Literature DB >> 25860860

The effect of queen pheromone status on Varroa mite removal from honey bee colonies with different grooming ability.

Rassol Bahreini1, Robert W Currie.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the effects of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) with different grooming ability and queen pheromone status on mortality rates of Varroa mites (Varroa destructor Anderson and Trueman), mite damage, and mortality rates of honey bees. Twenty-four small queenless colonies containing either stock selected for high rates of mite removal (n = 12) or unselected stock (n = 12) were maintained under constant darkness at 5 °C. Colonies were randomly assigned to be treated with one of three queen pheromone status treatments: (1) caged, mated queen, (2) a synthetic queen mandibular pheromone lure (QMP), or (3) queenless with no queen substitute. The results showed overall mite mortality rate was greater in stock selected for grooming than in unselected stock. There was a short term transitory increase in bee mortality rates in selected stock when compared to unselected stock. The presence of queen pheromone from either caged, mated queens or QMP enhanced mite removal from clusters of bees relative to queenless colonies over short periods of time and increased the variation in mite mortality over time relative to colonies without queen pheromone, but did not affect the proportion of damaged mites. The effects of source of bees on mite damage varied with time but damage to mites was not reliably related to mite mortality. In conclusion, this study showed differential mite removal of different stocks was possible under low temperature. Queen status should be considered when designing experiments using bioassays for grooming response.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25860860     DOI: 10.1007/s10493-015-9907-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol        ISSN: 0168-8162            Impact factor:   2.132


  9 in total

1.  Quantifying parasites in samples of hosts.

Authors:  L Rózsa; J Reiczigel; G Majoros
Journal:  J Parasitol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 1.276

2.  Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited.

Authors:  A O Bush; K D Lafferty; J M Lotz; A W Shostak
Journal:  J Parasitol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 1.276

3.  Genotypic variability and relationships between mite infestation levels, mite damage, grooming intensity, and removal of Varroa destructor mites in selected strains of worker honey bees (Apis mellifera L.).

Authors:  Ernesto Guzman-Novoa; Berna Emsen; Peter Unger; Laura G Espinosa-Montaño; Tatiana Petukhova
Journal:  J Invertebr Pathol       Date:  2012-03-23       Impact factor: 2.841

4.  Laboratory evaluation of some plant essences to control Varroa destructor (Acari: Varroidae).

Authors:  Ardeshir Ariana; Rahim Ebadi; Gholamhosein Tahmasebi
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.132

5.  Queen honey bee attractiveness as related to mandibular gland secretion.

Authors:  N E GARY
Journal:  Science       Date:  1961-05-12       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Effect of concentration and exposure time on treatment efficacy against Varroa mites (Acari: Varroidae) during indoor winter fumigation of honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) with formic acid.

Authors:  Robyn M Underwood; Robert W Currie
Journal:  J Econ Entomol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.381

7.  Effect of pheromones, hormones, and handling on sucrose response thresholds of honey bees (Apis mellifera L.).

Authors:  T Pankiw; R E Page
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2003-08-07       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Varroa-tolerant Italian honey bees introduced from Brazil were not more efficient in defending themselves against the mite Varroa destructor than Carniolan bees in Germany.

Authors:  M H Corrêa-Marques; D De Jong; P Rosenkranz; L S Gonçalves
Journal:  Genet Mol Res       Date:  2002-06-30

9.  Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) queen feces: Source of a pheromone that repels worker bees.

Authors:  D C Post; R E Page; E H Erickson
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 2.626

  9 in total
  3 in total

1.  Differential Gene Expression Associated with Honey Bee Grooming Behavior in Response to Varroa Mites.

Authors:  Mollah Md Hamiduzzaman; Berna Emsen; Greg J Hunt; Subhashree Subramanyam; Christie E Williams; Jennifer M Tsuruda; Ernesto Guzman-Novoa
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 2.805

2.  Genetic Basis of Natural Variation in Spontaneous Grooming in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Aya Yanagawa; Wen Huang; Akihiko Yamamoto; Ayako Wada-Katsumata; Coby Schal; Trudy F C Mackay
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 3.154

3.  Miticidal activity of fenazaquin and fenpyroximate against Varroa destructor, an ectoparasite of Apis mellifera.

Authors:  Rassol Bahreini; Medhat Nasr; Cassandra Docherty; Samantha Muirhead; Olivia de Herdt; David Feindel
Journal:  Pest Manag Sci       Date:  2022-01-23       Impact factor: 4.462

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.