






 |
ERIC H. ERICKSON
Few beekeepers question whether their systems of bee breeding
and colony management adversely affect the normal biological
processes of honey bees. And even fewer consider assuring that
the environment within the hive is "natural" - as close
as possible to that which is optimal for honey bee survival.
It seems that we have come to expect that honey bee colonies
are generic and are only found in nearly square white boxes just
as children believe that milk comes from paper or plastic containers.
The fact is, of course, that before the intervention of beekeepers,
feral (wild) honey bees were (and still are) highly adapted to
native habitats and utilize as domiciles naturally occurring
cavities in living trees, rock crevices, ground holes and other
similar spaces. As beekeepers, we assume that the white boxes
we provide as hives are somehow adequate if not better than natural
cavities. We find it difficult to understand why, given our breeding
and management strategies, our bees are often unable to withstand
the onslaughts of weather, diseases, mites and perhaps even the
incursion of Africanized bees. The fact is that from the very
moment we place bees in artificial wooden hives, we impose upon
them a large measure of stress.
Natural ...
When a honey bee swarm exits a natural cavity in search of a
new domicile it is, under normal circumstances, guided entirely
by its own instincts. It exercises these instincts in the selection
of a well insulated, properly sized cavity. Herein it builds
comb using inherent skills. The attachment of these combs to
the interior ceiling and walls of the cavity as well as a small
upper entrance establishes relatively stable thermal and humidity
zones for brood rearing and communication. This construction
greatly restricts the movement of bees, air and hive odors. The
newly founded colony will rear its young, establish its own defenses
against enemies (diseases, parasites and predators) and gather
and store provisions in a manner that ensures a nutritionally
adequate and well balanced diet. If it fails in these endeavors,
for whatever reason, the population declines and with continued
failure, dies. Shortly thereafter, wax moths move in to clean
(by destroying the combs) and restore the cavity to its nearly
original state.
This housekeeping force readies the cavity for the next
swarm. In this natural scenario, three biological facts are evident:
1) environmental stress imposed on this colony is minimal;
2) colonies with genetic composition that reduces fitness for
survival are quickly eliminated, often before they can produce
drones; and
3) wax moths are beneficial insects that eliminate old and perhaps
contaminated food stores, toxins and disease organisms. This
cavity restoration assures that new swarms construct new, uncontaminated
combs for brood rearing and food storage.
Artificial...
But then mankind, as a not-so-benevolent keeper of bees, enters
the scene and, usually unknowingly, imposes stress. The beekeeper
captures that swarm, hives it in an uninsulated, free standing,
oversized box and forces it to build comb. The cells may be highly
variable in size depending on the foundation used. The flow of
interior air and hive odors is greatly increased by the additional
space around removeable frames and between hive bodies and by
an enlarged entrance placed at the bottom. This results in increased
energy expenditure by the bees for temperature and humidity control.
The bees are subjected to management schemes that result in exorbitantly
large populations and the removal of excessive quantities of
pollen and/or honey. The beekeeper alters the diet of the colony
first by stimulating increased levels of foraging and brood rearing
and then by selectively removing pollen and honey (e.g. early
season honey and/or pollen and leaving only late season stores
which often have lower nutritional value). Sometimes, these are
replaced with artificial substitutes. Both natural food quantity
as well as quality are thus altered.
Old, dark combs, usually contaminated by continuous exposure
to naturally-occuring microbes, plant toxins and man-made
pesticides, may be kept for thirty years or more. The bees are
bred for behavioral traits foreign to their survival (but in
harmony with their current environment) and are subjected, often
unprotected (except for an uninsulated box), to the environmental
extremes of winter cold, desert heat and/or more pesticides.
In this man-made scenario three facts, entirely different from
the natural scenario above, are evident: 1) domestic honey bee
colonies in box hives are subjected to stresses seldom encountered
in nature; 2) domestic colonies whose genetic fitness may be
reduced are nursed along, often unknowingly, so that undesirable
genes may be perpetuated; and 3) housekeeping chores normally
carried out by wax moths are added to the responsibilities of
worker bees or remain undone. Thus, toxins disease organisms
and other undesirable elements of the environment often accumultate
in the hive for many years, further reducing the ability of the
colony to function normally. The wonder then is not that so many
domestic colonies dwindle or succumb for whatever reason, but
rather that so many survive in spite of beekeepers!
It is upon this latter point that we must learn to focus if we
are to understand honey bee stress and then reduce it. Remember
that bees function like other insects, mammals and even human
beings. They learn and remember via both short - and long-term
memory but can be confused by exceptional or adverse elements.
For example, they sense and respond to their environment, but
they can adapt only within certain limits and thus may become
chilled or overheated. They function less efficiently under nutritional
stress and their immune system can be compromised by toxic elements
in the environment. The task is to recognize stress when it occurs
in domestic colonies and then to assist our bees through difficult
times.
STRESS..
Stress as it occurs in honey bees is still poorly defined. To
evaluate fully the effects of honey bee stress inducers, we need
to know much more than we presently do about the natural biology
of honey bees. Having said this, however, let us examine in detail
what we know and can presume about several probable sources of
honey bee stress.
CLIMATE, WEATHER AND THE BOX HIVE.
Among the elements stressing honey bees, few ravage domestic
colonies more than the weather. While feral colonies are for
the most part comfortable within their natural cavities, domestic
colonies in uninsulated hives must struggle to survive the seasonal
extremes of cold winters and hot summers If they survive, and
many do not, their productivity is significantly reduced. This
is not to say that feral colonies are not affected by seasonal
and climatic change - they probably are, but undoubtedly to a
far lesser degree due to the factors discussed below. They survive,
in part, because they still have the tools, acquired through
millennia of evolution, to cope with hardship.
In a living tree, the honey bee colony is surrounded (usually)
by several inches of heart and sap wood plus a layer of living
tissue (the cambium) and bark. The R value (1 divided by the
thermal conductivity of the material) for the cavity walls in
a living tree likely falls between 5 and 15 and perhaps higher,
although precise measurements are unavailable. The R factor for
a one-inch pine board (which is actually about 0.75 inch) is
1, essentially zero insulation (Wheast, 1980). Hence, the R factor
for a box hive is far different from that of the typical feral
colony. (Note: the R value for walls in new homes in many areas
of the United is R=19). The living tissue surrounding the
tree cavity generates some heat from metabolic processes. Moreover,
the cells of the cambium carry cool water from the soil to the
tree top, a function that likely thermally stabilizes or cools
the cavity slightly in summer. In the winter, the cambium is
supercooled but not frozen, thus contributing insulation in addition
to that of the cavity wall. In those areas of the world where
there are few if any trees large enough to accommodate a colony,
honey bees utilize rock crevices and ground holes. The
surrounding rock soil mass is a virtually unlimited thermal (and
humidity) buffer for these small caves, a point more easily understood
when one feels the air expelled at the entrance to a large underground
cavern in mid-summer or mid-winter.
Studies have shown that the temperature inside an uninsulated
box hive differs little from ambient temperature (Owens, 1971).
Thus, depending on locality, internal hive temperatures outside
of the cluster may range from -30 degrees Ferenheit (-34 degrees
Celius) to 115 degrees Ferenheit (46 degrees Celcius). This potential
145 degrees Ferenheit (70 degrees Celcius) temperature range
is undoubtedly far different than that of natural cavities which
probably vary by no more than plus or minus 30 degrees Ferenheit
(17 degrees Celcius) This concept is strengthened by the work
of Severson and Erickson (1985) who showed that in Wisconsin
the colonies' consumption of honey for the production of heat
does not vary with the severity of ambient winter temperatures.
Thus, one must assume that once the heating mechanism reaches
maximum output, all the bees can do to survive increasingly cold
conditions is to tighten the cluster. Other work (Erickson, unpublished)
indicates that during brood rearing worker bees maintain absolute
humidity at near saturation within the brood nest. During the
winter months, the humidity within the cluster is only slightly
lower. Since both heat and moisture production are accomplished
via the metabolism of honey, it must be assumed that both honey
stores and the physiological strength of bees are unnecessarily
reduced during winter in the uninsulated cavities of box hives.
Several studies have shown that honey bees can compensate for
and survive temperature extremes. However, what such studies
have not considered is the drain on the physiological resources
of the colony. The effects of this stress may well be significant
in terms of reduced brood rearing or foraging and shortened worker
bee life span.
COLONY SIZE.
The number of honey bees in a normal feral colony varies from
about 14,000 to 25,000 (Seeley and Morse, 1976). Beekeepers,
using a variety of strategies, are able to increase managed populations
to approximately 60,000 (Farrar, 1968). These strategies include
increasing available brood nest space (e.g. cavity size), reversing
the brood nest, stimulative feeding and breeding honeybee stocks
for increased brood production.
The basic design of the Langstroth hive may also contribute to
the increased size of managed populations. For example, the spaces
created by the development of the moveable frame greatly alters
air flow patterns within the hive. This increase in the potential
for air movement is further enhanced by beekeeper efforts to
ventilate hives and provide a greatly enlarged entrance relocated
at the bottom of the cavity. Conversely, the natural cavity that
the bees choose has combs that are attached to the ceiling and
walls. Air exchange is restricted between the large, undulating,
pendulous combs. Ventilation is greatly reduced by an upper (usually)
entrance, generally a tiny knothole, crack or crevice (Avitabile
et al, 1978).
We know that colony integrity is maintained, at least in part,
by pheromones - those chemicals produced externally by bees (Gary,
1975). Gaseous products of in-hive metabolism, such as water,
ethylene and carbon dioxide may also regulate bee activity and
behavior. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that excessive
air circulation within the box hive and ventilation at the entrance
significantly alter concentrations of these bioregulators.
It is argued that in cold climates, colonies must be ventilated
to prevent the build-up of moisture and ice in the colony. But,
this excess water is the product of condensation on the uninsulated
walls of box hives (Detroy et. al., 1982). Thus, both condensation
and ventilation draw moisture from the cluster, stressing the
bees by causing them to step up the metabolism of honey to maintain
both temperature and humidity in their "comfort zone"
COMB CELL SIZE.
Unbeknownst to most beekeepers, the issue of the relative size
of the cells of honeycomb (and foundation) has been the subject
of controversy since the late 1800s and perhaps earlier (Erickson
et al., 1990) when, in Europe, the diameter of the raised imprint
of the cell on manufactured foundation was 5.0 mm. However, Baudoux,
beginning in the late 1800s, conducted a series of experiments
which demonstrated that this smaller than natural size induced
developmental abnormalities in bees and reduced colony productivity.
In further experiments, be demonstrated that larger bees with
longer tongues could be produced in abnormally large (6.0 mm,
diameter) cells. Finally, be purported to show that this increased
size would result in greater colony productivity and that the
size of bees in subsequent generations would be inherited. Baudoux's
latter two views have since been debunked. More recent studies
(Grout, 1937) failed to provide scientific evidence for increased
honey production by colonies with bees produced in larger cells.
What has emerged from all of this is the concept that bigger
is better - but is it? The current industry standard for cell
size on manufactured foundation is 5.4 mm or larger. But the
diameter of cells instinctively built by honey bees is slightly
less than 5.2 mm (see Erickson et. al., 1990). The difference
in cell size means that more bees can be produced per unit area
in a brood nest of small cells. This translates into more rapid
spring buildup an d probably less metabolic energy expended in
the production of each bee. It might also result in a shortened
time for larval/pupal development.
Here, the issue of stress must again be raised. Do enlarged cells
stress bees just as Baudoux demonstrated for abnormally small
cells (see Erickson et al., 1990)? Could nutritional, wintering,
disease and mite problems be reduced by returning to natural
cell size at least in brood nest combs?
COMB AGE.
Beekeepers usually prefer to retain the old combs in their hives
for many (20 to 40) years as opposed to replacing them. They
believe that the process of comb building, the conversion of
honey into wax, significantly reduces net colony honey production.
However, I am unaware of any scientific data to support this
contention.
The honey produced in old, dark comb is usually darker in color,
and the bees may be smaller due to residue buildup within the
cells. Many organic molecules and most pesticides are lipophillic
(fat and wax -loving"). This, of course, includes beeswax
which is one of the most efficient waxes in this regard. Because
of their high lipid affinity, many toxic and potentially hazardous
substances from the environment are bound up in beeswax combs.
Thus, it can be argued that the wax produced by bees serves as
the -liver" of the colony by providing a natural cleaning
mechanism in the hive. Such a mechanism would ensure a clean
environment for brood rearing and supply of healthy, palatable
food, but the ability of wax combs to absorb toxicants is not
unlimited. Hence, the struggle to keep colonies vigorous
on old combs seems much like trying to keep a patient alive with
a cirrhotic liver. It is likely that the perceived savings from
the retention of old combs would be more than offset when new
combs increase the productivity of healthy colonies and reduce
reliance on medications and supplemental feeding. This has long
been the contention of Mr. Glen Stanley, Des Moines, Iowa (pers.
comm.).
Like all worlds, that of the honey bee is filled with hazards
not the least of which are naturally occurring toxins. There
are, for example, toxins in the nectar and pollen of some plants
as well as toxins produced externally by fungi that may develop
on these floral products. Still, bees gather these materials,
usually without harmful side effects. Perhaps, if we understand
all of the natural mechanisms like beeswax that protect bees
from such toxins, we may be able to utilize these to protect
our colonies from pesticides and other manmade chemical hazards.
PROPOLIS.
Propolis is an admixture of plant resins, beeswax and hive debris.
Worker bees use some kind of solvent, probably glandular in origin,
to mix these materials into the familiar brown, sticky substance
that many beekeepers find objectionable. Strains of bees that
produce very little propolis have been developed.
Propolis is likely highly beneficial to bees because it contains
antimicrobial chemicals called terpenes. Terpenes such as pinene,
limonene and geraniol, just to name a few, are well known bacteriocides,
fungicides and miticides. Such terpenes have been shown to be
of great importance in the biologies of other insects. Thus,
one can readily speculate that the reduction of propolis in domestic
beehives may have rendered our colonies more susceptible to diseases
and mite infestations.
BIGGER BEES.
Honey bees have been selectively bred for centuries. Among the
many traits that have been altered or enhanced are productivity,
gentleness, color and size. Unfortunately, every artificial selection
and breeding program has its inherent risks because enhancement
of one trait can, and often does, lead to the loss of others
-such as reproductive advantage and natural immunity. Frequently,
such a loss goes unnoted for many generations, and usually it
is not until calamity befalls the population that the loss is
recognized.
Space does not permit discussion of the many potential shortfalls
that may emanate from past and current breeding programs. However,
it is timely to address one, perhaps misguided, selection effort
- breeding larger bees. As previously noted, beekeeper preoccupation
with large bees is longstanding; and while size is, in part,
a function of relative comb cell size, there is also a large
heritable component. Thus, today we have larger queens producing
larger workers in larger cells.
The question that must be asked is "do larger bees require
a longer developmental period?" If so, what then is the
impact on colony vitality, particularly population size, worker
bee replacement rates, efficiency of brood food utilization,
susceptibility to diseases and mites, as well as efficient heating
of the brood nest? The issue of bee size deserves extensive study,
particularly in regard to alteration of the impact of stress-inducing
environmental hazards on populations of honey bees! For example,
are larger bees more or less susceptible to temperature or humidity
extremes, and pesticides?
FORAGE RESOURCES.
The single most important factor limiting the growth, development
and productivity of an otherwise normal honey bee colony is the
availability of pollen and nectar. The plant ecosystem (not the
beekeeper) drives all aspects of colony development and performance.
Some plant species or cultivated varieties naturally produce
greater quantities of nectar and pollen. Even so, plants stressed
by water, light or nutritional deficiencies may limit or cease
production of nectar and pollen, thus stressing nearby colonies.
Honey bees require a balanced diet. Since few, if any, single
species of pollen are nutritionally complete bee diets, plant
species diversity is essential for development of healthy, vigorous
colonies. Frequently, this diversity is lost in areas suffering
from drought and where monoculture is practiced on weed-free
farms. Plant stress may also lower the nutritional value of the
floral reward, either nectar of pollen. As a result of any of
these conditions, colonies may dwindle. The best adapted and
otherwise unstressed colonies will survive longest on the resources
of environmentally-stressed plants.
Finally, the ease with which bees can forage successfully within
a patch of flowers is well recognized. Flower accessibility is
important, but all too often, beekeepers fail to recognize that
the nearer their colonies are to floral resources, the more efficiently
those resources will be harvested. The issue is simple - the
farther a colony must fly to gather nectar, the more honey it
will use as fuel. Equivalent flight miles per gallon of honey
(km per liter) can be easily calculated for a bee or a colony
(ca. seven million MPG). Wear and tear on the bee is also important.
Bees only fly an average of about 140 miles (ca. 240 km) up to
a maximum of 500 miles (800 km) in a lifetime before wearing
out (Neukirch, 1982). Thus, while bees may forage at distances
of up to five miles from the hive, such distances reduce foraging
efficiency and the working life of the bee.
THE ENEMY.
The honey bee colony has a number of natural stress inducers
and enemies including weather, natural disasters, predators,
parasites and disease. The latter are well described in the book
edited by Morse (1990). However, none of these inflict as much
stress on the domestic colony as the beekeeper.
My purpose in writing this article is simply to emphasize the
fact, as stated in the opening paragraph, that beekeepers all
too often unnecessarily stress their bees. Hopefully, by drawing
attention to some of the little recognized but significant sources
of honey bee stress, beekeepers around the world will be able
to improve their colony management strategies and hence their
profits.
References:
Avitabile, A., D. P. Strafstrom and K. J. Donovan. 1978. Natural
nest sites of hone) bee colonies in trees in Connecticut,
USA. J . Apic. Rea. 17:222-226.
Detroy, B. F., E. H. Erickson and K. Diehnelt. 1982. Plastic
hive covers for outdoor wintering of honey bees. Am. Bee
J. 122:583-587.
Erickson, E. H., D. A. Lusby, G. D. Hoffman and E. W. Lusby.
1990. On the Size of Cells: Speculations on foundation
as a colony management tool. Glean. Bee Cult. 118:89-101.
Farrar, C. L. 1968. Productive management of honey
bee colonies. Amer. Bee J. 108:1 - 20.
Gary, N. 1975. Activities and behavior of honey bees.
IN: The Hive and the Honey Bee, Dadant & Sons (eds.), Hamilton,
IL, p. 185-264.
Grout, R. A. 1937. The influence of size of brood cell upon
the size and variability of the honey bee (Apis mellifera
L.). Iowa Agr. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. No. 218, p. 260-279.
Morse, R. A., ed. 1990. Honey Bee Pests, Predators, and Diseases,
(second edition). Ithaca, Cornell Univ. Press.
Neukirch, A. 1982. Dependence of the life span
of the honey bee (Apis mellifica) upon flight performance
and energy consumption. J. Comp. Physiol. 146B:35-40.
Owens, C. D. 1971. The thermology of wintering
honey bee colonies. USDA Tech. Bull. No. 1429, 32 p.
Seeley, T. D. and R. A. Morse. 1976. The nest of the honey
bee (Apis mellifera L.). Insectes Sociaux 23:495-512.
Severson, D. W. and E. H. Erickson. 1985. Honey consumption by
honey bee colonies in relation to winter degree-day aocumulation.
Amer. Bee J. 125:643-644.
Weast, R. C. (Ed.). 1980. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and
Physics, 60th Edition, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 370p. |
|