Marker assisted selection for Varroa destructor resistance in New Zealand honey bees.

Varroa destructor is a honey bee (Apis mellifera) parasite identified as one of the leading causes of overwintering colony loss in New Zealand. It has been shown that a naturally occurring heritable trait, "Varroa Sensitive Hygiene" (VSH), confers an advantage to colonies by increasing behaviours that limit the survival and reproduction of Varroa mites. The SNP 9-9224292 is an adenine/guanine (A/G) polymorphism on chromosome 9 of Apis mellifera where the G allele was observed to be associated with VSH behaviour in North American honey bees. In this study, we sought to determine if selection for the G allele of SNP 9-9224292 could decrease Varroa mite infestation of New Zealand honey bee (Apis mellifera ligustica) colonies. We genotyped queens and tracked their colonies over summer before measuring Varroa levels at the point of autumn Varroa treatment. The mean Varroa population level in colonies headed by queens that carry two copies of VSH associated G allele of SNP 9-9224292 was 28.5% (P<0.05) lower compared with colonies headed by queens with two copies of non-VSH associated A alleles. Although a significant reduction in mite infestation was achieved in treatment colonies, conventional Varroa treatment was still required for adequate Varroa control. Considering the open mating of queens used and a lack of drift control in this study, this VSH SNP shows promise for marker assisted selection of New Zealand honey bees when aiming for innate Varroa control traits.

Honey bee toxicological responses do not accurately predict environmental risk of imidacloprid to a solitary ground-nesting bee species.

Honey bees (Apis mellifera) are the current model species for pesticide risk assessments, but considering bee diversity, their life histories, and paucity of non-eusocial bee data, this approach could underestimate risk. We assessed whether honey bees were an adequate risk predictor to non-targets. We conducted oral and contact bioassays for Leioproctus paahaumaa, a solitary ground-nesting bee, and A. mellifera, using imidacloprid (neonicotinoid) and dimethoate (organophosphate). The bees responded inconsistently; L. paahaumaa were 36 and 194 times more susceptible to oral and topically applied imidacloprid than A. mellifera, but showed comparable sensitivity to dimethoate. Furthermore, the proposed safety factor of ten applied to honey bee endpoints did not cover the interspecific sensitivity difference. Our standard-setting study highlights the urgent need for more comparative inter-species toxicity studies and the development of standardized toxicity protocols to ensure regulatory pesticide risk assessment frameworks are protective of diverse pollinators.

Orchard layout and plant traits influence fruit yield more strongly than pollinator behaviour and density in a dioecious crop.

Mutualistic plant-pollinator interactions are critical for the functioning of both non-managed and agricultural systems. Mathematical models of plant-pollinator interactions can help understand key determinants in pollination success. However, most previous models have not addressed pollinator behavior and plant biology combined. Information generated from such a model can inform optimal design of crop orchards and effective utilization of managed pollinators like western honey bees (Apis mellifera), and help generate hypotheses about the effects of management practices and cultivar selection. We expect that the number of honey bees per flower and male to female flower ratio will influence fruit yield. To test the relative importance of these effects, both singly and simultaneously, we utilized a delay differential equation model combined with Latin hypercube sampling for sensitivity analysis. Empirical data obtained from historical records and collected in kiwifruit (Actinidia chinensis) orchards in New Zealand were used to parameterize the model. We found that, at realistic bee densities, the optimal orchard had 65-75% female flowers, and the most benefit was gained from the first 6-8 bees/1000 flowers, with diminishing returns thereafter. While bee density significantly impacted fruit production, plant-based parameters-flower density and male:female flower ratio-were the most influential. The predictive model provides strategies for improving crop management, such as choosing cultivars which have their peak bloom on the same day, increasing the number of flowers with approximately 70% female flowers in the orchard, and placing enough hives to maintain more than 6 bees per 1000 flowers to optimize yield.

Netted crop covers reduce honeybee foraging activity and colony strength in a mass flowering crop.

The widespread use of protective covers in horticulture represents a novel landscape-level change, presenting the challenges for crop pollination. Honeybees (Apis mellifera L) are pollinators of many crops, but their behavior can be affected by conditions under covers. To determine how netting crop covers can affect honeybee foraging dynamics, colony health, and pollination services, we assessed the performance of 52 nucleus honeybee colonies in five covered and six uncovered kiwifruit orchards. Colony strength was estimated pre- and postintroduction, and the foraging of individual bees (including pollen, nectar, and naïve foragers) was monitored in a subset of the hives fitted with RFID readers. Simultaneously, we evaluated pollination effectiveness by measuring flower visitation rates and the number of seeds produced after single honeybee visits. Honeybee colonies under cover exhibited both an acute loss of foragers and changes in the behavior of successful foragers. Under cover, bees were roughly three times less likely to return after their first trip outside the hive. Consequently, the number of adult bees in hives declined at a faster rate in these orchards, with colonies losing on average 1,057 ± 274 of their bees in under two weeks. Bees that did forage under cover completed fewer trips provisioning their colony, failing to reenter after a few short-duration trips. These effects are likely to have implications for colony health and productivity. We also found that bee density (bees/thousand flowers) and visitation rates to flowers were lower under cover; however, we did not detect a resultant change in pollination. Our findings highlight the need for environment-specific management techniques for pollinators. Improving honeybee orientation under covers and increasing our understanding of the effects of covers on bee nutrition and brood rearing should be primary objectives for maintaining colonies and potentially improving pollination in these systems.

To breed, or not to breed? Predation risk induces breeding suppression in common voles.

Breeding suppression hypothesis (BSH) predicts that, in several vole species, females will suppress breeding in response to high risk of mustelid predation; compared to breeding females, suppressing females would gain higher chances of survival. Seminal evidence for BSH was obtained in the laboratory, but attempts to replicate breeding suppression under field conditions were less conclusive. We tested whether breeding suppression occurs in common voles (Microtus arvalis), and how population density and predation risk combined affect voles' reproductive activity. We found that, in contrast to males, female common voles suppress reproductive activity when faced with high predation risk. Population size was not reduced despite breeding suppression. A model of the interaction between predation risk and population density revealed that predator-induced breeding suppression depends on the density of conspecifics. We concluded that breeding suppression is a viable adaptation only at low vole densities, when per capita predation risk is high. Finally, we identified the key issues of experimental design required for the consistency of future studies on breeding suppression.