Mating Designs

Laidlaw, Harry H.; Page, Robert E.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-588920-9.50018-2

Cited by 66 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The remaining 8 mated and laying queens then were removed from their respective mating nuclei, placed into separate queen cages, and introduced into new field colonies by following standard techniques (23). All of the final colonies were unrelated to each other and all other colonies in the experiment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In managed colonies, the natural process of queen replacement, where an aging queen is superseded by a daughter queen, raised by her worker sisters from within the larval ranks, typically is prevented by beekeepers. Instead, intentionally bred queens are artificially introduced to a colony by beekeepers only after taking a circuitous path through several other related and unrelated host colonies (22,23).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of the Honey Bee Gut Microbiome throughout the Queen-Rearing Process

Tarpy

Mattila

Newton

2015

Appl Environ Microbiol

118

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European honey bee (Apis mellifera) is used extensively to produce hive products and for crop pollination, but pervasive concerns about colony health and population decline have sparked an interest in the microbial communities that are associated with these important insects. Currently, only the microbiome of workers has been characterized, while little to nothing is known about the bacterial communities that are associated with queens, even though their health and proper function are central to colony productivity. Here, we provide a large-scale analysis of the gut microbiome of honey bee queens during their developmental trajectory and through the multiple colonies that host them as part of modern queen-rearing practices. We found that queen microbiomes underwent a dramatic shift in size and composition as they aged and encountered different worker populations and colony environments. Queen microbiomes were dominated by enteric bacteria in early life but were comprised primarily of alphaproteobacteria at maturity. Furthermore, queen gut microbiomes did not reflect those of the workers who tended them and, indeed, they lacked many of the bacteria that are considered vital to workers. While worker gut microbiotas were consistent across the unrelated colony populations sampled, the microbiotas of the related queens were highly variable. Bacterial communities in mature queen guts were similar in size to those of mature workers and were characterized by dominant and specific alphaproteobacterial strains known to be associated with worker hypopharyngeal glands. Our results suggest a model in which queen guts are colonized by bacteria from workers' glands, in contrast to routes of maternal inoculation for other animal microbiomes.H oney bees (Apis spp.) are characterized by a highly partitioned reproductive division of labor, where a single queen lays the eggs that give rise to virtually all members of her colony, and her daughters, the workers, execute all other laborious jobs, including that of caring for her offspring (1). As the sole caregivers in the colony, workers share food extensively with one another, consuming their colony's food reserves and then distributing nutrients in various forms to their queen, other workers, and reproductive males (drones) (2). For all three of these castes, workers share food with adults through trophallaxis (mouth-to-mouth food transfer of liquids from one worker's gut to another's) or by feeding developing larvae brood food (glandular secretions derived from consumed nutrients). Because of these mechanisms of food distribution, a honey bee colony often is considered to have a "social stomach." Studies with tracers show rapid distribution (Ͻ24 h) of food from small numbers of individuals to many, if not the majority, of colony members across all ages and castes (3-7). Nurse-age bees (typically less than 10 days old) are the primary consumers of pollen (8); thus, they are the main distributors of pollen-based nutrients to adults and the brood that they rear (3, 5). Nectar als...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of the Honey Bee Gut Microbiome throughout the Queen-Rearing Process

Tarpy

Mattila

Newton

2015

Appl Environ Microbiol

118

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although honeybee drones don't forage or participate in colony maintenance they contribute with the queens to the genotype of the female offspring, and it is of paramount importance for beekeepers that produce queens and those that buy queens, that an abundance of drones of a designated stock be present at the place and time when bees mate in order to ensure insemination by drones of a desired stock (Laidlaw & Page, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphometry and number of spermatozoa in drone honeybees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) reared under different conditions

Mazeed¹

2011

Eur. J. Entomol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The effects of three factors operating during pre-emergence development period on some characteristics of drones were studied. Weight of newly emerged drones, length of forewing, length of tibia, length of femur, length and width of basitarsus and number of spermatozoa in drones from colonies in which the workers had access to drone brood (A), the size of brood cells differed (B) or the colony had a queen or was queenless (C), were determined. For this purpose, 9 colonies were chosen at random from the test apiary and prepared so that each contained one empty Langstroth frame with six small sub-frames containing drone combs, three of which were used to test the effect of one level and the other three the other level of each factor. The results showed that, colony status had a greater effect on the parameters measured than either the size of the brood cells or whether the workers had access to sealed brood cells. Most of the parameters were significantly different in C, whereas only a few in B and non in A were significantly different. The distance between discriminant scores in each experiment enhanced the previous results, as it was highest in C, followed by B and then A. Optimal drone characteristics may be recorded for colonies in which the queens were induced to lay unfertilized eggs in newly built drone combs, and then removed and the drone brood reared in a queen less colony.

show abstract

“…These significant relationships appeared to be stronger via the queen side, suggesting a maternal pattern of inheritance. However, this could also be an artifact of the closer relatedness of phenotyped worker brood to its super or half sisters (used as queens) in the next generation than to the gametes (drones) of queens used to inseminate those queens (Laidlaw and Page 1986). The initial twofold difference in fecundity between Italian colonies and three pure VSH colonies (which had been bred for a number of generations for reduced mite reproduction in brood) was the most striking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting honeybees for worker brood that reduces the reproduction of Varroa destructor

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-We investigated an effect of Apis mellifera worker brood on the reproduction of Varroa destructor as a resistance trait by conducting seven generations of bidirectional selection. Initial tests showed twofold differences in mite fecundity (progeny per foundress mites) between colonies of different origins. In the first two generations of selection, low and high lines differed significantly in mite fecundity (2.6 vs. 2.9 and 2.3 vs. 2.8), but in five subsequent generations the average values of the low fecundity lines (ranges of 2.7 to 3.3) became indistinguishable from high lines (2.9 to 3.1). Similarly, the relationship between mite fecundity in 117 offspring colonies and in their 26 queen and 22 drone parent colonies was partly significant in the first three generations but not in subsequent generations. These findings suggest that adaptation of mites to host cues, loss of resistance alleles in a small breeding population, or environmental effects present challenges to breeding for this trait.Varroa destructor / selection / honeybee / reproduction / heritability

show abstract

Mating Designs

Cited by 66 publications

References 41 publications

Development of the Honey Bee Gut Microbiome throughout the Queen-Rearing Process

Development of the Honey Bee Gut Microbiome throughout the Queen-Rearing Process

Morphometry and number of spermatozoa in drone honeybees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) reared under different conditions

Selecting honeybees for worker brood that reduces the reproduction of Varroa destructor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About