Santarém, Pará, from October 2016 to December 2017. All collections of meliponiculture material were conducted during the first week of each month. Characteristics such as the total number of food pots, height, diameter, and volume of honey and pollen pots, the mass of the colony, production of pollen and honey, and the productivity of the bee colony as a whole were constantly monitored. Each month, biometric measurements of fifteen colonies of native bees of the specie were conducted and analyzed in the Statistical Analysis System. The greatest honey production by these colonies was strongly correlated with the less-rainy period that occurs in the region, and this production was most pronounced during October through December.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document