Evaluation of Cage Designs and Feeding Regimes for Honey Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Laboratory Experiments

Abstract

The aim of this study was to improve cage systems for maintaining adult honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) workers under in vitro laboratory conditions. To achieve this goal, we experimentally evaluated the impact of different cages, developed by scientists of the international research network COLOSS (Prevention of honey bee COlony LOSSes), on the physiology and survival of honey bees. We identified three cages that promoted good survival of honey bees. The bees from cages that exhibited greater survival had relatively lower titers of deformed wing virus, suggesting that deformed wing virus is a significant marker reflecting stress level and health status of the host. We also determined that a leak- and drip-proof feeder was an integral part of a cage system and a feeder modified from a 20-ml plastic syringe displayed the best result in providing steady food supply to bees. Finally, we also demonstrated that the addition of protein to the bees' diet could significantly increase the level ofvitellogenin gene expression and improve bees' survival. This international collaborative study represents a critical step toward improvement of cage designs and feeding regimes for honey bee laboratory experiments.

Effects, but no interactions, of ubiquitous pesticide and parasite stressors on honey bee (Apis mellifera) lifespan and behaviour in a colony environment

“…laboratory versus field) (Schmuck et al ., ; Mattila and Otis, ), which may potentially be a consequence of a higher sensitivity due to the artificial conditions in the laboratory (e.g. Huang et al ., ; Retschnig et al ., ). Experimental workers in the present study lived in a colony environment (i.e.…”

Influence of food and Nosema ceranae infection on the gut microbiota of Apis cerana workers

“…The newly emerged workers (<24h) were randomly distributed into 18 laboratory rearing cages. 30 bees were transferred to each cage The experimental cages were divided into two groups: 1) group supplied with only 50% (W/V) sugar water in modified syringe feeder [36], and 2) group supplied with both 50% (W/V) sugar water and beebread freshly collected from the A. cerana colonies (thereafter call beebread). For each group, three subgroups were set up one without spore inoculation which was used as a negative control, one inoculated with N. ceranae 5000 spores per bee, and one inoculated with 50000 spores per bee (Figure 1).…”

The honey bee gut microbiota: strategies for study and characterization

“…Ap. mellifera experience stress when kept in captivity, and imitating feeding behaviour with in‐lab administered flower nectars and pollens only further lowers the applicability of lab‐based studies (Huang et al ., ). Beehives kept on expansive farms with limited flower varieties can help to reduce the gap between experiment and reality, but Ap.…”