A review of methods for discrimination of honey bee populations as applied to European beekeeping

Bouga, Maria; Alaux, Cédric; Bieńkowska, Małgorzata; Büchler, Ralph; Carreck, Norman; Căuia, Eliza; Chlebo, Róbert; Dahle, Bjørn; Dall’Olio, Raffaele; Rúa, Pilar De la; Gregorc, Aleš; Ivanova, Evgeniya; Kence, Aykut; Kence, Meral; Kezic, Nikola; Kiprijanovska, Hrisula; Kozmus, P.; Kryger, Per; Conte, Yves Le; Lodesani, Marco; Murilhas, António; Siceanu, Adrian; Soland, Gabriele; Uzunov, Aleksandar; Wilde, J.

doi:10.3896/ibra.1.50.1.06

Cited by 124 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

100

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Globally, many A. mellifera L. sub-species (up to 30) have been described in the literature (Ruttner 1988(Ruttner , 1992Hepburn and Radloff 1998;Bouga et al 2011;da Silva et al 2015). Sub-species are mainly classified based on various morphological characteristics, and more recently, molecular techniques have also been applied (Ruttner 1988;Meixner et al 2013).…”

Section: Honeybees Of Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Honeybee health in Africa—a review

Pirk¹,

Strauss²,

Yusuf³

et al. 2015

Apidologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) pathogens and parasites and the negative effects thereof on honeybee populations remain an issue of public concern and the subject of active research. Africa with its high genetic diversity of honeybee sub-species and large wild population is also exposed to various factors responsible for colony losses in other parts of the world. Apart from the current American foulbrood epidemic in the Western Cape of South Africa, no large-scale colony losses have been reported elsewhere on the continent. We discuss the presence of pathogens, parasites, pests and predators of African honeybees as well as the threats they face in relation to habitat changes arising from the impact of increased human populations. In addition, we discuss current efforts aimed at protecting and promoting the health of African honeybees.honeybees / Africa / honeybee health / pathogens / parasites / pests / predators / habitat loss

show abstract

Section: Honeybees Of Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Honeybee health in Africa—a review

Pirk¹,

Strauss²,

Yusuf³

et al. 2015

Apidologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whereas the CBeeWing gives the percentage of bees that are within the morphological limits of the sub-species in question, the Dawino analysis (which uses more wing measurements than the CBeeWing) gives a statistical probability that the samples are taken from the respective sub-species. The proportion of wings within the range defined for A. m. carnica in the CBeeWing was not significantly related to the probability that the sample came from A. m. carnica colony (in Bouga et al, 2011). The variation can be attributed to improper sampling (solely young bees should be collected, otherwise bees from neighbouring colonies can be presented) or measurement errors.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 94%

“…(in Bouga et al, 2011). If we apply German standard with no upper limits all samples are within a range, so the question arises, if the upper limit proposed by Ruttner (1988) is properly set up, because cubital index is out of maximum range even in two other common bee races of the Central European region -A. m. mellifera (1.0-1.5) and A. m. ligustica (1.6-2.0) and drift of genes of other subspecies is rather unlike due to climatic adaptations.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Wing morphometry of Slovak lines of Apis mellifera carnica honeybee population

Chlebo

Čápek

2016

Acta fytotechn zootechn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Samples of forewings from 16 hives belonging to various lines of Slovak Carniolan bee kept by queen breeders in Slovakia were taken in year 2013 to perform wing morphometry measurements. The Dawino, complex wing morphometry method, has been applied for workers samples and measurements of Cubital index for drones samples. Worker bees samples showed similarity to Carniolan bee standard from 50 to 84% in 15 cases, on sample was out of standard. Cubital index of drones samples comply with a carnica bee standard in 14 cases, 2 samples were out of the range. The future of use wing morphometry for detection of hybridization in Apis mellifera carnica populations is discussed.

show abstract

“…1a. Anatolia and Thrace, when considered together, harbors a vast diversity: at least five honey bee subspecies belonging to two different lineages meet, exchange genes and adapt to local conditions determined by diverse climatic, topographical and floristic variations available (Bouga et al 2011). Studies concerning honey bee populations of Turkey (Bodur et al 2007;Kence et al 2009) demonstrated the high genetic structuring among them and confirmed presence of divergent populations pointing to different subspecies.…”

Section: Cc-by-nc-nd 40 International License Not Peer-reviewed) Ismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the recent years' studies conducted on honey bee population structure in European countries, it was shown that the past structure was lost or strongly disturbed (Dall'Olio et al 2007;Canovas et al 2011;Bouga et al 2011). Introgression of non-native DNA was monitored in wild populations of Sudan (El-Niweiri & Moritz 2010).…”

Section: Cc-by-nc-nd 40 International License Not Peer-reviewed) Ismentioning

confidence: 99%

Honey Bee Diversity is Swayed by Migratory Beekeeping and Trade Despite Conservation Practices: Genetic Evidences for the Impact of Anthropogenic Factors on Population Structure

Kükrer

Kence

2017

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intense admixture of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) populations is mostly attributed to migratory beekeeping practices and replacement of queens or colonies with non-native races or hybrids of different subspecies. These two practices are also heavily carried out in Turkey where 5 subspecies are present naturally. Despite the signs of gene flow, our findings confirm high levels of geographically structured genetic diversity of four subspecies of honey bees in Turkey and emphasize the need to develop policies to maintain this diversity.

show abstract

A review of methods for discrimination of honey bee populations as applied to European beekeeping

Cited by 124 publications

References 76 publications

Honeybee health in Africa—a review

Honeybee health in Africa—a review

Wing morphometry of Slovak lines of Apis mellifera carnica honeybee population

Honey Bee Diversity is Swayed by Migratory Beekeeping and Trade Despite Conservation Practices: Genetic Evidences for the Impact of Anthropogenic Factors on Population Structure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About