best management practices for pollen substitute … eccles...population july 2012 5 47 30.207 14.158...
TRANSCRIPT
Best Management Practices for Pollen Substitute Application for
Pollination Colonies
Les Eccles
OBA Tech-Transfer Program
Importance of Pollination to Ontario Beekeeping
• New Brunswick
– 12-13 million pounds
– $7.2-7.8 million
Ontario Honey Bees Colonies in the Maritimes
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Number of Colonies
Number of Colonies
Importance of Pollination to Ontario Beekeeping
Remember Cranberries!
• Québec
– 10% annual growth
– 2010 ~6000 acres
• Predict increase annual growth rate
Added Opportunities = Added Challenge
• Nutrient Deficiencies
• Transportation
• Pest and Disease
• Population maintenance
• Overwintering
What Bees Need from Pollen
“All amino acids are protein; but not all proteins are
amino acids”
Is all pollen the same?
• 20% protein minimum requirement
• Proper balance of amino acids (DeGroot, 1953)
• 30 – 100 lbs yr
Pollen Type % Protein Amino Acids
Pear 26.2 9/9
Vetch 24 9/9
White Clover 23.9 8/9
Lavender 19.4 8/9
Corn 14.5 9/9
Willow 14.8 -21.9 8/9
Blueberry 13.9 9/9
Fireweed 13.8 8/9
Sunflower 12.9 9/9
Buckwheat 11 9/9
BeePro 48.5 9/9
Global Patties 22.2 ?
Feedbee 41.51 9/9
Vitellogenin What is it Good For?
ABSOLUTELY EVERYTING
Vitellogenin
• Food Reservoir
• Synthesize royal Jelly
• Immune system component (Amro, Zayed)
• Hormonal activity – foraging and queen longevity
• Overwintering ability
Causes of Protein Deficiency
• Low or poor quality pollen
• Increased activity over pollen requirements
– I.e. high nectar flow with poor pollen
• Pollen too far away
• Varroa effects protein storage
– Poor overwintering
Effects of Protein Deficiency
• Halt to brood rearing
– Consume eggs and larva
– Premature capping of pupa
• Increased risk of EFB
• Lower or poor quality supercedure
• Decreased foraging behaviour
• Poor overwintering
EFB
Recover Time
• 2 weeks – month
• Critical in Fall when body protein build up for overwintering takes place
Weight of new emerging adult bees sampled from the broodnest of varroa infested honey bee colonies fed BeePro® + 4% pollen (USDA)
Measurement
Treatments
Low mites,
fed diet
n=31/31
Low mites,
no diet
n=31/29
High mites,
fed diet
n=31/29
High mites,
no diet
n=31/26
Newly
emerged adult
weight at start
112.7 a
113.89 a
113.19 a
112.01 a
Newly
emerged adult
weight at end
112.59 a
109.98 b
106.19 c
106.50 bc
Δ in weight of
new adults
during trial
0.78 a
-6.45 ab
-7.75 b
-6.98 b
Added Opportunities = Added Challenge
• Recommendations
– Nutrition
• How much – U.S. 18-30 lbs
• Timing – Prevent negative effects
– Pest and Disease Management
• More sensitive to disease
• Amplified with stress
What to Do? • Goals and Conditions
– Local Pollination vs. Long Distance
– Single or Multiple
– Other floral sources
• Experimenting
– Recipes
– quantities
• Cost Benefit
– Feeding x lbs = y $profit
Randy Oliver, 2007 – Fat Bees Part 2
2012 Nutritional Study
• Apply 3 quantities of pollen (Global Patties)
– 2 lbs. – low
– 3 lbs. – mid
– 5 lbs. – high
– Study optimal amount
• Upon return from pollination
• Colony Strength (Bees and brood)
• Disease profile
• Food stores (honey and pollen)
– Cost Analysis
Effect of Feeding on Bee Population July 2012
47 30.207 14.158 2.065
58 16.511 8.948 1.175
56 16.525 6.934 .927
66 13.538 7.840 .965
Count Mean Std. Dev. Std. Err.
Ni ll
Two
Three
Five
7 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Means Table for F Bees Su
Effect: Feed Amt
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Cell M
ean
Ni ll Two Three Five
Cel l
7 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Interaction Bar Plot for F Bees Su
Effect: Feed Amt
Error Bars: ± 1 Standard Error(s)
Effect of feeding/Pollination on Varroa Infestation
181 1.194 2.583 .192
32 3.816 4.301 .760
Count Mean Std. Dev. Std. Err.
Fed
Not Fed
21 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Means Table for % Varroa Su
Effect: Fed
0
.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Cel
l Mea
n
Fed Not Fed
Cel l
21 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Interaction Bar Plot for % Varroa Su
Effect: Fed
Error Bars: ± 1 Standard Error(s)
Effect of Feeding/Pollination on Nosema
129 1164470.295 1851353.672 163002.602
44 484848.455 743184.618 112039.297
Count Mean Std. Dev. Std. Err.
Fed
Not Fed
8 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Means Table for Spores/bee Su
Effect: Fed
Split By: NosemaD
Cell: Positive
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
Cel
l Mea
n
Fed Not Fed
Cel l
8 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Interaction Bar Plot for Spores/bee Su
Effect: Fed
Split By: NosemaD
Cell: Positive
Error Bars: ± 1 Standard Error(s)
Pollen Substitute Results
• No difference 2, 3 and 5 lbs
– Brood
– Frames of Bees
– Food Stores
• Colony Health
– Increase EFB
– Increase Nosema compared to non pollination
– Decreased Varroa compared to non pollination
– Missing eggs and larva
What is going on??
• Quantity of Pollen?
• Quality of Pollen?
• Disease build up in Comb?
• Management of EFB
• Recovery conditions before overwintering
2013 Pollen Substitute Types
• Bee Pro
– 15% protein
– $1.20
• Global Patties
– 15% protein
– $1.20
Home Made Substitute
Parts Quantity Ingredient Specs Price
8 100 lbs. Granulated Sugar $38.00
2 25 lbs. Brewer’s Yeast 48% protein $39.25
1 12 lbs. Dried Whole Egg 47-48% protein $26.40
5 litres Water
3 cups Veg Oil $01.75
3 cups Lemon Juice $01.25
Total 150 lbs. 11.2% $106.65
2013 Project Set up and Evaluation
• Application rate for each substitute type
– Control (no substitute)
– 3 lbs.
– 5 lbs.
• Assessment – 180 colonies
– Frame by frame
• Honey, pollen, brood, bees
• Disease presence (chalkbrood, sacbrood etc)
– Weight (food stores
– Varroa, nosema and tracheal mites
PHOTOS
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
C HM BP GL
Effect of substitute type on frames of bees after pollination
b
a
b b
Rel
ativ
e C
han
ge in
po
pu
lati
on
(%
)
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
0,9
1
HM BP GL
3lbs
5lbs
Effect of substitute amounts on frames of bees
a
b
b
b
b a
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
0,35
0,4
0,45
0,5
C HM BP GL
Effect of substitute type on brood after pollination
ab
a
b b
Effect of substitute application rate on stored Pollen
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1,6
HM BP GL
3 lbs
5 lbs
a a
b
a
a
a
Fram
es o
f St
ore
d P
olle
n
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
C HM BP GL
Effect of Substitute type on Population Build up for Winter
a ab bc c
Fram
es o
f B
ees
Home Made Substitute $0.71/lb
Parts Quantity Ingredient Specs Price
8 100 lbs. Granulated Sugar $38.00
2 25 lbs. Brewer’s Yeast 48% protein $39.25
1 12 lbs. Dried Whole Egg 47-48% protein $26.40
5 litres Water
3 cups Veg Oil $01.75
3 cups Lemon Juice $01.25
Total 150 lbs. 11.2% $106.65
Benefits of Home Made Substitute
• Higher immediate consumption
• Improved brood and bee populations after pollination
• Improved build up to winter time
• Cost approx. $2.10 per colony compare to approx. $3.60 per colony (BP and GL)
Pollination vs. Non-pollination
-
500 000
1 000 000
1 500 000
2 000 000
2 500 000
3 000 000
Spring Summer Fall
Average Nosema spores per bee
Pollination colonies
Non-pollination colonies
0,00
2,00
4,00
6,00
8,00
10,00
12,00
14,00
16,00
18,00
Spring Summer Fall
Average Varroa per 100 Bees
Nosema control may be an especially big concern for beekeepers who provide pollination services
Virulence – Winter mortality
0
200 000
400 000
600 000
800 000
1 000 000
1 200 000
1 400 000
1 600 000
spring* summer fall
No
sem
a (
sp
ores/
bee)
2012 Nosema levels for 2013 live vs dead colonies
live
dead
Nosema Ceranae infection does not seem to contribute to winter mortality in Ontario
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
spring summer* fall*
Varro
a m
ites/
10
0 b
ees
2012 Varroa levels for 2013 live vs.
dead colonies
live
dead
Virulence – Winter mortality
A much stronger relationship exists between Varroa levels and winter mortality
Pollination vs. Non-pollination
-
500 000
1 000 000
1 500 000
2 000 000
2 500 000
3 000 000
Spring Summer Fall
Average Nosema spores per bee
Pollination colonies
Non-pollination colonies
0,00
2,00
4,00
6,00
8,00
10,00
12,00
14,00
16,00
18,00
Spring Summer Fall
Average Varroa per 100 Bees
Nosema control may be an especially big concern for beekeepers who provide pollination services
IPM for Pollination Service
• Varroa
– Decreased varroa rate of reproduction in pollination
– Resulting in decreased winter mortality
• Will this change if improved management increases brood production?
Current Control
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
spring* summer* fall
No
sem
a sp
ore
s/b
ee
Effect of spring Fumagillin treatment on Nosema levels in 2012
pollination colonies
not treated
treated
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
spring* summer fall
No
sem
a sp
ore
s/b
ee
Effect of spring fumagillin treatment on Nosema levels in 2013 pollination
colonies
not treated
treated
IPM for Pollination Service
• Nosema
– increased concern for pollination colonies
– No impact on overwinter mortality however
– Possible significant economic impact
– Improve BMPs to reduce stress, and improved treatments and application methods
Best Management For Pollination
• Pollen substitutes should be tested in field just like other in hive products
• Reducing other stresses could greatly improve colony conditions
– Transportation
– Management while in pollination
• Nosema requires improved BMP recommendations
Control room
Duckwork and inside
Protocol for Comb testing - Les
Results for Pesticide Residue
a
a
a
b
a
a 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
tau-Fluvalinate Coumaphos 2,4-DMA
ppm
Effect of Ozone Treatment
Before Ozone
After Ozone
a
a
b
a
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Tebufenozide Boscalid
ppm
Effect of Ozone Treatment
Before Ozone
After Ozone
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
2
Frames of Bees
Frames of Bees
Difference in Frames of Bees June
OZ Difference
C Difference
H Difference
Development of Nosema
0
2000000
4000000
6000000
8000000
10000000
12000000
14000000
16000000
April May June July Oct
Nosema Spores Per Bee
Oz Nosema
H Nosema
C Nosema
Summary of Results From Ozone Treatment
• Significant reduction of some pesticide residues in wax
• Did not reduce the level of Coumaphos residue in Wax
• Did provide significant increase in bee production leading to pollination
Other Observations • Significant levels of nosema and chalkbrood
arriving with imported packages from Australia
• Ozone benefit could be negated by the introduction of disease with new nuc or package of bees
• Culling of old comb and important BMP to remove pesticide residues over time
• Neonics residues not present in dead out comb in tested colonies
2017:
• 7,686 colonies inspected by brood chamber and 21,420 by top bar inspections. 322 individual beekeepers and 724 individual beeyards were inspected (as of Oct 10, 2017)
• 21 yards positive for SHB outside of the Quarantine Area to date (13 in Niagara; 6 in Norfolk; 1 in Haldimand; 1 in Timiskiming)
• 1st in Haldimand is linked to one of the two large operations in Niagara
• 2 other large operations from Niagara (one with >1,000 colonies and one with ~10,000 colonies) are both found positive with SHB
• Of these one has self-reported SHB in northern Ontario (first case in this region)
– 1st operation in Timiskiming found with SHB. This operation originates in Niagara Region
National Biosecurity Standards
• National biosecurity standards have been developed for several commodities – poultry, swine, beef, dairy, sheep, goats, mink, bees, potatoes and grain/oilseeds
Other Important Issues
• Treatment Free Beekeepers
• Need for more varroa management tools
• Apivar resistant varroa
• New Regulations on Antibiotic use
• Education standards for beekeepers
• Opportunity to increase habitat for pollinators
Honey Bee Population and Varroa Mite Population Over a
Season
Acknowledgements
Dr Ernesto Guzman’s lab:
Dr. Guzman, Paul Kelly, Mollah Md. Hamiduzzaman, Hailey Ashbee, Berna Emsen, Jessica Gu, Dan Borges, Esther Uribe
Tech Transfer Program:
Les Eccles, Devan Rawn, Melanie Kempers, Raquel Mijares,
Natalie Talbot, Sarah D’Andrea, Kinnison Ma, Daniel Thurston