Thanks for posting! Interesting and important.

 

Time will tell.

 

Jose Villa jsvilla@cox.net via community.lsoft.com	7:46 AM (4 hours ago)		​
to BEE-L

The list of hypotheses was simply a rough framework that could be helpful in discussing the complicated (and controversial) issue of the existence, applicability, utility, value of genetically resistant bees. It was not intended to be a perfect final product, and I am sure with more thought and discussion can be improved. Regardless of what we think and write, reality is still in the making and only the test of ​time will tell.

Many have had poor experiences with supposedly resistant bees, leading to the concept that their utility may be limited to only certain environments, or to where they originated. In the current US market, and possibly worldwide market, anyone can say anything about their genetic material and sell as many queens as they can produce. So here is another question that can be crafted into a testable hypothesis: Are bees being sold as resistant in a given operation really resistant?

 

time has told. as the authors point out, it is predictable that the bees would adapt in a relatively short time frame because of their unique mating habits. it's reasonable to assume that varroa isn't the first novel pest that the bees have had to contend with over the millennia, and yet here they are. the study suggests that if mite treatments were stopped most of the bees dependent on them would perish and would eventually be replaced with bees that successfully coexist with mites.

 

time has told.

i'll retract that statement and replace it with this one:

time appears to be telling.

mikheyev et. al. present compelling scientific evidence in their paper on the ithaca bees, randy oliver acknowledges being aware of lineages showing resistance, and there are the anecdotal reports from many others having success with keeping bees off treatments.

perhaps the most compelling evidence are the mitochondrial dna studies on feral bees published by dulaney, szalanski, and others that found bees surviving in the wild that can trace their queen lines to long before varroa was introduced and not coming from commercially produced stock.

for those in need of an absolute yes or no on the matter, or if the only acceptable proof will be that resistant bees can be transplanted into any environment or management setting and not have issues, it's more likely time may never tell.

 

Adaptation using available genetic information in DNA in response to a stressor I could see. Evolution due to mutations giving rise to completely new genetic information is not a conclusion supported by the study.

 

I didn't post the information as a segue into a debate on evolution. This isn't the forum for that. I posted it it to share the information on a scientific study of interest to some beekeepers.

 

exactly. it's more like the bees already have their genetic tool kit of survival traits and novel stressors bring the needed tools to bear down with increasing effectiveness over succeeding/surviving generations.

 

So, peg, we can all stop using miticides now? All we have to do is get queens from Ithaca, NY?

 

as you know mark that's not my mantra. i don't think you and most commercials would be able nor willing to suffer through the process. what i like about the study is that it confirms what i believed to have happened in my area, i.e. resistance via genetic diverstity and hybribization. one ramification of these results may be commercial queen breeders striving to get as much of a genetic mix as possible vs. selecting for a given trait or two.

 

I'm with sqcrk, time will tell. The bees can out reproduce the mites with a brood break. Mel Disselkoen's work and the Africa bees have proved that. It's the pathogens that mites carry is the wildcard.
It's like Mel says, a human doesn't die from the HIV virus, it's the complications.

 

It's the pathogens that mites carry is the wildcard.

exactly. this may be why there are less issues in places like ithaca and down here where i am located in which there is less opportunity for horizontal transmission. large holding yards would likely be fertile ground for those pathogens due to the ease of transmission.

 

The varroa club forum just posted that they are evolving as well and are working on this Ithaca thing.

 

The varroa club forum? What's that?

 

The important things from that study is that the bees did exactly what the 'experts' say can't happen

When left to their own devices, the bees, in a very short period of time went through a genetic bottleneck and came out the other side with the ability to (at least) tolerate mites well enough not to get wiped out.

One of the visible adaptations that have occurred in this short time is that the bees got smaller.

 

The important things from that study is that the bees did exactly what the 'experts' say can't happen.

at least one expert said that these results are likely what would happen:

"There is some evidence that some lineages are innately more resistant to certain parasites [44]. The question that haunts me is to what degree our recent elevated rate of colony mortality might be due to the limited gene pool of our managed stocks, which may simply be lacking critical genes for resistance to the onslaught of our recently-introduced parasites and the associated virus issues. Such a problem would likely be self correcting if it weren’t for the nearly universal reliance upon medications by our queen producers [45]."

(bold mine)

from:

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/wha...g-to-the-bees-part-5-is-there-a-difference-between-domesticated-and-feral-bees/

in my view to deny that populations of bees are developing up resistance to varroa is to deny the results of this study and the opinion of knowledgeable persons such as randy and others. the 60,000 question is how do we transition painlessly from where we are now to where we would like to be. i would submit that it is easier for the backyard and sideliner than for the commercial, especially if the one incorporates queen rearing and making sustainable increase into the management scheme.

as far as ots splitting as a way to control varroa, this is primarily good if selling bees is the goal and honey production is not important. my personal opinion is that while aggressive splitting may indeed allow one to stay ahead of varroa sans treatments, it's not as meaningful as having colonies that grow to full production size and yield a honey crop. if everyone practiced such aggressive splitting and sold bees there would be no one left to buy those bees, and to those buying bees from such an operation there may not be a track record of how they would perform in the absence of being split so much.

 

Hey Guys, I see that the Dodo is still adapting to its changed environment.
Johno

 

Mark, the "varroa club forum" is a forum dedicated to Varroa Destructor, much like Beesource is dedicated to honeybees.


Aunt Betty's comment is easier to understand with a little bit of tongue in cheek. :shhhh:

But there is a real point to her message - its unlikely that varroa are standing still, most likely some kind of adaptations/changes are occurring with varroa too. But I'm not going to be so bold as to predict what the outcome of those changes will be.

 

in one sense it would be better for the varroa if they were less virulent. as a parasite the killing of one's host is usually not a good idea. in the wild colonies may be separated enough so that the mites cannot easily transfer from a collapsing colony to a healthy one, the mites may have adapted to be less virulent, and host/parasite equilibrium may have been achieved. when colonies are densely packed on the other hand, those conditions actually favor hypervirulence by the mites.

 

There is some good information on the BL forum regarding resistant bees, some thing about what happened to the Avignon resistant bees. Read it and it will make you re think some of the expert opinions.
Johno

 

it's the same there as it is here in that 'expert' is a relative term, meaning some opinions are more expert than others.

i like the way donald rumsfeld put it: "it's important to know what you don't know..."

 

Square, Avignon was the birth place of the Bond method of breeding for mite resistance. You know the story , live and let die until only the colonies are left that are mite tolerant. It seems that those bees die when moved to other locations. Perhaps there was a mite flu epidemic at Avignon and maybe that's how those bees became mite tolerant. LOL.
Johno

 

good one johno.

is it that you don't believe the reports of populations of bees developing mite resistance or just pointing out that that resistance doesn't necessarily carry over into succeeding generations when those bee are transplanted to other locations?

 

Square, as far as mite tolerance is concerned it appears that the hypothesis does not meet reality.
There is more to this tolerance than meets the eye, if some one had truly resistant bees they would be making a fortune in queen sales.
Johno

 

That's why a while back I wrote, "Time will tell." Will what has been seen last and is it transferable. Is there any value to what has been observed? Meaning, can we grow queens from these bees and will they maintain their characteristics?

 

understood johno, and i thought that might be where you were coming from. my view is that this is another one of those aspects of beekeeping that tends to be 'local' and that there's a more than just genetics at play. many thanks for the reply.

 

I disagree with the premise that feral bee isolation plays a part in mites speading. No matter how separated, a hive that died is cleaned out completely by other bees. The bees become the pest's transport to a new home.