The variation trend of the functional traits of improved queens of Iranian honeybees (Apis mellifera meda) during four generations in different private apiaries

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Professor of Honeybee Department, Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

2 Professor of Entomology Department, College of Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

3 Assistant Professor of Genetic Department, Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

4 Assistant Professor of Honeybee Department, Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

5 Instructor of Genetic Department, Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

6 Technical Expert of Honeybee Department, Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Taking advantage of genetically modified queens that have desirable productive traits and behavior is an important factor in beekeeping. The current study aimed to evaluate the performance of the 14th-17th generations of breeding improved queens in the Iranian Honey Bee Breeding Program, and their comparison with control queens kept in private apiaries.
Materials and methods: To evaluate the queens, specific questionnaires were designed and completed by beekeepers in their apiaries based on the performance of queens in the third layer. Means comparison showed that the improved queens had better performance than control queens in terms of swarming, honey production, aggressive behavior, and calmness behavior in comparison to queens kept in private apiaries. This evaluation and comparison were performed in private apiaries of 12 provinces in 2016, 11 provinces in 2017, 12 provinces in 2018, and 12 provinces in 2019. During the project, colonies with control and modified queens had the same management in each apiary in terms of nutritional conditions, migration management, and pest and disease management. To compare the improved queen and local queens (as control), a paired sample t-test was used. In each apiary, the minimum number of the improved queen was 10. The t-test was done for all of the recorded traits in the SPSS program. To investigate the effects of the year (2016 to 2019) and queen type (improved and local queens), a two-way analysis of variance was done using the GLM procedure of the SAS program.
Results and discussion: The obtained results revealed that the bred queens in 2016 and 2017 are significantly superior to control queens in terms of swarming, and had fewer queen cells, which is desirable for beekeepers. Despite the superiority of the improved queens during 2018 and 2019, the difference between control and improved queens was not significant for swarming behavior. Totally, during generations 14 to 17, the bred queens were significantly better than control queens in terms of swarming behavior in private apiaries. Honey production evaluation of improved queens and comparison with control queens in private apiaries showed that improved queens in 2016-2019 had a significant advantage over control queens (P<0.05). A comparison of improved and control queens in terms of honey production during generations 14 to 17 showed the superiority of improved queens. Aggressiveness behavior comparison of control and bred colonies in 2016-2017 showed the superiority of Iranian bred colonies (P<0.01). A comparison of colony calmness in 2016-2017 also showed the superiority of Iranian improved colonies (P<0.01). Overwintering comparison of control and improved colonies showed that in 2016 and 2018, despite the low superiority of bred colonies, there is no significant difference between the modified and control colonies. However, there was a significant difference between the two groups and the Iranian improved colonies were better than the control colonies in terms of overwintering in 2017 and 2019 (P<0.05).  In other words, the bred colonies were significantly superior to the control colonies (P<0.05). According to the results of variance analysis, the effect of queen type (bred queen and control queen of beekeepers) on calmness, aggressive, swarming behavior and honey production was significant (P<0.01), but did not affect overwintering. The effect of year and generation on calmness, aggressive behavior, swarming, and honey was significant (P<0.01), and it was also significant on overwintering at the lower level (P<0.05). The interaction effect of queen type×year was significant for calmness (P<0.01) and for swarming and honey (P<0.05), but had no significant effect on other traits.
Conclusions: The obtained results revealed that to protect the Iranian honeybee as a valuable genetic resource while preserving the superiority of genetically improved queens and genetic stabilization of improved traits, prevention of sex alleles homozygosity which have a direct effect on decreasing colonies' performance, conducting more investigations against new problems of beekeeping industry are required.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Alemu T., Legesse G. and Ararso Z. 2014. Performance evaluation of honeybee (Apis mellifera scutellata) in Guji Zone. International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies, 9: 2028‌-9324.
Basiri M., Imam Juma N., Ebadi R. And Tahmasbi Gh. 1999. Study of biological traits and estimation of their genetic parameters in Iranian honeybee colonies. Modares Agricultural Sciences, 1(2): 91-96. (In Persian).
Borst P. 2015. The origin and distribution of honey bees. American Bee Journal, 8: 565-568.
Brascamp E., Willam A., Boignzahn Ch., Bijma P. and Veekamp R. 2016. Heritabilities and genetic correlations for honey yield, gentleness, calmness and swarming behaviour in Austrian honey bees. Apidologie, 47: 739-748.
Büchler R., Andonov S., Bienefeld K., Costa C., Hatjina F., Kezic N., Kryger P., Spivak M., Uzunov A. and Wilde J. 2013. Standard methods for rearing and selection of Apis mellifera queens. Journal of Apicultural Research, 52: 1‌30-135
Engellsdrop D. and Otis G. W. 2000. Application of modified selection index for honeybee (Hymenoptera: Apidea). Journal of Economic Entomology, 93: 1606‌-1612
Garcia R., Oliveira R., Camargo S., Pires B., Oliveira O. and Teixeira R. 2011. Honey and propolis production, hygiene and defense behaviors of two generations of Africanized honey bees. Scientia Agricola, 70: 74-‌81.
Gromisz M. 1995. O stanie krajowej hodowli pszczół i kierunkach jej rozwoju. Instytut Sadownictwa i Kwiaciarstwa, Skierniewice, 195: 4-5.
Haiduck A., Sattler A., Cobuci J. and McManus C. 2013. Genetic parameters for five traits in Africanized honeybees using Bayesian Inference. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 36: 207-‌213.
Honko S. and Jasinski Z. 2002. Comparison of different honeybee races under the conditions of south-western Finland. Journal of Apicultural Science, 46: 97-106.
Jevtic G., Andelkovic B., Lugic Z., Radovic J. and Dinic B. 2012. Heritability of production characteristic of regional population of honeybees from Serbia. Genetica, 44: 47‌-54.
Leboeuf A., Nasr M., Jordan Ch., Kempers M., Kozak P., Lafreniere R., Maund C., Morris J., Pernal S., Sproule J., Westendorp P. and Wilson G. 2015. Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists Statement on Honey Bee Wintering Losses in Canada, Honey Bee Research Association. Pp. 1‌1-41.
Melellan A. R. 1978. Growth and decline of honey bee colonies and inter relationship of adult bees brood, honey and pollen. Journal of Apicultural Research, 15: 155‌-161.
Olszewski K. 2009. Assessment of production traits in the Buckfast bee. Journal of Apicultural Science, 53: 79-90.
Paleolog J. 1999. Studies of the factors influencing results of the productivity field test in different honeybee queens. Annales University Marine Curie Sklodowska Sectio Cootechnica, 17: 295-‌302.
Poklukar J. and Kezic N. 1994. Estimation of heritability of some characteristics of hind legs and wings of honeybee workers (Apis mellifera carnica Polm) using the half – sibs method. Apidologie, 25: 3-‌11.
Prabucki J. and Chuda-Mickiewicz B. 2002. Honey yield of Polish commercial lines of Middle European bee (Apis mellifera mellifera L.) and their crossbreeds with other races. Journal of Apicultural Science, 46: 65-72.
Prabucki J. and Mickiewicz C. H. 1998. Results of the middle European bee improvement in western Pomerania. Folia Universitaties Agriculture Stetinensis Zootechnica, 36: 27-‌37.
Roman, A., Popiela-Pleban, E. and Roman, K. 2014. Evaluation of the functional characteristics of selected breeding lines of Carniolan bees (Apis mellifera carnica). Scientific Annals of Polish Society of Animal Production, 10: 35-47.
Seitz N., Traynor K., Steinhauer N., Rennich K., Wilson M., Ellis J., Rose R., Tarpy D., Sagili R., Caron D., Delaplane K., Rangel J., Lee K, Baylis K., Wilkes J., Skinner J., Pettis J. and Engelsdorp D. 2015. A national survey of managed honey bee 2014–2015 annual colony losses in the USA. Journal of Apicultural Research, 46: 292-305.
Tahmasbi G., Babaei M., Tajabadi N., Seifi A., Mashayekhi N. and Rezazadeh H. 2017. The performance of improved honey bee colonies obtained from the thirteenth generation of Iranian queens and control colonies in different apiaries of Iran. Journal of Animal Production, 19(4): 729-750. (In Persian).
Tahmasbi G., Kamali M. A., Ebadi R., Nejati Jwarmi A., Javaheri D., Babaei M., Jamshidi M., Akef M. and Tajabadi N. 2010. Comparison of bred honeybee queens of central Iran with control queens in different apiaries of Tehran, Markazi, Qazvin and Isfahan provinces. Research and Construction, 23(1): 31-39. (In Persian).
Tahmasbi G., Kamali M. A., Ebadi R., Nejati Jwarmi A., Javaheri D., Babaei M., Jamshidi M., Akef M. and Tajabadi N. 2010. Comparison of improved queens of central Iran with control queens in different apiaries of Tehran, Markazi, Qazvin and Isfahan provinces. Research and Construction, 23(1): 31-39. (In Persian).
Tahmasbi G., Qujq D. A., Ebadi R. and Akhundi M. 1999. Using electrophoretic properties of proteins of the thorax in the separation of populations of Iranian honeybees. Agricultural Science and Technology and Natural Resources, 3(4): 97-104. (In Persian).
Tahmasbi G., Ibadiyya R., Ismaili M. and Cambodia C. 1998. Morphological study of Apis mellifera in Iran. Journal of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources, 2(1): 89-101. (In Persian).
Zakour M. and Bienefeld K. 2014. Basic considerations in the development of breeding plans for honey bees, illustrated by data on the native Syrian honey bee (Apis mellifera syriaca). Journal of Apicultural Research, 53: 314-‌326.
Zee R., Brodschneider R., Brusbardis V., Charrière J., Chlebo R., Coffey M., Dahle B., Drazic M., Kauko L., Kretavicius J., Kristiansen P., Mutinelli F., Otten C., Peterson M., Raudmets A., Santrac V., Seppälä A., Soroker V., Topolska G., Vejsnæs F. and Gray A. 2014. Results of international standardised beekeeper surveys of colony losses for winter 2012-‌2013: analysis of winter loss rates and mixed effects modelling of risk factors for winter loss. Journal of Apicultural Research, 53: 19-‌34.
Animal Production Research
Volume 11, Issue 1
June 2022
Pages 91-105

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics