Ingredients:

French bread or sour dough loaf, cut to fit in a 9×13 pan (a regular loaf of bread works too)
8 ounces cream cheese, room temperature
2 tablespoons vanilla, divided
2 cups powdered sugar
Juice from 1 lemon
2 cups fresh blueberries
1 cup fresh raspberries or blackberries (frozen berries will work too)
6 eggs
2 cups milk
1/3 cup honey
1 teaspoon ground cinnamon

Directions:

Prepare your 9×13 backing dish with cooking spray.

If you’re using French bread, cut into one inch slices.

Make the filling by mixing the cream cheese and one tablespoon of vanilla, until smooth. Fold in berries.

In a large bowl, mix together the eggs, milk, honey, one teaspoon of cinnamon and one tablespoon of vanilla.

Pour over the bread making sure to get the tops of the slices.

Cover and chill overnight (up to two days).

Preheat oven to 350 degrees.

Remove French toast from refrigerator while oven heats.

Bake, uncovered for 30-40 minutes, or until puffed and golden and a knife inserted in the center comes out clean.

Cover with foil and bake another five to 10 minutes if needed for the eggs to set.

Some people think you can just do dumb things without any forethought, but learning how to do dumb things responsibly takes years of diligent practice. And some people, realizing how difficult it is to do dumb things responsibly, try to avoid doing dumb things all together. My wife is one of those people. She just let’s me do all the dumb stuff and then reaps the rewards.

For instance, last week a smoke detector started chirping in the middle of the night and was disturbing her slumber. With a sharp elbow to my ribs, she then disturbed my slumber and said, “Fix it.”

Our old farmhouse has twelve-foot ceilings, and I didn’t feel like going to the barn to retrieve the ladder, so I did what any reasonably trained person in the art of doing dumb things would do. I erected a makeshift tower using chairs and advanced engineering practices (big chairs on bottom; small chairs on top), climbed it like King Kong, and then used a plunger to extend my reach and twist down the smoke detector (really, your standard plunger fits your standard smoke detector; try it). Then I went back to bed. The next morning when my wife woke up and saw the chair tower still standing, she was deeply impressed and said, “That was really dumb. I’m surprised you didn’t fall.”

What my wife didn’t realize, however, was that tower represented years of study in the art of doing dumb things and stood as a monument to my specialization in elevated dumbery, or the branch of doing dumb things from heights.

I had been building and climbing chair towers ever since I was a little boy searching for hidden Christmas gifts. As a child, I climbed with natural aplomb, but getting down was sometimes a different matter. Once my neighbor Andy and I got stuck in the top of a magnolia, and my mom threatened to call the fire department. That got us down fast. Nothing negates the gratification earned in climbing to a treetop more than having one’s mom request an embarrassing emergency rescue. Even Andy realized we’d be better off taking our chances with gravity than living with a rescue on our permanent record. After my mom motivated us “to get down now,” it was no time before Andy was down and blissfully biking home with orders to say hello to his mom. Erstwhile, once my feet touched terra firma, I was ordered straight to my room. That just goes to show you that you’re usually better off performing courageous climbs at a friend’s house and being extradited than performing them in your own parent’s jurisdiction.

In college, I finally got serious about elevated dumbery. In fact, whoever decided to add brick latticework to the side of the freshman men’s dorm should have just put a three-story rock-climbing wall. I graduated with a degree in English, but, to be honest, the experience climbing has probably proven more valuable.

If I had to estimate the value in bees I’ve gotten from catching swarms or doing cutouts on a ladder, it wouldn’t be unsubstantial; it would at least be enough to pay the first installment for a decent orthopedic surgeon when the time comes that I do fall. And I suppose the older I get, the closer I get to that time. Once when I was clinging to the top of an extension ladder that was wavering unsupported in midair, I thought the time was nigh. Above me was a swarm hanging from a limb. Below me was my wife’s poppaw who was holding an A-frame ladder steady, to which the bottom of the extension ladder was securely latched with a few strands of old bailing twine. Never have I ever been so happy to safely walk down a ladder again. I promised myself that I would never do anything quite so dumb again at an elevated position.

I’m not sure what the life expectancy is for a beekeeper who does elevated cutouts, but I know enough to know now that when someone calls with a cutout in a second story soffit, I let the young guys take it because I figure they’re a lot further away from finding out what that expectancy is. I may be well-educated in the high art of elevated dumbery, but I ain’t stupid. So just remember this: Discretion is the better part of valor, especially when bees, ladders, and saws are involved.

Jerry Hayes
Jerry Hayes started out in life as a High School teacher. He hated it. He went into another business where he worked with a beekeeper. Back many years ago Jerry knew about Honey Bees but nobody actually knew a ‘Beekeeper’, did they? Jerry asked him questions, picked his brain, became more interested and fascinated and started reading everything he could get his hands on about Honey Bees. He turned into the consummate backyard beekeeper. He did all the fun and crazy things backyard beekeepers do and built and experimented with. He wondered if he could get into the Beekeeping world and support a young family. So, with the support of his family he went back to school under the tutelage of Dr. Jim Tew, at Ohio State University. “Top 10 Best thing I ever did,” Jerry said.
Years later he looks back on his opportunities as a Research Technician at the USDA/ARS Baton Rouge Bee Lab, Dadant and Sons Regional Mgr., Dadant And Sons New Product Dev., and AR Mgr., Chief of the Apiary Section for the Florida Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Monsanto Honey Bee Lead, VP. of Vita Bee health North America and now Editor of Bee Culture magazine with awe and amazement.
Add to the above the Classroom Q&A Column of the American Bee Journal for almost 40 years, the ‘Classroom’ Book, Author or Co-Author on 23 research papers and a variety of Honey Bee related articles in a variety of publications. Plus, Past President of Apiary Inspectors of America, Heartland Apiculture Assoc., Colony Collapse Working Group, CAPS Science Advisor, PAm Science Advisor, AHPA Science Advisor and many Professional Presentations internationally and media opportunities. And Now Editor of Bee Culture magazine. It has been a Great Journey.
Just recently, Jerry Hayes was honored by Project Apis m during the ABF Conference for his years of Service to PAm, Science Advisory Committee. See photo. Contact Jerry at Jerry@BeeCulture.com

Emma Wadel
Emma Wadel is a recent graduate of Kent State University with a BFA in Visual Communication and Design and a minor in User Experience Design. All of that is fancy talk for graphic design. She has recently come onboard to help with all elements of design and a bit of customer service. So far, she’s taken over the website and all the content updates and is now the graphic designer behind the magazine. Even though her main job is design, with such a small team she’s doing a little bit of everything. If you have any questions or concerns about either the magazine or the website, she’s the person to contact! Contact Emma at Emma@BeeCulture.com

Jen Manis
Jen Manis comes from a well-rounded background in the retail industry, having served many roles from customer service lead, to visual merchandising, to marketing. She earned her BA in psychology from Kent State University, and an AAS in graphic arts and photography from Stark State College. Her diverse background and interests make her well prepared for her many different roles she plays at Bee Culture Magazine, including customer service and advertising. When she’s not working, you can find her photographing flowers in the garden, reading or spoiling her pet birds. Contact Jen at Jen@BeeCulture.com

Classified Ads
Somewhat new, somewhat a comeback… Classified ads are back! Starting in our April 2022 issue we will have a section of classified ads. To submit a classified ad, use our Google Form: https://forms.gle/tLcVkZMv7HbFvFwa6
Payments must be paid in full before your ad will be included. As a special for April, the price will be $1.00 per word, with a minimum of 10 words.
Questions? Email Jen Manis at Jen@BeeCulture.com

New Ad Sizes
We’re updating our rate card! With various changes to the magazine (removing ourselves from the newsstand, a new layout and design person, a new advertiser, and various other factors) we have chosen to slim down our available ad sizes. If you are already running ads with us, do not worry, your ad can stay the same. Going forward, any new advertisers and changes to ads will need to be in the new sizes. We are always flexible in terms of size and everything but these set standards will just make our jobs a touch easier. These changes will be starting with the April issue.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Jen Manis at Jen@BeeCulture.com

New Subscription Offer
As society leans more and more into digital technologies, we’ve decided to offer a new subscription bundle. We are offering a one-year print and digital bundle for $35! (International pricing is $50.) BUT WAIT… Now through the end of March, we’re offering a special offer. You can get this new bundle for $25 (that’s the price of a one-year print subscription)! (International pricing is $45). Just use code PD1B.
This subscription is great for anyone! If you like the print subscription but don’t want to keep loads of magazines around or you ran out of space, now you have access to our past digital editions. We have 150 years of magazines and while none of us have been around for that long, many of us have been around for a good majority of it. Our digital back issues will only go back to 2015, but will only keep growing as time goes on!

New Digital Features
A new feature for the digital edition that came with the February issue of Bee Culture is interaction! Before when you opened the digital edition, you weren’t able to click the links or emails. But now you can! Any link in blue will now work!
Any URL will open in a new tab. Any email will open in your preferred email application.
The ads are interactable as well! If you see a URL or an email, just click! They don’t have the special blue links but they do work the same way!
All contents pages now also have working page numbers! If you are looking for a specific article, now you can just click the page number or title and it will automatically jump to that page! This change is also in the Display Advertisers section. If you’re looking for a specific ad, just go back there and click on the page number or name and it’ll jump straight to it!
This new feature will be in all of the upcoming issues of Bee Culture. It will also be in the new Back Issues section of the website. (See New Website Feature)
If you ever notice any issues with the interactive portions please use this Google Form to let us know: https://forms.gle/33Yhcm5evms1aex49 We always try as hard as we can to make things perfect for all of you but every so often something may be missed or something may not work. We’d love to fix it, we just need to know about it!

New Website Feature
With new faces here at Bee Culture, we also have new talents. Our graphic designer Emma Wadel has some talents within website design. She will be adding 2015-2019 digital back issues onto the website. While our more recent editions can only be viewed by digital subscribers (a great reason to subscribe to the bundle mentioned before), these back issues will be available for anyone. They will have their own place within the website. This section will feature all issues from 2015-three years prior to the current year. So for 2022, it will feature 2015-2019. This way new subscribers can see how long we’ve been doing this and can access old issues that may be referenced by our wonderful writers.
Please be patient with these new pages being uploaded. All of the past editions will be interactive as well; however, it will only be the blue links that work and the page numbers. The ads won’t be interactive in these back issues. All of that requires some manpower behind it since they weren’t previously interactive! We promise they’re coming, it’s just going to take some time. We want to make sure all of the new issues are the best they can be so that is always our first focus here!

Many years ago, a futurist/motivational speaker named Ed Barlow spoke to the National Honey Board. I was an Alternate Member, Producer Region three at the time; but was fortunate enough to hear the presentation. His remark, ‘The future won’t necessarily be bad. It will be different.’ Stays with me to this day. Since the late 1980’s the future has not necessarily been bad or good. We can spend pages and pages on our opinions of the future. Change is constant.

Pictured is a new device in use at Bullseye Farms, near Woodland, CA. The InsightTrac device cameras tri-angulate, while trolling through an almond orchard on tracks – ‘looking’ for stick-tights. Stick-tights are almonds in the shell, that refuse to release from the tree when shaken, during harvest. Stick-tights are an almond grower’s affliction. That big, long, orange-tipped barrel fires a pellet at stick-tights. Why? Stick-tights harbor Navel Orange Worm [NOW]. NOW’s set up housekeeping in stick-tights, raise a family that in the Spring spread throughout the orchard. Growers face dockage when NOW infest harvested nuts. Walnut growers also fight NOW.

Beekeepers are interested in models SL-100 & SL-150 Mag Laser Boresighting System. It’s the future.

An almond grower seeks to maximize crop quality and minimize crop dockage. After harvest, stick-tights represent a hygienic cost to the grower. A grower may elect to chemically control NOW with a pesticide application – an increasingly expensive and difficult process in California. She may hire a ‘polling crew’ of perhaps dozens of employees walking through the orchard with 20 foot poles, physically knocking the stick-tights from branches; or may employ a device like the Mag Laser System. None of the solutions are cheap. Orchard hygiene is now a leading almond orchard expense.

In the recent past, a designer and inventor, Anna Haldewang mused on the challenge of stick-tights. She was visiting Mel Machado’s [Blue Diamond Grower Relations] office in Ripon, CA. A prototype device was assembled. It was big, ugly, buggy [in a techy way], and temperamental. V 2.0 was better. Over 20,000 images of almond trees, tree rows, stick-tights, branches, scaffolds, and an occasional blackbird were logged into the ‘training’ of the device.

The skeptical approach challenges ideas and inspiration. ‘I don’t know if this thing is going to work’. A lot of stuff does not work. Everyone has a brilliant idea that will not work. Creating the future isn’t simple, and it isn’t cheap – and sometimes does not work.

About twelve years ago, at Miller Honey, we came up with a contraption to mechanize dividing hives. It was a terrible thing. It was fast, and brutal. It was featured in a documentary called More Than Honey, by Marcus Imhoof. I’m not proud of the device.

Beekeepers invest a lot of labor and expense making up Spring divides. It’s how we sustain an unsustainable hive count.

In the future, a device will mechanize hive divisions.

200 parent hives present, on pallets; and are placed on a conveyance.

Hives will enter the process and scanners, cameras, lasers, and chemical sensors – all with 20,000 images of learned observation will ‘work the hive’. Instead  of a hive tool, smoke, muscle strength, sweat-strained eyesight, experience and subjective analysis – hives will pass across a conveyance.

During conveyance, hives will be disassembled with the smooth precision of mechanical handling. Levers will dislodge frames without dislodging bees. Scanners will evaluate frames; brood coverage, stage of brood development, resources; including pollen, and stores of honey. Chemical sensors will identify brood diseases [if any] and appropriately segregate or pass on frames. Lasers will scan for the Queen – dispatching her; so every single nucleus will be receptive to a replacement Queen. Phoretic Varroa and Tropilaelips will be laser dispatched. Chemical sensors will document presence and abundance of mites. The physical well-being of frames will be analyzed, removed, replaced, or repositioned to optimal placement, based on 20,000 learned images of broken ears, end bars, bottom bars, mouse damage and cell structure.

‘Nucs’ will be assembled, with the precise amount of brood, bees, feed, pollen, filler frames, feeder [filled] in positions one to nine occupy the hive body. Nine day-old Queen cells will be placed securely in the optimal position. [Mated Queens with perfectly punctured candy face down are an option.] Nucs will be fitted onto a pallet, cover correctly placed, and gently stacked four pallets high; one atop the other, and conveyed to the loading site. An automated forklift removes completed stacks.

The operator receives the output data. 2.3 net nucs per parent hive were harvested from 200 parents. Process analytics provides relevant data of disease, pestilence, and wellbeing.

The process occurs daily, every day, rain or shine – for 30 days, without interruption.

The process occurs indoors. The indoor storage building optimizing the wintering experience for hives now fulfills a second vital commercial beekeeping activity. The building is dark. The climate is controlled. The concrete is smooth, clean and never tips a stack. The harrowing labor intense dividing experience is replaced. The building houses replacement hive bodes, new frames, pallets, feeders, cell incubators, the necessary hardware is indoors, accessible, dry, in good repair, automatically inventoried, and replenished. The equipment is standard, universal, interchangeable. Syrup is held in a single tank, a single pump, measured, unspilled.

For inspiration, tour a distribution center. I don’t know who will make this work – but it will.

Designers and inventors like Anna Haldewang are inspiring. A young generation of beekeepers are going to make this work. ‘The future won’t necessarily be bad. It will be different.’

JRM

In the February edition of Bee Culture we looked at some of the scientific evidence of harm that radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) emitted by our modern communication devices like cell phones, WiFi, cell towers, smart meters can have on insects and honey bees. We continue this exploration this month beginning with a look at queens.

Queen Exposure
The impact of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) on queen bees appears to be significant. The detrimental impacts include poor queen cell production, reduced successful emergence of queens, reduced weight gain, reduced egg laying and subsequently, poor brood production, decreased Winter survival and increases in queen failure and queen loss. (Greenburg et. al. 1981; Sarma and Kumar 2010; Sahib 2011; Odemer 2019) It should be noted that all these observations could be caused from reduced foraging and nutritional stress caused by the decreased cognitive function in EMR exposed worker bees noted in last month’s article.

Real world multi-stress situations
It is clear that the EMR we rely on everyday has the potential to stress biological organisms but most of us and the wildlife around us are exposed to multiple simultaneous stressors daily. This led one group of researchers to look at the combined effects of both EMFs and pesticides together on honey bee colonies. Three apiaries were established: one control site removed from direct human induced stress, one pesticide stress site, and one multi-stress site which added to the same pesticide exposure the presence of EMFs from a high voltage electric line. The multi-stress site exhibited the worst health conditions which included the potential for greater susceptibility for disease, queen issues and biochemical anomalies. (Lupi et. al. 2021).

Evidence of Potential Genetic Damage
It is well established that electromagnetic radiation significantly effects living organisms. The effect is so pronounced that some predict the use of EMFs for medical treatments, referred to as electromedicine. (Becker 1990) Unfortunately, not enough health and safety research has been done on the safety of the non-ionizing radiation emitted by our communications technology. This is partly because it has always been believed that the primary danger from non-ionizing radiation is the heating of skin and that EMFs do not have enough energy to alter DNA directly. Additional research has proven this assumption to be false.
One disturbing study found that when honey bees were exposed to a Samsung F400 mobile phone with a carrier frequency range of 900-1900 MHz, the bee stomach cells became damaged after just 10 minutes of exposure, and were completely decayed after 20 minutes. (Mahmoud and Gabarty 2021) Other observations indicating electromagnetic radiation may cause genetic disorders in drone semen (Kumar et. al. 2012) has the potential to further complicate queen issues.
Evidence suggesting that EMFs can alter DNA, and damage or destroy cells, is important because historically such agents have often been shown to cause cancer and birth defects in people.

Different types of electromagnetic radiation.
Source Wikipedia

Human Exposure
Mice are often used as a proxy for humans in toxicological research and the study of EMR is no different. In one early study twelve pairs of mice were divided into two groups and repeatedly mated five times while in locations of an antenna park with different power densities ranging between 168 nW/cm2 and 1053 µW/cm2. Researchers found that over the generations there was a progressive decrease in the number of newborns which culminated in irreversible infertility. (Magras and Xenos 1997)
More recently, an American National Toxicology Program study (2016-2018) found a clear link between the near-field RF radiation from cell phones and malignant gliomas of the brain and schwannomas in the heart of rats. (Soffritti & Giuliani 2019) Additional rodent studies further support cancer findings with researchers concluding that there is clear evidence that RF radiation can cause various forms of cancer and should be classified as likely carcinogenic to humans. (Hardell & Carlberg 2019)
The initial potential for carcinogenic risk to humans from non-ionizing radiation exposure came way back in 1979 when a study showed that children exposed to extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields were at risk of developing leukemia. (Wertheimer & Leeper 1979) Subsequent research led the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to rate 50/60 Hz EMF as a possible carcinogen and in 2001-2002 the World Health Organization (WHO) classified powerfrequency magnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic for childhood leukemia (Class 2B). By 2011 radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) were classified as possibly carcinogenic for certain brain tumors (Class 2B) associated with wireless phone use. (WHO/IARC 2011). The Class 2B category includes a variety of substances including lead, car exhaust, dry cleaning chemicals, DDT, and methyl mercury.
Natural forms of electromagnetic radiation are not typically harmful at natural intensities and common exposure rates. Natural background Radio Frequency Electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) exposure during normal cosmic activities is no more than 0.000001 µW/m2. Current health guideline recommendations for much of Europe is 9,000,000 µW/m2 at 1800 MHz, while in the USA it is 10,000,000 µW/m2. This is much, much more than the natural background exposure rate (Johansson 2019). Current safe exposure rates are based on technical arguments and modeling based calculations that are decades old and focus on a single six to 10 minute acute exposure in an environment free of any other similar radiation for the rest of your life. Real-world exposures are 24/7 with an endless variety of electromagnetic background field and signal exposures. In case you’re wondering, harm from direct or indirect exposure to electromagnetic radiation from our modern-day gadgets are no-longer covered by insurance companies.

No Scientific Proof
It is not clear under what circumstances EMFs will cause damage despite the clear potential for harm. Thus, more research is warranted but, that research needs to be focused and comprehensive. As a recent review of over 450 studies concluded “We recommend that in future studies, effects of EF, MF and EMF in the IF range should be investigated more systematically, i.e., studies should consider various frequencies to identify potential frequency-dependent effects and apply different field strengths…”. (Bodewein, et. al. 2019)
Industries are fond of using doubt and a lack of scientific certainty to counter concerns about health and the environment from the effects of their products and business practices. As we have reviewed in this two-part article, there is quite a bit of proof of potential harm from EMFs to bees and beekeepers. Unfortunately the large well-funded cell phone industry PR machine has successfully buried it, put pressure on journals not to publish damaging studies, and has had their disinformation specialists plant falsehoods that are often repeated by lay people and sincere, well-meaning experts and professionals which sows doubt and confusion. These are all actions we have come to expect from industries that deal with health and safety issues as a political and public relations problem and allow profits to take precedence over science.
Just as big tobacco was able to manipulate studies, capture much of the regulatory and legislative processes to prevent and slow meaningful action, and use public relations and the media to spread misinformation favorable to their bottom line, the pesticide industry, fossil fuel industry and now WiFi/Internet-reliant industries are following the same playbook. Make no mistake, there are huge financial interests working to make sure no clearly negative conclusions are made with regard to the effects of EMFs on people, bees or the environment. Not only is the wireless industry one of the largest and fastest growing industries on earth, but many of today’s biggest and most profitable corporations (e.g. Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google) and the governments whose economies are heavily reliant on them and the jobs they provide, are counting on society to use more wireless/internet communications technology and not less. The beekeeping industry has even jumped on board with growth in the use of wireless in-hive monitors that track everything from temperature and humidity, to weight and the sounds a colony emits.
Political leaders who rely on corporate donations, regulatory agencies, and the wireless industry will cite studies showing contradictory results and the lack of a scientific consensus as evidence that there is no scientific proof of adverse effects of electromagnetic fields on humans, animals and plants. This is despite the warning of one of the industries own scientists that “The risk of rare neuro-epithelial tumors on the outside of the brain was more than doubled…in cell phone users”; there was an apparent “correlation between brain tumors occurring on the right side of the head and the use of the phone on the right side of the head’: and “the ability of radiation from a phone’s antenna to cause functional genetic damage [was] definitely positive…” (Hertsgaard and Dowie 2018) Again, this situation echoes the experiences of the tobacco, fossil fuel and the pesticide industries all of which were told by their own scientists at one time or another that their products cause severe harm to environmental and human health but chose to cover up and ignore it.
Part of the trouble with trying to get a handle on the EMR issues is that it is not clear at what frequency and intensity EMR will cause harm in a given situation. Poor study designs, low sample sizes, and numerous undocumented variables such as the number of frequencies subjects are exposed to during trials and their intensity; make it easy for policy makers and regulators to dismiss concerns.
Given what we already know about the potential dangers of the other G’s like 2G, 3G, and 4G as well as similar exposures from radio and television towers, smart household devices and power lines, to not proceed with caution before immersing ourselves and the rest of nature in more and more artificial electrical fields such as 5G is irresponsible.

Given what we know about EMR, caution should be taken when transporting bees. While the EMFs given off by this electric car stayed mostly in the low zone, the needle on the TriField meter would ccasionally peg all the way over to the right suggesting that transporting bees over long distances in an electric vehicle may be problematic.

Cautionary approaches
Honey bee scientists are increasingly relying on radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags to track the movement of individual honey bees during studies. They have to be careful however as some researchers have found that honey bee mortality increases when exposed to RFID radiations. It is recommend that bees not be exposed to the EMR from an RFID tag for more than about two hours. (Darney et. al. 2016)
Meanwhile, what can beekeepers do to protect our bees from RF-EMR exposure? While the ubiquitous nature of cell phone transmission towers makes them hard to avoid, beekeepers can at least keep their bee yards away from high voltage power lines.
It would be prudent for us beekeepers to also take precautions to also protect ourselves where possible by limiting cell phone usage and keeping phones as far away from our bodies as reasonably possible. When making or taking a call, make it a habit to hold the phone away from your head and use the speaker phone, or use non-electric headphones or earbuds that plug into the phone (bluetooth systems give off their own EMR). Folks who use their phone as an alarm clock should consider using the airport mode setting to prevent prolonged exposure while they sleep.
An alternative to WiFi is fiber optic cable. A home wired with fiber has faster, more reliable internet with less of an environmental footprint, while eliminating the high frequency radiation exposure associated with cell phone hotspots and WiFi computer access. Just plug your phone in to your home’s fiber network to access information and make calls through the internet. Also consider limiting your purchases of “smart” devices, or at least reduce their use as much as possible. Finally, be wary of WiFi and EMF shielding products that claim to protect you from radiation. I have tested some with my TriField meter and they do not always work.

Ross Conrad is the author of Natural Beekeeping: Organic Approaches to Modern Apicuture, 2nd Edition and co-author of The Land of Milk and Honey: A history of beekeeping in Vermont. Ross will be teaching an organic beekeeping for beginners class on Saturday and Sunday May 7-8th in Lincoln, Vermont and an advanced beekeeping class on Saturday May 21st in Middlebury, Vermont. For more information email dancingbhoney@gmail.com or call 802-349-4279.

References:
Becker, Robert, O. (1990) Cross Currents: The Perils of Electropollution, the Promise of Electromedicine, TarcherPerigee Publisher
Bodewein, L., Schmiedchen, K., Dechent, D., Stunder, D., Graefrath, D., Winter, L., Kraus, T., Driessen, S. (2019) Systematic review on the biological effects of electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields in the intermediate frequency range (300 Hz to 1 MHz), Environmental Research, 171: 247-259
Darney, K. Giraudin, A., Joseph, R., Abadie, P., Aupinel, P., Decourtye, A., Le Bourg, E., Gauthier, M. (2016) Effect of high frequency radiations on survival of the honeybee (Apis mellifera L.), Apidologie, 47:703-710
Greenberg, B., Bindokas, V.P., Frazier, M. J., Gauger, J.R. (1981) Response of honey bees, Apis mellifera L., to high-voltage transmission lines, Environmental Entomology, 10:600-610
Hardell, L., Carlberg, M. (2019) Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports on toxicology and carcinogenesis study in rats exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 900 MHz and in mice exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 1,900 MHz, International Journal of Oncology, 54(1):111-127
Hersgaard, M. and Dowie, M. (2018) How Big Wireless Made Us Think That cell Phones Are Safe: A special investigation, The Nation, April 23, 2018
Johansson, O (2019) To bee, or not to bee, that is the 5 “G” question, Newsvoice, https://newsvoice.se/2019/05/5g-question-olle-johansson/?fbclid=IwAR3VzYuLVNRSQT6ZCi3uTZkFJTfsiuBNV2MinktZRnUNxCICgDiz_gi_3k0
Kumar, N.R., Taruna, V., Anudeep (2012) Influence of cell phone radiations on Apis mellifera semen, Journal of Global Biosciences, 1:17-19
Lupi, D., Palamara Mesiano, M., Adani, A., Benocci, R., Giacchini, R., Parenti, P., Zambon, G., Lavazza, A., Boniotti, MB., Bassi, S., Colombo, M., Tremolada, P. (2021) Combined effects of pesticides and electromagnetic-fields on Honeybees: Multi-stress exposure, Insects: 12(8): 716
Magras, I.N., Xenos, T.D. (1997) RF radiation-induced changes in the prenatal development of mice, Bioelectromagnetics, 18:455-461
Mahmoud, E.A. and Gabarty, A. (2021) Impact of electromagnetic radiation on honey stomach ultrastructure and the body chemical element composition of Apis mellifera, African Entomology, 29(1):32-41
Odemer, Richard and Franziska (2019) Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMF) on honey bee queen development and mating success, Sci Total Environment, (661)553-556
Sahib, S.S. (2011) Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) clashes with honey bees, International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 1(5):897-900
Sharma, V.P. and Kumar, N.R. (2010) Changes in honey bee behavior and biology under the influence of cellphone radiations, Research Communications, Current Science 98(10): 1376-1378
Soffritti, M., Giuliani, L. (2019) The carcinogenic potential of non-ionizing radiations: The cases of S-50 Hz MF and 1.8 GHz GSM radiofrequency radiation, Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology, 125(3):58-69
Wertheimer, N., Leeper, E. (1979) Electrical wiring configurations and childhood cancer, American Journal of Epidemiology, 109:273-284
World Health Organization (WHO)/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC),2011, Cell phones and cancer: Assessment classifies radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans, Science News https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110531133115.htm

We’re obsessed with clover. Because clover fixes a lot of things, including nitrogen. And before we go a second further, let’s address the element in the room: what is nitrogen, why is everyone always talking about it, and why does it need to be fixed?

Nitrogen is a super abundant gas. (Sorry, we lack advanced degrees in chemistry so are going to leave it at that, after which things get metaphysical). But we can say for sure that nitrogen is everywhere. More specifically, it makes up about 78% of the earth’s atmosphere. For plants, nitrogen is totally essential. It’s key for plants to make proteins! It’s key for plants to make chlorophyll which they need for their life-affirming hobby, photosynthesis!
Sadly, plants can’t just grab nitrogen out of thin air. To make a very complex process (that you should google) simple, ambient nitrogen needs to be “fixed” into chemical forms that are useful to plants. Farmers may add fertilizers, composts or manures to their soils to get nitrogen into the soil in a way that’s palatable to plants.

But pulses and beans and rhizomatic roots! The legumes we fondly call La Familia de Frijoles have the ability to fix nitrogen in soils (though actually it’s certain bacteria with which legumes have a symbiotic relationship that do the fixing. Big shout out to biology for making everything complicated).

So, nitrogen fixation is super important for all plants and the farmers that grow them. And for growers, planting pulses as cover crops or between rows provides a few other fixes: legumes can help retain moisture in the soil, reduce runoff and erosion, compete with weeds, and provide nutrition for grazing animals should there be any. And now for the biggest fix of all: dinner for bees. In fact, the word “clover” is probably connected to the Germanic word “klaiwaz,” meaning “sticky sap,” an ode to the abundant honey made from clover’s sweet blossoms.

There are many plants that share the common name of clover and they all belong to the taxonomic Family Fabaceae (everything from those lucky four-leafers you looked for at recess having not been picked for any kickball teams, to those green split peas the soup of which had to eat before you left the dinner table). True clovers are in the genus Trifolium, which includes species native and non-native to North America (Taylor 1990). Some of the native clovers, (T. trichocalyx and T. anoemum) are listed on the Federal Endangered Species List as their associated indigenous landscapes are disappearing (https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/species-listings-by-tax-group?statusCategory=Listed&groupName=All%20Plants).

Honey bee foraging for pollen at a red clover (Trifolium pratense).
Photo credit: Judy Griesedieck Photography

As you would expect, the clover plants from which honey bees gather the most nectar and pollen fall into the non-native Trifolium clovers (shoutout to roving humans for making everything complicated!). The true clovers on every honey bees’ Top five include Dutch white clover (T. repens), Alsike clover (T. hybridum), crimson clover (T. incarnatum), and red clover (T. pratense). These clovers are used as cover crops for soil health, and bees appreciate it. Also beloved is Kura clover (T. ambiguum), a rhizome rooted plant that is used as an agricultural living mulch, forage, hay and nectar source with some plots surviving over 20 years.

Another genus in the Fabaceae Family that we call clover is Melilotus (you can practically hear the honey dripping off the name), home to the yellow (M. officinalis) and white (M. alba) sweet clovers both of which have been identified as potential threats to native plant communities (Van Riper et al. 2009). Conservationists are rightly concerned that these tall (reaching five feet), sweet clovers block sun from shorter native plants and increase soil nitrogen to unfavorable levels for natives. Planting sweet clover specifically for our bees is a great idea if we have the land and a management plan, but sincere care must be taken to keep sweet clovers well away from conservation efforts, and to manage their spread.

A new plot of yellow sweet clover, Melilotus officinalis. While bees find this flower as an excellent source of nectar, it is also of great concern to many who worry about its invasive tendencies. Ask your local experts if this plant is right for your plot. Photo credit: Keith Johnson

What can we say? One gal’s weed is another gal’s best honey crop. A University of Maryland study asking about the value of native and non-native plants in pollinator plots with seed mixes included sweet clover and three Trifolium species in their seed mixes and demonstrated that clover plants were visited frequently by a diverse group of bees during their expansive flowering seasons. Despite the value of the non-native plants for bees, the authors warn of the potential for these plants to disrupt native bee and plant communities (Seitz et al. 2020).

While clovers can seem like a triple win benefiting everyone from soil microbes to bees to bovines, it’s… complicated… to get it right. “Bloom and let bloom” may be our collective motto, but clover planted under or near crops that get sprayed (like vineyards or fruit trees) is best mown before the spray, even if blooming, so bees aren’t tempted to forage there (McDougall et al. 2021).  As beekeepers, it’s essential to talk to the mowers that be about letting their intentional and unintentional clovers bloom, knowing that livestock or crop considerations may get priority.

We are totally fixated on clover, and not least because it tends to do well in many contexts and does not require much talent to grow.  We also love the intoxicating scent of it, the giddiness of knowing our bees are feasting, filling up supers. So definitely plant some clover this spring, but pledge to manage it well. Here’s to a year of tall hives and big, big jars of honey.

How do honey bees digest pollen?

Pollen supplies critical nutrients to many animals, including honey bees (Wright et al. 2018) and other bee species (Leach and Drummond 2018). Pollen is rich in protein, free amino acids, lipids, vitamins, and inorganic elements, all of which are found at much lower levels in honey bees’ other food source floral nectar (Brodschneider and Crailsheim 2010; Nicolson 2011). Pollen grains contain only a few cells which are protected by an inner layer (intine) and a very tough outer layer (exine). These grains are dehydrated, made metabolically inactive for dispersal, and are known for their near indestructibility (Borg and Twell 2013). So how pollen-eating, or palynivorous, animals digest pollen has been a long-standing mystery. Before we get into pollen digestion, let’s review pollen biology. Bees pollinating flowers transfer pollen from one flower to another (Figure 1). In order to fertilize new flowers, pollen grains produced by the anther / stamen of a male flower must first interact with a compatible stigma on a female flower. Then, the pollen grain initiates a process called germination resulting in the formation of a structure known as the pollen tube, which grows down the length of the style, descending from the stigma on a female flower. Upon reaching the ovule, the site of egg production in a female flower, the pollen tube ruptures, allowing for the joining of the male and female gametes, which completes the process of fertilization and therefore pollination (Borg and Twell 2013).

Figure 1
(A) Forager working white clover (Trifolium repens).
(B) Forgaers on an anatomic front-mount pollen trap with visible pollen loads.
(C) Pollen pellets collected from the corbiculae of foragers returning to the colony.

Currently, pollen digestion is thought to involve one or several of the following mechanisms: induction of partial germination (pseudogermination), mechanical disruption of the pollen wall, enzymatic breakdown, and osmotic shock (Roulston and Cane 2000). In bees, including honey bees, pseudogermination and osmotic shock are the most likely routes for pollen digestion (reviewed in (Peng and Dobson 1997; McKinstry et al. 2020)). Osmotic shock occurs when the changes in osmotic pressures in different regions of the digestive tract cause the pollen grain to burst as it travels. Most studies looking at bee digestive tracts suggest that pollen contents are slowly released as the grains travel. So, while osmotic pressure changes may influence release, the gradual leakage of pollen contents argues against a dramatic rupture. For example, Peng and colleagues (1986) found that there was not an immediate rupture of alfalfa pollen after transition from the crop (also known as the foregut and similar to a stomach) to the midgut even though that transition involves a significant change in the osmotic environment. They instead observed slow changes in the pollen grains including a slow swelling around the germination pores where the pollen tube would emerge, followed by the release of internal material (Peng et al. 1986) (for a picture of pollen grains in a honey bee digestive tract see Figure 2). The authors suggested that these changes were much more consistent with a pseudogermination mode of digestion, which occurs when pollen grains initiate but do not complete a germination sequence. They proposed pseudogermination as opposed to full germination because it’s been known since the mid-1900s that honey bee-collected pollen has reduced capacity to pollinate female flowers, in part due to loss of germination potential. One of the earliest reports on this topic showed a loss of this potential after only a few hours (Singh and Boynton 1949). This has interesting implications for bee-mediated pollination, because it suggests that bee-collected pollen may be good for pollination when they are out in the field, but that bees may alter the pollen in a way that reduces its pollination efficiency perhaps while increasing its ability to be stored. For pseudogermination to be a possible digestion mechanism, pollen grains must retain the capacity to at least initiate the germination process. The Singh and Boynton study (and others like it) have demonstrated loss of germination potential by measuring pollen tube formation or fertilization potential, both of which are late events in the germination process. During germination, a number of early biochemical events occur in pollen grains before the dramatic morphological changes are observed, such as pollen tube formation. A pseudogermination mechanism of digestion would require that some aspects of germination, such as metabolic activity, remain intact despite the loss of the ability to complete the process. However, these events have been hard to measure leading to a gap in the evidence supporting pseudogermination as a mechanism for pollen digestion.

Figure 2
Hematoxilin and Eosin stained sections of honey bee midgut tissue reveal pollen in various stages of digestion inside the lumen. The cell and chitin layerlining the digestive tract is at the top.

New methods provide evidence that honey bee-collected pollen still retains the ability to ‘activate’ even if it can’t fully germinate.

Luckily, a number of recent advances in our understanding of the cellular and molecular steps involved early in the process of germination may provide new ways to demonstrate the ability of honey bee-collected pollen to partially germinate. For example, pollen germination has been shown to result in the production of an early ‘wave’ of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS), which is a common biproduct of metabolic activity that is also important for pollen function (reviewed in (McInnis et al. 2006)). In a recent study from my lab, we proposed that a burst of ROS in honey bee-collected pollen could provide additional evidence of retained metabolic activity and a potential pseudogermination mechanism operating during honey bee pollen digestion. We used a number of microscopy techniques and biochemical assays to show that pollen loads gathered by honey bee foragers could produce ROS (McKinstry et al. 2020). We first collected pollen pellets from the pollen baskets (corbiculae) of the back legs of foragers returning to the colony or from a pollen trap (Figure 1). We then rehydrated them to allow germination and found robust ROS signals in pollen pellets using two biochemical assays that detect two different forms of ROS, either hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) or superoxide anion. In Figure 3, we show results from the assay detecting hydrogen peroxide from a pollen load that we then used DNA sequencing to identify as being from flowers of white clover (Trifolium repens). In the case of the hydrogen peroxide assay, we further showed that the signal could be eliminated through various treatments. For example, treating the pollen with heat reduced the amount of ROS produced, demonstrating that the signal is dependent on active enzymes in living pollen. Other experimental manipulations are described in detail in McKinstry et al. (2020). Using a fluorescent dye that allows visualization of various types of ROS, we also showed that the signal was localized to pollen grains. These assays demonstrate that pollen collected from honey bee corbiculae possesses the ability to produce ROS upon rehydration.

Figure 3 (A) Results of Amplex Red Assay showing amount of hydrogen peroxide produced by white clover pollen after rehydration. Data shows μM H2O2 produced per minute represented as mean ± Standard Error of the mean **p<0.01 (B) Schematic showing how ROS produced upon germination can be inhibited by a number of conditions (further details in (McKinstry et al. 2020)).

It was important to show that pollen grains could produce ROS inside the honey bee digestive tract where the pseudogermination must occur to be involved in digestion. We collected foragers from the colony, dissected their digestive tracts, and removed the food bolus, a chitin-coated sac containing consumed pollen. Using these food boli and the biochemical method that detects hydrogen peroxide, we found a robust signal of ROS in the digestive tract of individual bees. Then, using the dye that allows visualization of ROS, we again observed that the signal was often present in structures that appeared to be pollen grains (Figure 4, page 71). Finally, we fed bees that had been deprived of pollen for 24 hours either sucrose syrup alone or sucrose syrup supplemented with fresh pollen for one hour. We observed increased ROS levels (and increased pollen counts) in bees fed sucrose syrup with pollen compared to those receiving sucrose syrup alone for the same time period. These results supported the idea that pollen could also produce ROS in the digestive tract of bees during the digestion process.

Conclusions and future directions

Most studies of germination potential post-collection have focused on pollen tube formation or fertilization potential (Roulston and Cane 2000). As these are late events in the germination process, we sought to focus on metabolic activity associated with early germination processes to provide support for a pseudogermination method of pollen digestion in honey bees. Our results are consistent with earlier studies that found that bee-collected pollen showed a significant increase in oxygen uptake upon rehydration (Keularts and Linskens 1968; Verhoef and Hoekstra 2012), supporting retained metabolic activity despite absence of pollen tube formation. There are a number of important questions left unanswered by our study. We observed highly variable levels of ROS production by pollen from different plant species and even differences in the levels of ROS in pollen from the same species. Understanding how experimental limitations and differences in the biology of different plant species might contribute to this variability will be important to disentangle. Also, the pollen-derived ROS we observed could have effects on the biology of the digestive tract in the honey bee by impacting the health of the midgut itself or the microbiome contained within it.

Despite these remaining questions, the evidence of retained metabolic activity in our study provides additional support for a mechanism of pollen digestion that includes pseudogermination in honey bees, and points to novel approaches for better understanding of pollen digestion in this species and other palynivorous insects. Further research will still be needed to determine whether pseudogermination is required for pollen digestion and whether osmotic shock plays a role in the process, with important consequences for understanding honey bee nutrition.

Figure 4
Food bolus dissected from honey bee forager and assayed for ROS presence using fluorescent dye (CM-H2DCF). Left panels are brightfield images, right panels are
fluorescent images for the same bolus with and without dye. Green fluorescence
indicating ROS presence is associated with pollen grains.

Author Bio
Jonathan W. Snow is an Associate Professor of Biology at Barnard College, Columbia University. His lab studies cellular stress responses and infectious disease in honey bees.

References
Borg M, Twell D (2013) eLS. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470015902.a0002039.pub2
Brodschneider R, Crailsheim K (2010) Nutrition and health in honey bees. Ann Abeille 41:278–294. https://doi.org/10.1051/apido/2010012
Keularts J, Linskens HF (1968) Influence of fatty acids on petunia pollen grains. Acta botanica neerlandica 17:267–272
Leach ME, Drummond F (2018) A Review of Native Wild Bee Nutritional Health. Int J Ecol 2018:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9607246
McInnis SM, Desikan R, Hancock JT, Hiscock SJ (2006) Production of reactive oxygen species and reactive nitrogen species by angiosperm stigmas and pollen: potential signalling crosstalk? New Phytol 172:221–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01875.x
McKinstry M, Prado-Irwin SR, Adames TR, Snow JW (2020) Retained metabolic activity in honey bee collected pollen has implications for pollen digestion and effects on honey bee health. Ann Abeille 51:212–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13592-019-00703-x
Nicolson SW (2011) Bee food: the chemistry and nutritional value of nectar, pollen and mixtures of the two: review article. African Zoology 46:197–204
Peng YS, Dobson HEM (1997) Digestion of Pollen Components by Larvae of the Flower-Specialist Bee Chelostoma florisomne (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae). JOURNAL OF INSECT PHYSIOLOGY 43:89–100
Peng YS, Nasr ME, Marston JM (1986) Release of alfalfa, Medicago sativa, pollen cytoplasm in the gut of the honey bee, Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 79:804–807
Roulston TH, Cane JH (2000) Pollen nutritional content and digestibility for animals. Plant Systematics and Evolution 222:187–209 Singh S, Boynton D (1949) Viability of apple pollen in pollen pellets of honeybees. Proc Am Soc Hort Sc 53:148–153
Verhoef H, Hoekstra FA (2012) Absence of 10-hydroxy-2-decenoic acid (10-HDA) in bee-collected pollen. In: Mulcahy DL (ed). pp 391–396
Wright GA, Nicolson SW, Shafir S (2018) Nutritional Physiology and Ecology of Honey Bees. Annual Review of Entomology 63:327–344. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-020117-043423

Grooming behavior: insights on a honey bee defense mechanism against mites
Morfin N1, Mora A1, Harpur BA2, Hunt GJ2, Given K2, Fillier TA3, Pham TH3, Thomas RH3, Goodwin PH1, Guzman-Novoa E1
1University of Guelph, School of Environmental Sciences;  2Purdue University, Department of Entomology; 3School of Science and the Environment/ Boreal Ecosystem Research Initiative, Memorial University of Newfoundland,
Self-grooming is a behavioral immune response of honey bees (Apis mellifera) to the ectoparasite Varroa destructor. Self-grooming and associated traits (e.g. mite population growth and the proportion of mutilated mites), have been used in breeding programs to select for V. destructor resistant honey bees. In a recent study, self-grooming was used to evaluate colonies selected for low and high mite population growth (LVG and HVG). Differences in self-grooming between the selected genotypes included time of first grooming, number of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and viral levels. The selection of resistant bees through self-grooming can be challenging, as the trait is affected by environmental stressors, such as the exposure to the insecticide clothianidin. Sublethal doses of clothianidin decreased the proportion of intense groomers. Also, the effect of the neurotoxic insecticide affected the lipid composition of the honey bee brain, including lipids related to energy metabolism and the stability of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (e.g. CL18:3/18:1/14:0/22:6 and PC16:0/18:3). Additionally, genes associated with the pathway GPI-anchor biosynthesis were found differentially expressed, indicating an effect of clothianidin on neural processes affecting motor control and self- grooming. Self-grooming appears to be an effective quantifiable behavioral trait to study behavioral immunity and neural processes in honey bees.

Is DWV-B taking over from DWV-A, and does it matter?
Paxton RJ
Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg
Arguably the most serious threat to honey bees worldwide is Deformed wing virus (DWV), transmitted by varroa mites and found as two widespread genotypes, A and B. DWV is often associated with colony death and may account for the apparent increase in colony mortality over the past two decades. The originally described DWV genotype A (DWV-A) has been shown to have spread across the world ‘out of Europe’, likely accompanying the dispersal of varroa mites through transport of queens and colonies. A second genotype B (DWV-B) has more recently been described, a genotype that we have shown to be apparently more virulent in adult honey bees than DWV-A. Here I provide evidence for its rapid worldwide spread, which is likely not due to under-recording, as well as its marked increase in prevalence, not only in the USA but also in many European countries. Using evidence from my own group and others, I show that DWV-B may be spreading, potentially at the cost to DWV-A, and that it is likely spilling over into wild bee species. This is a cause of concern for the health of both honey bees and wild bee species in the coming years.

Chemical Ecology, Behavior and Nutrition

Mandible differences between high and low mite biters: a multifaceted approach
Farrell MC1, Harpur B2, Li-Byarlay H1,3
1Department of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Central State University; 2Department of Entomology, Purdue University; 3Agricultural Research and Development Program, Central State University
Varroa destructor mites present a major threat to honey bee (Apis mellifera) populations worldwide. Recent research showed a significant difference in mite-biting behavior from breeding stocks (ankle-biters) in Indiana when compared to commercial colonies to defend against Varroa mites. The mandibles of these bees are morphologically different in the long edge, and appear to be smaller in size therefore more efficient at mite removal. To examine the molecular mechanisms underlying the mandible differences, we are analyzing the transcriptome of the mandibles themselves at two developmental timepoints to look for candidate genes that regulate the differences in mandible morphology. In addition, we are examining metal ion incorporation into the mandibles of bees. Metal ion incorporation into insect cuticles directly influences their hardness in insects and other invertebrates, and could contribute to the morphological changes observed in high biting bees. Taken together, these data present a complete picture of a mechanism of mite resistance in honey bees. Our new knowledge in molecular mechanisms will provide unique information and foundation for future genetic research to improve breeding and selection of mite-resistant bees.

Exploring the role of beeswax foundation to promote comb honey production and economic profit for hobbyist beekeepers
Kittle S, Fudolig M, Wu-Smart J
University of Nebraska-Lincoln Bee Lab
Managing honey bees provides economic revenue either as the main source of income for commercial beekeepers or as supplemental income for many small-scale or hobbyist beekeepers. Beekeepers commonly generate profit from extracted liquid honey, however, the average price of honey ($5-8/lbs) can fluctuate greatly with the market. Hobbyists have to contend with lower prices and fewer opportunities to commercially sell their products and therefore cannot compete with larger operations. Comb honey, or honey that is still contained in beeswax cells, is a “higher quality” or value-added specialty product (averaging $15-20 per 12oz or 0.75lbs) because it is more labor intensive and energetically costly for bees to produce. These are also reasons why the production of comb honey decreased tremendously, particularly among larger operations, after extraction of liquid honey had been widely implemented.This experiment seeks to evaluate the role different amounts of wax foundation (full, half, or none) plays on encouraging bees to build comb cells and compares economic costs and benefits of using the three sizes to stimulate comb honey production.

Determining the mechanism of honey bee (Apis mellifera) premature self-removal behavior
Twombly Ellis J, Rangel J
Texas A&M University Entomology Dept
The honey bee (Apis mellifera) is an economically important pollinator and a tractable system for studying the behavioral consequences of eusociality. A sterile worker’s own genetic fitness is best served by acting in the interest of her colony, even if that behavior curtails her lifespan. Stressed honey bees typically leave the colony to forage early, which leads them to be unproductive foragers. Precocious foraging behavior can even lead to colony collapse when expressed at high levels. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that developmentally stressed honey bees remove themselves prematurely from their colony and subsequently die. To confirm that this behavior is a reaction to severe stress, and not caused by a parasite or pathogen, we stressed bees with either temperature stress or Varroa mite parasitization during pupation. Stressed bees, as well as control counterparts, were tagged upon emergence and introduced to an observation hive. We then observed the colony for premature self-removal of tagged workers. We found that stressed bees self-remove at a significantly higher rate than their unstressed counterparts. Stressed bees also have smaller hypopharyngeal glands than their unstressed controls, indicating that this is a stress driven behavior and potentially a form of extremely accelerated precocious foraging.

Sublethal treatment of insect growth regulators induces precocious foraging and alters collected pollen quantity in honeybees
Deeter ME, Corby-Harris V
USDA-ARS, The University of Arizona
Commercial honey bee colonies have experienced rapid declines in the past two decades due to a synergy of stressors, such as pesticides. Chronic stress can have lasting physiological changes in worker bees, such as the accelerated depletion of internal nutrient stores. Experimental reductions in abdominal lipid have been linked to a behavior known as precocious foraging, wherein worker bees forage earlier in their adult lifespan. Precocious foragers have been speculated to be less effective, but the relationship between precocious foraging and reduced pollination services requires further investigation. In this study, we found that bees treated with sublethal quantities of pyriproxyfen, an insect growth regulator, forage earlier than untreated controls. Additionally, we found that bees treated with another insect growth regulator, spirodiclofen, return with less, yet fattier, pollen than untreated controls. Our results suggest a slight yet significant reduction in forager yield due to pesticide stress, an effect that can further compromise colony health.

A mixed-use landscape in Virginia provides sustained foraging resources for honey bees
Ohlinger BD, Schürch R, Couvillon MJ
Virginia Tech
Poor nutrition due to habitat loss has gained attention as a possible stressor contributing to the well-reported declines in managed honey bee colonies. Scientists, policymakers and concerned citizens have coordinated their efforts to mitigate habitat loss by providing supplemental forage for hungry bees. However, additional information related to the temporal and spatial availability of honey bee forage can help to develop management plans that better meet their needs. We used dance decoding to monitor honey bee foraging from April – October in 2018 and 2019 within a mixed-use landscape in Virginia.  We aimed to 1)identify temporal trends in communicated foraging distance and 2)identify attractive land characteristics within our study area. We observed a 63% increase in communicated foraging distance in June 2018 and a 64% increase in communicated foraging distance in June 2019; however, median yearly communicated foraging distances were relatively low in both 2018 (727 m) and 2019 (694 m). Additionally, honey bees expanded their foraging into distant forested areas during June in 2018 and 2019, indicating that forests provided quality forage during this time. Taken together, our results suggest that our relatively diverse study area provided sustained floral resources throughout the two honey bee foraging seasons.
You are what you eat: Effect of Fall feeding regimen on the overwintering success and gene expression
profiles of honey bees
Underwood RM, Döke MA, Ortiz-Alvarado Y, Koru BY, Giray T
Penn State University; University of Puerto Rico in Rio Piedras
In Fall, beekeepers generally remove stored honey from managed honey bee hives and replace it with artificial feed. This feed, which is often sucrose syrup (SS), high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), or invert syrup (IS), is a much-needed carbohydrate source that will sustain the colony over the Winter. In this study we examined the effect of these feeding regimens on colony survival and molecular markers of metabolic health in workers. Full-sized colonies were either allowed to keep their honey (control) or have their honey removed and replaced by one of the three artificial feeds (SS, HFCS, or IS) in Fall. In March, overwintered adults and newly emerging, callow worker bees were sampled from each feeding regimen. Overwintering success was significantly higher in colonies that kept their honey and those that were fed IS compared to those that were fed HFCS or SS. Moreover, vitellogenin and ILP-2 were up-regulated while ILP-1 and JHamt were down-regulated in brain samples of bees that consumed honey or SS relative to those that were fed HFCS or IS. These findings were consistent across overwintered and callow worker samples, the latter of which had no direct access to the feed available in the colony.

Flowers contributing to colony weight gain and honey production in an agriculturally intensive Midwestern landscape
McMinn-Sauder H, Lin C-H, Eaton T, Johnson R
Department of Entomology, The Ohio State University
The Ohio agricultural landscape includes a variety of sources for honey bee forage, including crop plants, weeds, and supplemental plantings. Currently, there is little understanding of the complementarity of these resources in the honey bee diet. This study aims to identify the flowers contributing most to colony honey production in agriculturally intensive regions of Ohio, with specific focus on soybeans as a resource and the dietary contribution of pollinator plantings. Colonies at twenty-four apiaries in north-central Ohio were monitored in 2020 and 2021. Broodminder hive scales were used to track colony weight continuously, capturing periods of honey production. Nectar samples were collected from apiaries monthly and pollen metabarcoding was used to identify the plants contributing most during periods of colony weight gain. Results indicate colonies at all sites gained weight during soybean bloom with nectar samples composed largely of Trifolium (clover) and Glycine (soybean) nectar. In addition, Vitis (grapevine) pollen was detected frequently in samples during this period. This study provides insight into nectar resources for bees in this landscape and identified periods of nectar dearth. These dearth periods can then be targeted in supplemental plantings to include blooming flowers, maximizing honey bee colony health and productivity in this landscape.

Improving honey bee tolerance to Deformed wing virus infection by optimizing macronutrient ratios within artificial diets
Payne AN1, Lau PW2, Garcia C1, Gomez J1, Boncristiani HF3, Rangel J1
1Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University; 2USDA Pollinator Health in Southern Crop Ecosystems Research; 3Inside The Hive Media & Consulting, Inc.
It has been shown that the health of honey bees infected with pathogens can be improved by ensuring proper nutrition. However, commercially available pollen substitutes vary widely in their macronutrient protein (P) to lipid (L) ratios, and it is unknown what target ratio can help bees better deal with pathogen infection. The purpose of this study was to determine what P:L ratio had a positive impact on the survivorship, physiology, and overall health of honey bees infected with a common honey bee pathogen: Deformed wing virus (DWV). We conducted cage assays where both infected and non-infected cohorts of bees were fed one of four diet treatments: a high P: low L diet (40P:10L), a low P: high L diet (20P:30L), an intermediate diet ratio at which non-infected honey bees were previously found to self-select for (30P:20L), or no diet whatsoever. Differences in diet consumption, survivorship, pathogen load, and physiology were compared between our different experimental groups. The purpose of this study is to identify at what macronutrient ratio honey bees can better tolerate infection with a viral pathogen in order to better tailor commercially available pollen substitutes for managed colonies on altered and changing landscapes.

Stockpiling pasture legumes and forbs for late Summer honey bee forage on non-irrigated pastures
Melathopoulos, A, Kincaid, S., Ates, S
Department of Horticulture, Oregon State University
Western Oregon is home to over 80,000 honey bee colonies. While honey and pollen flows are adequate through to the end of July, beekeepers have difficulty preparing colonies for Winter owing to a lack of forage in the latter half of the Summer. We have been working together with the National Honey Board to develop late-Summer bloom in dairy and sheep pasture systems, where pastures are grazed during Winter and Spring and are currently left dormant during the dry Summer. We investigated the nectar output in pastures where we incorporated perennial forages (forage chicory, hubam sweet clover and birdsfoot trefoil) and self-regenerating annual forages (balansa and berseem white clover), following Spring closures from sheep grazing on non-irrigated pastures. In spite of severe drought, we demonstrated tremendous nectar output from the self-regenerating annual forages. On the other hand, the bloom from perennial legumes was lower than expected.
Developing a methodology to detect honey bee foraging using bioacoustics analysis
McKenzie H, Johnson R, Lin C-H
Department of Entomology, The Ohio State University
Detecting bees in crop fields is critical for assessing pollination activity and for choosing appropriate time periods to apply pesticides to minimize bee exposure. There are currently several methods for detecting pollinator presence and activity, including pan traps, manual collection, and visual observation. However, there are limitations to the utility of existing methods, including the bias of pan traps against large bees and the limited duration of observation possible using manual approaches. I am developing a methodology to record the audible wingbeats of foraging honey bees (Apis mellifera) in soybean (Glycine max) fields and quantify periods of honey bee foraging by identifying the wingbeat frequency specific to honey bees, 234±13.9 Hz. I outline the technological and practical challenges of this new methodology, as well as how those challenges might be addressed and overcome by future work. Successful refinement of this methodology would provide a useful tool for measuring activity of honey bees and other flying insects in other crops or ecosystems.

Nutritional triggers of migration and swarming in Apis cerana
Klett K, Ihle K, Spivak M
My goal is to understand the physiological mechanisms underlying swarming and migration in Apis cerana. Apis cerana undergoes a yearly colony growth period, culminating in swarming. Conversely, A. cerana colonies undergo migration, in which the entire colony moves to a new location when resources become scarce. I tested potential nutritional triggers of swarming in Apis mellifera in Minnesota before testing them on A. cerana. Reproductive swarming is a complex, multi-stage group decision. A reduction in queen pheromone dispersal and crowding have been identified as triggers of swarming, yet causal mechanisms have not been demonstrated. I hypothesize that protein intake via pollen collection, and resulting nutritional status in individual bees, may be physiological triggers of swarming. I marked 7d and 14d old bees weekly, for two months, from colonies that eventually swarmed or did not swarm. I weighed pollen collected in traps over a 24 hr period every week and measured quantities of vitellogenin using qPCR as a nutritional indicator. After repeating this experiment with A. cerana, I will test the hypothesis that colony migration, in contrast to swarming, may be triggered by a reduction in protein intake, leading to the movement of the colony to areas of higher resource availability.

Pests, Pathogens and Beneficial Microbes

Effects of plant natural products on honey bee (Apis mellifera) health and gut microbiota
Martin A, Simone-Finstrom M, Ricigliano V
Louisiana State University, Dept. of Entomology
Honey bees are exposed to many different plant derived compounds both naturally (e.g. propolis, phytochemicals in nectar and pollen) and via management (added essential oils in dietary supplements or for treatments). Since animal microbiota are influenced by host phytochemical ingestion, more research is necessary to understand these dynamics in honey bees. This project aims to understand how phytochemicals may modulate the gut microbiota and what these changes could mean for bee health. Cages of newly emerged bees were provided sucrose syrup containing different concentrations of i)Brazilian or ii)Louisiana propolis extract, or iii)lemongrass, iv)spearmint, or v)thyme oil and pollen paste ad libitum for seven days. Control syrups contained either emulsifiers, kanamycin, or just sucrose. Abdomen samples were collected on day 7 and day 14 for microbiota analysis via taxon-specific bacterial 16S rRNA quantification and culture-based approaches. Bees fed sucrose, Brazilian propolis, and lemongrass had the longest median lifespans while bees fed thyme and spearmint had the shortest. Results of the influence of these diets on gut microbial communities will also be presented. The results will help elucidate the impacts of naturally-encountered and beekeeper-applied phytochemicals on honey bee physiology and health.

Developing a method for rearing Varroa destructor in vitro
Johnson BL, Jack CJ, Ellis JD
University of Florida- Department of Entomology & Nematology – Honey Bee Research & Extension Laboratory
Varroa destructor is a significant mite pest of western honey bees (Apis mellifera). Developing a method to rear and maintain populations of V. destructor in vitro would provide year-round access to the mites, allowing scientists to study its biology, behavior and control more rapidly. In this study, we determined the impact of various rearing parameters on V. destructor survival and reproduction in vitro. To do this, we collected V. destructor from colonies, placed them in gelatin capsules containing a honey bee larva, and manipulated the following conditions experimentally: rearing temperature, colony source of honey bee larva, behavioral/developmental stages of V. destructor and honey bee larva, and mite:bee larva ratio. Varroa destructor survival was significantly impacted by temperature, colony source of larvae, and mite behavioral stage. In addition, V. destructor reproduction was significantly impacted by mite:larva ratio, larval developmental stage, colony source of larva, and temperature. The following conditions optimized mite survival and reproduction in vitro: using a 4:1 mite:larva ratio, beginning the study with late stage uncapped larvae, using mites collected from adult bees, setting the rearing temperature to 34.5°C, and screening larval colony source. Ultimately, our data can be used to improve V. destructor in vitro rearing programs.
DO NOT ENTER: Keeping small hive beetles at bay through olfactory cues
Roth MA, Lahondère C, Gross AD
Virginia Tech
Small hive beetles (Aethina tumida) are invasive pests that enter Apis mellifera colonies and inflict feeding damage. Apis mellifera colonies emit many volatiles, including the key alarm pheromone component isopentyl acetate (IPA); A. tumida adults use these volatiles to locate hives. We hypothesize that one way to keep A. tumida adults from invading apiaries is to obscure responses to IPA through use of repellent molecules, which we are testing at antennal and behavioral levels through electroantennography and olfactometry. Thus far, electroantennograms (EAGs) have been performed using IPA and several repellent volatiles (paraffin oil control). EAG results allowed for calculation of half-maximal effective concentrations (EC50) for IPA (5.6ppm), picaridin (16.6%), piperidine (15.9%), pyrrole (1.19%), and pyrrolidine (0.26%). Mixing EC50 values of IPA and picaridin have resulted in significantly reduced responses compared to IPA alone. Dual-choice olfactometers are now being used to compare beetle behavior to EAG results. Thus far, slight preference for IPA was observed, while pollen patty (12g) was significantly attractive. Additionally, when 10mg of pyrrolidine were added to filter paper atop 12g of pollen patty, beetles significantly avoided this treatment. Ultimately, repellent compounds could mask attractive volatiles, preventing A. tumida adults from discovering apiaries.

Stable carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios in healthy and Nosema-infected honey bees
Kamminga K, Webster T
College of Agriculture, Community and the Sciences, Kentucky State University
Nosema ceranae infection in honey bee workers was studied through the measurement of stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes. For this study, mixed-age honey bees were collected and maintained in an incubator at 32°C. Bees were fed 50% sucrose solution with Nosema spores. At days 0, 6, 9, 12, and 26 post-inoculation (DPI), sixty bees were removed from each cage and anesthetized. Newly emerged bees were also analyzed. Sixty midguts from each group were placed by tens in microcentrifuge tubes and crushed with a pestle to release spores. Spore numbers were counted on a hemocytometer. The pellet tissue was dried and sent to the University of Arkansas Stable Isotope Laboratory for isotope analysis. Through ANOVA, we found significantly higher δ13C at 6, 9 12, and 26 DPI than for newly emerged and uninfected bees. However, δ15N was lower for newly emerged bees than for the mixed aged bees at 0 through 26 dpi. Statistically significant positive relationships of δ13C and δ15N with increasing spore counts were also found through linear regression. This indicates that the developing N. ceranae aggressively incorporates carbon as it develops. This result conforms to published literature which states that parasites are isotopically more enriched than their host.

Three’s a crowd: How honey bees respond to infection with Lotmaria passim and Nosema ceranae
MacInnis C1,2, Guarna MM2, Luong LT1, Pernal SF1
University of Alberta and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Nosema ceranae and Lotmaria passim are two digestive tract parasites of the honey bee that have been associated with honey bee colony losses in Canada, the U.S., and Europe. Unfortunately, honey bee colonies are often co-infected with these parasites, and we have little information regarding how the two parasites interact to affect honey bee health. We have investigated the effect of both parasites (single and mixed infections) on honey bee mortality, humoural defense response, and foraging behavior. Results of a mortality experiment suggest that L. passim is less virulent than N. ceranae, with individuals inoculated with only L. passim surviving 10.4 days longer than those inoculated with only N. ceranae. Interestingly, mixed infections also appeared less virulent than N. ceranae alone, with individuals inoculated with both parasites surviving 0.75 days longer than those inoculated with N. ceranae only. We will also discuss the effect of single and mixed infections on individual honey bee behavior.

Comparative quantification of honey bee (Apis mellifera) associated viruses in wild and managed colonies
Dickey M, Rangel J
Texas A&M
The most detrimental threat to honey bee (Apis mellifera) health is the ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor, which is linked to sizeable colony losses worldwide. Varroa is also a prolific vector of several honey bee-associated viruses. Wild honey bee colonies live in feral conditions and are thus not treated for Varroa control, which has enabled the natural selection of mite tolerant bees. To date, there is limited information about virus prevalence in wild Africanized honey bee (AHB) populations. The Welder Wildlife Refuge (WWR) is a unique site to study the viral landscape of wild AHBs in the Southern U.S. The goal of this project is to quantify honey bee-associated viruses in a wild population of AHBs, compare the presence of these viruses to that in the nearest managed apiaries. In 2013 we detected the presence of Deformed wing virus (DWV), Black queen cell virus (BQCV), and Lake Sinai virus (LSV). In 2016 we detected the presence of DWV, BQCV, and Sacbrood virus (SBV). All samples that tested positive for viruses contained extremely low copy numbers in both years. This study provides us the first information on the presence and levels of honey bee-associated viruses in a wild population of AHBs.

The effect of hygienic behavior, viral co-infection and blueberry pollination on the development of European foulbrood in honey bees in Michigan
Fowler P, Schroeder D, Kevill J, Milbrath M
Michigan State University
European foulbrood (EFB) has been an increasing problem for Michigan beekeepers. Here we examine the role that blueberry pollination, hygienic behavior, and viral co-infection play in the development of EFB. In May of 2020, 60 queen-right hives were selected from a commercial beekeeping operation in Michigan and split into two locations: in blueberry fields for pollination or a distant holding yard, away from blueberries. Hygienic testing was performed on each hive and workers were collected for viral testing and hive health metrics and EFB disease status were gathered three times over the season. We found high levels of viral co-infection, with no clear links to health outcomes. No statistically significant difference was found in the development of clinical disease between the two groups with 61% (17/28) of the colonies in the holding yard developing moderate to severe disease over the course of the season compared with 69% (20/29) of those in blueberry pollination. No relationship was found between hygienic behavior and colony health. This suggests that blueberry pollination is likely not an important factor in the development of European foulbrood and hygienic behavior is not important in preventing the development of this disease.

Hygienic Behavior in Feral and Managed Honey Bees (Apis mellifera) in Response to Parasitic Mites (Varroa destructor)
Mukogawa B, Nieh, J
UC San Diego
Varroa destructor is threatening both managed and feral Apis mellifera colonies worldwide. Some studies suggest feral colonies may have increased resistance to V. destructor because of their increased immunocompetence and due to disruption of V. destructor reproductive cycles through their more frequent swarming. Additionally, Africanized colonies have also been shown to demonstrate increased hygienic behavior by removing more dead/infected brood and grooming more intensely, making them potentially more Varroa resistant in subtropical areas. This study aims to understand whether there are differences in hygienic behavior between feral and managed A. mellifera. We wish to understand why, despite not being treated, feral colonies are able to survive with Varroa. Interestingly, there are few observed differences between the autogrooming behavior of managed and feral colonies through behavioral lab assays. And similarly, there are no differences in their mite biting behavior. However, there is a common trend of honey bees biting off specific mite legs (pedipalps) more than other legs—which may be a strategy to reduce mite infestations. These findings may help us understand how feral A. mellifera colonies combat V. destructor infestations.

Comparison of individual hive and apiary-level sample types for spores of Paenibacillus larvae in Saskatchewan honey bee operations
Zabrodski MW, DeBruyne JE, Wilson G, Moshynskyy I, Sharafi M, Wood SC, Kozii IV, Thebeau J, Klein CD, de Mattos IM, Sobchishin L, Epp T, Ruzzini AC, Simko E
University of Saskatchewan
Three commercial honey bee operations in Saskatchewan with outbreaks of American foulbrood (AFB) and recent or ongoing antibiotic use were sampled to detect spores of Paenibacillus larvae. We compared spore concentrations in different sample types within individual hives, assessed the surrogacy potential of honey collected from honey supers in place of brood chamber honey or adult bees within hives, and evaluated the ability of pooled, extracted honey to predict the degree of spore contamination identified through individual hive testing. Spore concentrations in unaffected apiaries were significantly different from AFB affected apiaries in one of three operations. Only a few hives were responsible for the majority of spore contamination in any given apiary. For individual hive samples, brood chamber honey was best for discriminating clinically affected apiaries from those unaffected (p = 0.001). Honey super honey positively correlated with both brood chamber honey (rs = 0.76, p < 0.0001) and bees (rs = 0.50, p < 0.0001) and may be useful as a surrogate for either. Spore concentrations in pooled, extracted honey have predictive potential for overall spore contamination within each operation and may have prognostic value in assessing the risk of future AFB outbreaks at the apiary (or operation) level.

Genetics and Evolution

Breeding Varroa mite resistant honey bees in Canada
De la Mora A, Emsen E, Morfin N, Kelly P, Borges D, Eccles L, Goodwin P; Guzman-Novoa E. University of Guelph The mite Varroa destructor is considered the main threat to honey bee health worldwide. In Ontario, V. destructor is responsible for most overwinter colony losses (>80%). V. destructor also is a vector of the deformed wing virus (DWV) that is transmitted to the bees. This dual parasitism shortens the lifespan of infested bees and contributes to the collapse of colonies. Beekeepers control mite infestations using synthetic miticides, but the mites soon develop resistance to their active compounds, compromising their efficacy. Accordingly, it is necessary to have alternative control strategies. One way of reducing the impact of V. destructor and DWV parasitism is to breed Varroa-resistant strains of honey bees. We are implementing a bee breeding program in Ontario, Canada, to select for lower and higher rates of V. destructor population growth (LVG and HVG, respectively), monitoring infection rates of DWV. Collaborative institutions are the Ontario Queen Breeders Association, the Ontario Beekeepers Association, and the University of Guelph. Preliminary results show a six-fold difference in mite population growth between the LVG and HVG colonies. Additionally, DWV levels and winter colony mortality are significantly lower in LVG colonies than in HVG colonies.

Genetic Progress Achieved during 10 Years of Selective Breeding for Honey bee Traits of Interest to the Beekeeping Industry
Maucourt S, Fortin F., Robert C., Giovenazzo P.
Laval University
Genetic improvement programs have resulted in spectacular productivity gains for most animal species in recent years. The introduction of quantitative genetics and the use of statistical models have played a fundamental role in achieving these advances. For the honey bee (Apis mellifera), genetic improvement programs are still rare worldwide. Indeed, genetic and reproductive characteristics are more complex in honey bees than in other animal species, which presents additional challenges for access to genetic selection. In recent years, advances in informatics have allowed statistical modelling of the honey bee, notably with the BLUP-animal model, and access to genetic selection for this species is possible now. The aim of this project was to present the genetic progress of several traits of interest to the Canadian beekeeping industry (hygienic behavior, honey production and spring development) achieved in our selection program since 2010. Our results show an improvement of 0.30% per year for hygienic behavior, 0.63 kg per year for honey production and 164 brood cells per year for Spring development. These advances have opened a new era for our breeding program and sharing this superior genetic available to beekeepers will contribute to the sustainability and self-sufficiency of the beekeeping industry in Canada.

How many species of honey bees (Apis) are there?
Otis GW
School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph
At least 178 forms of honey bees have been given species names since Carl Linnaeus first named Apis mellifera in 1758. Subsequently, most of those taxa were combined until, by 1986, there was general agreement that there are just 4-5 species of Apis: the single species A. mellifera of Europe and Africa and 3-4 species in Asia—the dwarf honey bee, giant honey bee, and eastern hive bee. However, expanded research of the honey bees across Asia has led to recognition of between 7-14 species, with the number depending on the species concept that one follows. Several genetic studies over the last 15 years suggest that there is justification for 14+ species. The fallacy of basing species on male genitalic differences will be reviewed. Species concepts and how they influence our understanding of the diversity within the genus Apis will be briefly explained. Several exciting biological situations will be highlighted, as well as the future for understanding honey bee diversity.

Population Genomics of Managed and Feral Honey Bees
Carpenter MH, Harpur BA, López-Uribe MM
Purdue University Department of Entomology; The Pennsylvania State University
Humans have intentionally selected, bred, and managed animals for over 15,000 years. In some cases, human-mediated selective pressures have generated subsets of the original populations containing unique phenotypes and genotypes: domesticated species. Honey bees (Apis mellifera) are a unique case because their reproductive strategy is rarely subjected to human control, allowing free mating between managed colonies and their sympatric feral or wild counterparts. Therefore, it is unknown if feral honey bees constitute a genetically distinct population from managed honey bees, or if feral stocks are escapees from nearby managed colonies. To answer this question, we conducted whole-genome re-sequencing on five managed stocks from across the United States and three known feral populations. We found that feral and managed stocks are closely related on the mitochondrial level, but whole genome sequencing reveals significant differences in genetic differentiation and ancestry.

A Tale of Two Stocks; Variance in chalkbrood symptoms between domestic honey bee (Apis mellifera) stocks
Walsh E1, Paillard M2, Giovenazzo P2, Pernal S1
1Beaverlodge Research Farm, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada; 2Centre de Recherche en Sciences Animales de Deschambault
Chalkbrood is a common fungal disease that affects honey bee (Apis mellifera) brood, and is caused by the cosmopolitan heterothallic fungus, Ascosphaera apis. Chalkbrood can cause serious economic damage to beekeeping operations, particularly when colonies are already stressed. There are no chemical treatments registered for chalkbrood disease control in Canada or the USA, and as such, prevention and control of the disease must be achieved through best management practices. Because A. apis spores are common and the active fungus may be asymptomatic, it can be difficult for beekeepers to know the prevalence of the disease in their colonies or beekeeping operation. Consequently, the use of highly-resistant honey bee stocks capable of mitigating chalkbrood infections are critical to prevent significant disease outbreaks, such as those reported by Canadian beekeepers during blueberry and cranberry pollination. We assessed social immunity traits—namely propolis production and hygienic behaviour—in various stocks of bees and determined their effect on chalkbrood expression. Our results indicate variability in chalkbrood symptoms across stock types. Hygienic behaviour differed between both stocks, with our Quebec stock averaging 84.03%+/- 3.9% and our Albertan stock averaging 69.48%+/-4.35%. However, neither propolis envelope nor hygienic behaviour were affected by disease status in this experiment.

Don’t put all your honey on one stock: The role of genetics in virus and mite resistance
Cambron LD, Underwood RM, Given JK, Harpur BA, López-Uribe MM
The Pennsylvania State University; Purdue University
Honey bee viruses impact individual and colony health, and can be difficult to treat within and between colonies. One approach for fighting pathogens is to actively select for resistance traits. However, while several genetic stocks are available, there is a need for data-driven recommendations based on stock performance so beekeepers can make informed decisions about which stocks to introduce into their operations. To measure intra-colony variation and compare genetic stocks, we tested colonies from one of 10 apiaries located in Pennsylvania that were requeened in June (40 queens per stock) in a blind study where neither the beekeepers nor the molecular biologist had information about the origin of the stocks. Preliminary data shows a strong effect of colony on viral genes, and a significant  difference between genetic stocks for expression levels of Deformed Wing Virus, Black Queen Cell Virus, and expression of the mite biting gene neurexin. These findings show a difference in virus and grooming genes between genetic stocks. Further analysis of the remaining colonies will provide detailed information on stock performance which will help beekeepers obtain healthier bees, best suited for the operation, and decrease colony and profit losses.

The grooming behavior between European Honey Bees and Asian Honey Bees
Belton H1, Luo S2, and Li-Byarlay H1,3
1Department of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Central State University, 2Institution for Apicultural Research, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Science, 3Agricultural Research and Development Program, Central State University
The grooming behavior of honey bees is one of beneficial traits for breeding. Worker bees can perform either auto-grooming individually or allo-grooming as a group in a colony. High levels of grooming can help to remove mites (Varroa destructor) from the body of worker bees. Asian honey bees (AHB, Apis cerana) as original hosts of Varroa mites may display a higher level of grooming behavior than European honey bees (EHB, Apis mellifera). But it is unknown whether the foster environment affects the grooming behavior when workers of one species are placed in the colony of the other species. Hence, we designed two experiments using colored fluorescent powders to induce grooming behavior and observed the 8-day old worker bees. In the first experiment, results showed that AHB workers spent more time on allo-grooming as a group than EHB workers, which is consistent with previous reports. In our second experiment of foster environment, interestingly, the environmental change in the colony level affected the auto- and allo-grooming behavior of workers in both species after they were placed in the foster colonies. These results show that both genetics and environment may affect the grooming behavior of honey bees.

Beekeeping Management, Education and Outreach

Thinking inside the box: building beehives that stimulate propolis collection and support honey bee health
Shanahan M, Simone-Finstrom M, Spivak M
Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota
Wild honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies coat the rough inner surfaces of hollow tree cavities with propolis, a substance comprised primarily of plant resins. The resulting “propolis envelope” serves both structural and therapeutic functions inside the hive. Previous studies have shown that the presence of a propolis envelope leads to both individual and colony-level health benefits through the modulation of immune gene expression and increased colony strength. However, the smooth surfaces of the standardized wooden bee boxes currently used in beekeeping do little to stimulate bees to build a propolis envelope. As such, propolis has yet to be implemented as a tool to boost colony health in real-world beekeeping operations. In this study, we compared multiple hive textures for their ability to stimulate propolis deposition in stationary and migratory beekeeping contexts. We then examined effects on immune gene expression, colony health, and honey production. Our results provide support for the implementation of rough box hives as a means to stimulate propolis collection and support colony health in both stationary and migratory beekeeping contexts.

Times they are a’ changin’ – A decade of documenting changes in beekeeping practices
Steinhauer N, Wilson M, Fauvel AM, vanEngelsdorp D
University of Maryland, Department of Entomology
A principle aim of the Bee Informed Partnership (BIP) is to monitor the health of U.S. managed honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies. We do this through various citizen science programs including survey and active field sampling. The Annual Colony Loss Survey taught us that between dead-outs and the combining and splitting of colonies, the average turnover – or “loss” – of colonies in a calendar year is 40% (Bruckner et al. 2021). The risk of colony loss varies by season, operation type, year, and region, but also according to the management practices beekeepers use (Steinhauer et al. 2021). Honey bees face many stressors, but good management offers a chance to prevent or rectify some of them. Survey results indicate that management of the ectoparasitic mite Varroa (Varroa destructor) in particular is associated with very different outcomes (Haber et al. 2019). BIP also employs effectiveness trials (pragmatic trials) using our networks of both backyard and commercial beekeepers to estimate the effect of different practices under “real world” conditions. However not all beekeepers are as likely to employ Varroa management (Thoms et al. 2018). Still, a decade of survey points to some encouraging shifts in beekeeper’s practice, possibly the result of extensive extension efforts.

Spotted lanternfly honeydew honey: a unique new varietal from an introduced invasive insect
Underwood RM, Zhu F, Urban J
The Pennsylvania State University
The spotted lanternfly (Lycorma delicatula; SLF) is an introduced planthopper from Asia that was discovered in the U.S. in Pennsylvania in 2014 and has since spread to several other states. This invasive species feeds on phloem and excretes copious amounts of honeydew, which is attractive to honey bees (Apis mellifera). Control measures include application of the systemic insecticides dinotefuran and imidacloprid to SLF adults’ preferred host, tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima). Lanternflies feed on treated trees and, thus, can produce honeydew that contains pesticide residues, exposing non-target insects to these insecticides. Additionally, lanternflies feeding on tree-of-heaven as adults sequester the quassinoid ailanthone, which is known to impart a bitter taste in components of tree-of-heaven. If SLF honeydew contains this substance, it could explain the unusual taste of the honey that is being produced in SLF-infested areas. We have determined that the presence of SLF, and its associated chemical controls are leading to production of honeydew-based honey that can contain dinotefuran metabolites, imidacloprid, and ailanthone. However, contaminants have not been detected at levels of concern for honey bee or human health. As SLF have spread, so have reports of this distinct honey, so beekeepers should be made aware of this association.

Can irradiated royal jelly be used to rear Apis mellifera in vitro?
Standley JM, Ellis JD
University of Florida- Department of Entomology & Nematology – Honey Bee Research & Extension Laboratory
The ability to rear Apis mellifera workers in vitro is an important method used to study the effects of pesticides, nutrition, hormones, etc. on bee development. In this assay, bee larvae feed on an artificial diet that includes royal jelly (RJ) often sourced internationally, raising concerns about pathogen spread. These concerns may be mitigated by irradiating the RJ prior to use, though this could affect RJ’s value in an artificial diet. The purpose of our study was to determine if A. mellifera can be reared in vitro on a diet containing RJ irradiated at 25 kGy. Twelve-hour-old larvae were collected from eleven colonies and fed a diet containing untreated RJ, irradiated RJ, or an irradiation control. Statistically fewer larvae survived to adulthood when fed irradiated RJ (71%) than when fed untreated RJ (85%) or the irradiation control (78%). Feeding on irradiated RJ did not affect bee developmental time, though weight at emergence was reduced over that of the control group. Our data demonstrate that A. mellifera workers can be reared on a diet that includes irradiated RJ, but that additional diet refinements may be necessary to improve survival of these individuals to levels experienced by larvae feeding on untreated diet.

BIP Bites; BIP Tech Transfer Team Teasers
Fauvel AM, Steinhauer N, Wilson M
Bee Informed Partnership – University of Maryland
The Bee Informed Partnership (BIP) Tech Transfer Team provides inspecting, diagnosing, sampling, reporting and consulting services to commercial beekeepers across the U.S. A decade after establishing the first Tech Team region, we can tease out some interesting data regarding consistently lower Varroa, and higher Nosema loads and prevalence in BIP Tech Team beekeeper participants compared to the APHIS National average, as well as significant increases in honey bee hygienic behavior scores in California queen breeders. In addition to Tech Team regular services, the honey bee health field specialists conduct real-world condition field trials with our vast commercial operation network in collaboration with a variety of beekeeping industry stakeholders. From indoor wintering studies, to testing effectiveness of products such as probiotics and miticides, field evaluation of new genetic honey bee lines and surveying Varroa-vectored viruses across the nation, the Bee Informed Partnership Tech Transfer Team will share a few preliminary results.

How does learning environment affect knowledge and adoption of Varroa IPM?
Bruckner S, Mahood J, Steinhauer N, Wilson M, Williams GR
Auburn University
U.S. beekeepers commonly cite the ectoparasitic Varroa mite (Varroa destructor) as a major threat to their honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies. However, many beekeepers do not implement existing field-tested Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices recommended by extension agents and scientists, possibly because existing information resources are not aligned with their preferred learning environment. This study aimed to: 1)assess how two learning environments affect beekeeper knowledge gain and behavior change concerning Varroa IPM, and 2)identify their preferred information resources. To achieve this, we recruited beekeepers from the Southeast U.S., half of which experienced a fully online learning environment, whereas the other half engaged in an in-person experience. We found that both learning environments resulted in short term knowledge gain, but more in-person participants intend to change their behavior concerning Best Management Practices in Varroa IPM. This aligned to beekeeper preferred learning environments − attending classes and instructed workshops. Furthermore, beekeepers predominantly sought information from their clubs and fellow beekeepers through informal discussions. These insights are useful in promoting knowledge gain and behavior change by small-scale beekeepers via tailored information resources and educational opportunities.

A Bee’s Eye View of Apiary Inspection: Updates on Honey Bee Health from the Apiary Inspectors of America (AIA)
Skyrm K
Apiary Inspectors of America/Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources
Apiary Inspectors and Apiary Programs are the regulatory authority for enforcing the laws and regulations of certain honey bee pests, parasites and pathogens. Given this, inspectors are responsible for monitoring and ensuring honey bee health by conducting field visits to apiaries where they inspect, identify, diagnose, and provide recommendations for treatment of issues. Apiary Programs are dynamic, often with inspectors also serving as educators, researchers, state fair superintendents, and coordinators for other-bee related activities such as Managed Pollinator Protection Plans (MP3). This presentation will provide information on how researchers can work with Apiary Inspectors as well as updates on member and organizational efforts from the past year along with inspection data and observed trends related to honey bee health.

Pesticides and Acaricides

Pesticide risk during apple pollination differs between honey bees and native wild bees
Mueller T, Zhao C, Sossa D, Baert N, McArt S.
Department of Entomology, Cornell University
Bees in agricultural systems are exposed to a wide variety of chemicals, many of which are highly toxic and have been linked to pollinator declines. Little work, however, has looked at how bee taxa differ in their levels of pesticide exposure and resulting risk during crop pollination. We collected five bee taxa across 20 New York apple orchards during bloom, including managed honey bees (Apis mellifera) and bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), wild bumblebee queens (B. impatiens), wild ground-nesting bees (Andrena sp. and Melandrena sp.), and wild wood-nesting bees (Xylocopa virginica). All bees were quantified for 93 common pesticides using HPLC-MS/MS. We found that bee taxa differed in the quantity and composition of pesticides they harbored with honey bees having the greatest risk from exposure. We assessed which pesticides were driving risk in each of the bee taxa surveyed, as well as if the landscape and crops surrounding the orchard were a driver of pesticide exposure and risk for different bees.

Pesticide risk to honey bees and native bees in sweet cherry production of Oregon
Carlson E, Sagili R, Melathopoulos A
Oregon State University
Apis mellifera L. colonies in agricultural environments may stray from a crop and forage on wild plants and other nearby food sources. This leads to a complex pesticide risk profile that includes the products applied to the crop and the potential for honey bees to be exposed to chemicals applied to other attractive plants within their foraging radius. When a diverse pollen sample is tested for pesticides, it is difficult to ascertain where the chemicals originated in the landscape. While a test of the composite sample provides a holistic view of pesticide exposure over a given period, it does not allow scientists and land managers to identify high-risk areas of the landscape. In this study, we investigate pesticide risk to honey bees in sweet cherry fields. Twelve cherry orchard sites were sampled for pollen at early and peak bloom; samples were analyzed for over 250 pesticide residues. We then sorted composite pollen samples into each species and identified the major plant species within each color of pollen. These sorted samples were tested again for pesticides and compared to the original composite test, allowing identification of the plant species which disproportionately contribute pesticide risk to the composite sample.

An evaluation of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) worker behaviors when exposed to a pesticide-contaminated environment
Tokach R, Smart A, Wu-Smart J
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Honey bees exhibit age polyethism and thus have a predictable sequence of behaviors they express through developmental time. Pesticide exposure can lead to behavioral acceleration, resulting in younger workers transitioning to performing more risky colony tasks, including precocious foraging. This, in turn, can lead to an imbalance in the number of workers performing colony tasks and eventual colony failure. This research examines the relationship between environmental pesticide exposure and colony failure by observing the task-specific behaviors of worker honey bees in observation hives. More specifically, this study assessed potential changes in behaviors of similarly aged workers within two treatment groups: 1)colonies located near point-source pesticide pollution, and 2)colonies embedded within a typical agricultural environment (control). Cohorts of newly emerged sister workers were routinely paint-marked and randomly incorporated into separate treatment hives to establish similar population structures that contained a range of age-marked individuals from newly emerged workers to older foragers. In 2021, worker bee tasks were monitored and assessed on a total of eight colonies three times a week for a month to determine potential impacts of pesticide-contaminated environments on worker performance and age-specific tasks critical for normal colony functions.

Toxicity of Spray Adjuvants and Tank Mix Combinations to Adult Honey Bees
Shannon B, Walker E, Johnson R
The Ohio State University
Spray adjuvants are a diverse group of agrochemicals that are added to pesticide tank mixes to improve the function of spray application. There is concern that significant honey bee colony losses that are reported during and after almond bloom in California are related to adjuvant and pesticide exposure during almond pollination. The aim of this research was to determine if adjuvants and field-relevant mixtures of adjuvants and pesticides applied during almond bloom can cause increased mortality in adult worker honey bees exposed to simulated spray applications. This study established the acute toxicity, expressed as LC50, of different adjuvants and adjuvant tank-mix combinations. Spray application was performed using a Potter Spray Tower on 3-day-eclosed adult worker honey bees. Tested adjuvants included Dyne-Amic, Kinetic, Surf-90, Induce, Cohere, Liberate, Activator 90, Nu Film P, LI 700, Choice, Latron B, and Attach; tested fungicides included Pristine, Tilt, Vanguard, and Luna Sensations; and tested insecticides included Intrepid. Results showed substantial bee toxicity of some adjuvants applied alone at field relevant levels. Results also showed a trend in increased toxicity of some adjuvants when applied as a tank mix with some pesticides. There is evidence that the toxicity of an adjuvant is related to a relatively higher application rate recommended on the label.

Novel method for Varroa destructor management: utilizing worker brood to control mite populations in honey bee colonies
Reams T, Rangel J
Texas A&M University
Parasitization of Apis mellifera by the mite Varroa destructor is one of the main causes for the decline of honey bee health worldwide. To reproduce, a female mite enters the comb cell of a bee larva before it is capped, undergoes development and reproduction within the cell, and exits the cell as the bee emerges. Varroa mites have shown a preference for invading drone cells during the reproductive phase, but will invade worker cells throughout the year, as the population of mites within a hive escalates. A mechanical method for mite control is the removal of capped drone brood, but this can only be done when drone larvae are widely present in the hive. Our study involves the manipulation of nurse bee visitations of worker cells by starving worker brood for several hours. We then measured the mites’ invasion rates of starved and non-starved (untreated) worker brood. Our results show that starved worker brood have increased mite invasion compared to non-starved worker brood. These results show that starved worker brood could be more attractive to Varroa mites, and could be used as a potential control method throughout the summer, when drone larvae are not widely present in the colony.

Predicting the long-term effects of metal pollutants on the honey bee colony: A comparison of modeling approaches
Ricke D, Johnson R
The Ohio State University
Honey bees are regularly exposed to metals in the environment. Unlike pesticides, metals never break down, allowing them to accumulate in colonies over time. In contrast, our understanding of the effects of metals on honey bees is based on relatively brief laboratory assays. Consequently, there’s interest in modeling approaches that can leverage short-term toxicological data collected from individuals to predict the cumulative effects of metals and other toxic substances on whole colonies. For the present study, we compare two approaches for predicting the long-term effects of metals on honey bees: a “traditional” approach based on dose-response curves and a state-of-the-art model of survival (the General Unified Thresholds Model of Survival, GUTS). Specifically, we compare how well each approach predicts the results of 20-day chronic toxicity assays using data from standard (10-day) assays. We then compare the predictions of each approach in the background of a preexisting colony population model. We’ve found that GUTS outperformed the traditional approach for two metals (Cd and Li) when predicting 20-day survival in the lab. Results were equivocal for a third metal (Zn). In addition, GUTS tended to predict lower rates of colony population growth under exposure to metals. These results indicate that prevailing approaches for predicting toxic effects may underestimate effects that accumulate over time.

Efficacy of new compounds against Varroa destructor and their safety to honey bees (Apis mellifera)
Jack C, Kleckner K, Demares F, Rault L, Anderson T, Carlier P, Bloomquist J, Ellis J
University of Florida
Acaricides used to control Varroa destructor are becoming increasingly ineffective due to resistance issues, prompting the need for new compounds that can be used by beekeepers. Ideally, such compounds would be highly toxic to Varroa while maintaining a relatively low toxicity to bees. We characterized the lethal concentrations (LC50) of amitraz, matrine, FlyNap®, carbamate 421, carbamate 408 and dimethoate (positive control) for Varroa using a glass vial assay. Additionally, the test compounds were applied to honey bees using an acute contact toxicity assay to determine the adult bee LD50 for each compound. Amitraz was the most toxic compound to Varroa, but carbamate 421 was nearly as toxic (within 2-fold) and the most selective due to its low bee toxicity, demonstrating its promise as a Varroa control. While carbamate 408 was less toxic to honey bees than amitraz, it was also 4.7-fold less toxic to the mites. Matrine was relatively non-toxic to honey bees, but also not effective against Varroa. FlyNap® was ineffective at killing Varroa and was moderately toxic to honey bees. Additional Tier 2 and Tier 3 testing is required to determine if carbamate 421 can be safely used as a Varroa control in honey bee colonies.

The causes of variability in honey bee residual toxicity tests
Swanson L, Bucy M, Melathopoulos A
Oregon State University
Residual toxicity statements on pesticide labels are informed by tests, whereby treated foliage is harvested at specified intervals of weathering to determine whether honey bee contact with this foliage results in mortality (EPA Ecological Guidance 850.3030). The information is of considerable importance to both beekeepers and pesticide applicators to determine whether toxic products sprayed at dusk would dissipate by the following morning. I completed a meta-analysis of 31 papers consisting of 1,299 individual residual toxicity trials of 136 insecticide active ingredients. I estimated the residual toxicity for each active ingredient by calculating RT25 (i.e., weathering time taken for cage mortality to be reduced to 25%) and determined sources of variation in experimental protocols that influenced RT25 values. I reported on discrepancies in RT25 values calculated from the literature compared to values recently published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I investigated whether discrepancies were the product of variation in the parameters of the test. I found that the age of bees used in test cages (R2= – 0.48) were associated with bee mortality and may be responsible for discrepancies from EPA results.

Apple orchards feed and contaminate bees during, but even more so after bloom
Steele T, Schürch R, Couvillon M
Honey bees provide vital pollination services to many crops such as apples. Previous studies have focused on the impact of bees on orchards during bloom, but fewer studies have examined the reciprocal relationship of orchards on honey bees, particularly across the entire foraging season. We investigated honey bee foraging in orchards in Northern Virginia by mapping 3,710 waggle dances across two years concurrent with pesticides analysis on the forager collected pollen. We found that bees foraged mostly locally (< 2 km), with some long-range events occurring in May after bloom (both 2018 and 2019) and in Fall (2019). The shortest communicated median distances (0.50 km and 0.53 km) occurred in September in both years. We determined that honey bees forage more within apple orchards after the bloom (29.4% an 28.5% foraging) compared to during bloom (18.6% and 21.4% foraging). This post bloom foraging also exposed honey bees to the highest cumulative concentration of pesticides compared to other times (2322.89 ppb pesticides versus 181.8 during bloom, 569.84 in late Summer, and 246.24 in Fall). Therefore, post bloom apple orchards supply an abundance of forage, but also the highest risk of pesticide exposure, which may have important implications for future management decisions.