Effects ofNosema apisInfection on Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Digestive Proteolytic Enzyme Activity

Malone, Louise A.; Gatehouse, Heather S.

doi:10.1006/jipa.1997.4715

Cited by 50 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nosema counts were converted to proportional change (final spore count/initial spore count) and compared among treatments using AOV. Nosema infection can interfere with digestion (Malone and Gatehouse 1998;Dussaubat et al 2012), so we tested for a correlation between final spore count in a colony and proportion of undigested protein in the hindgut of bees from that colony. Colony size comparisons were made using AOV with the proportional population change (ending/starting population size) as the test statistic.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Honey bee colonies provided with natural forage have lower pathogen loads and higher overwinter survival than those fed protein supplements

Chen²,

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Malnutrition is a major cause of colony losses. In managed hives, bees are fed protein supplements (PS) during pollen shortages. If bees were provided with natural forage instead of PS, would they have lower pathogen levels and higher queen and colony survival? We addressed this question by either providing colonies with forage (Brassica rapa -rapini) or feeding them PS from November to February. Soluble protein concentrations in the PS were lower than the rapini pollen as were levels of most amino acids. Nurse bees digested less of the protein in PS than the pollen. Hemolymph protein titers in nurse bees and colony growth did not differ between those fed PS or foraging on rapini. However, colonies fed PS had higher levels of black queen cell virus and Nosema and greater queen losses, indicating that natural forage might improve overwintering survival.pollen nutrition / digestion / amino acids / Nosema / viruses

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Honey bee colonies provided with natural forage have lower pathogen loads and higher overwinter survival than those fed protein supplements

Chen²,

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…by holding each bee with its mouthparts touching the sucrose droplet at the tip of a micropipette (Malone and Gatehouse, 1998). This induces the extension of the proboscis and allows the bees consuming the entire droplet.…”

Section: Food Supplymentioning

confidence: 99%

Standard methods for toxicology research inApis mellifera

Mędrzycki

Giffard²,

Aupinel³

et al. 2013

Journal of Apicultural Research

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryModern agriculture often involves the use of pesticides to protect crops. These substances are harmful to target organisms (pests and pathogens). Nevertheless, they can also damage non-target animals, such as pollinators and entomophagous arthropods. It is obvious that the undesirable side effects of pesticides on the environment should be reduced to a minimum. Western honey bees (Apis mellifera) are very important organisms from an agricultural perspective and are vulnerable to pesticide-induced impacts. They contribute actively to the pollination of cultivated crops and wild vegetation, making food production possible. Of course, since Apis mellifera occupies the same ecological niche as many other species of pollinators, the loss of honey bees caused by environmental pollutants suggests that other insects may experience a similar outcome. Because pesticides can harm honey bees and other pollinators, it is important to register pesticides that are as selective as possible. In this manuscript, we describe a selection of methods used for studying pesticide toxicity/selectiveness towards Apis mellifera. These methods may be used in risk assessment schemes and in scientific research aimed to explain acute and chronic effects of any target compound on Apis mellifera. Métodos estándar para la investigación toxicológica en Apis mellifera ResumenLa agricultura moderna a menudo implica el uso de plaguicidas para proteger los cultivos. Estas sustancias son dañinas para los organismos objetivo (plagas y patógenos). Sin embargo, también pueden dañar a animales que no son objetivo, como artrópodos polinizadores y entomófagos. Obviamente los efectos secundarios indeseables de los plaguicidas sobre el medio ambiente deben ser reducidos al mínimo. Las abejas occidentales (Apis mellifera) son organismos muy importantes desde el punto de vista agrícola y son vulnerables a los impactos inducidos por los plaguicidas. Contribuyen activamente a la polinización de los cultivos y de la vegetación silvestre, lo que hace posible la producción de alimentos. Como Apis mellifera ocupa el mismo nicho ecológico que muchas otras especies de polinizadores, la pérdida de las abejas melíferas causada por contaminantes ambientales sugiere que otros insectos pueden experimentar un resultado similar. Ya que los plaguicidas pueden dañar a las abejas y a otros polinizadores, es importante registrar los plaguicidas que sean lo más selectivos posible. En este artículo, se describe una selección de los métodos utilizados para el estudio de la toxicidad y el efecto selectivo de los plaguicidas hacia Apis mellifera. Estos métodos se pueden utilizar en sistemas de evaluación de riesgo y en la investigación científica para explicar los efectos agudos y crónicos en Apis mellifera de cualquier compuesto objetivo.

show abstract

“…2.1) and kept in wooden cages for 24 hours. The bees had access to gravity feeders containing sucrose syrup 50% (w/v) which were removed 2 hours before individually force-feeding the bees with 1 µL of the inoculated sucrose syrup suspension, according to the method described by Malone and Gatehouse (1998). Immediately after inoculation, the bees were placed in the cages, approximately 30 bees each, and kept at 33…”

Section: Infection Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening of natural compounds for the control of nosema disease in honeybees (Apis mellifera)

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The potential of some natural compounds (thymol, vetiver essential oil, lysozyme, resveratrol) for the control of nosema infection in honeybees was evaluated. A first trial aimed at screening substances, in candy preparations, on the basis of their toxicity to honeybees and bees' dietary preferences. None of the tested substances showed an increased bee mortality or decreased bee preference, and were therefore considered suitable for further testing. In the second trial the effects of the natural compounds on nosema diseased honeybees were evaluated: bees were individually dosed with nosema spores and fed candies prepared with the screened substances. The results showed that bees fed with thymol and resveratrol candies had significantly lower infection rates, and bees supplied with resveratrol prepared candy also lived significantly longer. We suggest that thymol and resveratrol could be useful in alternative strategies for the control of nosema disease.Nosema / microsporidian / honeybee / thymol / resveratrol

show abstract

Effects ofNosema apisInfection on Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Digestive Proteolytic Enzyme Activity

Cited by 50 publications

References 25 publications

Honey bee colonies provided with natural forage have lower pathogen loads and higher overwinter survival than those fed protein supplements

Honey bee colonies provided with natural forage have lower pathogen loads and higher overwinter survival than those fed protein supplements

Standard methods for toxicology research inApis mellifera

Screening of natural compounds for the control of nosema disease in honeybees (Apis mellifera)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About