medigraphic.com

2008, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Vet Mex 2008; 39 (1)

Comparative study of three assays to evaluate hygienic behavior in honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies

Espinosa-Montaño LG, Guzmán-Novoa E, Sánchez-Albarrán A, Montaldo HH, Correa-Benítez A

Language: English/Spanish
References: 35
Page: 39-54
PDF size: 340.00 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The discriminatory capacity, cost and practicality of three assays to measure hygienic behavior in 60 honey bee colonies were compared in a fi rst experiment. Capped worker brood of these colonies were killed with an insect pin (P), frozen in a freezer at –18°C (CC) and with liquid nitrogen at –195°C (CN2). The percentage of brood removed by the bees was recorded 24 h after being killed. Since the P assay showed a low discriminatory capacity, an additional experiment with 50 colonies was performed, reducing the evaluation time to 8 h and verifying the influence of body fluids and odors released by the pin-killed brood. Colonies were significantly more hygienic (P ‹ 0.01) with the P assay (88%) than with the CC (69%) and CN2 (65%) assays. There were significant correlations among assays (r › 0.54, P ‹ 0.01) and between replicates within assays (r › 0.37, P ‹0.01). Variation among colonies was greater with the CN2 and CC assays than with the P assay. The P assay was the least expensive and easiest to apply (6.59 pesos, 0.58 dollars per colony), but showed the lowest discriminatory capacity, that could not be enhanced even though the time of evaluation was reduced. This could have been caused by the strong stimulus from odors and haemolymph released from the pinkilled brood. The CN2 and the CC assays showed a high discriminatory capacity, but the former was more expensive (14.80 pesos, 1.31 dollars) and the least practical. The CC assay was the second least expensive (10.15 pesos, 0.90 dollars) and practical. The application of either freeze assays is recommended for screening hygienic behavior in honey bees because of their reliability.


REFERENCES

  1. Rothenbuhler WC. Behavior genetics of nest cleaning in honey bees I. Responses of four inbreed lines to disease-killed brood. Anim Behav 1964;12:578-583.

  2. Büchler R. Test de tolerancia de las colmenas frente a varroasis. Vida Apícola 1997;82:45-48.

  3. Spivak M, Downey DL. Field assays for hygienic behaviour in honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J Econ Entomol 1998;91:64-70.

  4. Park OW. Disease resistance and American foulbrood. Am Bee J 1936;76:12-15.

  5. Gilliam M, Taber S, Richardson GV. Hygienic behavior of honey bees in relation to chalkbrood disease. Apidologie 1983;14:29-39.

  6. Milne CP. Honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) hygienic behavior and resistance to chalkbrood. Ann Entomol Soc Am 1983;76:384-387.

  7. Masterman R, Smith BH, Spivak M. Brood odor discrimination abilities in hygienic honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) using proboscis extension refl ex conditioning. J Insect Behav 2000;13:87-101.

  8. Boecking O, Drescher W. The removal response of Apis mellifera L. colonies to brood in wax and plastic cells after artifi cial and natural infestation with Varroa jacobsoni Oud. and to freeze-killed brood. Exp Appl Acarol 1992;16:321-329.

  9. Spivak M. Honey bee hygienic behavior and defense against Varroa jacobsoni. Apidologie 1996;27:245-260.

  10. Spivak M, Reuter GS. Performance of hygienic honey bee colonies in a commercial apiary. Apidologie 1998;29:291-302.

  11. Message D, Gonçalves LS. Efeito de diferentes condicoes ambientais no comportamento higienico em abelhas Apis mellifera (Africanizadas). Anais do Simpósio Internacional sobre Apicultura em Clima Quente; 1978 octubre 19-28; Florianópolis (SC) Brasil. Bucharest (Romania): International Federation of Beekeepers Association, 1979:218-219.

  12. Spivak M, Gilliam M. Facultative expression of hygienic behaviour of honey bees in relation to disease resistance. J Apic Res 1993;32:147-157.

  13. Spivak M, Reuter GS, Lamb M. Frequency of hygienic behavior in naturally mated daughters of a hygienic breeder queen. Am Bee J 1995;135:830-831.

  14. Spivak M, Gilliam M. Hygienic behaviour of honey bees and its application for control of brood diseases and varroa. Bee World 1998;79:124-134.

  15. Rothenbuhler WC. Behaviour genetics of nest cleaning in honey bees. IV. Responses of F1 and backross generations to disease-killed brood. Am Zool 1964;4:111-123.

  16. Moritz RFA. A reevaluation of the two-locus model for hygienic behavior in honeybees. J Heredity 1988;79:257-262.

  17. Lapidge KL, Oldroyd BP, Spivak M. Seven suggestive quantitative trait loci infl uence hygienic behavior of honey bees. Naturwissenschaften 2002;89:565-568.

  18. Harbo JR, Harris JW. Heritability in honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) of characteristics associated with the resistance to Varroa jacobsoni (Mesostigmata: Varroidae). J Econ Entomol 1999;92:261-265.

  19. Arechavaleta VME, Hunt G. Componentes genéticos y medio ambientales del comportamiento higiénico de colonias de abejas melíferas. Memorias del XVIII Seminario Americano de Apicultura; 2004 septiembre 8-10; Villa Hermosa (Tabasco). México (DF): Unión Nacional de Apicultores, 2004:204-207.

  20. Newton D, Ostasiewski N. A simplifi ed bioassay for behavioral resistance to American foulbrood in honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Am Bee J 1986;126:278-281.

  21. Newton DC, Cantwell GC, Bourquin EP. Removal of freeze-killed brood as an index of nest cleaning behavior in honey bee colonies (Apis mellifera L.). Am Bee J 1975;115:388, 402, 406.

  22. Spivak M, Reuter GS. Honey bee hygienic behavior. Am Bee J 1998;138:283-286.

  23. Espinosa ML. Estudio de tres factores asociados con la tolerancia al ácaro Varroa jacobsoni Oud., en colonias de abejas africanizadas (Apis mellifera L.) en Yucatán, México (tesis de maestría). Mérida (Yucatán) México: Univ Autónoma de Yucatán, 1998.

  24. Arechavaleta VME, Guzmán-Novoa E. Relative effect of four characteristics that restrain the population growth of the mite Varroa destructor in honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies. Apidologie 2001;32:157-154.

  25. Medina FCA, Medina ML. Frecuencia de colonias altamente higienistas en abejas africanizadas (Apis mellifera) de Yucatán. Memorias del XVIII Seminario Americano de Apicultura; 2003 agosto 7-9; Aguascalientes (Aguascalientes) México. México (DF): Unión Nacional de Apicultores, 2003:69-72.

  26. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática. Anuario estadístico del Estado de México. México (DF): INEGI, 1998.

  27. Secretaría de Gobernación. Diario Ofi cial de la Federación, Comisión Nacional de los Salarios Mínimos. Salario mínimo publicado el 26 de diciembre de 2002 para el área geográfi ca C, vigente para 2003. México (DF): Segob, 2002.

  28. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. 8th ed. USA: Iowa State University Press, 1991.

  29. SAS Institute. JMP The statistical discovery software (computer program) versión 5.0.1 Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc, 2002.

  30. Guzman-Novoa E, Page RE, Spangler HG, Erickson EH. A comparison of two assays to test the defensive behaviour of honey bees (Apis mellifera). J Apic Res 1999;38:205-209.

  31. Guzmán-Novoa E, Prieto-Merlos D, Uribe-Rubio JL, Hunt GH. Relative reliability of four fi eld assays to test defensive behaviour of honey bees (Apis mellifera). J Apic Res 2003;42:42-46.

  32. Zar JH. Bioestatistical Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1996.

  33. Gramacho KP, Gonçalves LS, Rosenkranz P, De Jong D. Infl uence of body fl uid from pin-killed honey bee pupae on hygienic behavior. Apidologie 1999;30:367-374.

  34. Gramacho KP, Gonçalves LS, Stort A, Noronha AB. Is the number of antennal plate organs (sensilla placodea) greater in hygienic than in non-hygienic Africanized honey bees? Genet Mol Res 2003;2:309-316.

  35. Sistema de Administración Tributaria. Tipo de cambio del 28 de noviembre de 2003. [citado 2006 noviembre 2]. Disponible en: http://www.sat.gob.mx/sitio_internet/asistencia_contribuyente/información_frecuente/tip




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com