Progress 03/01/08 to 02/28/11
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Updates and results of this research project were disseminated to communities of interest mainly through oral presentations at national, regional, state, and local meetings and master beekeepers program training sessions and workshops. A preliminary results progress report titled "a test for sub-acute effects of commonly-used beehive chemicals" was given orally at the January 2010 American Bee Research Conference held in Orlando , FL.(85 present). An oral presentation titled "A test for sub-acute effects of some common varroa miticides" was given on this project at the American Bee Research Conference held in Gainesville, FL. in 2009. A presentation was given at a workshop discussing the project at the Eastern Apicultural Society annual conference held in Ellicottville, NY. in 2009 where 140 beekeepers and scientists were present. A brief discussion of the project results were presented at the NC 1173 annual meeting which was held in Galveston, Texas in January 2011 where 31 bee scientists were present. In 2011, an oral presentation of the results of this project was given at a workshop on pollinator issues to EPA national headquarters staff. In May 2011, an oral presentation on the results of this project titled "Sublethal effects of miticides" was given at the University of Georgia Beekeeping Institute held at Young Harris College, GA. A project update, preliminary results, or final results were presented orally at six state beekeeper association meetings during the life of the project including: the 2008 South Carolina Beekeepers Assoc. summer conference workshop (65 present); the 2009 Mississippi State Beekeepers Assoc. annual training and workshop (74 present), the 2009 joint meeting of the North Carolina State Beekeepers Assoc. and the South Carolina Beekeepers Assoc. (530 present); the 2010 Virginia State Beekeepers Assoc. annual spring meeting (135 present); the 2010 Georgia State Beekeepers Assoc. fall conference (195 present); and the 2010 South Carolina Beekeepers Assoc. annual summer meeting (148 present). Project results were presented orally at two local beekeepers association meetings in South Carolina: Oconee County Beekeepers Association in 2009 (41 present) and the Charleston Area Beekeepers Assoc. meeting in 2010 (38 present). Project updates, preliminary results or results were presented orally during several South Carolina Master Beekeeper Program training sessions including: 2008 journeyman level short course hosted by the Pickens County Beekeepers Assoc. (31 present); 2009 certified level short course hosted by the Lakeland Beekeepers Assoc. in Greenwood (65 present); 2009 journeyman level short course offered at the South Carolina Beekeepers Assoc. annual summer conference at Clemson University (115 present); 2010 certified level short course hosted by the Edisto Beekeepers Assoc. in Blackville (38 present); 2010 certified level short course hosted by the Low Country Beekeepers Assoc. (40 present); 2011 certified level short course hosted by the Oconee County Beekeepers Assoc. in Walhalla (29 present); and the 2011 certified level short course hosted by the Anderson County Beekeepers Assoc. in Starr (32 present). PARTICIPANTS: Keith Delaplane and Jennifer Berry, University of Georgia cooperators and William M. Hood, Clemson University cooperator. Maxcy P. Nolan IV, Graduate Student, Clemson University, assisted in this research. Barbara Tate, Research Assistant, Clemson University, assisted in this resarch. Roger Simonds, USDA Agricultural Marketing Service Science and Technology Programs Field Lab, Gastonia, NC, analyzed beeswax samples for pesticide residues. TARGET AUDIENCES: Target audiences for this research project are apicultural scientists, extension apicultural specialists, extension apicultural/agricultural agents and all beekeepers in the United States. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: No major changes in approach were taken in this research project other than additonal beehive chemicals were included in these investigations and end of season analyses of beeswax for chemical residues were conducted and reported.
Impacts
This regional research project was conducted and replicated annually over a two year period in two states, GA and SC, beginning in Apr 2008. We examined sub-lethal effects of selected beehive chemicals including two registered products, Apistan (fluvalinate) and CheckMite+ (coumaphos), two off label products, Maverick (fluvalinate) and Taktic (amitraz), and Cu-napthenate, a bottom board chemical treatment. Varroa mite levels (mites/100 bees) were significantly higher in non-treated colonies than colonies treated with Amitraz. Queen cell construction (number of queen cells) occurring in CheckMite treated colonies (3.3) was significantly greater (P<0.05) when compared to non-treated colonies (0.5). There was no significant difference (P>0.05) in cumulative adult mortality over a 30 day period between colonies of the six treatments. Approximately 38% cumulative mortality occurred in all treatments by day 12. A slight numerical increase occurred in foraging rates (bees exiting hive/minute) in non-treated colonies(31.1) when compared to other treatments: CheckMite (27.4), Amitraz (27.2), Mavrik (27.1), Apistan (25.9), and Cu-napthenate (25.1). Arrival times for the mark-release-recapture rates were significantly higher (P<0.05)in Mavrik treated colonies(560 sec.)when compared to Apistan treated colonies (410 sec.) All other treatments were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in the brood viability test. There was a significant increase(P<0.05) in number of frames of adult bees in the Amitraz treated colonies (7.1)compared to the Apistan treated colonies (4.9)and the CheckMite treated colonies (5.4). There was no significant difference in the non-treated colonies (6.0) compared to the chemical treated colonies. There was no significant difference in frames of brood and honey among the various chemically treated colonies compared to the non-treated colonies. There was no difference in the sum of antennal contacts with queens. For the proboscis extension test (PET),there was no significant difference in the sum of bees remembering or the percentage of bees remembering among the various treatments. Although extreme care was taken to use new beehive equipment without any trace of chemical contamination, we followed up at the end of each test year with single beeswax residue(in each state for a total of 4 samples of each treatment)analysis conducted by USDA National Science Lab, Gastonia, NC. CheckMite treated colonies had residues of 208.02 PPM CheckMite and 0.11 PPM Apistan. Apistan treated colonies had residues of 11.2 PPM Apistan and 0.20 PPM CheckMite. Taktic treated colonies had residues of 1.00 PPM Apistan, 0.2 PPM CheckMite, and nd PPM Taktic. Non-treated control colonies had residues of 0.02 PPM Apistan and 2.62 PPM CheckMite. The only chemical exceeding EPA tolerance levels (100 PPM CheckMite)was the CheckMite treated colonies reporting an average of 208.02 PPM CheckMite. Therefore, in these investigations, CheckMite treated colonies had over twice the EPA tolerance level of coumaphos and control colonies which were not treated had 2.62 PPM coumaphos which should be of much interest to the beekeeping community.
Publications
- Delaplane, K.S. and Berry, J.A. 2010. Test for sub-lethal effects of some commonly used hive chemicals, year two. Proc. 2010 American Bee Research Conf., Orlando, Florida. Published in the American Bee Journal, Vol. 150, No. 5. pp. 498-499. Delaplane, K.S. and J.A. Berry. 2009. A test for sub-lethal effects of some commonly used hive chemicals . Proc. 2009 American Bee Research Conference, Gainesville, FL. Published in the American Bee Research Journal, vo. 149, No. 6. P. 586.
|
Progress 03/01/09 to 02/28/10
Outputs
OUTPUTS: A year 2 oral presentation report on this project was given at the American Bee Research Conference held on 14-15 January 2010 in Orlando, Florida. A year 2 oral presentation report of this project was given at the Georgia State Beekeepers Association annual winter meeting held in Moultrie, Georgia on 12 February 2010. PARTICIPANTS: Barbara Tate, research assistant (Clemson University), and Justin Cannon, undergraduate student (Clemson University) worked on this project for year 2. Roger Simonds, USDA Agricultural marketing Service and Technology Programs Field Lab, Gastonia, NC, analyzed beeswax samples for pesticide residues. Keith Delaplane (professor UGA), Jennifer Berry (UGA research assistant)and Brett Nolan (UGA graduate student) worked on this project. Year 2 of this project provided first time exposure to apicultural research and training for Justin Cannon (undergraduate student, Clemson University). TARGET AUDIENCES: Target audiences for this research are apicultural scientists, extension apicultural specialists, extension agricultural agents and all beekeepers in the US. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Year 2 research on the project began the first week of April 2009 with the establishment of 24 colonies using 3# packages of honey bees and queens placed in Langstroth beehives. Hive frames were fitted with small strips of uncoated plastic foundation to prevent any initial pesticide contamination in wax. Eight colonies were randomly selected to receive one of three treatments: (1) two strips of Apistan, (2) two strips of Check Mite +, or (3) no treatment as control. Forty-two day treatments were conducted in May and August. Adult bee population, sealed brood, and honey production were measured on day 0 and 42. Bee foraging rates were measured twice during each treatment period. Brood survivorship was measuered at days 7,14, 35, 42. Emerging adults were weighed and cumulative mortality rates were monitored. Proboscis extension response assays were conducted and worker sensitivity to queen mandibular pheromone was assessed. One beeswax composite sample was collected at the end of year 2 research from each of the three treatments for pesticide residue analysis, which was conducted by the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service Science & Technology Programs Field Lab in Gastonia, NC. The coumaphos treatment composite wax sample yeilded 293,000 PPB coumaphos and 20.4 PPB fluvalinate. The fluvalinate treatment composite wax sample yielded 8,230 PPB fluvalinate and 170 PPB coumaphos. The control treatment composite wax sample yielded 28.2 PPB fluvalinate and 390 PPB coumaphos and 12.5 PPB coumaphos oxon. Small amounts of fluvalinate and coumaphos showed up in beeswax collected from control colonies even though extreme caution was exercized to prevent this from occurring. This discovery will reinforce the theory that even though beekeepers may not use pesticides in their colonies, there will always be a chance of wax contamination possible. Other data collected during year 2 of the project are now being analyzed. Results of both years data, 2008 and 2009, will be combined and further analyzed in 2010. The University of Georgia Honey Bee Lab conducted an additional replication of this project as stated above and results of both state's research will be further combined and analyzed.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 03/01/08 to 02/28/09
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Field research on this project was initiated on 1 April 2008. Twenty-four colonies were established using 3# packages of bees and queen placed in new Langstroth beehives using small strips of uncoated plastic foundation. Eight colonies were randomly selected to receive one of three treatment: (1) two strips of Apistan (2) two strips of Check Mite+, or (3) no treatment as control. Forty-two day treatments were conducted in May and August. Adult bee population, sealed brood, and honey production were measured on day 0 and 42. Bee foraging rates were measured twice during each treatment period. Brood survivorship was measured at days 7,14,35 and 42. Emerging adults were weighed and cumulative mortality rates were monitored. Proboscis extension response assays were conducted and worker sensitivity to queen mandibular pheromone was assessed. One beewax samples was taken from each of the three treatments for pesticide residue analysis which was conducted by the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service Science & Technolgy Programs Field Lab in Gastonia, NC. Some supercedure problems occurred during the year and some queens were replaced. The results from this first year of researh are too preliminary to establish any long term outcomes/impacts of the project. Year two of the project will begin in April 2009. However, the impact of this research will lead to a better understanding of how sublethal doses of commonly used pesticides effect honey bee colony health. PARTICIPANTS: Keith Delaplane and Jennifer Berry, University of Georgia cooperators. Maxcy P. Nolan IV, Graduate Student, Clemson University, assisted in this research. Barbara Tate, Research Assistant, Clemson University, assisted in this resarch. Roger Simonds, USDA Agricutural Marketing Service Science and Technology Programs Field Lab, Gastonia, NC, analyzed beeswax samples for pesticide residues. TARGET AUDIENCES: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: The first pesticide treatments were conducted 30 days later than proposed, because package bees had to be purchased, installed in colonies on 1 April, and allowed to become established prior to treatment. Uncoated strips of plastic foundation was used to provide a base for the bees to build comb because no pesticide-uncontaminated beeswax could be located to begin the project.
Impacts
No outcomes available for first year.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|