| Food Grade
Mineral Oil [FGMO] for Mite Control: 11th Anniversary American Bee Journal - December, 2004 |
|
by DR. PEDRO P. RODRIGUEZ Anecdotal Contributions
Introduction At a time when great numbers of honey bee colonies are being lost due to massive infestation by honey bee mites, it seems proper to evaluate numerous factors that have evolved during the last decade using food grade mineral oil for the management of honey bee external parasites. This evaluation is of interest since FGMO used according to strict guidelines (protocol) has demonstrated to be a cost-effective alternative means for managing honey bee parasites, especially since it has been demonstrated that honey bee parasites are having an enormous influence on the beekeeping industry in particular and of agriculture in general since so much depends on the activities of honey bees for pollination resulting in a very definite increment of costs for services and products. Qualifications The FGMO (short for Food Grade Mineral Oil) management concept for honey bee parasites did not develop by chance or fluke happening. The FGMO concept was developed by a beekeeper with fifty five years experience in beekeeping, a bachelor's degree in animal husbandry and a doctor's degree in veterinary medicine, retired from USDA employment (disease eradication, food service, epidemiological surveys) and private veterinary practice. As a student, the developer of the FGMO concept had the privilege of working as a member of university research groups (i.e. the cardiovascular research group in the Hahnneman Medical College, Philadelphia, PA and the College of Agriculture and Mechanical Arts, University of Puerto Rico), obtaining by virtue of his education and training during his student and professional employment, ample knowledge for development of scientific research projects. Background Selection of food grade mineral oil was not made per chance or blindly. Food grade mineral oil was chosen because of its known qualities as a non-chemical agent used by medical facilities and food packing industries as a non-contaminating lubricant. Long, careful preparations and literary research were made prior to initiating treatment of honey bee parasitic mites. Professional use of food grade mineral oil for treatment of leg mites in birds and ear mites in cats and rabbits inspired the thought of using FGMO for treatment of honey bee parasites. Many unknown factors had to be approached in order to determine if the use of FGMO would be effective against mites without harming honey bees. Research for the mechanism of action of FGMO became a fundamental issue in order to make its use credible. Literary Research and Laboratory Trials Soon after the appearance of honey bee parasitic mites, it became widely known that the very existence of honey bees was at stake and more ominous yet, that untreated hives would die within a year or two. Worsening the situation, it was soon discovered that mites were developing resistance to chemicals introduced for specific management of these parasites. Complications arose from the fact that these chemicals are expensive, have toxic characteristics that may threaten not only the health of honey bees and can lead to contamination of hive products becoming harmful to consumers. Obviously there was need for cost-effective and safe means of treatment that guaranteed the wholesomeness of hive products and consumers and safety of the environment. It was thought that FGMO met those requirements and a strict protocol was designed and implemented. Trials with FGMO in search of the necessary remedy were begun in 1993. Biology and Characteristics of Honey bee Parasitic Mites Until now, one of the difficulties for treatment of honey bee parasitic mites has been that mites have two stages in their life: a developmental stage deep inside the bee larvae and one stage actively feeding on the surface of adult bees, called phoretic stage. This stage is very important because in this stage is the only time when mites are vulnerable to treatment without harming the bees. I learned early in my initial phase of discovery that mites are vulnerable to FGMO in several ways, depriving the mites of oxygen and fluids necessary for completion of their biologic processes. 1). Breathing mechanism of mites. The existence of the mites depend on successful sucking hemolymph (bee blood) from honey bees hence effective treatment of these parasites can be achieved by means that block their activities. Searching for information that would interfere with their mode of feeding, I read that a British research team [Pugh, King and Fordy, Experimental and Applied Acarology, 15(2): 123-129] had determined that female Varroa mites keep their respiratory orifices open when feeding, giving me the idea that mites could be killed by asphyxia if their respiratory system were to be blocked. A thought came to mind, would FGMO kill bees as well? It was quickly determined that it did, thus it was obvious that one needed to employ methods that would not put the life of the bees at risk. My knowledge of the anatomy of mites and that of bees promptly provided the answer to this puzzle utilizing the difference in size of their respiratory system. I thought that FGMO would have to be reduced to particles large enough to block the breathing mechanism of the mites but not that of the bees. Market research lead me to a thermal fogging machine, The Burgess Insect Propane Fogger* that reduces FGMO particles to fog. Laboratory trials determined that in fact, FGMO applied in the form of thermal fog does kill Varroa mites but not honey bees. An additional bonus was discovered simultaneously since thermal fog penetrates the respiratory system of the honey bee providing a very effective weapon against tracheal mites thus eliminating treatments that depend on migration of the tracheal mites to a new host. Constant dissection of honey bee tracheas demonstrated early in my research project total elimination of tracheal mites in colonies treated with FGMO thermal fog. Shortly after, this fact was verified by a beekeeper in the Spanish Canary Island of La Palma, who posted on www.beesource.com forum that he "had not seen cleaner trachea in his bees" since he started using FGMO fog. (*) Please read instructions in the manual provided with the Burgess Propane Insect Fogger. 2). Attachment mechanism of the mites. Mites depend on structures on their feet to cling to the surfaces on which they walk, giving rise to another question. Could these structures be altered to prevent the mites from clinging to the bees? The idea was laboratory tested promptly. Mites were carefully transferred to Petri dishes with the walls previously smeared with a minute film of FGMO. It was readily observed that healthy mites that previously were moving around freely could no longer crawl up on the walls of treated Petri dishes. This principle was put to practice utilizing the Burgess Insect Fogger to fog honey bee colonies. The intention was to provide the bees with a film of FGMO creating a slick surface to which the mites could not cling. The effectiveness of this procedure was readily demonstrated by observation of increased mite drop numbers. 3). Form of application of FGMO. Many forms of application of FGMO were developed and researched looking for cost-effective means of application and continuity of medication within the hives. This search lead to development of an FGMO formula for soaking cotton cords to place within the hive from which the bees would become exposed to FGMO. Intensive research lead to discovery of an economic homemade formula that would utilize hive products that attract bees. This formula provided another bonus. The bees would be attracted to the emulsion-soaked cords and become actively engaged in removing the cords. It was observed that the bees that came in contact with the emulsion, began to comb themselves promptly, thus stimulating their hygienic behaviour contributing to make their body surface sleek further enhance by the bees picking off mites. As with thermal fogging, effectiveness of this methodology was demonstrated by increased mite drop counts. Subsequent trials and reports from contributing beekeepers have demonstrated that mites can be treated with FGMO fog alone, with FGMO emulsion soaked cords and or fogging and cords. Use of fogging and cords simultaneously has been determined to be the most effective form of application. 4). Research and development. Research and development with FGMO demonstrated that utilization of thymol as a synergist greatly increased the effectiveness of FGMO contributing to increasing mite drop ratios. Utilization of FGMO/thymol has an added advantage. Mites that come in contact with FGMO/thymol drop readily preventing them from returning to the bee cells to continue their reproductive cycle hence there is no opportunity for mites to develop resistance to FGMO/thymol treatments. 5). Absence of residues in hive products. Honey and wax taken from colonies that had been under treatment with FGMO during three consecutive years were submitted for gas chromatography analysis. These tests revealed no traces of either FGMO or thymol thus demonstrating that FGMO/thymol used according to the protocol developed during these trails were effective and safe. World-wide recognition The merits of FGMO have been slowly recognized due to several factors, primarily slow mite removal action and negative comments from those who contrast FGMO with chemical pesticides. Yet, hundreds of beekeepers around the world are writing to tell about their experiences and success with FGMO. These are reports from individuals and associations who are eagerly seeking alternative means to fight honey bee parasites and who welcome innovative non-chemical substances that promise effective removal of parasites without fear of contamination of hive products and development of resistance by the parasites as evidenced from field reports on the use of chemical pesticides. Contrary to synthetic chemicals, especially when applied as thermal fog with a propane fogger, treatments with FGMO are safe and very economic. The propane fogger converts one ounce of FGMO into 2000 cubic feet of fog sufficient to treat large numbers of hives in a very short time. As reported previously, FGMO is found to be most effective when FGMO is applied in fog form simultaneously with emulsion-soaked cotton cords adding efficiency and reduced costs. As demonstrated by testimonials from FGMO users, success is being obtained by beekeepers who are using a variety of modes of application: thermal fogging alone, emulsion soaked cords separately, or the combination of cords and fog. Application of FGMO is proving to be a cost-effective alternative means of treatment under a wide variety of colony management procedures and environmental differences around the world. Our research and reports from contributing beekeepers show increased bee populations, increased honey production and increased colony longevity. Beekeepers report enjoying the pleasure of working with colonies as much as six years old. While the number of colonies under treatment may not represent a comparative size to that of commercial operators, and though operated under different management conditions, the results obtained with FGMO are very valuable, as the method is proving to be for participating beekeepers around the world. The threshold management practice is flawed primarily because it requires constant monitoring, a technique about which most beekeepers are not familiar and are not willing to spend the required time to accomplish the task. End result, beekeepers become aware that they have a problem when their hives begin to collapse under huge numbers of mites especially in the latter part of the summer and early fall. I acquired this knowledge during my early stages of research through observation of my hives. I developed a technique (published in earlier articles) that determined the source of these sudden huge surges of mites in colonies that had recently appeared free of mites. Bees from healthy hives visit heavily infested weak hives to rob them and bring home not only the honey they rob but also heavy loads of mites which begin to multiply in the larvae of their new home at incredible rates. Also weak, heavily mite-infested hives become stressed and tend to abscond taking with them heavy mite loads spreading mites to their new location. Proponents of treatment with synthetic chemicals allege that beekeepers should monitor their mite populations and treat only after certain thresholds are met while FGMO treatments are recommended to be continued as long as mites are observed among the bee population. The reasoning for this difference of opinion is very simple. Beekeepers who utilize the threshold theory before initiating treatment, face the risk of having resistant mite populations which will not respond to treatment at the time when they feel they have reached the threshold for treatment, hence they will incur not only in the loss of the cost of treatment but also in the loss of colonies that will not survive such heavy mite build up. On the contrary, beekeepers applying treatments with FGMO/thymol remove mites continuously preventing overwhelming mite build-up, reaping benefits from mite-free colonies. While it is true that some mites die during their confinement in the larval stage, these deaths are insignificant when the mites are allowed to proliferate uncontrolled as proposed by the proponents of the threshold theory. Some defend their posture alleging that not all the eggs laid become mature female mites. This assumption is also flawed especially during months of abundance of drones. Even if half of the female eggs grow to maturity, millions of female mites grow into maturity overwhelming the bees' ability to cope with them. This is especially true during the summer months when harvesting bees rob weakened hives heavily infested by mites. The old saying, "an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of medicine," may be quite applicable under these circumstances. Graphics utilized to demonstrate the rate of breeding of mites based on rate of reproduction of 5x in a 12-day cycle reveal that 48,828,125 mites have been produced in a period of 120 days. This period of time happens to coincide with the time when honey supers are on and the use of chemical pesticides is not allowed. Unfortunately, at this time drone production is high contributing to mite population increase. By the time when the use of chemical pesticides is permitted, colonies are on the way to collapse. This is not the case with FGMO since it is a non-contaminating substance as determined by laboratory gas chromatography analysis. On the 14th and 15th of September 2004, a small but very revealing test was run to demonstrate mite ratios with 4 colonies standing side-by-side treated with FGMO/thymol emulsion soaked cords and thermal fog contrasted with 29 colonies under threshold type management treated with FGMO fog alone. All test colonies were equipped with screened bottom boards and removable bottom sticky trap trays lined with waxed paper smeared with food grade mineral oil. Mite drop counts were performed at 24-hour periods.
Contrast and Comparison There is a marked difference in the number of mites while monitoring natural mite drop counts and mite drop counts after treatment. As shown in the graph below, mite growth is exponential. Colonies managed with a continued form of treatment with FGMO/thymol definitely show mite populations under control in which mite drop counts are low both during natural mite drop counts as well as after treatment. Conversely, monitoring of mites in colonies managed under the threshold theory reveal comparatively enormous mite growth during natural mite drop and after treatment mite drop counts.
Conclusion It is common knowledge that bee colonies are collapsing at a worrisome rate for beekeepers, agriculture and related industries. The reason(s) for this failure is known also; failure to control honey bee parasitic mites and consequent invasion by other disease causing organisms cohabiting with the mites in the bee colonies. Beekeepers are desperate. Some are willing to try new controls while others are throwing up their arms in disgust, quitting. Regardless of the "sounding of the drums," those of us who know about honey bees and who care about the ominous catastrophe (as explicitly told by Albert Einstein) keep our chins up and continue to search for solutions to the problem. It is common knowledge that chemical pesticides alone have not been able to control the mite's rampage. On the other hand, some of us have discovered alternative means to stall their development until such a time when "a silver bullet" is discovered. There is little doubt that there is a place for alternative control means as told in multiple reports and media. Obviously, chemical laboratories have not been able to control the onslaught brought by the mites in more than a decade, not withstanding immense costs to the beekeeping industry. Beekeepers need to pool our resources together and accept the help provided by alternative means to contain the damage done by these parasites. Eleven years of continued research with food grade mineral oil and accessories, as demonstrated by the voice of those who are willing to use the established protocol developed during these years, has demonstrated the use of food grade mineral oil (FGMO) to be a cost-effective alternative means for the control of honey bee mites. FGMO has proved to be effective when using a strict proven protocol. Some recent publications with obscured motives by those who claim FGMO to be ineffective, show that none of the authors have demonstrated that they have used the established protocol that is proving otherwise for beekeepers worldwide. It is widely known that inability of the users to follow instructions for application is the main reason for failure of chemical treatments and development of resistance by the mites. Fortunately, there is no possibility for development of resistance to FGMO even when used improperly. Across time, honest empirical research has led to incredible discoveries and is always welcome and necessary. Improvement of past discoveries are continuously leading to beneficial findings to society. Experience tells us in our daily encounters that those who attempt to "re-invent the wheel" for their own glory and benefit fail to convince their audience. Let us not scorn honest work and accept every help, small as it might be, in a time of disaster for apiculture and its ominous message for humanity. Let us accept alternative means with dignity. According to the testimony of those who have used it in earnest, FGMO has earned its place in apiculture as a cost-effective alternative means for the control of honey bee mites and deserves to be accepted as such. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
