Journal of Apiculture (한국양봉학회지)

The Apicultural Society of Korea (한국양봉학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Impact of Confinement and Population Size on the Instrumentally Inseminated Queen's Performance of Apis cerana Species in South Korea

  • Vung, Nguyen Ngoc (Department of Agricultural Biology, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Iksoo (College of Agriculture & Life Sciences, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Lee, Man-Young (Department of Agricultural Biology, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Hye Kyung (Department of Industrial Entomology, Korea National College of Agriculture and Fisheries) ;
  • Kim, Dong Won (Department of Agricultural Biology, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, RDA) ;
  • Choi, Yong Soo (Department of Agricultural Biology, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, RDA)
  • Received : 2018.11.04
  • Accepted : 2018.11.28
  • Published : 2018.11.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Instrumental insemination of honey bee is an attractive alternative to natural mating in breeding program as it allows mating crosses between desirable queen and specific drone. However, nursery condition that the queen is kept before and after insemination is major factor affected to the performance of instrumentally inseminated queen. In this study, we evaluated the influences of three different nursery-conditions of push-in cages, mini nuclei and normal colonies on number of spermatozoa stored in the spermatheca, body weight, onset of ovipositon and performance of instrumentally inseminated Apis cerana queen. Our results demonstrated that instrumentally inseminated queens kept in mini nuclei and in normal hives showed no significant difference in queen's weight (159.8 and 166.2mg, respectively), number of spermatozoa in spermatheca ($2.02{\times}10^6$ and $2.76{\times}10^6$, respectively), proportion of queen supersedure (33.3 and 66.7% queen survival at 11 months after oviposition, respectively) and brood production, compared to naturally mated queens. In contrast, instrumentally inseminated queens kept in push-in cages showed significant difference of those above data in comparison to queens mated naturally. Our results suggested that instrumentally inseminated queens could be kept in mini nuclei containing about 1.000 attendant bees to have desirable performance of queen whereas the push-in method should be practiced for the purpose of using queen in the length of time less than 7 months.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : National Institute of Agricultural Sciences

References

  1. Chinh, T. X., W. J. Boot and M. J. Sommeijer. 2005. Production of reproductives in the honey bee species Apis cerana in northern Vietnam. J. Apic. Res. 44: 41-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.2005.11101146
  2. Chuda-Mickiewicz, B., J. Prabucki and J. Samborski. 2003. Onset of oviposition in honeybee queens kept in boxes with non-free flying bees. Journal of Apicultural Science 47: 27-30.
  3. Chuda-Mickiewicz, B., J. Prabucki, J. Samborski and P. Rostecki. 2009. The role of phytohormones in instrumental insemination of queen bees. Journal of Apicultural Science 53: 91-96.
  4. Cobey, S. W. 2007. Comparison studies of instrumentally inseminated and naturally mated honey bee queens and factors affecting their performance. Apidologie 38: 390-410. https://doi.org/10.1051/apido:2007029
  5. Cobey, S. W., D. R. Tarpy and J. Woyke. 2013. Standard methods for instrumental insemination of Apis mellifera queens. J. Apic. Res. 52: 1-18.
  6. Collins, A. M. 2000. Relationship between semen quality and performance of instrumentally inseminated honey bee queens. Apidologie 31: 421-429. https://doi.org/10.1051/apido:2000132
  7. Gabka, J. 2018. Drifting of honey bee queens returning from flights. J. Apic. Res. 57: 580-585. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.2018.1492502
  8. Gerula, D. 2007. Observations of body injuries of artificially inseminated honey bee queens inflicted in the subsequent stages of rearing and during their introduction into colonies. Journal of Apicultural Science 51: 5-17.
  9. Gerula, D., B. Panasiuk, P. Wegrzynowicz and M. Bienkowska. 2012. Instrumental insemination of honey bee queens during flight activity predisposition period 2. Number of spermatozoa in spermatheca. Journal of Apicultural Science 56: 159-167. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10289-012-0016-8
  10. Gerula, D., P. Wegrzynowicz, B. Panasiuk, M. Bienkowska and W. Skowronek. 2016. Productivity and longevity of honey bee queens inseminated with freshly collected and diluted semen. J. Apic. Res. 55: 130-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.2016.1200880
  11. Harbo, J. R.1986. Propagation and instrumental insemination, in: Rinderer, T. E. (Ed.), Bee genetic and breeding, Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL.
  12. Harbo, J. R. and T. I. Szabo. 1984. A comparison of instrumentally inseminated and naturally mated queens. J. Apic. Res. 23: 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1984.11100606
  13. Jasinski, Z. 1987. Injuries of queens caged in queenless colonies, Proc. 31st Intern. Apic. Cong. Warsaw, Apimondia Pub. House, pp. 67-68.
  14. Kaftanoglu, O. and Y. S. Peng. 1982. Effects of insemination on the initiation of oviposition in the queen honeybee. J. Apic. Res. 21: 3-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1982.11100508
  15. Laidlaw, H. H. 1987. Instrumental insemination of honeybee queens: its origin and development. Bee World 68: 17-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/0005772X.1987.11098905
  16. Laidlaw, H. H. and R. E. Page. 1984. Polyandry in honey bees (Apis mellifera L.): sperm utilization and intracolony genetic relationships. Genetics 108: 985-997.
  17. Mackensen, O. 1955. Experiments in the technique of artificial insemination of queen bees. J. Econ. Entomol. 48: 418-421. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/48.4.418
  18. Medina, L. M. and L. S. Goncalves. 2001. Effect of weight at emergence of Africanized (Apis mellifera L.) virgin queens on their acceptance and beginning of oviposition. American Bee Journal 141: 213-215.
  19. Nelson, D. L. and H. H. Laidlaw. 1988. An evaluation of instrumentally inseminated queens shipped in packages. American Bee Journal 128: 279-280.
  20. Palmer, K. A. and B. P. Oldroyd. 2000. Evolution of multiple mating in the genus Apis. Apidologie 31: 235-248. https://doi.org/10.1051/apido:2000119
  21. Prabucki, J., Z. Jasinski and B. Chuda-Mickiewicz. 1987. The results of mass insemination of bee queen inseminated one fold and twofold and stocked in different ways, Proc. 31st Intern. Apic. Cong. Warsaw, Apimondia Pub. House, pp. 169-174.
  22. Rangel, J., J. Keller and D. Tarpy. 2013. The effects of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) queen reproductive potential on colony growth. Insectes sociaux 60: 65-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00040-012-0267-1
  23. Richard, F. J., D. R. Tarpy and C. M. Grozinger. 2007. Effects of insemination quantity on honey bee queen physiology. PloS one 2: e980. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000980
  24. Ruttner, F., J. Woyke and N. Koeniger. 1972. Reproduction in Apis cerana 1. Mating behaviour. J. Apic. Res. 11: 141-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1972.11099714
  25. Shah, F. A. and T. A. Shah. 1980. Early life, mating and egg laying of Apis cerana queens in Kashmir. Bee World 61: 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/0005772X.1980.11097796
  26. Sharma, P. L. 1960. Observations on the swarming and mating habits of the Indian honeybee. Bee World 41: 121-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/0005772X.1960.11096778
  27. Smith, R. K., M. Spivak and O. R. Taylor. 1991. Chemical differences between naturally mated and instrumentally inseminated queens, Proc. Am. Bee Res., Conf. Am. Bee J, pp. 781.
  28. Szabo, T. I. and G. F. Townsend. 1974. Behavioural studies on queen introduction in the honeybee 1. effect of the age of workers (from a colony with a laying queen) on their behaviour towards an introduced virgin queen. J. Apic. Res. 13: 19-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1974.11099754
  29. Tanaka, E. D. and K. Hartfelder. 2004. The initial stages of oogenesis and their relation to differential fertility in the honey bee (Apis mellifera) castes. Arthropod Structure & Development 33: 431-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2004.06.006
  30. Vesely, V. 1970. Retention of semen in the lateral oviducts of artificially inseminated honey-bee queens (Apis mellifera L.). Acta Entomologica Bohemoslovaca 67: 83-92.
  31. Vung, N. N., M. L. Lee, H. K. Kim, K. H. Byeon and Y. S. Choi. 2016. Efficiency of artificial insemination for breeding Apis cerana in Korea. Korean J. Apiculture 31: 323-330. https://doi.org/10.17519/apiculture.2016.11.31.4.323
  32. Winston, M. L. 1991. The biology of the honey bee. Harvard university press.
  33. Woyke, J. 1973. Instrumental insemination of Apis cerana indica queens. J. Apic. Res. 12: 151-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1973.11099743
  34. Woyke, J. 1975. Natural and instrumental insemination of Apis cerana indica in India. J. Apic. Res. 14: 153-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1975.11099820
  35. Woyke, J. 1979. Effect of the access of worker honeybees to the queen on the results of instrumental insemination. J. Apic. Res. 18: 136-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1979.11099957
  36. Woyke, J. 1988. Problems with queen banks. American Bee Journal.
  37. Woyke, J. and Z. Jasinski. 1979. Number of worker bees necessary to attend instrumentally inseminated queens kept in an incubator. Apidologie 10: 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1051/apido:19790205
  38. Woyke, J. and Z. Jasinski. 1990. Effect of the number of attendant worker bees on the initiation of egg laying by instrumentally inseminated queens kept in small nuclei. J. Apic. Res. 29: 101-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218839.1990.11101204
  39. Woyke, J. and Z. Jasinski. 1982. Comparison of the number of spermatozoa entering the spermatheca of instrumentally inseminated queens kept in nuclei and in normal honeybee colonies. Pszczelnicze Zeszyty Naukowe (Poland): 29-34.