Removal of Drone Brood From <I>Apis mellifera</I> (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Colonies to Control <I>Varroa destructor</I> (Acari: Varroidae) and Retain Adult Drones

Abstract

The parasitic mite Varroa destructor Anderson & Trueman (Acari: Varroidae) has plagued European honey bees, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae), in the Americas since its introduction in the 1980s. For many years, these mites were sufficiently controlled using synthetic acaricides. Recently, however, beekeepers have experienced increased resistance by mites to chemical pesticides, which are also known to leave residues in hive products such as wax and honey. Thus there has been increased emphasis on nonchemical integrated pest management control tactics for Varroa. Because mites preferentially reproduce in drone brood (pupal males), we developed a treatment strategy focusing on salvaging parasitized drones while removing mites from them. We removed drone brood from colonies in which there was no acaricidal application and banked them in separate "drone-brood receiving" colonies treated with pesticides to kill mites emerging with drones. We tested 20 colonies divided into three groups: 1) negative control (no mite treatment), 2) positive control (treatment with acaricides), and 3) drone-brood removal and placement into drone-brood receiving colonies. We found that drone-brood trapping significantly lowered mite numbers during the early months of the season, eliminating the need for additional control measures in the spring. However, mite levels in the drone-brood removal group increased later in the summer, suggesting that this benefit does not persist throughout the entire season. Our results suggest that this method of drone-brood trapping can be used as an element of an integrated control strategy to control varroa mites, eliminating a large portion of the Varroa population with limited chemical treatments while retaining the benefits of maintaining adult drones in the population.

Construction and Rescue of a Molecular Clone of Deformed Wing Virus (DWV)

“…The global invasion reached central Europe in the 1970s and the USA in the 1980s [8]. Nowadays, bee colony survival depends on human supervision, intervention and regular control measures such as biotechnical or miticide treatments [12, 13]. …”

Challenges for developing pathogen-based biopesticides against Varroa destructor (Mesostigmata: Varroidae)

“…Once established in an area, V. destructor are difficult to eliminate. Bee researchers and beekeepers have developed and tested numerous biological or biotechnical methods to control this mite, including drone brood removal (Wantuch and Tarpy 2009), which is labor intensive, screens on bottom boards (Harbo and Harris 2004;Delaplane et al 2005), and dusting with a powder such as flour or powdered sugar (Fakhimzadeh 2001), methods which have not always been found effective (Ellis et al 2009;Rosenkranz et al 2010). The most common approach (and until recently the most effective) has been chemical control, which includes synthetic miticides and organic acids as well as plant essential oils (e.g., Ruffinengo et al 2002;Eguaras et al 2005;Damiani et al 2010).…”

Effect of Using Drone Brood Cells as Traps Against Varroa destructor (Varroa Mite)

“…In this study, the effect value of using drone bee honeycomb as a trap on V. destructor infestation rate was found to be approximately 43%. This value has been confirmed as 44% (Huang, 2001;Wilkinson and Smith, 2002;Charrierere et al, 2003;Wantuch and Tarpy, 2009;Al Toufailia et al, 2018;Wang et al, 2019), 91.14% (Çetin, 2010), 71% (Calderone, 2005), and 67-96% (Calis et al, 1999). Furthermore, when this Varroa destructor biological control method is compared to the method of sprinkling icing sugar in some studies, the effect value (43%) partially harmonizes with the 39.72% and 44.26% effect value of powdered sugar application to colonies in the morning and afternoon, respectively (Muz et al, 2014).…”