Ingredients
□ 1¾ cups all-purpose flour
□ ½ cup whole wheat or graham flour
□ 1 tsp baking powder
□ ¼ tsp baking soda
□ ¼ tsp salt
□ ¼ cup (½ stick) butter or margarine, melted
□ ⅓ cup honey
□ 1 tsp vanilla extract
□ 1 egg yolk, lightly beaten
□ ¼ cup nonfat milk
□ 1 (8 oz) package Neufchatel or reduced-fat cream cheese
□ ¼ cup honey
□ 3 cups assorted sliced or whole fresh fruits
□ Toasted coconut or granola
□ Optional honey or chocolate syrup

Crust Directions
Step 1
Preheat oven to 375°F.

Step 2
In a large bowl, combine flours, baking powder, baking soda and salt. Mix well.

Step 3
In a small bowl, mix together melted butter, honey and vanilla. Stir into the flour mixture.

Step 4
Stir in egg yolk and milk.

Step 5
Form into a ball with hands.

Step 6
Place on a lightly greased pizza pan or baking sheet.

Step 7
With floured hands, press dough to form a 12-inch circle.

Step 8
Bake at 375°F for 12 to 15 minutes or until golden brown.

Step 9
Remove from pan. Cool on wire rack.

Topping Directions
In a small bowl, combine Neufchatel cheese and honey. Mix until well blended.

Serving Directions
Step 1
Spread topping onto crust to within ½ inch of edge.

Step 2
Arrange fruit over top.

Step 3
Sprinkle with toasted coconut and drizzle with honey, if desired.

The study found that climate conditions and soil productivity — the ability of soil to support crops based on its physical, chemical and biological properties — were some of the most important factors in estimating honey yields. Credit: Arwin Neil Baichoo/Unsplash. All Rights Reserved.

By Katie Bohn

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — Honey yields in the U.S. have been declining since the 1990s, with honey producers and scientists unsure why, but a new study by Penn State researchers has uncovered clues in the mystery of the missing honey.

Using five decades of data from across the U.S., the researchers analyzed the potential factors and mechanisms that might be affecting the number of flowers growing in different regions — and, by extension, the amount of honey produced by honey bees.

The study, recently published in the journal Environmental Research, found that changes in honey yields over time were connected to herbicide application and land use, such as fewer land conservation programs that support pollinators. Annual weather anomalies also contributed to changes in yields.

The data, pulled from several open-source databases including those operated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service and USDA Farm Service Agency, included such information as average honey yield per honey bee colony, land use, herbicide use, climate, weather anomalies and soil productivity in the continental United States.

Overall, researchers found that climate conditions and soil productivity — the ability of soil to support crops based on its physical, chemical and biological properties — were some of the most important factors in estimating honey yields. States in both warm and cool regions produced higher honey yields when they had productive soils.

The eco-regional soil and climate conditions set the baseline levels of honey production, while changes in land use, herbicide use and weather influenced how much is produced in a given year, the researchers summarized.

Gabriela Quinlan, the lead author on the study and a National Science Foundation (NSF) postdoctoral research fellow in Penn State’s Department of Entomology and Center for Pollinator Research, said she was inspired to conduct the study after attending beekeeper meetings and conferences and repeatedly hearing the same comment: You just can’t make honey like you used to.

According to Quinlan, climate became increasingly tied to honey yields in the data after 1992.

“It’s unclear how climate change will continue to affect honey production, but our findings may help to predict these changes,” Quinlan said. “For example, pollinator resources may decline in the Great Plains as the climate warms and becomes more moderate, while resources may increase in the mid-Atlantic as conditions become hotter.”

Co-author on the paper Christina Grozinger, Publius Vergilius Maro Professor of Entomology and director of the Center for Pollinator Research, said that while scientists previously knew that many factors influence flowering plant abundance and flower production, prior studies were conducted in only one region of the U.S.

“What’s really unique about this study is that we were able to take advantage of 50 years of data from across the continental U.S.,” she said. “This allowed us to really investigate the role of soil, eco-regional climate conditions, annual weather variation, land use and land management practices on the availability of nectar for honey bees and other pollinators.”

One of the biggest stressors to pollinators is a lack of flowers to provide enough pollen and nectar for food, according to the researchers. Because different regions can support different flowering plants depending on climate and soil characteristics, they said there is growing interest in identifying regions and landscapes with enough flowers to make them bee friendly.

“A lot of factors affect honey production, but a main one is the availability of flowers,” she said. “Honey bees are really good foragers, collecting nectar from a variety of flowering plants and turning that nectar into honey. I was curious that if beekeepers are seeing less honey, does that mean there are fewer floral resources available to pollinators overall? And if so, what environmental factors were causing this change?”

For Quinlan, one of the most exciting findings was the importance of soil productivity, which she said is an under-explored factor in analyzing how suitable different landscapes are for pollinators. While many studies have examined the importance of nutrients in the soil, less work has been done on how soil characteristics like temperature, texture, structure — properties that help determine productivity — affect pollinator resources.

The researchers also found that decreases in soybean land and increases in Conservation Reserve Program land, a national conservation program that has been shown to support pollinators, both resulted in positive effects on honey yields.

Herbicide application rates were also important in predicting honey yields, potentially because removing flowering weeds can reduce nutritional sources available to bees.

“Our findings provide valuable insights that can be applied to improve models and design experiments to enable beekeepers to predict honey yields, growers to understand pollination services, and land managers to support plant–pollinator communities and ecosystem services,” Quinlan said.

To learn more about the land use, floral resources and weather in specific areas, visit the Beescape tool on the Center for Pollinator Research website.

David A.W. Miller, associate professor of wildlife population ecology, was also a co-author on the study.

The NSF Postdoctoral Research Fellowship in Biology Program and the USDA National Institute Food and Agriculture’s Pollinator Health Program and Data Science for Food and Agricultural Systems Programs helped support this research.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: Why are bees making less honey? Study reveals clues in five decades of data | Penn State University (psu.edu)

Links:

Zoom: https://auburn.zoom.us/j/904522838

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LawrenceCountyextension/

Email: ams0137@aces.edu

The bustling aisles of a grocery store offer rows upon rows of food to choose from. In this space, the freedom of choice appears endless, though insight into where and how exactly a product originates may not be as readily available. Peering beyond the confines of the supermarket’s shelves can reveal the scope of this journey, all the way from pollination to plate.

Across the globe, a little over one-third of food crops and plants are dependent on pollinators for reproduction, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It’s estimated that approximately one out of every three bites of food individuals consume exist because of such animals and insects — from birds to butterflies, bats and especially bees.

“A large portion of our crops are pollinated by insect pollinators, whether it’s watermelons, cantaloupes, cucumbers, different berry crops and so on,” said Timothy Coolong, a professor in the University of Georgia’s department of horticulture and the program coordinator of Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education. “So not only are they critical for environmental health, but we will not have a crop to sell if we don’t have pollinators.”

Despite the significant impact they have on food production, the landscape and its inhabitants, these insects often go unnoticed. UGA Honey Bee Program lab manager Jennifer Berry attributes this disparity not to ignorance, but simply to a lack of public knowledge when it comes to “how important they are for pollination.”

However, through local beekeepers’ involvement within and across their communities, this knowledge rift is slowly closing. From raising small bee colonies for farmers to purchase in the spring to selling honey at markets, over the past 18 years, Abby’s Apiary has contributed to bridging the gap in food trust and transparency.

Hutchinson poses for a portrait in his backyard workshop in Watkinsville, Georgia, on Oct. 24, 2023. Pictured behind him are the wooden bee boxes he makes. (Photo/Skyli Alvarez)

“[Bees] are one of the very few creatures you can keep that you don’t have to feed,” said David Hutchinson, founder of Abby’s Apiary. “They actually feed you.”

Hutchinson was first introduced to beekeeping when he was a freshman in college. He lived with his great uncle at the time, who laid the foundation for his knowledge and interest in the activity. Though Hutchinson took time away from it for several years, after his first child was born, he decided to revive his beekeeping endeavors, return to his very first honeybee hives and launch Abby’s Apiary, named after his daughter.

For Hutchinson, beekeeping is restorative and recentering.

“I just enjoy beekeeping,” Hutchinson said. “Thankfully, the business side takes care of itself, because there are enough people out there [who] want local honey.”

Abby’s Apiary regularly participates in the Oconee Farmers Market each year by selling honey, and the demand for this versatile condiment is evident. In the Southeast, Georgia is one of the top producers of honey, bringing nearly $9 million into the economy, according to USDA’s 2022 Honey Production Survey.

Florida and Georgia make up more than half off the southeast’s production value for honey. (Source: USDA)

The leading two honey producing colonies in the southeast are Florida and Georgia. (Source: USDA)

Along with Georgia’s substantial honey production, an interest in beekeeping persists. When Hutchinson sells his small colonies each spring, he looks forward to meeting customers, new and old, ranging from gardeners, to farmers and newcomers just beginning to familiarize themselves with backyard beekeeping. As opposed to previous years, “among the general public, there’s a lot more attention paid now to providing pollinators habitats,” Coolong notes.

“There’s been a real blossoming of beekeeping, and I love that, being a beekeeper myself,” Berry said. “The only problem I see is, when we have a lot of people doing something, is there going to be an impact?”

According to Berry, the rise of amateur beekeeping that she, Coolong and Hutchinson note has come in response to colony collapse disorder. This phenomenon occurs when much of a colony’s worker bee population disappears, leaving behind the queen and little else. Berry explains how the disorder can be attributed to viruses brought about by parasitic, invasive mites. A notable instance of this observance took place in 2006 and 2007, affecting bee colonies in over 20 U.S. states. Since then, colony collapse disorder’s impact on colony loss has decreased, though the issue of colony loss remains.

As per Berry, the solution to this disorder is reflective of “the state of [the] industry” at large, ultimately lying in the hands of bigger commercial operations with tens of thousands of colonies. However, this does not mean that independent and amateur beekeepers have no impact on their communities.

“I think one of the challenges with beekeeping is just staying knowledgeable as to what is happening with new diseases or pests,” Hutchinson said. “Management techniques are evolving, [but] if you just say ‘this is the way I’m going to do it’ and you do it that way forever, you may not succeed as a beekeeper.”

When it comes to colony loss, he expresses the importance of continually remaining “connected to research” and the beekeeping community, both of which have helped him prevent infestations of pests and sustain his bees’ wellbeing.

“Every time I walk into a grocery store and I see all of that fruit and all of those vegetables, I’m like, ‘thank God for bees,’” Berry said. “They are responsible for the nutritious food that we eat and the color in our diet.”

Skyli Alvarez and Melanie Velasquez are seniors majoring in journalism at the University of Georgia.

To access the complete article go to; From Pollination to Plate, Bees and Beekeeping Play an Irreplaceable Role in Food Production — Grady Newsource (uga.edu)

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: From Pollination to Plate, Bees and Beekeeping Play an Irreplaceable Role in Food Production — Grady Newsource (uga.edu) 

Trisiloxane Surfactants Negatively Affect Reproductive Behaviors and Enhance Viral Replication in Honey Bees

Julia D. Fine, Diana L. Cox-Foster, Kyle J. Moor, Ruiwen Chen, Arian Avalos

https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5771

Abstract

Trisiloxane surfactants are often applied in formulated adjuvant products to blooming crops, including almonds, exposing the managed honey bees (Apis mellifera) used for pollination of these crops and persisting in colony matrices, such as bee bread. Despite this, little is known regarding the effects of trisiloxane surfactants on important aspects of colony health, such as reproduction. In the present study, we use laboratory assays to examine how exposure to field-relevant concentrations of three trisiloxane surfactants found in commonly used adjuvant formulations affect queen oviposition rates, worker interactions with the queen, and worker susceptibility to endogenous viral pathogens. Trisiloxane surfactants were administered at 5 mg/kg in pollen supplement diet for 14 days. No effects on worker behavior or physiology could be detected, but our results demonstrate that hydroxy-capped trisiloxane surfactants can negatively affect queen oviposition and methyl-capped trisiloxane surfactants cause increased replication of Deformed Wing Virus in workers, suggesting that trisiloxane surfactant use while honey bees are foraging may negatively impact colony longevity and growth. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;43:222–233. © 2023 SETAC. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: Trisiloxane Surfactants Negatively Affect Reproductive Behaviors and Enhance Viral Replication in Honey Bees – Fine – 2024 – Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry – Wiley Online Library

• USDA Agricultural Research Service

Honey bees survive winters in cold climates by forming a thermoregulating cluster around the honey stored in the colony. Recent research showed overwintering colony losses are linked to a specific metabolic pathway connected to how bees apportion their energy resources.  Contributed

Agricultural Research Service scientists and their Chinese colleagues have recently identified a specific metabolic pathway that controls how honey bees apportion their body’s resources such as energy and immune response in reaction to stresses such as winter’s cold temperatures, according to recently published research.

That cellular pathway has the strongest connection yet found to the large overwintering colony losses that have been plaguing honey bees and causing so much concern among beekeepers, and farmers, especially almond producers, during the past 15 years, said entomologist Yanping “Judy” Chen, who led the study. She is with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service’s Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland.

The “signaling” pathway governs the increased and decreased synthesis of the protein SIRT1, one of a family of proteins that help regulate cellular lifespan, metabolism and metabolic health, and resistance to stress.

“In honey bees merely exposed to a cold challenge of 28 degrees Celsius for five days, we saw almost three-fold lower levels of SIRT1 and significantly higher levels of colony mortality compared to bees maintained at 34 to 35 degrees Celsius, which is the optimal core temperature of a honey bee cluster inside a bee hive in winter,” Chen said.

The researchers also found that bees under cold stress were associated with an increased risk of disease infections, which in turn led to an increased likelihood of colony losses.

When honey bee colonies were inoculated with the intracellular microsporidia parasite Nosema ceranae, and kept at 34 degrees Celsius, they had a survival rate of 41.18 percent while the mortality rate of the colonies exposed to the cold stress of 28 degrees Celsius for five days was 100 percent.

“So that showed it is primarily cold stress that the SIRT1 signaling pathway is responding to rather than pathogens,” Chen said. “Our study suggests that the increased energy overwintering bees use to maintain hive temperature reduces the energy available for immune functions, which would leave overwintering bees more susceptible to disease infections, all leading to higher winter colony losses.”

Chen points out that research also offers a promising avenue for new therapeutic strategies to mitigate overwintering and annual colony losses. One way could be by increasing the production of the SIRT1 protein by treating honey bees with SRT1720, a specific SIRT1 gene activator being experimentally used as an anti-inflammatory and anti-cancer treatment.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: Metabolic pathway discovered (agupdate.com)

Fig. 1. A 3D model of CPI (Intelligent Collector of Propolis) (Breyer, 2016)
Notes: A – case for stacking the collector; B – Intelligent Collector of Propolis; C – insert board for closing the hole in the case

Propolis is a sticky resinous substance collected from the buds, leaves and stems of wild plants and processed by bees, which has bactericidal properties and is used by bees to seal cracks in a hive, polish walls of wax cells and embalm corpses of enemies (mice, reptiles, etc.) (DSTU 4662, 2006). The sources of propolis are plants from which honey bees collect resin. However, not all plants that secrete resin are sources of propolis. The physical properties of plant resin, accessibility to bees, and anatomical features of a honey bee exoskeleton underlie the hypothesis of plant selection for propolis collection (Langenheim, 2003; Salatino and Salatino, M. L. F., 2017). In the mild climate zone Ukraine belongs to, honey bees collect plant resins mainly from Populus nigra L., Populus tremula L. and Betula pubescens L., which determines chemical and physical properties of the yield. Subsequently, bees bring plant resins to the nest and use them to seal cracks or to build their structures (Isidorov et al., 2016; Przybyłek and Karpiński, 2019).

Using the bees’ instincts to seal cracks in the nest, protect the nest from pests and the need to maintain the microclimate of the bee nest at the proper level, beekeepers collect propolis in industrial volumes mainly in two ways. The first one is to modify walls of hives and use collectors, and the second is to place nets (grids) over the honey bee nest (Breyer, 2016; Tsagkarakis et al., 2017).

Fig. 2. Green propolis obtained in Brazil (photo by the author, 2022)

In countries with a tropical climate, where the outside temperature resembles the microclimate of the bee nest, propolis collectors are placed on holes in the outer walls of hives (Fig. 1, 2).

Placement of this type of collector implies that products (honey, pollen) will not be taken from bee families. The presence of food in the nest helps to increase productivity of the bee family. Another important technological aspect is that propolis apiaries migrate to areas rich in plant sources of propolis. It should be noted that such a method as moving to propolis sources is not used in mild climate zones.

Today, according to the state register, there are 54,406 beekeeping households in Ukraine with 2,579,453 bee colonies. Since registration is voluntary, these figures are not final. There are two ways to collect propolis in Ukraine: the first is to clean the nest elements (frames, parts of the hive, etc.) with a beekeeper’s chisel; the second is to place elastic nets or plastic grids over the honey bee nest in the hives. The first method mentioned of extracting propolis is unproductive and outdated and yields in a small amount of propolis, which is mainly contaminated with wood splinters and parts of bee bodies. Such propolis is used for personal and technical needs. The second method, which uses special collection equipment, such as elastic nets and plastic grids, is more productive for big apiaries. At the same time, obtaining 300-500 nets or grids covered with propolis on a farm requires their cleaning. The lack of equipment to automate the process of nets or grids cleaning of propolis and the use of manual labor lead to higher product prices, lower quality and unprofitable production. The use of manual labor to clean propolis may be accompanied by a violation of sanitary and hygienic conditions due to the human factor.

Fig. 3. Experimental 3D model of a device for collecting propolis.
Notes: 1 – a set of gears; 2 – lower and upper pair of shafts, protrusions of which fit one-to-one; 3 – an electric motor; 4 – a hole for inserting nets with propolis; 5 – an outlet; 6 – an electric cable; 7 – a switch; 8 – a protective chamber; 9 – a power cable compartment; 10 – a metal frame

As part of our dissertation research on “Scientific and technical support of the process and equipment for propolis production” at the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine in 2020-2023, we designed, manufactured and tested a device for cleaning propolis-coated elastic nets (Fig. 3).

Manufacture of the device and its introduction into production help to fill in gaps in the technology of obtaining high quality propolis.

To extract propolis using the device, beekeepers follow the sequence of actions:

• place elastic nets in hives to collect propolis (it is recommended to use nets made of ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA));
• place nets on the upper bars of frames after they are cleaned of wax residues and existing propolis;
• inspect bee colonies as is customary on the farm;
• after the bees cover nets with propolis, shift them so that an entire net is covered with propolis (approximately 20-30 calendar days, depending on availability of the plant base and propensity of the bee family to accumulate propolis);
• collect nets from bee colonies and roll for easy transportation and further cooling (Fig. 4, B);
• for high-quality cleaning of nets with propolis using the device, it is enough to cool nets at a temperature of +5°C for 60-90 minutes, depending on the type of propolis;
• insert the cooled nets into the cleaning device (Access the author’s accounts YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/QktpMJc-0hY?si=MOMb8R6w7LrkgJ2C).

Fig. 4. Propolis obtained at Ukrainian beekeeping farms using the new technology (photo by the author, 2021) Notes: Right – propolis purified from elastic nets using the device; Left – elastic nets covered with propolis obtained from beekeeping farms in Ukraine

After the cleaning is completed, nets are returned to the bee colonies, if necessary, and the obtained propolis is packed and stored for further use.

Nets in the device are cleaned mechanically. One net can be cleaned with the device 100 or more times without visible mechanical damage. The specially designed shafts of the device are pulled into the net and simultaneously bend it in a wave-like manner. During this bending, the propolis is shed in the lower tray. For comfortable work of the operator, the room temperature can be +20-22°C. In countries with tropical climates, it is possible to place the net cleaning device in honeycomb storages, where the temperature is always kept low, which will provide additional savings on room cooling. The propolis harvesting device can be used by beekeepers to clean 227 nets in one working day (eight hours). The developed device has been patented: patent No. 139736 “Device for collecting propolis” (UA). Details of the development and operation of the device were presented at the 47th Apimondia Congress (Istanbul) (PP-177).

For more detailed information on the operation of the device for cleaning nets from propolis and other research papers of the author, please use the link by QR code (Access the author’s account in the scientific social network ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Roman-Dvykaliuk).

Dvykaliuk Roman, Chairman of the Board of BeesAgro Controlled Pollination Association; PhD candidate of the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine; Kyiv, Ukraine.
E-mail: Roman.Dvykaliuk@delta-sport.kiev.ua

References
DSTU 4662:2006 “Propolis (Bee Glue). Specifications” (2007). Kyiv: State Standards of Ukraine
Salatino, A., & Salatino, M. L. F. (2017). Why do honeybees exploit so few plant species as propolis sources. MOJ Food Processing & Technology, 4(5), 158–160. https://doi.org/10.15406/mojfpt.2017.04.00107
Langenheim, J. H., 2003. Plant Resins: Chemistry, Evolution, Ecology, and Ethnobotany. Timber Press., Portland,OR, USA.
Isidorov, V. A., Bakier, S., Pirożnikow, E., Zambrzycka, M., Swiecicka, I. Selective behaviour of honeybees in acquiring European propolis plant precursors. Journal of chemical ecology. 2016. Vol. 42(6), Р. 475–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-016-0708-9
Przybyłek, I., & Karpiński, T. M. (2019). Antibacterial properties of propolis. Molecules, 24(11), 2047. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24112047
Breyer, H. F. E., Breyer, E. D. H., & Cella, I. (2016). Produção e beneficiamento da própolis [Production and processing of propolis]. Boletim Didático, 1, 30. https://publicacoes.epagri.sc.gov.br/BD/article/view/405 [in Portuguese] Tsagkarakis, A. E., Katsikogianni, T., Gardikis, K., Katsenios, I., Spanidi, E., & Balotis, G. N. (2017). Comparison of Traps Collecting Propolis by Honey Bees. Advances in Entomology, 5(02), 68. 5. https://doi.org/10.4236/ae.2017.52006
Device for collecting propolis [Prystrii dlia zboru propolisu]: pat. 139736 Ukraine. № u 201910696; decl. 29.10.2019. publ. 10.01.2020. Bul. № 1. (in Ukrainian)

Field pansies (Viola arvensis) growing near Paris produced 20% less nectar than those growing there 20 to 30 years ago, the study found. Photograph: Courtesy of Samson Acoca-Pidolle

Study: Flowers are Starting to Self-Pollinate Due to Fewer Insects

Flowers are “giving up on” pollinators and evolving to be less attractive to them as insect numbers decline, researchers have said.

A study has found the flowers of field pansies growing near Paris are 10% smaller and produce 20% less nectar than flowers growing in the same fields 20 to 30 years ago. They are also less frequently visited by insects.

“Our study shows that pansies are evolving to give up on their pollinators,” said Pierre-Olivier Cheptou, one of the study’s authors and a researcher at the French National Centre for Scientific Research. “They are evolving towards self-pollination, where each plant reproduces with itself, which works in the short term but may well limit their capacity to adapt to future environmental changes.”

Plants produce nectar for insects, and in return insects transport pollen between plants. This mutually beneficial relationship has formed over millions of years of coevolution. But pansies and pollinators may now be stuck in a vicious cycle: plants are producing less nectar and this means there will be less food available to insects, which will in turn accelerate declines.

“Our results show that the ancient interactions linking pansies to their pollinators are disappearing fast,” said lead author Samson Acoca-Pidolle, a doctoral researcher at the University of Montpellier. “We were surprised to find that these plants are evolving so quickly.”

Insect declines have been reported by studies across Europe. One study on German nature reserves found that from 1989 to 2016 the overall weight of insects caught in traps fell by 75%. Acoca-Pidolle added: “Our results show that the effects of pollinator declines are not easily reversible, because plants have already started to change. Conservation measures are therefore urgently needed to halt and reverse pollinator declines.”

The method used in the study is called “resurrection ecology”. It involved germinating ancestral pansy plants from seeds collected in the 1990s and 2000s, which were being stored in the national botanical conservatories. The team compared how four populations of field pansies (Viola arvensis) had changed during this period.

Other than changes to the flowers, they found no other changes between the populations, such as the leaf size or total size of the plant, according to the paper, published in the journal New Phytologist.

If flowers are not likely to attract insects, then a plant is wasting energy making them large and nectar-rich. Previous research has shown the percentage of field pansies relying on self-pollination has increased by 25% over the past 20 years.

“This is a particularly exciting finding as it shows evolution happening in real time,” said Dr Philip Donkersley, from Lancaster University, who was not involved in the study.

“The fact that these flowers are changing their strategy in response to decreasing pollinator abundance is quite startling. This research shows a plant undoing thousands of years of evolution in response to a phenomenon that has been around for only 50 years.

“Although most research has been done in Europe and North America, we know that pollinator declines are a global phenomenon. These results may just be the tip of the iceberg: areas with far greater plant diversity will likely have many more examples of wild plants changing their pollination strategies in response to a lack of pollinators.”

Similar processes can be seen in invasive populations that need to adapt new ecological niches. Populations of foxglove have evolved to be pollinated by bumblebees in Europe. However, 200 years ago they were introduced to Costa Rica and Colombia, and they have since changed the shape of their flowers so they can be pollinated by hummingbirds, researchers found.

Other research shows plants that are unable to self-pollinate go the other way, producing more pollen when pollinators are scarce. Because they cannot resort to other methods, they have to outcompete other plants to attract a shrinking number of pollinators.

Prof Phil Stevenson, from Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, who was also not involved in the research, said it made sense that traits that guide or reward pollinators are likely to change when the number of pollinators drops, especially among species that have the option of self-pollinating.

“This is especially so for reproduction,” he said, “which is arguably the most important living function of organisms and likely the most adaptive trait of all.”

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2023/12/study-flowers-are-starting-to-self-pollinate-due-to-fewer-insects/

Whole Foods Market announced a new pollinator policy for its Fresh Produce and Floral purchasing to support pollinators in recognition of the critical role they play in our food system and the environment. The company has long championed pollinator health through its commitment to organic agriculture, which prohibits toxic persistent pesticides.

As part of the new pollinator policy, by 2025, the company will:

• Require all fresh produce and floral growers to implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) system, which prioritizes preventative and biological pest control measures and reduces the need for chemical pesticides.
• Prohibit the use of nitroguanidine neonicotinoids (clothianidin, dinotefuran, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam) in all potted plants they sell.
• Encourage all fresh produce and floral suppliers to phase out the use of nitroguanidine neonicotinoids.

In addition to honeybees, Whole Foods Market recognizes native pollinators, such as bumble bees, wasps, and butterflies, are critical to the food system and an important indicator of biodiversity.

“We understand the important role pollinators play in our food system and, through this policy, will build on our long legacy of supporting biodiversity and pollinator health,” said Karen Christensen, senior vice president, Perishables & Quality Standards at Whole Foods Market. “This is another critical step forward in our journey of climate-smart agriculture as part of our purpose to nourish people and the planet.”

The company engages its foundations and internationally recognized third parties to create campaigns that raise awareness of pollinators and their impact. In addition, its Whole Kids Bee Grant Program helps schools and non-profit organizations receive support for educational beehives and bee programming so students can observe bees up close and learn more about the vital role of pollinators. Since 2014, the Whole Kids Bee Grant program has awarded more than 850 educational beehives to schools and nonprofits with support from The Bee Cause Project.

Whole Foods Market continues to work across the industry to encourage all fresh produce and floral suppliers to phase out the use of nitroguanidine neonicotinoids, which are particularly harmful to pollinators, and pave the way for other solutions. Whole Foods Market suppliers like Rainier Fruit continue to demonstrate their commitment to advancing pollinator health by maintaining 150 acres of dedicated pollinator habitat, in addition to 325 acres of Bee Better Certified® orchard in partnership with the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation.

“Every single piece of fruit we grow requires pollination. We wouldn’t have a crop without honeybees, so pollinator health is of utmost importance for us as farmers,” said Mark Zirkle, president of Rainier Fruit. “We’re appreciative of Whole Food’s advocacy and look forward to continued efforts towards more sustainable agriculture.”

For more information on how Whole Foods Market is protecting pollinators and raising awareness for the critical role they play in our lives, visit https://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/mission-in-action/environmental-stewardship/pollinator-health.

About Whole Foods Market

For more than 40 years, Whole Foods Market has been the world’s leading natural and organic foods retailer. As the first certified organic national grocer, Whole Foods Market has more than 500 stores in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. To learn more about Whole Foods Market, please visit https://media.wholefoodsmarket.com/.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://media.wholefoodsmarket.com/whole-foods-market-unveils-new-pollinator-health-policy-for-fresh-produce-floral/

Tri-County Beekeepers Association Inc.

“Maximizing Your Colonies Potential”

The 45th Annual Spring Beekeeping Workshop in Wooster, Ohio on Friday and Saturday, March 1-2, 2024 is being planned. As in the past, it will be held at Fisher Auditorium and the Shisler Conference Center on Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center (OARDC) campus, located at 1680 Madison Ave. (at State Route 302 east and State Route 83) just south of Wooster. Last year, the workshop participants were not only from Ohio but a number of neighboring states.

Keep an eye out for more information!

Survival of NEBs inoculated with one of five treatments modeled using a Mixed Effects Cox Model. Dark lines represent mean treatment survival across replicates, while the shading surrounding the dark lines represent 95% CI. Different letters represent significant differences between treatments (coxme; α = 0.05).

A tale of two parasites: Responses of honey bees infected with Nosema ceranae and Lotmaria passim

• Courtney I. MacInnis,
• Lien T. Luong &
• Stephen F. Pernal

Scientific Reports volume 13, Article number: 22515 (2023) Cite this article

• Metricsdetails

Abstract

Nosema ceranae and Lotmaria passim are two commonly encountered digestive tract parasites of the honey bee that have been associated with colony losses in Canada, the United States, and Europe. Though honey bees can be co-infected with these parasites, we still lack basic information regarding how they impact bee health at the individual and colony level. Using locally-isolated parasite strains, we investigated the effect of single and co-infections of these parasites on individual honey bee survival, and their responsiveness to sucrose. Results showed that a single N. ceranae infection is more virulent than both single L. passim infections and co-infections. Honey bees singly infected with N. ceranae reached < 50% survival eight days earlier than those inoculated with L. passim alone, and four days earlier than those inoculated with both parasites. Honey bees infected with either one, or both, parasites had increased responsiveness to sucrose compared to uninfected bees, which could correspond to higher levels of hunger and increased energetic stress. Together, these findings suggest that N. ceranae and L. passim pose threats to bee health, and that the beekeeping industry should monitor for both parasites in an effort correlate pathogen status with changes in colony-level productivity and survival.

To read the complete research paper go to; A tale of two parasites: Responses of honey bees infected with Nosema ceranae and Lotmaria passim | Scientific Reports (nature.com)

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: A tale of two parasites: Responses of honey bees infected with Nosema ceranae and Lotmaria passim | Scientific Reports (nature.com)

by University of Göttingen

Carpenter bees (Xylocopa sp) at Lablab in Bengaluru. Credit: Vikas S Rao

Increasing urbanization worldwide is a growing threat to biodiversity. At the same time, flowering plants are often more diverse in cities than in the countryside. This is due to flowering plants and agricultural crops, which are increasingly being grown in cities. A recent study shows that the interactions between plants and pollinators, which are essential for agricultural production, are surprisingly dynamic.

For example, the plant and bee species involved in pollination vary significantly between the seasons. This was shown by an international research team led by the University of Göttingen. The scientists studied farms that produce vegetables in the southern Indian metropolis of Bengaluru—a classic example of a rapidly growing city in the tropics.

Urbanization intensifies the seasonal differences in plant-pollinator networks, as a comparison of urban and rural cultivation areas revealed. The results were published in the journal Ecology Letters.

To identify influences on the interactions between pollinators and plants, the researchers analyzed 36 vegetable-producing farms in Bengaluru every month for a year. In this way, they covered the seasons that are characteristic of the local climate: the mild-dry winter, the hot-dry summer, and the rainy monsoon.

The farms were distributed along two routes that ran from the city center to the rural villages. The researchers recorded the bee species at each site, the plant species visited by bees, and the frequency of these interactions.

From the data, they identified plant-pollinator networks for each location and each season. They analyzed which factors explain differences in the interactions: the time of year, or the distance from the city center, or the degree of urbanization as indicated by the proportion of “sealed surfaces” such as roads, buildings, or pavements.

“Our study provides new insights into the role of urbanization in the dynamics of networks involving plants and pollinators in the tropics, which have been little studied. This is particularly important as current and future urban expansions are largely occurring in tropical regions, where they are subject to different ecological, climate, and social factors than in temperate zones,” explains first author Dr. Gabriel Marcacci, a former Ph.D. student in the Functional Agrobiodiversity research group at the University of Göttingen and now a postdoc at the Swiss Ornithological Institute and the University of Neuchâtel.

“Our results point to major changes in plant-pollinator networks over the course of the year and to the little-recognized importance of seasonality for the interactions between plants and their pollinators, especially in rapidly growing tropical megacities,” say co-authors Professors Catrin Westphal and Teja Tscharntke from the University of Göttingen and Ingo Grass from the University of Hohenheim.

The research was carried out as part of an interdisciplinary DFG research group that investigates changes in socio-ecological systems at the interface of urban and rural environments in India.

More information: Gabriel Marcacci et al, Urbanization alters the spatiotemporal dynamics of plant–pollinator networks in a tropical megacity, Ecology Letters (2023). DOI: 10.1111/ele.14324

Journal information: Ecology Letters

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: https://phys.org/news/2023-12-urbanization-seasonal-differences-plant-pollinator-networks.html

Laidlaw Bee Facility

Named after the “father of honey bee genetics” Dr. Harry H. Laidlaw Jr., the Bee Research Facility is a part of a larger, as I like to refer to it, Bee Complex located only a few miles away off of Central UC Davis Campus (West of Route 113 for those who might be familiar with the area). The Bee Complex is composed of the Bee Facility, UC Davis Bee Haven garden, a number of smaller research plots, several ancillary buildings for storage and most recently, a set of mobile trailers housing the Davis USDA Bee Lab. But as you know, it is the people that really make the program, and our program at UC Davis is a home to a number of researchers and extension specialists contributing to bettering bee health. This series aims to showcase all of the great work being done by the UC Davis Bee Program teams. But first, a little bit about our history!

The Bee Facility Apiary

While you have likely heard of the Bee Program at UC Davis, you probably don’t know that its impressive history began long before many of us reading this issue of Bee Culture were even born. It is my pleasure to take you on a brief journey of the establishment of the UC Bee Program, as it has been shared with me by the late Robbin Thorp and Eric Mussen (to read a more detailed history written by Kathy Keatley Garvey, please visit https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=39191). Lastly, I will briefly introduce you to the current faculty members and their respective research and education programs, which we will expand on in the upcoming 2024 issues of Bee Culture. Many well-known and well-respected researchers and educators have conducted seminal works while at UC Davis. They helped make the UC Davis Bee Program what it is today and my current colleagues and I are eager to carry that legacy into the future. My hope is that you will enjoy reading this series as much as we are enjoying writing it for you.

The People: Early 1900s to Early 2010s
Let me take you back to the early 1900s (yes, I just said that, and yes it makes me feel old as well!), when George Haymaker Vansell (1892-1954) was a student at UC Davis. His interest in insect science led him to become the first instructor to teach an Entomology and Apiculture course at UC Davis from 1920 to 1931, highlighting the need for formal Entomology education. He was titled an Instructor in Entomology while also holding a position as a USDA employee at the Davis Experiment Station. Vansell was particularly interested in the field of plant-insect interactions, and has published a number of bulletins concerning honey bee forage. As avid beekeepers, most of you have probably heard at some point that honey bee colonies can suffer poisoning when foraging on California Buckeye (Aesculus californica). Vansell’s interest in this phenomenon resulted in several publications in which he discusses the symptoms of buckeye poisoning, and together with his colleagues, offers possible solutions for reducing damage to colonies. His work suggests that adult worker bees were usually not detrimentally affected; therefore, creating small colony units containing only adult workers and one frame of brood can lead to production of buckeye honey while simultaneously preserving some of the colony work force if the honey is extracted in a timely manner. Vansell and Todd also suggest that Italian x Carniolan hybrids faired a bit better during the production of the buckeye honey as compared to Italian x Caucasian hybrid colonies, but neither had successful recovery. Interestingly, throughout these research articles there is regular mention of the bears destroying colonies in the Sierra Nevada foothills, much like the beekeepers today still have to deal with these intruders. Prior to his sudden passing in 1954, Vansell had also completed research on fruit tree and seed crops pollination. A scholarship established in his honor has helped support many bee students in their fervent effort to advance the field of apiculture.

Around the same time period, Frank Edward Todd (1895-1969) served as the USDA apiculture research branch head at the USDA Pacific States Bee Culture Laboratory at UC Davis (1931-1942). He collaborated closely with Vansell on projects dealing with honey bee poisonous plants, and has advanced pollination of many crops including seed alfalfa, cantaloupes and tangerines. Perhaps most notably, he has reported observations of honey bee nectar collection on alfalfa and the, now well known, tripping mechanism of the alfalfa flower during attempted foraging by honey bees. While affiliated with the UC Davis Bee Biology Program, he modified the dead bee trap originally designed by Norman Gary, which is known as the “Todd Dead Bee Trap”, and has been used in research on effects of various chemicals on bee mortality. Another USDA apiculturist worth mentioning was Edward Lloyd Sechrist (1873-1953). While working in the USDA Office of Bee Culture, he collaborated with researchers at UC Davis Bee lab on several projects that have included honey gathering and daily colony weight changes due to nectar collection. His most notable contribution to the field of apiculture is the proposition for United States standards for honey in 1927.

You probably noticed that the first researchers conducting honey bee and pollination research at UC Davis were actually most directly associated with USDA. However, in 1931, UC Davis hired John Edward Eckert (1895-1975) as a Professor of Entomology and Apiculture, who also served as the Department Chairman from 1934 to 1946. Eckert is well known for studying the flight range of honey bees and he reported extensive observations on this topic including the observation that honey bees prefer to stay close to the apiary in search of forage, but will fly up to 8.5 miles to the food source if necessary. Honey bee resource constancy was also noted by him. Eckert (affectionately called Eck by his peers and stakeholders) was well respected among beekeepers as he supported their efforts to protect colonies from pesticides, and has completed research on potentially harmful pesticide effects on colonies. He is also credited with pioneering antibiotic use in honey bee colonies for management of bacterial diseases, and spent time in Australia and Europe researching various ectoparasitic mites on honey bees including Tracheal mites (Acarapis woodi). Very apropos to this article, Eckert spent decades as the editor of the California column in Gleanings in Bee Culture. Among his many extension publications is the first edition of the Beekeeping in California, Circular 100 from 1936, which has been updated over the years and is still used by many.

As mentioned before, the facility that is still being used by the Bee Program faculty, has been named in honor of Harry Hyde Laidlaw, Jr. (1907-2003) who joined UC Davis as a Professor of Apiculture in 1947. Laidlaw’s research studying mutations leading to differences in eye color, pigment-free blind drones, differences in wing length, hairlessness and resulting identification of underlying molecular and biochemical pathways, have earned him an unofficial title of “The Father of Honey Bee Genetics”. Arguably most impactful applied technology development, however, was the development of the first functional instrument for insemination of queen honey bees. This was made possible by Laidlaw’s study of the queen morphology, and subsequent realization that the only way the queen can be successfully instrumentally inseminated is if the valve-fold is held away from the median oviduct opening. His discovery has provided the means for successful bee breeding and has revolutionized the beekeeping industry. Northern California bee breeders still speak very fondly of Laidlaw. Speaking to his aptitude for innovation and leadership was his selection as the first Dean for Research in the College of Agriculture at UC Davis. He published several seminal queen rearing and bee breeding books, including my personal favorite Queen Rearing and Bee Breeding, written in collaboration with Robert Page, another alumni of our Bee Program. Lastly, in addition to the Bee Biology Facility being named after him, the Laidlaw family established an endowment in his name and in support of student research.

Robbin Thorp, Norm Gary, Larry Connor at the Bee Facility in February 2016

Fifteen years later, Norman E. Gary joined UC Davis as a Professor of Apiculture with special interest in studying honey bee foraging behavior and mating behavior of queens and drones. He was the first to identify queen mating pheromones, and to observe and describe aerial mating of queens and drones. During the medfly eradication efforts by California Department of Food and Agriculture, Gary began studying the impact of pesticide applications on honey bee health, which led to his design of the dead bee trap, later modified by Todd. Gary is also well known for his contributions to the film industry as he has been an adviser on sets of movies such as “Fried Green Tomatoes”, “My Girl” and “Candyman”, earning him the nickname “The Bee Wrangler”. He even has his own IMDb page. Gary has been retired since 1994, but he still occasionally visits the Bee Facility and even borrows bee colonies for small behavioral experiments. Much like his contemporaries Robbin Thorp and Eric Mussen were not, Gary is not very good at being “retired”, and has since published another one of my favorite book recommendations Honey Bee Hobbyist: The Care and Keeping of Bees (I have been lucky enough to have him sign my copy!).

Joining forces with Laidlaw and Gary, Ward Stanger (1913-2000), an extension apiculturist quickly became a champion for the beekeeping industry. In the late 1960s and early 1970s he published extension works discussing the beekeeping industry in California, and comparing the bee breeding and queen rearing efforts in Northern California versus southeastern Gulf States. Stanger understood the value of optimal nutrition to bee health and need for pesticide protection, readily urging the U.S. government to allow for forage access and stricter pesticide regulations. He has also published recommendations for supplemental feeding of colonies to increase their productivity, and a manual on how to remove honey bees from structures.

Christine Peng and Elina L. Niño, January 2020

In 1975, Christine Y. S. Peng joined the Entomology Department as the Professor of Apiculture specializing in insect physiology. I am sure that at this point many, if not all of you, are aware that antibiotics for management of honey bee bacterial diseases require a prescription from a veterinarian. But I bet you did not know that Peng was instrumental in selecting tylosin as a possible replacement antibiotic for oxytetracycline hydrochloride (Terramycin®) since Paenibacillus larvae started developing resistance to it. Peng has also made invaluable contributions in elucidating gamete physiology laying groundwork for successful cryopreservation of honey bee genetic material. Her research into honey bee nutritional needs has led to guidelines for seasonal feeding regimes, and her interest in parasitology has led her to explore varroa mite physiology and various management strategies.

I am pretty certain that Robert E. Page Jr. and his seminal works in honey bee genetics don’t need much of an introduction to the readers of Bee Culture. Page joined the Department of Entomology faculty in 1989 where he also served as the Department Chair. There is not enough space here to write about his many research accomplishments so I invite you to read some of the hundreds of scientific articles or the four books that he has published thus far. His published works report on fundamental discoveries in honey bee behavior particularly regulation of foraging behavior, population genetics and the evolution of complex social behavior. Despite all his achievements and accolades he remains a refreshingly approachable colleague. His passion for honey bees particularly shines through in one of his latest projects “The Art of the Bee” YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/@artofthebee).

Sue Cobey, March 2018

The Bee Program can’t really be talked about without mentioning the contributions of Susan Cobey who was at UC Davis from 2007 to 2012. Cobey is a giant in the field of honey bee breeding and has worked tirelessly for decades to maintain and improve quality honey bee stock in close collaboration with the Northern California Bee Breeders. As a young eager doctoral student just discovering my interest in honey bee queen mating physiology, I deeply valued the opportunity to take the world-renowned Instrumental Insemination (II) course with Cobey while she was still working at UC Davis. Principles of II and many tips and tricks shared with me by Cobey are something I now share with the students in our own II courses. Her sustained efforts to improve the bee stock in the U.S. have led to the establishment of the New World Carniolan Breeding Stock that can be purchased from Northern California bee breeders.

Back in 2014, I joined the Department of Entomology and Nematology at UC Davis as the Extension Apiculturist, and to my delight I was able to spend a significant amount of time in the company of two great pollinator researchers and educators: Robbin W. Thorp (1933-2019) and Eric C. Mussen (1944-2022).

Thorp (To read more about R. W. Thorp, visit: https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=30459) joined UC Davis as a Professor of Apiculture in 1964 and his research interests were in pollination behavior of honey bees particularly in almond production. Later on, he shifted his focus to non-Apis bees with emphasis on bee systematics, bee conservation and pollination of vernal pool plants. Bumblebee conservation efforts have been in large part inspired by Thorp’s research and he is cited as the main catalyst for successful petition for listing rusty patch bumblebee as an endangered species. Even though he retired in 1994, Thorp continued to come to work at the Bee Facility every day and continued to work on several projects. I have to specifically recommend two books he co-authored in his retirement: Bumble Bees of North America: An Identification Guide and California Bees and Blooms, a Guide for Gardeners and Naturalists. I am forever grateful to him for his guidance and advice, and for not minding me asking him a million questions while he was patiently identifying drawers-full of pinned bees for dozens of student and postdoc projects.

Eric Mussen – Photo by Kathy Keatley Garvey

Similarly, I will forever harbor deep gratitude and appreciation for Eric C. Mussen (To read more about E. C. Mussen, visit: https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=52399). He joined University of California Cooperative Extension in 1976 and quickly became a go-to person for the beekeeping industry in California. As he spent more time immersed within California beekeeping, many others such as government entities, non-profit organizations, commodity boards became reliant on him for scientific and practical information. In collaboration with other UC Davis bee researchers, he conducted applied studies immediately relevant for the contemporary beekeeping industry. Shortly before I came to the University, Mussen retired in 2014. I will always be grateful to him for introducing me to the California beekeeping community, for offering guidance, and persistent willingness to give advice while making sure I become fully integrated within the California beekeeping industry.

It was truly my great honor and privilege to learn directly from two great bee researchers and educators. There is absolutely no replacement for their innovation and ingenuity in tackling challenges plaguing bee health, and I only hope I can serve California stakeholders as well as they have. They are very missed!

The People: 2010s to Today
Currently, the Bee Program in the Department of Entomology and Nematology has three core faculty members charged with conducting research and formal and informal education on bee biology and health. Neal M. Williams joined the department in 2009 where he continues working on wild bee biology, native bee conservation and pollination biology. He is devoted to developing supplemental forage mixes to enhance nutrition of all bees in agricultural landscapes of California, as well as modeling potential risks and benefits to bees within California lands. Brian R. Johnson joined the department in 2012 with a strong background in bee behavior. At UC Davis, he continues to study the genetic basis of bee behavior, bee defenses, impact of number of stressors on bee health, spread of Apis mellifera scuttelata hybrids within California, and occasionally conducts projects involving other insects. Most recently, he has published a book Honey Bee Biology which is bound to become a staple reading for beekeepers and researchers alike, and his second book should be coming out soon, so keep an eye out for it. I joined the department as an extension apiculturist in 2014, and learned quickly that I still have much more to learn. California beekeeping is not for the faint of heart and I am really grateful for the super supportive California beekeepers whose backing has allowed me to develop my research and extension program to an advanced level. My team and I conduct research that is directly applicable to beekeepers, including varroa mite management, improved nutrition and enhanced crop pollination. Extension activities are done by all members of my team and they range from offering beekeeping courses and giving club presentations through the California Master Beekeeper Program, all the way to offering technical services such as bee testing and colony inspections through newly established UC Davis Bee Health Hub. Several other of our UC Davis colleagues conduct bee research and we often collaborate with Rachel Vannette and Santiago Ramirez, as well as the two new USDA Bee Researchers Arathi Seshadri and Julia Fine.

Thank you for letting me take you on this short, yet (you hopefully agree) impressive journey through the history of UC Davis Bee Program. Make sure you stay tuned for the next articles in this UC Davis series, and with the upcoming start of pollination season it seems only appropriate to continue with an article delving deeper into some of the bee health and crop pollination research being done in the E. L. Niño Bee Lab. “See you” next month!

By James Murray

Image from Unsplash

Thunder Bay – Business – Almost everyone loves the taste of honey. In an age where food authenticity is increasingly scrutinized, a lesser-known but significant issue has emerged in the honey industry: honey-laundering. This term refers to the illegal practice of mislabeling the origin of honey or adulterating it with other substances. As consumers, understanding honey-laundering and knowing how to ensure the authenticity of the honey you purchase is crucial.

What is Honey-Laundering?

Honey-laundering primarily involves two deceptive practices:

Mislabeling Origin: Some manufacturers label their honey as being from a particular region or country, often one known for high-quality honey, when it actually originates from somewhere else. This practice is commonly used to circumvent import tariffs or bans from countries with a history of contamination in honey production.

Adulteration: This involves diluting pure honey with other cheaper sweeteners like high-fructose corn syrup, rice syrup, or other sugary substances. Adulterated honey is less expensive to produce but is sold as pure honey, deceiving consumers and undercutting honest producers.

Impact of Honey-Laundering

Honey-laundering not only deceives consumers but also has broader implications:

Economic Impact: It undermines legitimate beekeepers and honey producers who struggle to compete with the lower prices of adulterated products.

Health Risks: Adulterated honey can contain harmful antibiotics or heavy metals, posing health risks to consumers.

Environmental Concerns: Mislabeling origin can mask environmentally harmful production practices in some regions.

How to Ensure You’re Buying Real Honey

Read Labels Carefully: Check for country of origin and ingredient list. Authentic honey should have no other ingredient except honey.

Buy Local: Purchasing from local beekeepers or farmers’ markets can increase the likelihood of getting pure honey. It also supports local agriculture.

Certifications and Tests: Look for certifications like “True Source Certified” which ensure the traceability of honey. Some companies also put QR codes on their products that provide detailed sourcing information.

Price Point: If the price seems too good to be true, it probably is. Producing genuine, pure honey is a labor-intensive process, which is reflected in its cost.

Consistency and Texture: Pure honey tends to crystallize over time, whereas adulterated honey will remain syrupy.

Water Test: Put a drop of honey in water. Pure honey will settle at the bottom, while adulterated honey will start dissolving.

Flame Test: Dip a matchstick in honey and try to light it. If it lights easily, the honey is pure. Adulterated honey will prevent the match from lighting due to moisture from additives.

Trust Your Taste: Pure honey has a complex flavour profile that changes slightly with each batch, reflecting the flowers from which the nectar was harvested.

Conclusion

Honey-laundering is a global issue with significant impacts on consumers, producers, and the environment. By being vigilant and informed, consumers can play a crucial role in combating this practice. Always opt for transparency, traceability, and trustworthiness when it comes to purchasing honey. Remember, choosing authentic honey not only ensures you enjoy a quality product but also supports ethical and sustainable practices in the honey industry.

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: NetNewsLedger – Unveiling Honey-Laundering: Ensuring Authenticity in Your Honey Purchase

By Mitch Leslie

Yao honey hunter Seliano Rucunua holds a male honeyguide caught for research in the Niassa Special Reserve in Mozambique. CLAIRE SPOTTISWOODE

When people in the Niassa Special Reserve of northern Mozambique hanker for something sweet, they don’t call DoorDash or Uber Eats. They call a bird. The aptly named honeyguide will lead them to a bee nest so they can harvest the honey. The bird obtains a treat, too—scrumptious wax and bee larvae. A new study suggests this partnership, which occurs in several places in Africa, is even more intricate than scientists thought. People in different regions make unique sounds to summon the birds, and the birds recognize and respond to calls from their local area, researchers report today in Science. The authors say the results suggest humans and honeyguides shape each other’s cultural traditions.

“It’s an elegant study. The results are so clear, and the experimental design is so simple,” says ethologist Julia Hyland Bruno of the New Jersey Institute of Technology, who wasn’t connected to the work.

Scientists have documented just a handful of cases in which humans cooperate with wild animals. For example, in Brazil, Myanmar, and India, people and dolphins work together to catch fish. But the alliance between honey-seeking people and honeyguides in Africa takes collaboration to a higher level. The small, brown-and-white birds are adept at finding bee nests and remembering their locations. “They learn the landscape intimately,” says behavioral ecologist Claire Spottiswoode of the University of Cambridge, a co-author on the new paper. Humans, in turn, chop open the trees where the nests are located and smoke out the furious bees. The two species often split the spoils, but honey hunters sometimes stiff their assistants, destroying the wax so the birds are motivated to look for more nests.

Honeyguides sometimes solicit people to follow them, but honey hunters can also invite the birds to help. The Yao people who live in the Niassa Special Reserve, for instance, make a distinctive “brrrr” sound, followed by a “huh” that rises in pitch.

The sounds people use to draw the birds differ from place to place. Can the birds tell the difference? To find out, Spottiswoode teamed up with anthropologist Brian Wood of the University of California, Los Angeles, who has been studying the Hadza community of northern Tanzania for almost 20 years. The Hadza rely on complex whistles that are, as Wood puts it, “almost like an orchestra of melodies” to notify the birds they are ready to look for honey.

At sites in Tanzania and Mozambique, researchers and honey hunters tramped through the bush playing recordings of the Yao calls, Hadza whistles, or humans yelling their names, which served as a control. In Tanzania, honeyguides were more than three times more likely to hook up with a group playing the Hadza whistles than with one playing the Yao call or the shouts. And in Mozambique, a playback of the Yao call was more than twice as effective as the other two sounds. The researchers ruled out the possibility that the birds opted for a particular sound because it was easier to hear in that environment, determining that the calls and whistles faded equally rapidly in the two locations. The DNA of the birds doesn’t differ from place to place, but the calls can change over relatively short distances, which suggests the honeyguides don’t inherit their preference, Spottiswoode says. A more likely explanation is that “the birds learn to respond to the signals of their local human partners.”

Like humans, birds can have their own cultures, often passed down through their songs. The new findings suggest honeyguides and humans reinforce each other’s traditions. Yao and Hadza honey hunters told the researchers that they stick with the calls they learned from their forebears because changing them reduces the odds of attracting honeyguides. The birds apparently figure out that the call of their area means an opportunity for food, and they are drawn to people making it. But they don’t respond the same way to an unfamiliar call, which discourages honey hunters from innovating. Whether the honeyguides learn to respond to the local call from other honeyguides or on their own is a question the researchers want to investigate.

Yao honey hunters use fire and tools to harvest a bees’ nest in the Niassa Special Reserve in Mozambique. CLAIRE SPOTTISWOODE

“They provide really clear evidence for the interaction between honeyguides and humans and the possibility for learning by the birds,” says behavioral ecologist Mauricio Cantor of Oregon State University, who wasn’t connected to the study. “They’ve done an elegant job of demonstrating that there is cultural variation here,” adds behavioral ecologist Stephen Nowicki of Duke University. Humans cooperate and communicate with domesticated animals all the time, “but this is a wild animal. To see the complexity of communication that can occur—that’s really unusual.” As the authors note, fewer people are hunting for honey because they can now buy sugar. That decline could affect the birds, notes ornithologist John Marzluff of the University of Washington. “If you are a species cooperating with us, you have to be on your game because we change rapidly.”

Humans are making massive changes to the planet and threatening biodiversity, but the birds provide a positive example of an animal that can live alongside people, Wood says. Their “ability to learn opens up possibilities for cooperation and coexistence.”

We are here to share current happenings in the bee industry. Bee Culture gathers and shares articles published by outside sources. For more information about this specific article, please visit the original publish source: Birds that lead people to honey recognize local calls from their human helpers | Science | AAAS