Varroa destructor reproduction and cell re-capping in mite-resistant Apis mellifera populations

Martin, Stephen J.; Hawkins, George P.; Brettell, Laura E.; Reece, Natasha; Correia-Oliveira, Maria Emilene; Allsopp, Michael H.

doi:10.1007/s13592-019-00721-9

Cited by 50 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This behavior, a product of rapid evolution, avoids the cost of losing brood. These results were confirmed by Martin et al [ 73 ] when comparing cell recapping in mite-resistant honey bees from Brazil and Africa ( A. m. scutellata ) with “mite-naive” honey bees from the United Kingdom and Australia.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Unraveling Honey Bee–Varroa destructor Interaction: Multiple Factors Involved in Differential Resistance between Two Uruguayan Populations

Mendoza

Tomasco

Antúnez

et al. 2020

Veterinary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ectoparasite Varroa destructor is the greatest biotic threat of honey bees Apis mellifera in vast regions of the world. Recently, the study of natural mite-resistant populations has gained much interest to understand the action of natural selection on the mechanisms that limit the mite population. In this study, the components of the A. mellifera–V. destructor relationship were thoroughly examined and compared in resistant and susceptible honey bee populations from two regions of Uruguay. Mite-resistant honey bees have greater behavioral resistance (hygienic and grooming behaviors) than susceptible honey bees. At the end of the summer, resistant honey bees had fewer mites and a lower deformed wing virus (DWV) viral load than susceptible honey bees. DWV variant A was the only detected variant in honey bees and mites. Molecular analysis by Short Tandem Repeat showed that resistant honey bees were Africanized (A. m. scutellata hybrids), whereas susceptible honey bees were closer to European subspecies. Furthermore, significant genetic differentiation was also found between the mite populations. The obtained results show that the natural resistance of honey bees to V. destructor in Uruguay depends on several factors and that the genetic variants of both organisms can play a relevant role.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Unraveling Honey Bee–Varroa destructor Interaction: Multiple Factors Involved in Differential Resistance between Two Uruguayan Populations

Mendoza

Tomasco

Antúnez

et al. 2020

Veterinary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…larvae. This activity suggests that a behavioral defense which predated Varroa is now being used as a primary tool of social immunity against the mite (Villegas and Villa 2006;Martin et al 2019). The activity also is notable because it apparently represents a response only to stimuli produced by the pupa.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Detection Of D I S E a S E D A N D V A R R O Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Colonies that are apparently resistant to Varroa display high frequencies of cell recapping; that is, the wax capping over a pupa is opened, then recapped with wax (Boecking and Spivak 1999;Aumeier et al 2000;Harris et al 2012;Martin et al 2019). Recapping by the bees is evident when the cell capping is experimentally removed and inspected from underneath; if it has been recapped, there is a circular area with no silk lining.…”

Section: Recappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives on hygienic behavior in Apis mellifera and other social insects

Spivak

Danka

2020

Apidologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hygienic behavior in honey bees, Apis mellifera, has been studied for over 80 years with the aim of understanding mechanisms of pathogen and parasite resistance and colony health. This review emphasizes the underlying behavioral mechanisms of hygienic behavior in honey bees and when known, in other social insects. We explore the relationship between honey bee hygienic behavior toward diseased brood and Varroa-parasitized brood (Varroa-sensitive hygiene, VSH); the timing of hygienic removal of diseased, Varroa-infested, and virus-infected brood relative to risk of transmission that can affect colony fitness; and the methods, utility, and odorants associated with different assays used to select colonies for resistance to diseases and Varroa. We also provide avenues for future research that would benefit honey bee health and survivorship.

show abstract

“…Later, in a comparison of Africanised and A. m. carnica colonies with regards to VSH, it was determined that three to seven days after the initial artificial infestation, the absence of only the introduced mite was more common than the removal of both the mite and pupae (Aumeier and Rosenkranz, 2001;Aumeier et al, 2000). Comparable findings were later obtained in A. m. scutellata (Cheruiyot et al, 2018), and high recapping rates were identified in naturally surviving A. m. capensis and Africanised honey bees (Martin et al, 2019b). As the cells were experimentally sealed after infestation, it can be hypothesised that they were opened by adult workers, which induced the exit of the mite, before later being recapped.…”

Section: Uncapping-recappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three Decades of Selecting Honey Bees that Survive Infestations by the Parasitic Mite <em>Varroa destructor</em>: Outcomes, Limitations and Strategy

Guichard¹,

Dietemann²,

Neuditschko³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the implementation of control strategies, the invasive parasitic mite Varroa destructor remains one of the principal causes of honey bee (Apis mellifera) colony losses in numerous countries. For this reason, the parasite represents a serious threat to beekeeping and to agro-ecosystems that benefit from the pollination services provided by honey bees. Numerous selection programmes have been initiated over the last three decades with the aim of promoting the establishment of balance in the host–parasite relationship and, thus, helping European honey bees to survive in the presence of the parasite without the need for acaricide treatments. Such programmes have focused on either selective breeding for putative resistance traits or natural selection. To date, no clear overview of these attempts has been available, which has prevented building on past successes or failures and, therefore, hindered the development of a sustainable strategy for solving the V. destructor problem. In the present study, we review past and current selection strategies, report on their outcomes and discuss their limitations. Based on this state-of-the-art knowledge, we propose a strategy for increasing response to selection and colony survival against V. destructor infestations. Developing in-depth knowledge regarding the selected traits, optimising selection programmes and communicating their outcomes are all crucial to our efforts to establish a balanced relationship between the invasive parasite and its new host.

show abstract

Varroa destructor reproduction and cell re-capping in mite-resistant Apis mellifera populations

Cited by 50 publications

References 51 publications

Unraveling Honey Bee–Varroa destructor Interaction: Multiple Factors Involved in Differential Resistance between Two Uruguayan Populations

Unraveling Honey Bee–Varroa destructor Interaction: Multiple Factors Involved in Differential Resistance between Two Uruguayan Populations

Perspectives on hygienic behavior in Apis mellifera and other social insects

Three Decades of Selecting Honey Bees that Survive Infestations by the Parasitic Mite <em>Varroa destructor</em>: Outcomes, Limitations and Strategy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About