The immunological dependence of plant-feeding animals on their host’s medical properties may explain part of honey bee colony losses

Tihelka, Erik

doi:10.1007/s11829-017-9553-1

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The decline of many pollinator species has been reported (Lever, van Nes, Scheffer, & Bascompte, 2014;Potts et al, 2010;Tepedino, Durham, Cameron, & Goodell, 2015), and parasitism seems to be an important factor contributing to pollinator loss (Goulson, Nicholls, Botías, & Rotheray, 2015;Potts et al, 2010). Recent evidence suggests that the dependence of honey bees on disappearing medicinal plants may partly explain honey bee colony losses (Tihelka, 2017). In addition, the wide use of domesticated pollinators and commercialized insect pollinators (i.e., honey bees and bumble bees) leads to the transmission and spread of parasites to wild pollinator populations (Gisder & Genersch, 2017;Murray, Coffey, Kehoe, & Horgan, 2013;Otterstatter & Thomson, 2008;Whitehorn, Tinsley, Brown, & Goulson, 2013).…”

Section: Self-medicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Detailed investigation of the effects of pollinator parasites on plantpollinator interactions could help improve our understanding of the drivers of global pollinator decline (Potts et al, 2010). Such decline could be influenced by the disappearance of the medicinal plants on which pollinators depend (Tihelka, 2017). In addition, mass-flowering crops lead to reduction in pollinator abundance (Holzschuh et al, 2016), perhaps in part by facilitating the transmission of parasites between pollinators.…”

Section: Behavioral Immunity and Land-use Changementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pollinator parasites and the evolution of floral traits

Fouks

Wagoner

2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main selective force driving floral evolution and diversity is plant–pollinator interactions. Pollinators use floral signals and indirect cues to assess flower reward, and the ensuing flower choice has major implications for plant fitness. While many pollinator behaviors have been described, the impact of parasites on pollinator foraging decisions and plant–pollinator interactions have been largely overlooked. Growing evidence of the transmission of parasites through the shared‐use of flowers by pollinators demonstrate the importance of behavioral immunity (altered behaviors that enhance parasite resistance) to pollinator health. During foraging bouts, pollinators can protect themselves against parasites through self‐medication, disease avoidance, and grooming. Recent studies have documented immune behaviors in foraging pollinators, as well as the impacts of such behaviors on flower visitation. Because pollinator parasites can affect flower choice and pollen dispersal, they may ultimately impact flower fitness. Here, we discuss how pollinator immune behaviors and floral traits may affect the presence and transmission of pollinator parasites, as well as how pollinator parasites, through these immune behaviors, can impact plant–pollinator interactions. We further discuss how pollinator immune behaviors can impact plant fitness, and how floral traits may adapt to optimize plant fitness in response to pollinator parasites. We propose future research directions to assess the role of pollinator parasites in plant–pollinator interactions and evolution, and we propose better integration of the role of pollinator parasites into research related to pollinator optimal foraging theory, floral diversity and agricultural practices.

show abstract

Section: Self-medicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Behavioral Immunity and Land-use Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Pollinator parasites and the evolution of floral traits

Fouks

Wagoner

2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1B ), leading to speculation that they may be procuring a nutritional or medicinal gain. This behaviour may represent a novel facet of social immunity, given that a growing body of evidence indicates that honey bees self-medicate using plant-derived substances 29 – 31 . In this study, we evaluated extracts derived from the mycelia of several polypore mushroom species for activity against two major honey bee viruses in vivo in both laboratory and field studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extracts of Polypore Mushroom Mycelia Reduce Viruses in Honey Bees

Stamets¹,

Naeger²,

Evans³

et al. 2018

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waves of highly infectious viruses sweeping through global honey bee populations have contributed to recent declines in honey bee health. Bees have been observed foraging on mushroom mycelium, suggesting that they may be deriving medicinal or nutritional value from fungi. Fungi are known to produce a wide array of chemicals with antimicrobial activity, including compounds active against bacteria, other fungi, or viruses. We tested extracts from the mycelium of multiple polypore fungal species known to have antiviral properties. Extracts from amadou (Fomes) and reishi (Ganoderma) fungi reduced the levels of honey bee deformed wing virus (DWV) and Lake Sinai virus (LSV) in a dose-dependent manner. In field trials, colonies fed Ganoderma resinaceum extract exhibited a 79-fold reduction in DWV and a 45,000-fold reduction in LSV compared to control colonies. These findings indicate honey bees may gain health benefits from fungi and their antimicrobial compounds.

show abstract

“…Group living seems to have counterintuitively led to the attrition of individual immune genes ( Evans et al 2006 ), instead favoring investment in social mechanisms such as propolis gathering and social medication ( Evans and Spivak 2010 , Borba et al 2015 , Spivak et al 2019 ). For example, honeybees are known to forage on specific plants to obtain necessary antimicrobials ( Erler and Moritz 2016 , Richardson et al 2016 , Tihelka 2018 , Bernklau et al 2019 ), reduce investment in personal immunity in favor of colony-level defense ( Borba and Spivak 2017 ), and tailor food store choices in response to parasitic pressures ( Gherman et al 2014 ). Through these mechanisms and others, honeybees outsource individual immunity to group-level social immunity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Honey Bees (Apis mellifera Hymenoptera: Apidae) Preferentially Avoid Sugar Solutions Supplemented with Field-Relevant Concentrations of Hydrogen Peroxide Despite High Tolerance Limits

Bartlett

Martinez-Mejia

Delaplane

2021

Journal of Insect Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Honey bees (Apis mellifera L. Hymeoptera: Apidae) use hydrogen peroxide (synthesized by excreted glucose oxidase) as an important component of social immunity. However, both tolerance of hydrogen peroxide and the production of glucose oxidase in honey is costly. Hydrogen peroxide may also be encountered by honey bees at high concentrations in nectar while foraging, however despite its presence both in their foraged and stored foods, it is unclear if and how bees monitor concentrations of, and their behavioral responses to, hydrogen peroxide. The costs of glucose oxidase production and the presence of hydrogen peroxide in both nectar and honey suggest hypotheses that honey bees preferentially forage on hydrogen peroxide supplemented feed syrups at certain concentrations, and avoid feed syrups supplemented with hydrogen peroxide at concentrations above some tolerance threshold. We test these hypotheses and find that, counter to expectation, honey bees avoid glucose solutions supplemented with field-relevant hydrogen peroxide concentrations and either avoid or don’t differentiate supplemented sucrose solutions when given choice assays. This is despite honey bees showing high tolerance for hydrogen peroxide in feed solutions, with no elevated mortality until concentrations of hydrogen peroxide exceed 1% (v/v) in solution, with survival apparent even at concentrations up to 10%. The behavioral interaction of honey bees with hydrogen peroxide during both within-colony synthesis in honey and when foraging on nectar therefore likely relies on interactions with other indicator molecules, and maybe constrained evolutionarily in its plasticity, representing a constitutive immune mechanism.

show abstract

The immunological dependence of plant-feeding animals on their host’s medical properties may explain part of honey bee colony losses

Cited by 13 publications

References 61 publications

Pollinator parasites and the evolution of floral traits

Pollinator parasites and the evolution of floral traits

Extracts of Polypore Mushroom Mycelia Reduce Viruses in Honey Bees

Honey Bees (Apis mellifera Hymenoptera: Apidae) Preferentially Avoid Sugar Solutions Supplemented with Field-Relevant Concentrations of Hydrogen Peroxide Despite High Tolerance Limits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About