|
by PATTI J. ELZEN, Ph.D
USDA-ARS
Weslaco, TX
We in the research community receive frequent requests for information
on alternative means of controlling varroa in managed hives.
This is particularly relevant in light of failures of the currently
registered compounds to control varroa that have developed resistance
to these compounds. In this column I'd like to cover one approach
that I've gotten several queries about - use of food grade mineral
oil to reduce varroa in hives.
Late last year I received a
call from Bob Brachmann in New York asking if I could give him
guidance on how to set up a trial to test mineral oil. If mites
are present, an efficacy trial is actually quite easy to do.
I advised Bob he needed to compare the food grade mineral oil
treatment with a standard industry treatment (he chose coumaphos)
and a reference untreated "control". These three groupings
then needed to be replicated, so that variation in hive responses
could be measured and used for analysis of data.
Bob chose to run three hives per group - three food grade mineral
oil hives, three coumaphos hives, and three untreated hives.
The food grade mineral oil was applied using an atomizer, the
coumaphos was applied as a strip in the brood nest and the control
was untreated. The final factor to consider was how to measure
the mite numbers, PRIOR TO and AFTER treatment. It is very important
to have a pre-treatment assessment - without having
a number of how many mites there were to start, how would one
know if the treatment actually reduced mite numbers? Bob chose
to use an alcohol wash of a known number of bees from each hive.
This is a good method - more accurate than ether rolls and less
cumbersome than sticky boards. The trial was set up on March
22, 2003 in Virginia, and resampled for post-treatment mite numbers
on April 6, 2003. In working out the plan, Bob was very clear
he would be using Russian bees in the trial, in an effort to
conduct not just an efficacy trial, but also the integration
of two control techniques - host resistance and non-synthetic
pesticides. Combining the methods would not be expected to confound
the results - all nine colonies were Russian, so all colonies
were comparable. Only treatment was varied.
What Bob found was the coumaphos gave 100% reduction of mites
during the treatment interval and the untreated hives remained
about the same overall. The food grade mineral oil treatment
gave 69.4% reduction of mites at the final assessment.
As I have stated elsewhere, the idea of combining multiple tactics
for varroa control is one of the best long-term strategies for
pesticide use reduction, minimization of resistance, and environmental
safety (to bees and humans). The value of 69.4% reduction is
quite acceptable when used in coordination with another control
tactic; here as Bob chose, of a partially-resistant bee line.
The real proof of the pudding comes over long-term success of
the multiple strategies - can the two together, while not giving
100% control on their own, add up to effective control and colony
survival over the long haul? This is the next step in pursuing
an approach such as this in generating data on food grade mineral
oil - a step I will take in an upcoming trial building on the
trial Bob conducted. How difficult it would be to pursue food
grade mineral oil registration for in-hive use is another matter
which deserves consideration.
The adoption of food grade mineral oil in controlling varroa
could be another tactic to use in rotation for a successful management
program. Currently the Weslaco lab is generating data to submit
to the EPA for registration of two natural compounds, both of
which could also serve as additional rotational materials. Other
compounds are being investigated experimentally at the present
time, but it may be quite some time before they would be considered
for approved registration.
In the final analysis, what the industry needs is as many control
tactics as possible for integration into a comprehensive management
plan. The more compounds we have to use in a rotational plan,
the better.
*
Disclaimer: Mention of a proprietary product does not constitute
endorsement by the USDA.
|