The Lifelog Monitoring System for Honeybees: RFID and Camera Recordings in an Observation Hive

A typical honeybee colony contains more than 15,000 individuals, each with its own task related to supporting the hive and maintaining the colony. In previous studies on honeybees, observing individual animals’ behaviors has been a difficult and time-consuming task to understand the relationship between in-hive communication and environmental changes outside the hive, therefore it is necessary in any attempt to develop applying a remote sensing technology. To allow researchers to pass much of this tracking work on to computers, we have developed the lifelog monitoring system for honeybees, which uses RFID and Raspberry Pi camera recordings. Our preliminary experiments consisted of several tests aimed at identifying the optimal conditions for this system. First, two commercial RFID readers with antennas were compared in terms of their sensitivity to signals from RFID tags placed at various distances. We found that the UP16-1000-J2 reader was much more sensitive and had a longer effective range compared to the UP4-200-J2. The most sensitive region in the RFID antenna on the UP16-1000-J2 reader was 30 mm long and 5 mm wide at its center. Based on this preliminary information, we designed and built a passage from the interior of the observation hive to the outside so that all RFID-tagged bees could be detected individually by the RFID reader as they walked through the passage. Moreover, to detect the direction of either departure or arrival of each bee, we placed two RFID antennas under the passage between the observation hive and the outside, one near each end of the passage. All departure and arrival times of RFID-tagged bees were detected with their ID numbers. Using recorded data from these two RFID readers, we could measure how much time each tagged bee spent outside the hive. In addition to RFID recording on the passage, we also tracked all in-hive movements of numbered RFID-tagged honeybees. In-hive movements were simultaneously, comprehensively and automatically recorded via six Raspberry Pi camera modules arranged on the two sides of the observation hive. The cameras were set to record from 6:30 to 19:30 every day for one month, once or twice each year from 2015 to 2018. The in-hive behaviors of these bees were analyzed according to a simultaneous tracking algorithm that we developed for this purpose. Data from the monitoring system revealed that time spent outside the hive increased markedly after following the waggle dance. In addition to its findings on bee behavior, this study also confirms the effectiveness of our recording system combining RFID and Raspberry Pi cameras for honeybee lifelog monitoring.

Slumber in a cell: honeycomb used by honey bees for food, brood, heating… and sleeping

Sleep appears to play an important role in the lives of honey bees, but to understand how and why, it is essential to accurately identify sleep, and to know when and where it occurs. Viewing normally obscured honey bees in their nests would be necessary to calculate the total quantity and quality of sleep and sleep’s relevance to the health and dynamics of a honey bee and its colony. Western honey bees (Apis mellifera) spend much of their time inside cells, and are visible only by the tips of their abdomens when viewed through the walls of an observation hive, or on frames pulled from a typical beehive. Prior studies have suggested that honey bees spend some of their time inside cells resting or sleeping, with ventilatory movements of the abdomen serving as a telltale sign distinguishing sleep from other behaviors. Bouts of abdominal pulses broken by extended pauses (discontinuous ventilation) in an otherwise relatively immobile bee appears to indicate sleep. Can viewing the tips of abdomens consistently and predictably indicate what is happening with the rest of a bee’s body when inserted deep inside a honeycomb cell? To distinguish a sleeping bee from a bee maintaining cells, eating, or heating developing brood, we used a miniature observation hive with slices of honeycomb turned in cross-section, and filmed the exposed cells with an infrared-sensitive video camera and a thermal camera. Thermal imaging helped us identify heating bees, but simply observing ventilatory movements, as well as larger motions of the posterior tip of a bee’s abdomen was sufficient to noninvasively and predictably distinguish heating and sleeping inside comb cells. Neither behavior is associated with large motions of the abdomen, but heating demands continuous (vs. discontinuous) ventilatory pulsing. Among the four behaviors observed inside cells, sleeping constituted 16.9% of observations. Accuracy of identifying sleep when restricted to viewing only the tip of an abdomen was 86.6%, and heating was 73.0%. Monitoring abdominal movements of honey bees offers anyone with a view of honeycomb the ability to more fully monitor when and where behaviors of interest are exhibited in a bustling nest.

The Effects of Some Drugs Used to Treat Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) Diseases and Pests on Lifespan of Honeybees

This study was conducted to determine the effects of Bayvarol®, Fumidil-B®, Neo-Terramycin® on adult honeybee lifespan. Total twenty honeybee colonies were used and randomly divided into four groups (each group consisted of five colonies). Experimental groups: Bayvarol ®, Fumidil-B® and Neo-Terramycin® were treated to first, second and third groups, respectively. No treatment was done to forth group taken as control group. A hundred one day old worker bees were taken from each group and marked with different colors and numbered on the thorax. After the marked, all worker bees were given into the observation hive. Marked worker bees were controlled and counted daily. Statistical analysis of data was done by variance analysis method and between groups comparisons were done with Duncan's multiple range tests. Average lifespans of the first, second, third and control groups were 44.97±4.90, 46.86±6.56, 45.38±6.12 and 47.72±6.06 days, respectively. There were found statistically significant differences among average lifespan of first, second, third and control groups (P