SMR Bees
This thread dates back to 2001 and at present, whilst
SMR bees are being trialled and bred, their other
characteristics are decidedly patchy.
Computer Software Solutions Ltd
email@omitted.anti.spam
Hello All
Allen Dick wrote from San Diego as follows:
John Harbo's talk about Suppressing Mite
Reproduction (SMR) bees. He has found bees on which
varroa females simply do not reproduce
successfully,
I was wondering if I could obtain further information
on this.
Thanks as always for any help
Sincerely
Tom Barrett
Dublin 18
Bob &Liz
email@omitted.anti.spam
I also seek information Tom. I believe research is
finally moving in the right direction and we are looking
closer at varroa reproduction than we ever have before.
John Harbo will be the first to admit we really don't
know WHY varroa females do not reproduce successfully on
certain bees as they do on others. This phenomenon has
been observed by many researchers and I am sure bees are
in a few hives on which varroa does not reproduce as well
as others.
With all due respect to John Harbo I am VERY skeptical
he has found A. melifera on which varroa females will
not reproduce. Varroa LOVE drone brood of
A.melifera! I believe Allen is reading more into the talk
than was given. If John Harbo had A.melifera on which
varroa couldn't reproduce we would all be dancing in the
streets and opening bottles of champagne. Maybe a
Nobel award would be in order.
Sorry to take the wind out of Allen's sails.
I remain very very sceptical.
In a round about way John Harbo is saying the same
thing many researchers have said that certain bees
tolerate varroa better than others. Nothing new yet.
However (in my opinion) the key to stopping varroa may
indeed be found by John Harbo as he is looking in the
right place.
Sincerely,
Bob Harrison
Michael W Stoops
email@omitted.anti.spam
Scepticism is good. If John Harbo's results can be
duplicated, then come the hallalooya's. Here's
hoping.
Mike Stoops
Adony Melathopoulos
email@omitted.anti.spam
Allen heard right, there is a character[istic floating
around within US bee stocks that results in reduced
reproduction of mites. The character is heritable, and
following a survey of US bee stocks in the mid-1990s, it
appeared to be the strongest resistance character in the
gene pool; that is to say it had a larger impact of mite
population growth than hygienic behavior, grooming
behavior and the duration of the capped period. Studies
suggest that both the adult bees and the brood contribute
to the character. I think one of the problems with the
character is that it is difficult finding the breeders.
The method to detect SMR is very time and labor intense.
It is not like hygienic behavior, where I think you need
a 3 days in the bee yard, a soup can and some liquid
nitrogen.
Regards
Adony
Dr. Pedro P Rodriguez
email@omitted.anti.spam
Hello to all.
A University study in southern Mexico has found that
the reproduction of varroa mites is closely related to
the release of certain pheromones by the honey bees. I
wonder if SMR bees have a dysfunction of some type of the
pheromone which triggers reproduction of the varroa
mites. I will try to contact those researchers on this
subject and post their reply later on. This is certainly
a fascinating subject on the fight against varroa and
worth pursuing.
Best Regards.
Dr. Pedro Pablo Rodriguez
Allen Dick
email@omitted.anti.spam
Hi Dr. Pedro,
Good to hear from you. I'll explain a bit more and
also address bob's comments.
The SMR mechanism was not explained, but the method of
selection was.
Harbo simply pulls out 200 worker pupæ that are
a little past the eye colour stage and examines them for
mites. The SMR bees will have only the (prospective)
mother mite(s) -- and no offspring attached. An obvious
additional indication is that the white fecal spot often
detaches from the cell and is found adhered to the pupa.
If I understood correctly, this does not usually happen
in non-SMR bees.
Harbo used queen(s) mated to a single drone to refine
his stock and achieved these results in only a few (I
forget how many -- was it eight?) generations.
Spivak spoke very highly of SMR in her talk. The SMR
bees are apparently much more resistant to varroa than
her hygienic stock, which has some anti-varroa powers,
but not a lot. However, please note that there are no
claims made for hygienic behaviour in Harbo's stock, and
there are no claims made about other desirable traits
either. His SMR bees simply do not support varroa
reproduction. Period.
He is planning to release breeders to queen suppliers
so they can incorporate this trait into their lines. It
is also possible that breeders will simply identify this
trait in their existing lines and select for it --
assuming that it is not strongly linked to some
unacceptable characteristic.
allen
Gavin Ramsay
email@omitted.anti.spam
Hi Allen
As I remember from his papers there are at least two
types [of SMR mechanisms. Remember that in the Varroa
life cycle, a mother lays one male egg and one or more
female ones. The male does not survive outside the sealed
cell. Females mate with their brother before the cell is
opened. In one type of SMR, the female mites are
unfertilised, or poorly fertilised - here the mechanism
could be that the male mites do not thrive on these bees
and are not as fertile as they should be. So, daughter
mites do not reproduce as they carry defective sperm or
none at all. In this type, if colonies are made up
experimentally with an SMR queen but non-SMR workers and
their mites, the SMR trait builds up over a few brood
cycles as the mites go through their reproductive cycles
and the old mites that arrived (already fertilised) in
the experimental colony die off. John Harbo and
colleagues also saw SMR expressing in the first brood
cycle in at least one experiment, so this must arise from
a different mechanism.
Some of the bees he used showed multiple resistance
traits. Here are two abstracts...
Gavin.
Title: Honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in
the United States that express resistance to Varroa
jacobsoni (Mesostigmata: Varroidae).
Author: Harbo, John R., Hoopingarner, Roger
A.
Author Address: [a Honey Bee Breed. Genet.
Physiol. Lab., USDA-ARS, Baton Rouge, LA 70820,
USA
Source: Journal of Economic Entomology 90
(4) 1997. 893-898.
Document Type: Research Article
Abstract: The purposes of this study were
to select honey bees, Apis mellifera L., for resistance
to varroa mites, Varroa jacobsoni Oudemans, and to find a
probable cause for this resistance. As a genetic source,
we assembled 8 colonies that we thought had potential for
resistance to varroa. Queens and drones were propagated
from this group to produce 43 instrumentally inseminated
queens, each queen mated to only 1 drone. Colonies from
27 of these queens were tested in Louisiana and 16 were
tested in Michigan. Each colony in the Louisiana test
began with 986 +/- 13 g (mean +/- SD) of bees and apprxeq
290 mites; Michigan colonies began with 3,212 +/- 171
bees and apprxeq 51 mites. The populations of mites and
bees were measured 10 wk later. Three of the 43 colonies
had fewer mites at the end of the test than at the
beginning. During the experiment, we evaluated each
colony for grooming behavior, hygienic behavior, the
duration of the post-capping period, and the frequency of
nonreproducing mites in brood cells. Of these 4
characteristics, only nonreproduction of mites was highly
related to a change in the mite population. The duration
of the post-capping period was marginally related, and
the other 2 characteristics were apparently unrelated to
the growth of the mite population. This study showed that
resistance to varroa mites is present in the honey bee
population in the United States, nonreproduction of mites
was highly correlated with the growth of a mite
population, and nonreproduction of mites may be a
valuable characteristic for selecting bees for resistance
to varroa mites.
Title: Heritability in honey bees
(Hymenoptera: Apidae) of characteristics associated with
resistance to Varroa jacobsoni (Mesostigmata:
Varroidae).
Author: Harbo, John R. [a Harris, Jeffrey
W.
Author Address: [a Honey Bee Breeding,
Genetics and Physiology Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Baton
Rouge, LA, 70820, USA
Source: Journal of Economic Entomology 92
(2) April, 1999. 261-265.
Document Type: Article
Abstract: This study uses sibling analysis
to measure the heritability in honey bees, Apis mellifera
L., of characteristics that have been associated with
resistance to the mite, Varroa jacobsoni Oudemans.
Twenty-eight uniform colonies of bees were established on
13 May in Baton Rouge, LA, each with 1 kg of
mite-infested bees and a queen. The 28 unrelated queens
in these colonies were divided into 7 groups of 4 based
on the insemination of 4 queens with the same mixture of
semen from 1 of 7 sire colonies. After worker progeny
from these queens had replaced the initial bee
populations, a colony was related as a full sister to the
other 3 colonies in its sire group and unrelated to the
other 24 colonies. Heritability (h2) was 1.24 for
proportion of mites in brood, 0.65 for hygienic behavior,
0.89 for the duration of the capped period, 0.46 for
suppression of mite reproduction, and 0.00 for physical
damage to mites (measured by the presence of physically
broken or dented mites on the bottom board). These
results suggest that it should be possible to enhance the
expression of 4 of these 5 characteristics with selective
breeding of bees, thus reinforcing confidence in our
ability to breed honey bees for resistance to V.
jacobsoni.
Nick Wallingford
email@omitted.anti.spam
In early June, at a Bay of Plenty branch field day to
discuss the then recent varroa outbreak in New Zealand,
Dr Denis Anderson of the CSIRO spoke to us with some
optimism regarding the long term future for varroa
control. My understanding of what he had to say
was that it would be related to the discovery of the
`trigger' that initiated reproductive behaviour within
the cell by the mite. He was a bit cagey and loathe to
provide too much detail due to the untested aspects of
what he was implying. I'm including below my notes from
his talk on that day, as it is an interesting overview of
varroa in general...
Nick Wallingford
http://www.beekeeping.co.nz
Dr Denis Anderson; From CSIRO (Commonwealth
Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation),
Australia.
Returned to Australia 11 years ago after working
as bee pathologist in NZ. At that time, varroa was just
on Australia's doorstep, in Papau New Guinea. Recent work
has indicated that there is in fact a new name for the
varroa we know on Apis mellifera, Varroa destructor.
Various ramifications to that finding that he'll discuss
in the talk.
Varroa was not originally on our honey bee, Apis
mellifera. It is on Apis cerana throughout Southeast
Asia, and exhibits similar behaviour.
Varroa was originally found in Java in the early
part of this century by a man named Jacobson. It was
described by Odemanns, and it was in fact a new genus.
There are not other varroa like mites - it is the only
one in that genus.
About 50-60 years ago, varroa appears to have
jumped hosts to our honey bee. There are in fact three
species of varroa already named: jacobsoni, underwoodi
and rinderera.
When Denis first started working in Irian
Jaya/Papua New Guinea, he found amazing behaviour. The
mites in PNG (which would have come originally from Java)
were not reproducing on Apis mellifera! Other researchers
around the world had taken own direction, and didn't seem
especially interested in the finding, or had other
explanations of their own. Published this in 1994 in
Apidolgie. Only researcher who took interest was a German
bee scientist, so Denis worked with him over the next few
years.
Considered that the failure to breed was in some
way related to either:
- resistant bees
- genetically different mites
- some environmental factors
Bred 40 sister queens in Australia and sent 20 to
Germany (where there was varroa present) and put 20 in
PNG. The colonies in Germany were soon killed completely
by varroa, but the PNG colonies remained.
Took DNA out of the mites in the two places and
compared it. Found 6.7% difference in mtDNA on
chromosomes which should not have been much different at
all - this was a big difference. Published this in
1998 in the Journal of Apicultural Research.
Decided at this stage to go back to look at varroa
on its natural host, Apis cerana. Did DNA sequencing from
the varroa found on cerana throughout SE Asia, with very
wide geographical sampling. For the mites all considered
to be `jacobsoni', found in fact about 6 species. Very
tidily geographically confined - jacobsoni was confined
for the most part to Indonesia and Malaysia. Another
species (which is now being called destructor) found
mostly in mainland Asia. Some others unresolved (which
will perhaps lead ultimately to other new species) from
both Philippines and Sri Lanka.
Destructor is significantly larger body size than
jacobsoni, and not so round. The two cannot
interbreed.
Did more extensive testing on the COIII gene.
Again, the distribution turned out the same, with
differences from mainland Asia to the Indonesian
groupings, and still the unresolved differences in
Philippines and Sri Lanka.
Then did survey for varroa found in 32 countries
on Apis mellifera. Found that there had been two types of
the mite that had in fact changed over to mellifera from
cerana - now called the Korean and Japan/Thailand types.
Korean most widely distributed, even where cerana is
present. It is this one that is present in Europe, US,
etc.
The Japan/Thailand type present and now spreading
out of Brazil, explained by the fact that honey bees were
taken to Brazil from Japan in 1972. This type now
spreading into US from the south.
Published this all in Journal of Experimental and
Applied Acarology. Easier to read review now available
from Apidologie.
Ramifications of this all. There is a name change
to contend with, from Varroa jacobsoni to Varroa
destructor. Said that after presenting the paper in
Canada, beekeeper said the change in name shouldn't be
too hard for them. They'd only just gotten used to saying
"My bees have VJ", so the change would be
interesting...
Impacts on bee trade and quarantine issues, with
two species involved. Bee management and control methods
may well be impacted. Even destructor is not especially
good at breeding on mellifera - does not manage the
necessary `signal' to initiate reproduction, so the
development is not especially good (though obviously good
enough to kill!). This weakness could lead to some form
of permanent control method, if the signal could be
disrupted or changed in some way. Finally, all previous
research needs to be reviewed in terms of the fact that
there are two different species involved.
Denis wanted to make a special acknowledgment to
the ACIAR (Australian Centre for International
Agricultural Research) who has been far-sighted enough to
continue to fund his work, along with CSIRO his direct
employer.
Denis then moved into a detailed description of
the varroa lifecycle. Varroa enters the cell in the
pre-capping stage and buries itself upside down in the
brood food. Once the larva has eaten most all the food
and turns around preparing to pupate, mite moves onto
position on abdomen. Moves from there to sit on the wall
of the cell for a time. Once the larva has finished
pupating, mite rejoins and begins to feed. About 70 hours
later, lays first egg. First is male, then generally
about 5 females. They develop in the cell before the bee
emerges. Male mates with his sisters then dies. Females
come out of the cell with the bee to continue the
process. Eventually re-enter a cell to repeat the cycle.
Goal is to develop some means of moving the signal `out
of the range' so that mite will fail to
reproduce.
Future control mechanisms for varroa were
discussed. European methods appear to be moving from
straight chemical control, to use of such things as
organic acids. Spring often mechanical controls
(variations on drone brood trapping of the mites to keep
their number down). Later, uses of organic acids (such as
formic acid, as spot treatment or longer). Autumn
treatment with chemicals as required. Avoids continuous
treatment. Goal is to reduce mite numbers through the
winter period - if you can't do this, numbers rise too
quickly in the main part of the season.
Question about Russian queens sold in US for
resistance. Rinderer took bees from Russia, near area of
original changeover to mellifera, and bred them. Being
released to beekeepers as unmated queens. Possible
resistance, but not clearly shown yet.
Denis was confident that some form of final
control method could be found. Expected it could take
about 3 years to identify the `signal' that he referred
to (as he has a fair idea of what it is already). From
then, should be relatively easy to develop some means of
delivery.
Discussed finds of Apis cerana (from PNG) in
Australia, one of which did have jacobsoni. Difficulty in
explaining to beekeepers that they didn't have to worry,
as even if it did get out into the mellifera
population, it would not breed.
|