Honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) distribution and potential for supplementary pollination in commercial tomato greenhouses during winter

This study examined the use of honey bees, Apis mellifera L., to supplement bumble bee, Bombus spp., pollination in commercial tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum Miller, greenhouses in Western Canada. Honey bee colonies were brought into greenhouses already containing bumble bees and left for 1 wk to acclimatize. The following week, counts of honey and bumble bees foraging and flying throughout the greenhouse were conducted three times per day, and tomato flowers open during honey bee pollination were marked for later fruit harvest. The same counts and flower-marking also were done before and after the presence of honey bees to determine the background level of bumble bee pollination. Overall, tomato size was not affected by the addition of honey bees, but in one greenhouse significantly larger tomatoes were produced with honey bees present compared with bumble bees alone. In that greenhouse, honey bee foraging was greater than in the other greenhouses. Honey bees generally foraged within 100 m of their colony in all greenhouses. Our study invites further research to examine the use of honey bees with reduced levels of bumble bees, or as sole pollinators of greenhouse tomatoes. We also make specific recommendations for how honey bees can best be managed in greenhouses.     

Pollinator genetics and pollination: do honey bee colonies selected for pollen‐hoarding field better pollinators of cranberry Vaccinium macrocarpon?

1. Genetic polymorphisms of flowering plants can influence pollinator foraging but it is not known whether heritable foraging polymorphisms of pollinators influence their pollination efficacies. Honey bees Apis mellifera L. visit cranberry flowers for nectar but rarely for pollen when alternative preferred flowers grow nearby. 2. Cranberry flowers visited once by pollen‐foraging honey bees received four‐fold more stigmatic pollen than flowers visited by mere nectar‐foragers (excluding nectar thieves). Manual greenhouse pollinations with fixed numbers of pollen tetrads (0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32) achieved maximal fruit set with just eight pollen tetrads. Pollen‐foraging honey bees yielded a calculated 63% more berries than equal numbers of non‐thieving nectar‐foragers, even though both classes of forager made stigmatic contact. 3. Colonies headed by queens of a pollen‐hoarding genotype fielded significantly more pollen‐foraging trips than standard commercial genotypes, as did hives fitted with permanently engaged pollen traps or colonies containing more larvae. Pollen‐hoarding colonies together brought back twice as many cranberry pollen loads as control colonies, which was marginally significant despite marked daily variation in the proportion of collected pollen that was cranberry. 4. Caloric supplementation of matched, paired colonies failed to enhance pollen foraging despite the meagre nectar yields of individual cranberry flowers. 5. Heritable behavioural polymorphisms of the honey bee, such as pollen‐hoarding, can enhance fruit and seed set by a floral host (e.g. cranberry), but only if more preferred pollen hosts are absent or rare. Otherwise, honey bees' broad polylecty, flight range, and daily idiosyncrasies in floral fidelity will obscure specific pollen‐foraging differences at a given floral host, even among paired colonies in a seemingly uniform agricultural setting.     

Honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) foraging in response to preconditioning with onion flower scent compounds

Onion (Allium cepa L.) seed production has long been plagued with yield problems because of lack of pollination by the honey bee, Apis mellifera L. To attempt to attract more pollinators to the onion seed production field, honey bees were conditioned to associate onion floral odor components with a reward. Isolated nucleus hives of honey bees were fed 30% sucrose solutions scented with a 0.2% solution of onion floral odor compounds. After feeding on these solutions for 6 wk, bees were not found to prefer onion flowers to two competing food sources, carrot and alfalfa flowers, at the 5% significance level. However, there was an overall trend indicating a change in honey bee behavior, with fewer "trained" bees visiting alfalfa and carrot and more visiting onion. Thus, it may be possible to alter honey bee behavior with preconditioning but probably not to a degree that would be economically significant.     

Honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) pollination of rabbiteye blueberry Vaccinium ashei var. 'Climax' is pollinator density-dependent

In a 2-yr field study, mature orchard plants of rabbiteye blueberry (Vaccinium ashei Reade variety 'Climax'), plus potted pollenizers ('Premier') were caged with varying densities of honey bees (0, 400, 800, 1,600, 3,200, 6,400, or 12,800 bees plus open plot) during the bloom interval. The rate of legitimate flower visits tended to increase as bee density increased within a range of 400-6,400 bees; there were more legitimate visits in cages with 6,400 bees than in those with < or = 1,600 bees. Similarly, within a range of 400-6,400 bees there was a trend for a corresponding increase in fruit-set with means ranging from 25.0 to 79%. Fruit-set was higher in cages with 6,400 or 3,200 bees than in those with < or = 800 bees. Regression analyses showed that fruit-set increased linearly with the rate of legitimate bee visits. Mean weight of berries was unaffected by bee density but varied significantly between years. Within a range of 0-3,200 bees/cage the average seeds per berry tended to increase with increasing bee density; there were more seeds in open plots than in cages with 12,800 honey bees or < or = 1,600 bees. Sucrose content ranged from 12.1 to 16.7% and fruits tended to have more sugar in cages with lower bee densities. Speed of ripening tended to be higher in cages with higher bee densities. Earlier work has shown that the effectiveness of Apis mellifera L. as a pollinator of rabbiteye blueberry is variety-dependent. Our data indicate that the effectiveness of A. mellifera is also bee density-dependent.     

Impact of the introduced honey bee (Apis mellifera) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) on native bees: A review

Abstract Interspecific competition for a limited resource can result in the reduction of survival, growth and/or reproduction in one of the species involved. The introduced honey bee (Apis mellifera Linnaeus) is an example of a species that can compete with native bees for floral resources. Often, research into honey bee/native bee competition has focused on floral resource overlap, visitation rates or resource harvesting, and any negative interaction has been interpreted as a negative impact. Although this research can be valuable in indicating the potential for competition between honey bees and native bees, to determine if the long‐term survival of a native bee species is threatened, fecundity, survival or population density needs to be assessed. The present review evaluates research that has investigated all these measurements of honey bee/native bee competition and finds that many studies have problems with sample size, confounding factors or data interpretation. Guidelines for future research include increasing replication and using long‐term studies to investigate the impact of both commercial and feral honey bees.     

Russian honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies: Acarapis woodi (Acari: Tarsonemidae) infestations and overwintering survival

Honey bee, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae), colonies infested by parasitic mites are more prone to suffer from a variety of stresses, including cold temperature. We evaluated the overwintering ability of candidate breeder lines of Russian honey bees, most of which are resistant to both Varroa destructor Anderson & Trueman and Acarapis woodi (Rennie), during 1999-2001. Our results indicate that Russian honey bee colonies (headed by original and supersedure queens) can successfully overwinter in the north, even during adverse weather conditions, owing to their frugal use of food stores and their resistance to tracheal mite infestations. In contrast, colonies of Italian honey bees consumed more food, had more mites, and lost more adult bees than Russian honey bees, even during unusually mild winter conditions.     

Influence of honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) density on the production of canola (Crucifera: Brassicacae)

Pollination is an essential step in the seed production of canola, Brassica napus L. It is achieved with the assistance of various pollen vectors, but particularly by the honey bee, Apis mellifera L. Although the importance of pollination has been shown for the production of seed crops, the need to introduce bee hives in canola fields during flowering to increase oil seed yield has not yet been proven. With the purpose of showing this, hives of A. mellifera were grouped and placed in various canola fields in the Chaudière-Appalaches and Capitale-Nationale regions (nine fields; three blocks with three treatments; 0, 1.5, and 3 hives per hectare). A cage was used to exclude pollinators and bee visitations were observed in each field. After the harvest, yield analyses were done in relation to the bee density gradient created, by using pod set, number of seeds per plant, and weight of 1000 seeds. Results showed an improvement in seed yield of 46% in the presence of three honey bee hives per hectare, compared with the absence of hives. The introduction of honey bees contributed to production and consequently, these pollinators represented a beneficial and important pollen vector for the optimal yield of canola.     

Pollination efficiencies of three bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) species visiting rabbiteye blueberry

Inadequate bee pollination limits rabbiteye blueberry, Vaccinium ashei Reade, production in the some areas of the southeastern United States. Honey bees, Apis mellifera L., are currently the only manageable pollinators available for pollinating V. ashei. However, a new adaptable pollinator for rabbiteye blueberry, Osmia ribifloris Cockerell, was successfully reared and flown in captivity. The bee nested successfully in wooden shelters and conferred superior fruit set to 2-yr-old potted, rabbiteye blueberry bushes. Pollination efficiency or the percentage of blueberry flowers to set fruit after being visited once by a female O. ribifloris was comparable to that of the female blueberry bee Habropoda laboriosa (F.) and worker honey bees. Interestingly, honey bees once thought to be inefficient pollinators of rabbiteye blueberry were found to be very efficient, especially for 'Climax' and 'Premier' flowers.     

Bombus impatiens (Hymenoptera: Apidae): an alternative to Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) for lowbush blueberry pollination.

The pollination effectiveness of the commercially reared bumble bee Bombus impatiens Cresson, was compared in field studies to the honey bee, Apis mellifera L., for lowbush blueberry, Vaccinium angustifolium Ait. A preliminary study indicated that B. impatiens had potential as an alternative pollinator. In a 3-yr study, percentage fruit set, percentage harvested berries, berry weight, and seeds per berry were compared in blueberry fields stocked at 7.5 A. mellifera hives per hectare to 5, 7.5, or 10 B. impatiens colonies per hectare. Percentage of harvested berries (yield) was significantly higher in fields stocked with B. impatiens at 10 colonies per hectare. No other parameters measuring pollinator effectiveness were significantly different at 5, 7.5, or 10 colonies per hectare. Flower handling time was significantly faster for B. impatiens and it more frequently collected blueberry pollen. All parameters of pollinator effectiveness were similar for B. impatiens, A. mellifera, and native wild bees in a follow-up study. Overall, B. impatiens was a suitable alternative to A. mellifera.     

Influence of brood, vent screening, and time of year on honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) pollination and fruit quality of greenhouse tomatoes

Greenhouse tomatoes, Lycopersicon esculentum Miller (Solanaceae), are autogamous, but facilitated pollination results in increased fruit size and set. Previous research examining honey bee pollination in greenhouse tomato crops established that fruit quality resulting from honey bee visitation is often comparable to bumble bees (Bombus spp.) and significantly better than in flowers that receive no facilitated pollination. However, management alternatives have not been studied to improve tomato fruit quality when honey bees are the only pollination option available for the high-value greenhouse industry. We investigated whether the quantity of brood (eggs, larvae, and pupae) in a honey bee colony in the winter and screening on greenhouse vents in the summer would encourage honey bee foraging on tomato flowers. We also established the influence of time of year on the potential for honey bees to be effective pollinating agents. We constructed small honey bee colonies full of naive forager bees with either two frames of brood ("brood colonies") or two empty frames ("no-brood") and compared total fruit set and the number of tomato seeds resulting from fruit potentially visited by honey bees in each of these treatments to bagged flowers that received no facilitated pollination. There was no significant difference in the quality of fruit resulting from honey bees from "brood" and "no-brood" colonies. However, these fruits produced significantly more seeds than bagged flowers restricted from facilitated pollination. Honey bees from brood and no-brood colonies also resulted in 98% fruit set compared with 80% fruit set in bagged flowers that received no facilitated pollination. During the summer, the number of seeds per fruit did not differ significantly between unbagged flowers potentially visited by honey bees in screened greenhouses and unscreened greenhouses and bagged flowers that received no facilitated pollination. However, time of year did have a significant influence on the quality of fruit produced by honey bees compared with flowers that received no facilitated pollination, because no difference in seed number was observed between the treatments after mid-April. The results from this study demonstrate that the management of brood levels and vent screening cannot be used to improve the quality of fruit resulting from honey bee pollination and that honey bees can be a feasible greenhouse pollination alternative only during the winter.     

Compatibility of an organically based insect control program with honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) pollination in cantaloupes

The application of azadirachtin to foliage of cantaloupes did not significantly reduce successful pollination by commercially managed honey bees, Apis mellifera L., as measured by numbers of foraging honey bees and yield. Similar results were obtained when the synthetic insecticide imidacloprid (used as a standard by cantaloupe growers) was applied to the soil. Fruit yield and quality, as a function of bee pollination, were statistically equal between the two treatments, and equal to that of the untreated control. The standard treatment of imidacloprid gave significantly better control than azadirachtin of one pest (cucumber beetle) early in the season. Fruit maturity was delayed in untreated plots, consistent with light insect pressure observed. These results indicate that an organically based insect control approach will not alter bloom acceptance and bee forager activity in cantaloupes.     

Managing honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) for greenhouse tomato pollination

Although commercially reared colonies of bumble bees (Bombus sp.) are the primary pollinator world-wide for greenhouse tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) previous research indicates that honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) might be a feasible alternative or supplement to bumble bee pollination. However, management methods for honey bee greenhouse tomato pollination scarcely have been explored. We 1) tested the effect of initial amounts of brood on colony population size and flight activity in screened greenhouses during the winter, and 2) compared foraging from colonies with brood used within screened and unscreened greenhouses during the summer. Brood rearing was maintained at low levels in both brood and no-brood colonies after 21 d during the winter, and emerging honey bees from both treatments had significantly lower weights than bees from outdoor colonies. Honey bee flight activity throughout the day and over the 21 d in the greenhouse was not influenced by initial brood level. In our summer experiment, brood production in screened greenhouses neared zero after 21 d but higher levels of brood were reared in unscreened greenhouses with access to outside forage. Flower visitation measured throughout the day and over the 21 d the colonies were in the greenhouse was not influenced by screening treatment. An economic analysis indicated that managing honey bees for greenhouse tomato pollination would be financially viable for both beekeepers and growers. We conclude that honey bees can be successfully managed for greenhouse tomato pollination in both screened and unscreened greenhouses if the foraging force is maintained by replacing colonies every 3 wk.     

Honey bee (Apis mellifera) preference towards micronutrients and their impact on bee colonies

Honey bees are important pollinators and take micronutrients from different natural floral resources and turbid water to adequately meet their nutritional requirements. But the role of micronutrients for honey bee health is not well understood. Here, the present study was conducted to determine honey bees' micronutrients preference in summer and winter seasons. Also, the impact of micronutrients on foraging behaviour and brood increase was studied in different honey bee colonies. The results elucidated that honey bees exhibited a strong preference for a salt solution compared to deionized water during the summer and winter seasons. However, there was a notable switch in salt preference between seasons. Overall, honey bees showed significantly more foraging activity, more pollen collection, and increased brood area after sodium consumption compared to other minerals in the summer season. Further, pollen collection and brood area were significantly higher after the use of potassium in the winter season. Thus, the food preference of honey bees is strongly linked with the seasons and the availability of the floral resources. Our data suggested that honey bees may seek specific nutrients during variation of the seasonal conditions.     

Varroa destructor infestation in untreated honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies selected for hygienic behavior

Honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies bred for hygienic behavior were tested in a large field trial to determine if they were able to resist the parasitic mite Varroa destructor better than unselected colonies of"Starline" stock. Colonies bred for hygienic behavior are able to detect, uncap, and remove experimentally infested brood from the nest, although the extent to which the behavior actually reduces the overall mite-load in untreated, naturally infested colonies needed further verification. The results indicate that hygienic colonies with queens mated naturally to unselected drones had significantly fewer mites on adult bees and within worker brood cells than Starline colonies for up to 1 yr without treatment in a commercial, migratory beekeeping operation. Hygienic colonies actively defended themselves against the mites when mite levels were relatively low. At high mite infestations (>15% of worker brood and of adult bees), the majority of hygienic colonies required treatment to prevent collapse. Overall, the hygienic colonies had similar adult populations and brood areas, produced as much honey, and had less brood disease than the Starline colonies. Thus, honey bees bred for hygienic behavior performed as well if not better than other commercial lines of bees and maintained lower mite loads for up to one year without treatment.     

A meta-analysis of effects of Bt crops on honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae)

Background

Honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are the most important pollinators of many agricultural crops worldwide and are a key test species used in the tiered safety assessment of genetically engineered insect-resistant crops. There is concern that widespread planting of these transgenic crops could harm honey bee populations.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We conducted a meta-analysis of 25 studies that independently assessed potential effects of Bt Cry proteins on honey bee survival (or mortality). Our results show that Bt Cry proteins used in genetically modified crops commercialized for control of lepidopteran and coleopteran pests do not negatively affect the survival of either honey bee larvae or adults in laboratory settings.

Conclusions/Significance

Although the additional stresses that honey bees face in the field could, in principle, modify their susceptibility to Cry proteins or lead to indirect effects, our findings support safety assessments that have not detected any direct negative effects of Bt crops for this vital insect pollinator.     

Orchard pollination in Capitol Reef National Park,Utah, USA. Honey bees or native bees?

Capitol Reef National Park in central Utah, USA surrounds 22 managed fruit orchards started over a century ago by Mormon pioneers. Honey bees are imported for pollination, although the area in which the Park is embedded has over 700 species of native bees, many of which are potential orchard pollinators. We studied the visitation of native bees to apple, pear, apricot, and sweet cherry over 2 years. Thirty species of bees visited the flowers but, except for pear flowers, most were uncommon compared to honey bees. Evidence that honey bees prevented native bees from foraging on orchard crop flowers was equivocal: generally, honey bee and native bee visitation rates to the flowers were not negatively correlated, nor were native bee visitation rates positively correlated with distance of orchards from honey bee hives. Conversely, competition was tentatively suggested by much larger numbers of honey bees than natives on the flowers of apples, apricots and cherry; and by the large increase of native bees on pears, where honey bee numbers were low. At least one-third of the native bee species visiting the flowers are potential pollinators, including cavity-nesting species such as Osmia lignaria propinqua, currently managed for small orchard pollination in the US, plus several fossorial species, including one rosaceous flower specialist (Andrena milwaukiensis). We suggest that gradual withdrawal of honey bees from the Park would help conserve native bee populations without decreasing orchard crop productivity, and would serve as a demonstration of the commercial value of native pollinators.     

Bumble bee abundance and richness improves honey bee pollination behaviour in sweet cherry

Pollination service in agricultural crops increases significantly with pollinator diversity and wild pollinator abundance. Differences in the foraging behaviour of pollinating insects are one of the reasons why pollinator diversity and abundance enhances crop pollination. Here, we focused on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees in sweet cherry orchards. In addition, we studied the influence of bee diversity and abundance on the foraging behaviour of honey bees and bumble bees. Honey bees were found to visit fewer flowers than bumble bees. Bumble bees also showed a higher probability of changing trees between rows than honey bees. Both visitation rate and probability of row changes of honey bees increased with bumble bee diversity and with bumble bee abundance. We also found that the probability of row changes of honey bees increased with increasing bumble bee abundance. These effects of bumble bee richness and abundance on the pollination behaviour of honey bees can improve the pollination performance of honey bees in crops that depend on cross pollination. Our results highlight the higher pollination performance of bumble bees and the facilitative effect of wild pollinators to crop pollination.     

The effect of temperature on candidate gene expression in the brain of honey bee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) workers exposed to neonicotinoid imidacloprid

Neonicotinoid insecticides are potent agonists of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and are a major factor in the decline of pollinators worldwide. Several studies show that low doses of this neurotoxin influence honey bee physiology, however, little is known about how insecticides interact with other environmental variables. We studied the effects of two neonicotinoid Imidacloprid doses (IMD, 0, 2.5, and 10 ppb), and three temperatures (20, 28, and 36°C) on gene expression in the brains of worker honey bees (Apis mellifera). Using qRT-PCR we quantified the expression of eight key genes related to the nervous system, stress response, and motor and olfactory capacities. Gene expression tended to increase with the low IMD dose, which was further intensified in individuals maintained in the cold treatment (20°C). At 20°C the octopamine receptor gene (oa1) was underexpressed in bees that were not exposed to IMD, but overexpressed in individuals exposed to 2.5 ppb IMD. Also, heat shock proteins (hsp70 and hsp90) increased their expression at high temperatures (36°C), but not with IMD doses. These results suggest that despite the low insecticide concentrations used in this study (a field-realistic dose), changes in gene expression associated with honey bee physiological responses could be induced. This study contributes to the understanding of how neonicotinoid residual doses may alter honey bee physiology.     

Honey bee‐collected pollen in agro‐ecosystems reveals diet diversity,diet quality,and pesticide exposure

European honey bees Apis mellifera are important commercial pollinators that have suffered greater than normal overwintering losses since 2007 in North America and Europe. Contributing factors likely include a combination of parasites, pesticides, and poor nutrition. We examined diet diversity, diet nutritional quality, and pesticides in honey bee‐collected pollen from commercial colonies in the Canadian Maritime Provinces in spring and summer 2011. We sampled pollen collected by honey bees at colonies in four site types: apple orchards, blueberry fields, cranberry bogs, and fallow fields. Proportion of honey bee‐collected pollen from crop versus noncrop flowers was high in apple, very low in blueberry, and low in cranberry sites. Pollen nutritional value tended to be relatively good from apple and cranberry sites and poor from blueberry and fallow sites. Floral surveys ranked, from highest to lowest in diversity, fallow, cranberry, apple, and blueberry sites. Pesticide diversity in honey bee‐collected pollen was high from apple and blueberry sites and low from cranberry and fallow sites. Four different neonicotinoid pesticides were detected, but neither these nor any other pesticides were at or above LD₅₀ levels. Pollen hazard quotients were highest in apple and blueberry sites and lowest in fallow sites. Pollen hazard quotients were also negatively correlated with the number of flower taxa detected in surveys. Results reveal differences among site types in diet diversity, diet quality, and pesticide exposure that are informative for improving honey bee and land agro‐ecosystem management.     

Development of Beauveria bassiana dry formulation for vectoring by honey bees Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) to the flowers of crops for pest control

Using bee pollinators as a means for the dissemination of microbial control agents, such as Beauveria bassiana, against insect pests of agricultural crops is a novel and interesting approach to biological control. In four laboratory trials, one in Canada and three in Jordan, factors affecting the acquisition of B. bassiana by honey bees were evaluated using hive-mounted inoculum dispensers. The numbers of conidia carried by bees emerging from the dispensers differed according to the type of carrier used. Bees that passed through corn flour acquired more inoculum than did those that walked through wheat flour, durum semolina, corn meal, potato starch, potato flakes, oat flour or barley flour. The numbers of conidia acquired by the bees increased with decreasing particle size and moisture content of the carrier, and with increasing density of B. bassiana conidia in the formulation. Time required for a bee to pass through the dispenser did not significantly affect the acquisition of conidia. This study indicated that honeybees (Apis mellifera carnica) have a great potential for vectoring B. bassiana in crop systems. It also opens more avenues for studies on bee delivery of other microbial biological control agents.