A high proportion of nonreproductive (NR) Varroa destructor Anderson & Trueman (Mesostigmata: Varroidae), is commonly observed in honey bee colonies displaying the varroa sensitive hygienic trait (VSH). This study was conducted to determine the influence of brood removal and subsequent host reinvasion of varroa mites on mite reproduction. We collected foundress mites from stages of brood (newly sealed larvae, prepupae, white-eyed pupae, and pink-eyed pupae) and phoretic mites from adult bees. We then inoculated these mites into cells containing newly sealed larvae. Successful reproduction (foundress laid both a mature male and female) was low (13%) but most common in mites coming from sealed larvae. Unsuccessful reproductive attempts (foundress failed to produce both a mature male and female) were most common in mites from sealed larvae (22%) and prepupae (61%). Lack of any progeny was most common for mites from white-eyed (83%) and pink-eyed pupae (92%). We also collected foundress mites from sealed larvae and transferred them to cells containing newly sealed larvae, prepupae, white-eyed pupae, or pink-eyed pupae. Successful reproduction only occurred in the transfers to sealed larvae (26%). Unsuccessful reproductive attempts were most common in transfers to newly sealed larvae (40%) and to prepupae (25%). Unsuccessful attempts involved the production of immature progeny (60%), the production of only mature daughters (26%) or the production of only a mature male (14%). Generally, lack of progeny was not associated with mites having a lack of stored sperm. Our results suggest that mites exposed to the removal of prepupae or older brood due to hygiene are unlikely to produce viable mites if they invade new hosts soon after brood removal. Asynchrony between the reproductive status of reinvading mites and the developmental stage of their reinvasion hosts may be a primary cause of NR mites in hygienic colonies. Even if reinvading mites use hosts having the proper age for infestation, only a minority of them will reproduce.

Varroa destructor continues to threaten colonies of European honey bees. General hygiene, and more specific Varroa Sensitive Hygiene (VSH), provide resistance towards the Varroa mite in a number of stocks. In this study, 32 Russian (RHB) and 14 Italian honey bee colonies were assessed for the VSH trait using two different assays. Firstly, colonies were assessed using the standard VSH behavioural assay of the change in infestation of a highly infested donor comb after a one-week exposure. Secondly, the same colonies were assessed using an “actual brood removal assay” that measured the removal of brood in a section created within the donor combs as a potential alternative measure of hygiene towards Varroa-infested brood. All colonies were then analysed for the recently discovered VSH quantitative trait locus (QTL) to determine whether the genetic mechanisms were similar across different stocks. Based on the two assays, RHB colonies were consistently more hygienic toward Varroa-infested brood than Italian honey bee colonies. The actual number of brood cells removed in the defined section was negatively correlated with the Varroa infestations of the colonies (r2 = 0.25). Only two (percentages of brood removed and reproductive foundress Varroa) out of nine phenotypic parameters showed significant associations with genotype distributions. However, the allele associated with each parameter was the opposite of that determined by VSH mapping. In this study, RHB colonies showed high levels of hygienic behaviour towards Varroa -infested brood. The genetic mechanisms are similar to those of the VSH stock, though the opposite allele associates in RHB, indicating a stable recombination event before the selection of the VSH stock. The measurement of brood removal is a simple, reliable alternative method of measuring hygienic behaviour towards Varroa mites, at least in RHB stock.

No abstract

Earlier studies showed that Russian honey bees support slow growth of varroa mite population. We studied whether or not comb type influenced varroa reproduction in both Russian and Italian honey bees, and whether Russian bees produced comb which inhibited varroa reproduction. The major differences found in this study concerned honey bee type. Overall, the Russian honey bees had lower (2.44 +/- 0.18%) levels of varroa infestation than Italian honey bees (7.20 +/- 0.60%). This decreased infestation resulted in part from a reduced number of viable female offspring per foundress in the Russian (0.85 +/- 0.04 female) compared to the Italian (1.23 +/- 0.04 females) honey bee colonies. In addition, there was an effect by the comb built by the Russian honey bee colonies that reduced varroa reproduction. When comparing combs having Russian or Italian colony origins, Russian honey bee colonies had more non-reproducing foundress mites and fewer viable female offspring in Russian honey bee comb. This difference did not occur in Italian colonies. The age of comb in this study had mixed effects. Older comb produced similar responses for six of the seven varroa infestation parameters measured. In colonies of Italian honey bees, the older comb (2001 dark) had fewer (1.13 +/- 0.07 females) viable female offspring per foundress than were found in the 2002 new (1.21 +/- 0.06 females) and 1980s new (1.36 +/- 0.08 females) combs. This difference did not occur with Russian honey bee colonies where the number of viable female offspring was low in all three types of combs. This study suggests that honey bee type largely influences growth of varroa mite population in a colony.

-The prevalence of Tropilaelaps mercedesae and Varroa destructor in concurrently infested A. mellifera colonies in Thailand was monitored. We also assessed the fecundity of T. mercedesae and V. destructor in naturally infested brood and in brood cells deliberately infested with both mite genera. Results showed that the natural co-infestation of an individual brood cell by both mite genera was rare (<0.1 %). Overall, T. mercedesae was the more dominant brood parasite of A. mellifera than V. destructor. In naturally infested brood, the proportion of nonreproductive Tropilaelaps (29.8±3.9 %) was lower than that of Varroa (49.6±5.9 %). Both mites produced similar numbers of progeny (T. mercedesae =1.48±0.05; V. destructor =1.69±0.14). The two mite genera also reproduced normally when they were deliberately introduced into the same brood cells. In two separate assessments, the average worker brood infestations of T. mercedesae (19.9 %) were significantly higher than that of V. destructor (0.7 %). Our results on the higher prevalence and reproductive ability of T. mercedesae in concurrently infested colonies reaffirm Tropilaelaps ' competitive advantage over V. destructor and their reported negative impact to A. mellifera colonies.Apis mellifera / Tropilaelaps mercedesae / Varroa destructor / concurrent infestation / seasonal abundance