Honey Bee Queen Replacement: An Analysis of Changes in the Preferences of Polish Beekeepers through Decades
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Survey Design and Response Rate
- Trends by decade timeslot: (I) 1980–1989; (II) 1990–1999, (III) 2000–2009, and (IV) 2010–2018.
- Apiary size, as follows:
- Micro-apiaries, from 1 to 10 colonies;
- Small apiaries, from 11 to 20 colonies;
- Medium apiaries, from 21 to 50 colonies;
- Big apiaries, from 51 to 80 colonies;
- Professional apiaries, above 81 colonies.
- Geographical location according to the administrative division of Poland (16 voivodeships).
2.2. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Beekeepers’ Preferences and Apiary Management Style
3.2. Honey Bee Queen Replacement
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
- Polish beekeepers have been following recommendations on queen bee replacement.
- A large percentage of Polish beekeepers regularly replaced and purchased queens, and this is related to apiary size and location.
- The involvement of purchased queens in colony management is associated with the decade, the size of the apiary, and its location.
- The percentage of purchased queens significantly increases with the number of colonies in the apiary (this tendency is displayed by apiaries with no more than 80 colonies).
- In order to maintain such a trend and further improve Polish apiaries, it is necessary to continue educational efforts and research in this area.
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Timeslot | Apiary Size | Beekeepers Replacing Queens | Beekeepers Purchasing Queens | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | (%) | n | (%) | ||
1980–1989 | 1–10 | 106 | 80.3 | 49 | 37.1 |
11–20 | 195 | 90.7 | 100 | 46.5 | |
21–50 | 550 | 96.2 | 288 | 50.3 | |
51–80 | 286 | 94.1 | 167 | 54.9 | |
>80 | 121 | 97.6 | 69 | 55.6 | |
total/average | 1258 | 93.4 | 673 | 50.0 | |
1990–1999 | 1–10 | 77 | 81.9 | 31 | 33.0 |
11–20 | 129 | 91.5 | 55 | 38.3 | |
21–50 | 333 | 94.9 | 180 | 51.3 | |
51–80 | 127 | 94.1 | 67 | 49.6 | |
>80 | 86 | 92.5 | 64 | 68.8 | |
total/average | 753 | 92.4 | 396 | 48.6 | |
2000–2009 | 1–10 | 33 | 76.7 | 17 | 39.5 |
11–20 | 75 | 87.1 | 53 | 62.4 | |
21–50 | 201 | 93.9 | 153 | 71.5 | |
51–80 | 99 | 98.0 | 73 | 72.3 | |
>80 | 50 | 89.3 | 39 | 69.4 | |
total/average | 457 | 91.6 | 335 | 67.1 | |
2010–2018 | 1–10 | 25 | 73.5 | 12 | 35.3 |
11–20 | 58 | 96.7 | 36 | 60.0 | |
21–50 | 122 | 93.3 | 94 | 73.4 | |
51–80 | 55 | 98.2 | 43 | 76.8 | |
>80 | 22 | 88.0 | 16 | 64.0 | |
total/average | 282 | 93.1 | 201 | 66.3 | |
in total | 2750 | 92.8 | 1066 | 54.2 |
Timeslot | Apiary Size | Percentage of Replaced Queens (X) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
X = 0% | 0% < X ≤ 50% | 50% < X < 100% | X = 100% | ||
1980–1989 | 1–10 | 22.2 | 35.7 | 26.3 | 15.8 |
11–20 | 8.0 | 32.5 | 51.0 | 8.4 | |
21–50 | 5.6 | 36.9 | 54.3 | 3.2 | |
51–80 | 4.1 | 43.2 | 51.4 | 1.4 | |
>80 | 9.8 | 34.5 | 54.6 | 1.1 | |
average | 8.0 | 36.9 | 50.3 | 4.9 | |
1990–1999 | 1–10 | 18.1 | 34.0 | 33.0 | 14.9 |
11–20 | 8.5 | 23.4 | 59.6 | 8.5 | |
21–50 | 5.1 | 31.6 | 59.0 | 4.3 | |
51–80 | 6.7 | 47.4 | 45.2 | 0.7 | |
>80 | 8.6 | 33.3 | 55.9 | 2.2 | |
average | 7.9 | 33.4 | 53.4 | 5.4 | |
2000–2009 | 1–10 | 27.9 | 32.6 | 14.0 | 25.6 |
11–20 | 10.6 | 36.5 | 43.5 | 9.4 | |
21–50 | 7.0 | 38.8 | 52.3 | 1.9 | |
51–80 | 2.0 | 36.6 | 59.4 | 2.0 | |
>80 | 10.7 | 35.7 | 53.6 | 0.0 | |
average | 8.8 | 37.1 | 49.1 | 5.0 | |
2010–2018 | 1–10 | 26.5 | 44.1 | 23.5 | 5.9 |
11–20 | 3.3 | 48.3 | 41.7 | 6.7 | |
21–50 | 4.7 | 48.4 | 44.5 | 2.3 | |
51–80 | 1.8 | 44.6 | 51.8 | 1.8 | |
>80 | 12.0 | 36.0 | 52.0 | 0.0 | |
average | 7.6 | 46.9 | 42.9 | 2.6 |
Timeslot | Apiary Size | Replaced Queens | Purchased Queens | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | (%) | N | (%) | ||
1980–1989 | 1–10 | 132 | 46.5 | 132 | 21.6 |
11–20 | 215 | 47.9 | 215 | 20.5 | |
21–50 | 572 | 52.2 | 572 | 13.7 | |
51–80 | 304 | 48.2 | 304 | 10.5 | |
>80 | 124 | 49.1 | 124 | 4.8 | |
total/average | 1347 | 49.8 | 1347 | 14.0 | |
1990–1999 | 1–10 | 94 | 51.3 | 92 | 34 |
11–20 | 141 | 60.0 | 137 | 20 | |
21–50 | 351 | 58.0 | 349 | 21.5 | |
51–80 | 135 | 47.3 | 135 | 11 | |
>80 | 93 | 53.0 | 93 | 22 | |
total/average | 815 | 55.2 | 807 | 21.0 | |
2000–2009 | 1–10 | 43 | 47.09 | 43 | 21.8 |
11–20 | 85 | 53.3 | 85 | 35.5 | |
21–50 | 214 | 52.2 | 214 | 32.2 | |
51–80 | 101 | 53.9 | 101 | 30.7 | |
>80 | 56 | 51.3 | 56 | 26.7 | |
total/average | 499 | 52.2 | 499 | 30.9 | |
2010–2018 | 1–10 | 34 | 35.6 | 34 | 24.9 |
11–20 | 60 | 51.9 | 60 | 32.5 | |
21–50 | 128 | 51.3 | 128 | 36.5 | |
51–80 | 56 | 54.0 | 56 | 35.5 | |
>80 | 25 | 49.5 | 25 | 16.5 | |
total/average | 303 | 50.0 | 303 | 32.6 | |
in total | 2964 | 51.7 | 2956 | 20.8 |
Apiary Size. (No. of Colonies) | Replaced Queens | Purchased Queens | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
N | (%) | N | (%) | |
1–10 | 303 | 47.0 | 301 | 25.8 |
11–20 | 501 | 52.7 | 497 | 24.4 |
21–50 | 1265 | 53.7 | 1263 | 21.3 |
51–80 | 596 | 49.5 | 596 | 16.4 |
>80 | 298 | 50.7 | 298 | 15.3 |
in total | 2963 | 51.7 | 2955 | 20.7 |
References
- The Beekeeping Sector in Poland in 2019. Available online: http://www.inhort.pl/files/program_wieloletni/PW_2015_2020_IO/spr_2019/Semkiw_2019_Sektor_pszczelarski_zad.4.3.pdf (accessed on 28 July 2020).
- Bieńkowska, M.; Widle, J.; Panasiuk, B.; Gerula, D. Bee breeding activity in Poland. In Proceedings of the SICAMM 2018 Conference, Mustiala, Finland, 13–15 July 2018; pp. 11–12. [Google Scholar]
- Hatjina, F.; Bieńkowska, M.; Charistos, L.; Chlebo, R.; Costa, C.; Drazic, M.M.; Filipi, J.; Gregorc, A.; Ivanova, E.N.; Kezić, N.; et al. A review of methods used in some European countries for assessing the quality of honey bee queens through their physical characters and the performance of their colonies. J. Apic. Res. 2014, 53, 337–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Büchler, R.; Costa, C.; Hatjina, F.; Andonov, S.; Meixner, M.D.; Le Conte, Y.; Uzunov, A.; Berg, S.; Bieńkowska, M.; Bouga, M.; et al. The influence of genetic origin and its interaction with environmental effects on the survival of Apis mellifera L. colonies in Europe. J. Apic. Res. 2014, 53, 205–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gray, A.; Brodschneider, R.; Adjlane, N.; Ballis, A.; Brusbardis, V.; Charrire, J.D.; Chlebo, R.; Coffey, M.F.; Cornelissen, B.; da Costa, C.A.; et al. Loss rates of honey bee colonies during winter 2017/18 in 36 countries participating in the COLOSS survey, including effects of forage sources. J. Apic. Res. 2019, 58, 479–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Der Zee, R.; Brodschneider, R.; Brusbardis, V.; Charrière, J.-D.; Chlebo, R.; Coffey, M.F.; Dahle, B.; Dražić, M.M.; Kauko, L.; Kretavičius, J.; et al. 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. J. Apic. Res. 2014, 53, 19–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sperandio, G.; Simonetto, A.; Carnesecchi, E.; Costa, C.; Hatjina, F.; Tosi, S.; Gilioli, G. Beekeeping and honey bee colony health: A review and conceptualization of beekeeping management practices implemented in Europe. Sci. Total. Environ. 2019, 696, 133795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akyol, E.; Yeninar, H.; Korkmaz, A.; Cakmak, I. An observation study on the effects of queen age on some characteristics of honey bee colonies. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 7, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plate, M.; Bernstein, R.; Hoppe, A.; Bienefeld, K. The importance of controlled mating in honeybee breeding. Genet. Sel. Evol. 2019, 51, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bixby, M.; Baylis, K.; Hoover, S.E.; Currie, R.W.; Melathopoulos, A.; Pernal, S.F.; Foster, L.J.; Guarna, M.M. A Bio-Economic Case Study of Canadian Honey Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Colonies: Marker-Assisted Selection (MAS) in Queen Breeding Affects Beekeeper Profits. J. Econ. Èntomol. 2017, 110, 816–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giacobino, A.; Molineri, A.; Cagnolo, N.B.; Merke, J.; Orellano, E.; Bertozzi, E.; Masciangelo, G.; Pietronave, H.; Pacini, A.; Salto, C.; et al. Queen replacement: The key to prevent winter colony losses in Argentina. J. Apic. Res. 2016, 55, 335–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, K.V.; Goblirsch, M.; McDermott, E.; Tarpy, D.R.; Spivak, M. Is the Brood Pattern within a Honey Bee Colony a Reliable Indicator of Queen Quality? Insects 2019, 10, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tarpy, D.R.; Keller, J.J.; Caren, J.R.; Delaney, D.A. Assessing the Mating ‘Health’ of Commercial Honey Bee Queens. J. Econ. Èntomol. 2012, 105, 20–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bieńkowska, M. Instrumental Insemination of Honey Bees—New Knowledge and Practice; Research Institute of Horticulture: Skierniewice, Poland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Bieńkowska, M.; (Research Institute of Horticulture, Skierniewice, Poland). The Importance of the Queen Bee in a Colony. Personal communication, 2017. (In Polish). [Google Scholar]
- Bieńkowska, M.; (Research Institute of Horticulture, Skierniewice, Poland). New Trends in Bee Breeding and Apiary Production. The most Effective Methods of Introduction of Queen Bees, before Oviposition, to Colonies. Personal communication, 2016. (In Polish). [Google Scholar]
- English: Honeybee queen management in Poland. In Proceedings of the XLIX Naukowa Konferencja Pszczelarska, Puławy, Poland, 13–14 March 2012; pp. 18–19. (In Polish).
- SmartBees—Sustainable Management of Resilient Bee Populations. Available online: http://www.smartbees-fp7.eu/ (accessed on 28 July 2020).
- EurBeST—European Honey Bee Breeding and Selection Team. Available online: https://eurbest.eu/ (accessed on 28 July 2020).
- Gromisz, M. Replacement of honey bee queens in Polish apiaries. Pszczel. Zesz. Nauk. 1975, 19, 151–179. [Google Scholar]
- Porporato, M.; Grillone, G.; Patetta, A.; Manino, A.; Laurino, D. Survey of the Health Status of Some Honey Bee Queens in Italy. J. Apic. Sci. 2015, 59, 27–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mutinelli, F. The spread of pathogens through trade in honey bees and their products (including queen bees and semen): Overview and recent developments. Rev. Sci. et Tech. de l’OIE 2011, 30, 257–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muñoz, I.; Pinto, M.A.; De La Rúa, P. Effects of queen importation on the genetic diversity of Macaronesian island honey bee populations (Apis mellifera Linneaus 1758). J. Apic. Res. 2014, 53, 296–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meixner, M.D.; Francis, R.M.; Gajda, A.; Kryger, P.; Andonov, S.; Uzunov, A.; Topolska, G.; Costa, C.; Amiri, E.; Berg, S.; et al. Occurrence of parasites and pathogens in honey bee colonies used in a European genotype-environment interactions experiment. J. Apic. Res. 2014, 53, 215–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Șeker, İ.; Köseman, A.; Karlıdağ, S.; Aygen, S. Beekeeping activities II: The evaluation of beekeeping activities in terms of beekeeper preferences, production quality and bee diseases in Malatya Province. JOTAF 2017, 14, 54–63. [Google Scholar]
- Chauzat, M.-P.; Cauquil, L.; Roy, L.; Franco, S.; Hendrikx, P.; Ribière-Chabert, M. Demographics of the European Apicultural Industry. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e79018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Döke, M.A.; McGrady, C.M.; Otieno, M.; Grozinger, C.M.; Frazier, M. Colony Size, Rather Than Geographic Origin of Stocks, Predicts Overwintering Success in Honey Bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in the Northeastern United States. J. Econ. Èntomol. 2018, 112, 525–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De La Rúa, P.; Jaffe, R.; Dall’Olio, R.; Muñoz, I.; Serrano, J. Biodiversity, conservation and current threats to European honeybees. Apidologie 2009, 40, 263–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pérez-Sato, J.A.; Âline, N.C.; Martin, S.J.; Hughes, W.O.H.; Ratnieks, F.L.W. Multi-level selection for hygienic behaviour in honeybees. Heredity 2009, 102, 609–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Krajowy Rejestr Sądowy. Available online: http://www.krs-online.com.pl/msig-2101-4099.html (accessed on 28 July 2020).
TIMESLOT | ← APIARY SIZE | Cd * → | C | C | C | C | C | N | N | S | S | W | W | SW | SW | SW | E | E | IN TOTAL |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
VOIVODESHIP ↓ | Kujawsko-pomorskie | Łódzkie | Mazowieckie | Świętokrzyskie | Wielkopolskie | Pomorskie | Warmińsko-mazurskie | Małopolskie | Podkarpackie | Lubuskie | Zachodniopomorskie | Dolnośląskie | Opolskie | Śląskie | Lubelskie | Podlaskie | |||
1980–1989 | 1–10 | 15 | 10 | 21 | 7 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 10 | 10 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 8 | 0 | 132 | |
11–20 | 8 | 25 | 16 | 7 | 22 | 6 | 17 | 20 | 21 | 13 | 8 | 7 | 9 | 26 | 6 | 1 | 215 | ||
21–50 | 25 | 38 | 15 | 2 | 64 | 40 | 34 | 43 | 38 | 19 | 54 | 49 | 15 | 58 | 51 | 27 | 572 | ||
51–80 | 20 | 19 | 11 | 0 | 42 | 23 | 19 | 11 | 24 | 19 | 31 | 23 | 2 | 28 | 22 | 10 | 304 | ||
>80 | 17 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 12 | 11 | 5 | 11 | 0 | 8 | 7 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 12 | 124 | ||
1990–1999 | 1–10 | 7 | 16 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 11 | 2 | 17 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 2 | 14 | 94 | |
11–20 | 29 | 21 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 10 | 9 | 4 | 19 | 11 | 8 | 141 | ||
21–50 | 49 | 24 | 2 | 7 | 12 | 28 | 24 | 31 | 30 | 15 | 22 | 22 | 2 | 27 | 32 | 24 | 351 | ||
51–80 | 17 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 11 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 9 | 21 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 17 | 4 | 9 | 135 | ||
>80 | 9 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 15 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 11 | 93 | ||
2000–2009 | 1–10 | 7 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 43 | |
11–20 | 5 | 7 | 25 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 10 | 11 | 5 | 86 | ||
21–50 | 12 | 20 | 20 | 11 | 12 | 1 | 5 | 16 | 14 | 17 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 34 | 21 | 18 | 214 | ||
51–80 | 20 | 5 | 10 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 17 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 11 | 8 | 2 | 101 | ||
>80 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 56 | ||
2010–2018 | 1–10 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 34 | |
11–20 | 7 | 2 | 10 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 60 | ||
21–50 | 4 | 11 | 5 | 5 | 17 | 5 | 1 | 17 | 1 | 10 | 12 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 20 | 14 | 128 | ||
51–80 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 56 | ||
>80 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 25 |
Effect | Beekeepers | |
---|---|---|
Replacing Queens | Purchasing Queens | |
Decade (De) | 0.575 | 0.200 |
Apiary size (As) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Voivodeship (Vo) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
De × As | 0.432 | 0.000 |
De × Vo | 0.000 | 0.117 |
As × Vo | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Apiary Size | Percentage of Replaced Queens (X) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
X = 0% | 0% < X ≤ 50% | 50% < X < 100% | X = 100% | |
1–10 | 21.5 | 37.6 | 25.7 | 15.2 |
11–20 | 8.6 | 39.5 | 46.0 | 5.9 |
21–50 | 4.8 | 39.1 | 53.3 | 2.8 |
51–80 | 5.0 | 44.5 | 49.3 | 1.2 |
>80 | 6.7 | 43.3 | 48.7 | 1.3 |
mean | 7.4 | 40.5 | 48.0 | 4.1 |
Effect | Queens | |
---|---|---|
Replaced | Purchased | |
Decade (De) | 0.990 | 0.005 |
Apiary size (As) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Voivodeship (Vo) | 0.999 | 0.000 |
De × As | 0.000 | 0.000 |
De × Vo | 0.000 | 0.000 |
As × Vo | 0.000 | 0.000 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Bieńkowska, M.; Łoś, A.; Węgrzynowicz, P. Honey Bee Queen Replacement: An Analysis of Changes in the Preferences of Polish Beekeepers through Decades. Insects 2020, 11, 544. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080544
Bieńkowska M, Łoś A, Węgrzynowicz P. Honey Bee Queen Replacement: An Analysis of Changes in the Preferences of Polish Beekeepers through Decades. Insects. 2020; 11(8):544. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080544
Chicago/Turabian StyleBieńkowska, Małgorzata, Aleksandra Łoś, and Paweł Węgrzynowicz. 2020. "Honey Bee Queen Replacement: An Analysis of Changes in the Preferences of Polish Beekeepers through Decades" Insects 11, no. 8: 544. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080544
APA StyleBieńkowska, M., Łoś, A., & Węgrzynowicz, P. (2020). Honey Bee Queen Replacement: An Analysis of Changes in the Preferences of Polish Beekeepers through Decades. Insects, 11(8), 544. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080544