Next Article in Journal
Responses of Spring Barley to Zn- and Cd-Induced Stress: Morphometric Analysis and Cytotoxicity Assay
Next Article in Special Issue
Floral Scent Chemistry and Pollinators of a Sexually Dimorphic Neotropical Orchid
Previous Article in Journal
Effect of Rhizome Fragment Length and Burial Depth on the Emergence of a Tropical Invasive Weed Cyperus aromaticus (Navua Sedge)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 11
Issue 23
10.3390/plants11233329
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Hydrolats from Humulus lupulus and Their Potential Activity as an Organic Control for Varroa destructor

by
Azucena Elizabeth Iglesias
1,2,*,
Giselle Fuentes
1,2,
Giulia Mitton
1,2,
Facundo Ramos
1,2,
Constanza Brasesco
1,2,
Rosa Manzo
2,3,
Dalila Orallo
2,4,
Liesel Gende
1,2,
Martin Eguaras
1,2,
Cristina Ramirez
4,
Alejandra Fanovich
5 and
Matias Maggi
1,2
1
Centro de Investigación en Abejas Sociales (CIAS), Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP), Mar del Plata CP 7600, Argentina
2
Instituto de Investigaciones en Producción, Sanidad y Ambiente (IIPROSAM), Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP), Mar del Plata CP 7600, Argentina
3
Laboratorio de Investigaciones en Evolución y Biodiversidad, Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia San Juan Bosco, Esquel CP 9200, Argentina
4
Departamento de Química y Bioquímica, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP), Mar del Plata CP 7600, Argentina
5
Instituto de Investigaciones en Ciencia y Tecnología de Materiales (INTEMA), Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP), Mar del Plata CP 7600, Argentina
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2022, 11(23), 3329; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11233329
Submission received: 27 October 2022 / Revised: 24 November 2022 / Accepted: 25 November 2022 / Published: 1 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Volatile Compounds Emitted by Flowers: Extraction, Identification, and Application)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Varroa destructor is a parasitic mite, which is considered a severe pest for honey bees causing serious losses to beekeeping. Residual hydrolats from steam extraction of hop essential oils, generally considered as a waste product, were tested for their potential use as acaricides on V. destructor. Four hop varieties, namely Cascade, Spalt, Victoria, and Mapuche, showed an interesting performance as feasible products to be used in the beekeeping industry. Some volatile oxidized terpenoids were found in the hydrolats, mainly β-caryophyllene oxide, β-linalool, and isogeraniol. These compounds, together with the presence of polyphenols, flavonoids, and saponins, were probably responsible for the promissory LC50 values obtained for mites after hydrolat exposition. Victoria hydrolat was the most toxic for mites (LC50: 16.1 µL/mL), followed by Mapuche (LC50 value equal to 30.1 µL/mL), Spalt (LC50 value equal to 114.3 µL/mL), and finally Cascade (LC50: 117.9 µL/mL). Likewise, Spalt had the highest larval survival, followed by Victoria and Mapuche. Cascade was the variety with the highest larval mortality. In addition, none of the extracts showed mortality higher than 20% in adult bees. The Victoria hydrolat presented the best results, which makes it a good compound with the prospect of an acaricide treatment against V. destructor.

1. Introduction

Apis mellifera [1] is a bee species with a cosmopolitan distribution that can be found today on almost all continents. It is widely used in beekeeping and pollination services, as it is one of the main pollinating species for crops and wild plants [2,3].
In recent years, this species has faced a steep decline in its colonies due to several factors, among which the ectoparasite mite Varroa destructor [4] generates great conflicts in the beekeeping activity, as well as complications for all crops that depend on the pollination services provided by A. mellifera [5,6]. It is also important to note that part of the parasite-host imbalance observed between these two species is mainly due to the short history of association between V. destructor and honey bees, where the latter has not particularly developed regulatory mechanisms to counteract the harmful effects of this parasite [7]. Over the years, it has been demonstrated that if no control mite measures are taken, bee colonies die in one season [6].
Since the beginning of the pathology caused by V. destructor mites, beekeepers have used a wide variety of acaricides to control this parasite in colonies, which mainly are substances from chemical families such as organophosphates and pyrethroids [8,9,10]. However, over the years, it has been observed that the use of these acaricides can cause significant damage to bee populations [11,12,13], in addition to contaminating bee products [10,14,15] or even worse, impact on bee health [16,17]. Especially, the indiscriminate application of these substances led to the emergence of resistant populations of mites to these compounds [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25].
As a consequence of the negative impact on bee colonies observed for synthetic acaricides, different researchers have studied and developed alternative forms of control [6,26,27]. Among them, organic acaricides have been tested, with characteristics that make them suitable for use in the environment [28], such as low toxicity to mammals and low environmental impact. These molecules are indispensable in the design of Integrated Pest Management programs, which combine techniques and knowledge that allow the rotation of synthetic acaricides. When these techniques are well-implemented, they allow sustainable development of the apiary with a lower environmental impact and high-quality products [29,30].
There are substances of natural origin with excellent results in the control of bee pests; among them, the essential oils (EOs) of various plant species have been extensively studied [31,32]. EOs are secondary metabolites that facilitate the main metabolism of plants and are widely used for defense against parasites [28,33]. In this regard, botanically derived products have demonstrated a wide range of biological activities, including toxicity, repellency, and growth regulatory properties [34,35,36,37].
In recent years, research has been conducted with various methods for the extraction of secondary metabolites from plant material of Humulus lupulus species, with promising results for the control of V. destructor [38,39,40,41,42,43,44]. The species H. lupulus L. belongs to the Cannabaceae family, and its female flowers (commonly known as hop cones) are traditionally used in the brewing industry to add flavor and bitterness to beer [45]. The main structural classes of chemical compounds identified in the essential oils of hop flowers are terpenes, bitter acids, and chalcones. Hops are also rich in flavonol glycosides (kaempferol, quercetin, quercitrin, rutin) [46] and catechins (catechin gallate, epicatechin gallate) [47]. Hundreds of terpenoid components have been identified in the volatile oil (0.3–1.0 wt.% of hop weight): mainly β-caryophyllene, farnesene, humulene (sesquiterpenes), and myrcene (monoterpene) [48,49,50].
Although there are numerous investigations focused on H. lupulus extractions in polar and non-polar solvents, to date, there are no studies that have evaluated the acaricidal activity of hydrolats of this species against V. destructor. Hydrolats, commonly known as flower water, is a by-product of obtaining essential oils by hydrodistillation, currently used in different industries such as food and cosmetics for their organoleptic and biological properties. The hydrolats of different plant species have been shown to have biological activity and are also used in agriculture against different pests such as fungi and insects and also for soil fertilization [51,52,53]. In general, there are not many studies that evaluate the role of the volatile compounds of hydrolats as potential acaricides. However, the main components are generally the same as those present in the oxygenated fraction of the corresponding essential oils [54].
The aim of the present research was to analyze the biological activity of hydrolats, obtained as water-soluble fractions in the hydro distillation process of essential oils from female flowers of the Spalt, Cascade, Victoria, and Mapuche varieties of H. lupulus over V. destructor, bee larvae, and adult bees, as well as to evaluate the attractive or repellent properties for these hydrolats on V. destructor.

2. Results

2.1. Chemical Composition

The volatile composition of the hydrolats is summarized in Table 1. The four varieties of hops presented a high presence of volatile compounds in their oxidized form, partly due to the extraction methodology.
The qualities of these extracts on the total content of phenolic compounds are shown in Table 2. For the Victoria variety, a higher amount of saponins and a higher antioxidant activity were found, followed by Cascade and Mapuche hydrolats with similar values between them. Finally, with respect to the Spalt hydrolat, a higher proportion of flavonoids and polyphenols in total were found, with lower antioxidant activity and a lower presence of saponins (Table 2).

2.2. Mite and Bee Lethality Test

The estimated LC50 value for V. destructor at 24 and 48 h obtained for each hydrolat is given in Table 3. The hydrolat from the Victoria hop variety demonstrated the lowest value of LC50 against V. destructor, indicating that it is the most lethal variety for mites. The observed nurse bee toxicity did not show significant mortality compared to the control. NOAEL values were calculated for each variety. For the Spalt hydrolat variety, the NOAEL was ≥20 μL/mL (X2(3, N = 25)) = 0 with a p-value of 1; for the Cascade hydrolat, the NOAEL was ≥20 μL/mL (X2(3, N = 25)) = 0 with a p-value of 1; for the Mapuche variety, the NOAEL value was of ≥20 μL/mL (X2(3, N = 25)) = 0.7003 with the p-value of 0.9512; and finally the NOAEL value calculated for the Victoria variety hydrolat was ≥20 μL/mL (X2(3, N = 25) = with a p-value of 0.9512. For tau-fluvalinate, the LC50 estimated at 24 h was 2.89 mL/dish for mites. This value decreased to 2.03 mL/dish at 48 h. LC50 for bees was 1.682 and 1.427 mL/dish at 24 h and 48 h, respectively. Significant differences were detected in relation to treatments (p < 0.001).

2.3. Attractivity Test

The hydrolats from all varieties tested did not show signs of attracting or repelling V. destructor mites. Fisher’s analysis showed that the expected position of the mites in the Petri dishes did not show significant differences with the control and was similar between the groups. The p-values obtained for the hydrolats were: Cascade variety (p-value = 0.5991), Spalt variety (p-value = 0.2489), Mapuche variety (p-value = 0.3795), and Victoria variety (p-value = 0.3215).

2.4. Larvae Lethality Test

On the last day of the larval stage, larval survival was different for each treatment, with significant differences between the larval survival curves (X2(5, N = 250) = 46,12, p-value = 0.0001). In particular, honey bee larvae exposed to the Mapuche and Cascade varieties showed significant differences in survival compared to the control group (Log-rank (Mantel--Cox) Test p = 0.0015; p < 0.0001, respectively). Victoria presented a larval survival on the sixth day of 80.39% ± 3.32, Cascade presented 69.10% ± 3.76, and Mapuche larval survival was 73.76% ± 3.58. Spalt showed a higher larval survival on the sixth day, 90.30% ± 2.55, and the control without solvent presented a larval survival of 85.09% ± 3.23. Finally, the control with solvent had a survival of 86.82% ± 3.02. The results can be seen in Figure 1.
When analyzing the weights of larvae on the last day of the experiment, no differences were found between the weights, except for the Spalt variety, which was higher than the control (Figure 2).

3. Discussion

It has become necessary to develop alternative control strategies against V. destructor to synthetic control substances that generate drawbacks such as residues and acaricide resistance [15]. The use of organic acids and compounds from plants are shown as interesting alternatives [55]. The four varieties of hops presented a high presence of volatile compounds in their oxidized form, partly due to the extraction methodology and the qualities of these extracts. The Victoria hydrolat presented a high acaricidal activity and null toxicity in adult bees. The larvae showed survival of almost 80.39% on the sixth day, which makes it a good compound to analyze its prospect as an acaricide treatment against V. destructor. The Victoria hydrolat presented the highest toxicity against mites, similar to those reported for other plant extracts [43]. For example, Zaitoon (2001) showed that acetonic extracts from Rhazya stricta, Heliotropium bacciferum, and Azadirachta indica had remarkable in vitro toxicity against Varroa mites [56]. At the same time, Damiani et al. (2011) evaluated the biological activity of botanical extracts from two indigenous plants from South America and obtained high levels of toxicity against the mites and no effect on A. mellifera [57]. The results obtained in the present study would indicate that Victoria hydrolat is a good compound to be used as an alternative for the control of V. destructor.
With regard to the other varieties studied in this work, a lower acaricidal activity was observed from the Spalt variety, which may be due to its low saponin content. According to Armah, et al. (1999), the spontaneous formation of a complex between the saponins and the membranes formed a micellar-type structure in two directions until the formation of the pore, thus allowing the passage of macromolecules into the cell [58]. Saponin compounds, together with the synergy caused by other components, have a great capacity to break the cells accelerating the cell death process, thus allowing cell death and collapse [59]. Another consideration is that the Spalt hydrolat had a lower presence in the number of compounds, as well as a lower concentration of them, as is the case of β-caryophyllene. The latter has been reported to have high toxicity at extremely low LD50 for other arthropods, such as dust mites, or one of the most important pests of various crops, the red spider mite, as it is commonly called [60]. In particular, β-caryophyllene oxide usually appears in different types of extractions in a lower proportion in essential oils [61], but in these types of hydrosols, this compound was found in high proportions for all cases. In the reports performed by Oh et al. (2014), β-caryophyllene was tested against two species of dust mites, with very favorable results, obtaining LD50 values of 0.44 µg/mL at 24 h after treatment [61]. In our study, the varieties that presented the highest percentage of this compound (Victoria and Mapuche) showed the best results against Varroa mites, with LC50 values of 16.1 µL/mL and 30.1 µL/mL, respectively (24 h after treatment). It must be considered that the LD50 value is always lower than the LC50 value (OECD). In the present study, high amounts of this compound were found in the hydrolat phase of all tested varieties.
Another compound that deserves attention is Linalool. This compound was mostly found in the four hydrolats analyzed in the present research, but also was found in the EO of many other plant varieties with interesting acaricidal properties for study [62,63]. Bava et al. (2021) found Linalool in all EOs studied, but in a very high concentration in bergamot EO, which consistently reduced V. destructor viability [64]. The authors point out that probably the combination of different concentrations of these compounds contributes to the successful mite inactivation.
No effects on adult bees were found for the four studied varieties. Regarding larval toxicity, the Cascade and Mapuche varieties showed the lowest survival values, with 69% survival for Cascade and 73% for Mapuche. This is relevant, taking into account that a good acaricide should reduce mite infestation without causing high toxicity and lethality in honey bees [65].
In many studies with essential oils, it is common to introduce the analysis of attraction and repellency on the mite since the result can give us important indications on the best use of these compounds [57]. Any effect that interferes with the mite’s ability to locate its host may have a practical value as a method of control. A substance able to modify the mite´s behavior inside the honey bee colony can be useful in controlling V. destructor [66]. In all cases, no statistically significant effect was observed with respect to the attraction or repellency of these compounds against V. destructor.
In recent years, studies on organic compounds with acaricidal activity, in general, and more particularly in the area of bee health, have increased [22,43,57,65,67]. However, we cannot ignore the fact that the honey bee is faced with various stressors in the different environments where it is found and under the different economic practices that are carried out with its use. Thus, the study of compounds of organic origin, and even more, as in this case of industry residues, is an important step towards the implementation of an ecologically and environmentally acceptable mechanism of V. destructor control in the industry.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Mites and Bees

A. mellifera workers and larvae, as well as adult females of V. destructor, were obtained from the experimental apiary of the Centro de Investigación de Abejas Sociales (CIAS of the Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, 38°10′06″ S, 57°38′10′10″ W) during the summer and fall of the 2018–2019 season. One year before the start of the experiments, the hives were treated with Aluen Cap® (oxalic acid-based organic acaricide) [6]. Then, the hives were allowed to be re-infested by the mite naturally. Therefore, colonies with less than 1% of mite infestation in adult worker bees were considered healthy, and those colonies with greater than 5 % of mite infestation in adult bees were considered infested colonies with high levels of V. destructor to be used as the source of the mites for the trials. Combs with operculated brood from colonies with high infestation levels were selected and taken to the laboratory for subsequent collection of adult females of V. destructor from sealed cells, selecting those with dark brown color. Nurse bees were collected from healthy hives, 1–3 days old, from frames with open brood containing eggs and larvae up to larval stage L5-L6 (Iglesias et al., 2021). One-day-old larvae (L1) were collected from frames with open brood from healthy hives. Bees (adults and larvae) and mites were collected from at least 5 different A. mellifera hives from the apiary.

4.2. Plant Material

About 100 g of H. lupulus female flower cones of Mapuche, Cascade, Spalt, and Victoria varieties were collected in February 2018 from a lupulus cultivar located in the vicinity of Mar del Plata (38°10′06′′ S, 57°38′10′10″ W, Buenos Aires province, Argentina). Flowers were dried at 55 °C and stored once they reached 9% humidity. Then, a two-hour hydro distillation was performed using a Clevenger-type European Pharmacopoeia apparatus [68]. Once this extraction process was completed, the oils and the remaining hydrolat were separated and placed in caramel-colored glass jars and kept at 4 °C until testing. The identification codes of the varieties are Spalt: IIMyCher: MDQ: 00455; Cascade: IIMyCher: MDQ: 00456; Mapuche: IIMyCher: MDQ: 00458; and Victoria: IIMyCher: MDQ: 00460.

4.3. Volatile Compounds

GC-MS Analysis

Samples were analyzed using a Shimadzu GCMS-QP2100ULTRA-AOC20i with a column of 0.25 mm ID, 30 m, and 0.1 µm phase thickness Zebron ZB-5MS. Samples were injected at pulsed splitless mode, and the injection volume was 1 mL. The interface and the ionization source were kept at 300 °C and 230 °C, respectively. Helium chromatographic grade (99.9999%) was used as the carrier gas with a constant linear velocity of 52.1 cm/seg. The oven temperature program started at 50 °C, where it was held for 2 min, and then increased to 300 °C at 15 °C/min, where it was held for 4 min. Electron impact ionization (EI) was used at 70 eV in a full scan. Full-scan EI spectra were acquired under the following conditions: mass range 35–700 m/z, scan time 0.3 s, and solvent delay 3.0 min. Characterization was performed using NIST and Wiley libraries and retention index.

4.4. Total Content of Phenolic Compounds

The total content of phenolic compounds in the different extracts was determined by the Folin--Ciocalteu method (F-C), according to the procedure reported by Singleton and Rossi (1965), with some modifications [69]. The F-C assay is a reaction based on electron transfer that measures the reducing capacity of an antioxidant. The F-C reagent is a mixture of phosphotungstic acid (H3PW12O40) and phosphomolybdic acid (H3PMo12O40) that reacts with phenols and non-phenolic reducing substances to form chromogen. The latter can be detected spectrophotometrically since, under alkaline conditions, the oxotungstate and oxomolybdate formed in this redox reaction show a blue coloration proportional to the concentration of polyphenols [70]. To carry out the quantification of phenolic compounds, a calibration curve was performed from a standard solution of Gallic Acid (GA) of 200 µg/mL, obtaining the following concentrations: 0, 2, 6, 8, 10, 15 and 20 µg/mL. From the linear regression of the sample, the total polyphenol content of each extract was estimated. The determination of the total amount of polyphenols for each of the extracts was carried out using a 96-well microplate in quadruplicate and was calculated as mg gallic acid equivalents (GAE) per g of dry extract.

4.4.1. Total Flavonoid Content

Total flavonoid content was determined by the method of Woisky and Salatino 1998, with some modifications [71]. The calibration curve was constructed from a quercetin (QE) standard solution of 200 µg/mL. The following concentrations were used; 0, 2, 4, 6, 10, 14, 18, and 22 µg/mL. From the linear regression of the sample, the total flavonoid content of each extract is obtained. The determinations were carried out in quadruplicate, and the absorbance was measured at 420 nm using an Agilent 8453 UV-visible spectrophotometer with a diode array. Total flavonoid content was calculated as mg QE equivalents per g of dry extract.

4.4.2. Total Saponin Content

The determination of total saponin content (TSC) was performed using the methodology proposed by Le et al. (2018), with some modifications [72]. The principle of the method is based on the reaction of triterpene saponins, which after being oxidized by sulfuric acid, react with vanillin. This reaction causes a distinct change in coloration towards purplish red and can be measured at wavelengths ranging from 473 to 560 nm. The TSC of a plant sample is determined from a calibration curve with a standard saponin (e.g., escin, oleanolic acid, diosgenin, quillaja saponin) and expressed in terms of equivalence of the standard [72]. The calibration curve was constructed with oleanoic acid (OA) as a reference standard, and concentrations between 0.001–0.005 µg/mL of OA were obtained, with which the calibration curve was performed. From the linear regression of the calibration curve, the TSC of each extract was obtained. The absorbance at 560 nm was measured in an Agilent 8453 UV-visible spectrophotometer with a diode array, and the values were recorded. Treatments were performed in quadruplicate, and the TSC was calculated as mg OA equivalent per g of dry extract.

4.5. Mite and Bee Lethality Test

The bioactivity of H. lupulus hydrolats was determined using the complete exposure method [31]. This method was also used in other research studies to test the acaricide activity of natural substances [21,43,44,65,73,74,75] The hydrolats of 4 hop varieties (Cascade, Victoria, Spalt, and Mapuche) were diluted in acetone in different treatments with concentrations of 0 (solvent-control-only), 2.5, 5, 10, and 20 µL/mL. Control treatments consisted of Petri dishes filled with solvent, acetone as a negative control, and fluvalinate (Sigma Aldrich, Darmstadt, Germany) as a positive control. An aliquot of 1mL of each concentration and controls was placed in each Petri dish with a diameter of 10 cm, then allowed to evaporate in free air for 3–5 min. After this time, 5 nurse bees and 5 female V. destructor mites obtained from brood cells were placed in the dish. Petri dishes containing mites and bees were incubated at 30 °C with 70% humidity for 72 h. The bees were fed with 3 g of candy per plate. A total of 5 treatments were performed with 5 plates per group. Mite and bee mortality was recorded every 24, 48, and 72 h by direct observation using an ocular magnifying glass. With this data, the LC50 (lethal concentration 50) lethality index was obtained. Acetone was purchased from Anedra, Research AG (Tigre, Buenos Aires, Argentina).

4.6. Attractivity Test

In order to test the attraction or repellent effects against V. destructor for Cascade, Victoria, Spalt, and Mapuche hydrolats, the methodology proposed by Damiani et al. (2011) was used [57]. Each Petri dish (9 cm diameter) was divided into four sections (A, B, C and D). For the hydrolats treatments, a circle of filter paper (1 cm diameter) embedded with 8 μL of acetone was placed in section A, and in section D, a circle of filter paper (1 cm diameter) embedded with 8 μL of the LC50 calculated for each hydrolat variety. As control tests, a circle of uncontaminated filter paper was placed in section A, and another circle of filter paper embedded with 8 μL of acetone was placed in section D. The solutions were allowed to evaporate before testing. Next, a single adult female mite was placed in the center of the Petri dish. After 90 min, the location of the mite was recorded (as in A, B, C, or D). Thirty observations for each hydrolats and controls were run simultaneously.

4.7. Honeybee Larvae Lethality Test

To test the acute toxicity of hydrolats in bee larvae, a bioassay based on the previous work of Iglesias et al., 2020 was used [43]. One-day-old larvae (1st instar, L1) of A. mellifera were collected from combs of healthy (non-infested) colonies and used for in vitro experiments with 96-well culture plates. The following treatments were performed: (a) control without solvent, (b) control only with solvent (acetone), (c) Spalt hydrolats, (d) Cascade hydrolats, (e) Mapuche hydrolats, and (f) Victoria hydrolats. An aliquot of 1 μL of the LC50 for each hydrolat and control was placed in each well. This solvent was selected because of its low toxicity in bee larvae [76]. One culture plate per treatment was used. The aliquot was left to evaporate in each well before the larvae were transferred from the brood comb to plates, with a single larva added to each well. Fifty replicates per treatment were made. The plates were then placed into a desiccator maintained at a relative humidity of 96% (K2SO4 saturated) in a 34 °C incubator. The volume and composition of the diet provided daily to larvae followed the protocol by Aupinel et al., 2005 [77]. Larval mortality was recorded when an immobile larva, even under paintbrush contact, was observed, as it is considered dead. To evaluate if hydrolats impact larval weight, fresh weight was measured in individuals on day 7 [78].
The following components 2,2′-Azino-bis (3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid), diammonium salt (ABTS), and Folin--Ciocalteu reagent were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich® (Darmstadt, Germany). The following standard compounds were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich® United States, and all standards purity ≥ 98.0%: gallic acid, quercetin, Trolox, vanillin, and oleanoic acid. Acetone and sulfuric acid were purchased from RESEARCH AG (Anedra, Tigre, Buenos Aires, Argentina) and used as received.

4.8. Statistical Analysis

4.8.1. Analysis of Mites and Bee Lethality Test

Mites and bee mortality were determined by visual inspection of the Petri dishes after 24, 48, and 72 h. The LC50 values for V. destructor and inverse 95% confidence intervals were estimated. The probit function and the PROC LOGISTICS procedure were used to transform variables and to resume the information [79,80]. The highest concentration of essential oil, which did not induce bee mortality significantly higher than that observed in controls (No Observed Adverse Effect Level = NOAEL (p = 0.05)), was estimated for bees [76]. The statistical comparison between uncorrected mortality in the treated sample and the control was performed using the Chi2 test.

4.8.2. Analysis of Attractivity

The attractivity of hops hydrolats to mites was analyzed by means of a binomial test for a two-level categorical dependent variable using the Fisher’s test and the software R Commander. R package version 2.5–3 (Fox and Bouchet-Valat, 2019).

4.8.3. Analysis of Honeybee Larvae Lethality Tests and Weight

Survival and mortality of bee larvae were estimated using the Graph pad software, according to Iglesias et al. (2020) [43]. Analysis of larval weights were compared by full interaction ANOVA analysis using log-transformed data to linearize potential functions, given that the required assumptions were maintained.

5. Conclusions

Our study suggests the good in vitro efficacy of the Victoria hydrolat, which presented a high acaricidal activity, null toxicity in adult bees, and very low toxicity in larvae of honey bees. These results would indicate that Victoria hydrolat is a good compound to use as an alternative for the control of V. destructor. In conclusion, this study represents another example of potential eco-friendly bee pesticides, leaning research towards the discovery and use of natural preparations rather than synthetic molecules whose persistent use and accumulation in the environment have proven to be counterproductive.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.E.I., G.F., M.E. and M.M.; methodology, A.E.I., G.F., G.M., R.M., C.R. and D.O.; software, A.E.I. and G.F.; validation, A.E.I., G.F. and R.M.; formal analysis, A.E.I., G.F., G.M. and F.R.; investigation, A.E.I., G.F., G.M., F.R., C.B., C.R. and D.O.; data curation; A.E.I., G.F., C.R. and D.O.; writing—original draft preparation, A.E.I., C.R., D.O. and L.G.; writing—review and editing, M.E. and M.M.; visualization, G.F. and R.M.; supervision, A.F.; funding acquisition, M.E. and M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica (ANPCyT) grant number PICT 2823-207 and PICT 0337-2017 granted to M.M. This study was also financially supported by the UNMDP and the CONICET.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the PICT 2823-207 and PICT 0337-2017 of Matias Maggi. We also gratefully acknowledge UNMDP and CONICET.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare there are no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Linnaeus, C. Systema Naturae; Laurentii Salvii: Stockholm, Sweden, 1758; Volume 1, p. 532. [Google Scholar]
  2. Garibaldi, L.A.; Steffan-Dewenter Winfree, R.; Aizen, M.A.; Bommarco, R.; Cunningham SAKremen, C.; Carvalheiro, L.G.; Harder, L.D.; Afik, O. Wild pollinators enhance fruit set of crops regardless of honey bee abundance. Science 2013, 339, 1608–1611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Basualdo, M.; Cavigliasso, P.; Samuel de Avila, R.; Aldea-Sánchez, P.; Correa-Benítez, A.; Martínez Harms, J.; Ramos, A.K.; Rojas-Bravo, V.; Salvarrey, S. Current status and economic value of insect-pollinated dependent crops in Latin America. Ecol. Econ. 2022, 196, 107395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Anderson, D.L.; Trueman, J.W.H. Varroa jacobsoni (Acari: Varroidae) is more than one species. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2000, 24, 165–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. De la Rúa, P.; Jaffé, 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]
  6. Maggi, M.; Tourn, E.; Negri, P.; Szawarski, N.; Marconi, A.; Gallez, L.; Medici, S.; Ruffonengo, S.; Brasesco, C.; De Feudis, L.; et al. A new formulation of oxalic acid for Varroa destructor control applied in Apis mellifera colonies in the presence of brood. Apidologie 2016, 47, 596–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Peng YS, C.; Fang, Y.; Xu, S.; Ge, L.; Nasr, M.E. Response of foster Asian honeybee (Apis cerana Fabr.) colonies to the brood of European honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) infested with parasitic mite, Varroa jacobsoni Oudemans. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 1987, 49, 259–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Milani, N.; Barbattini, R. Effectiveness of Apistan (fluvalinate) in the control of Varroa jacobsoni Andemans and its tolerance by Apis mellifera L. Apicoltura 1988, 3–58. [Google Scholar]
  9. Milani, N.; Iob, M. Plastic strips containing organophosphorus acaricides to control Varroa jacobsonii: A preliminary experiment. Am. Bee J. 1998. [Google Scholar]
  10. Rosenkranz, P.; Aumeier, P.; Ziegelmann, B. Biology and control of Varroa destructor. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2010, 103, S96–S119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Johnson, R.M.; Pollock, H.S.; Berenbaum, M.R. Synergistic interactions between in-hive miticides in Apis mellifera. J. Econ. Entomol. 2009, 102, 474–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Boncristiani, H.; Underwood, R.; Schwarz, R.; Evans, J.D.; Pettis, J. Direct effect of acaricides on pathogen loads and gene expression levels in honey bees Apis mellifera. J. Insect Physiol. 2012, 58, 613–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Tihelka, E. Effects of synthetic and organic acaricides on honey bee health: A review. Slov. Vet. Res. 2018, 55, 114–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Medici, S.K.; Sarlo, E.G.; Porrini, M.P.; Braunstein, M.; Eguaras, M.J. Genetic variation and widespread dispersal of Nosema ceranae in Apis mellifera apiaries from Argentina. Parasitol. Res. 2012, 110, 859–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Medici, S.K.; Maggi, M.D.; Sarlo, E.G.; Ruffinengo, S.; Marioli, J.M.; Eguaras, M.J. The presence of synthetic acaricides in beeswax and its influence on the development of resistance in Varroa destructor. J. Apic. Res. 2015, 54, 267–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dai, P.; Jack, C.J.; Mortensen, A.N.; Bustamante, T.A.; Ellis, J.D. Chronic toxicity of amitraz, coumaphos and fluvalinate to Apis mellifera L. larvae reared in vitro. Sci Rep. 2018, 8, 5635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Wu, X.; Liao, C.; He, X.; Zhang, L.; Yan, W.; Zeng, Z. Sublethal fluvalinate negatively affect the development and flight capacity of honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) workers. Environ. Res. 2022, 203, 111836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Spreafico, M.; Eördegh, F.R.; Bernardinelli, I.; Colombo, M. First detection of strains of Varroa destructor resistant to coumaphos. Results of laboratory tests and field trials. Apidologie 2001, 32, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Pettis, J.S. A scientific note on Varroa destructor resistance to coumaphos in the United States. Apidologie 2004, 35, 91–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Martin, S.J. Acaricide (pyrethroid) resistance in Varroa destructor. Bee World 2004, 85, 67–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Maggi, M.D.; Sardella, N.H.; Ruffinengo, S.R.; Eguaras, M.J. Morphotypes of Varroa destructor collected in Apis mellifera colonies from different geographic locations of Argentina. Parasitol. Res. 2009, 105, 1629–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Maggi, M.; Damiani, N.; Ruffinengo, S.; De Jong, D.; Principal, J.; Eguaras, M. Brood cell size of Apis mellifera modifies the reproductive behavior of Varroa destructor. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2010, 50, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Maggi, M.; Gende, L.; Russo, K.; Fritz, R.; Eguaras, M. Bioactivity of Rosmarinus officinalis essential oils against Apis mellifera, Varroa destructor and Paenibacillus larvae related to the drying treatment of the plant material. Nat. Prod. Res. 2011, 25, 397–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Mitton, G.A.; Quintana, S.; Giménez Martínez, P.; Mendoza, Y.; Ramallo, G.; Brasesco, C.; Villalba, A.; Eguaras, M.J.; Maggi, M.D.; Ruffinengo, S.R. First record of resistance to flumethrin in a Varroa population from Uruguay. J. Apic. Res. 2016, 55, 422–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mitton, G.A.; Szawarski, N.; Ramos, F.; Fuselli, S.; Meroi Arcerito, F.R.; Eguaras, M.J.; Ruffinengo, S.R.; Maggi, M.D. Varroa destructor: When reversion to coumaphos resistance does not happen. J. Apic. Res. 2018, 57, 536–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Giovenazzo, P.; Dubreuil, P. Evaluation of spring organic treatments against Varroa destructor (Acari: Varroidae) in honey bee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies in eastern Canada. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2011, 55, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Satta, A.; Floris, I.; Eguaras, M.; Cabras, P.; Garau, V.L.; Melis, M. Formic acid-based treatments for control of Varroa destructor in a Mediterranean area. J. Econ. Entomol. 2005, 98, 267–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Isman, M.B. Plant essential oils for pest and disease management. Crop Prot. 2000, 19, 603–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ruffinengo, S.R.; Maggi, M.D.; Marcangeli, J.A.; Eguaras, M.J.; Principal, J.; Barrios, C.; De Piano, F.; Mitton, G. Integrated Pest Management to control Varroa destructor and its implications to Apis mellifera colonies. Zootec. Trop. 2014, 32, 149–168. [Google Scholar]
  30. Jack, C.J.; Ellis, J.D. Integrated Pest Management Control of Varroa destructor (Acari: Varroidae), the Most Damaging Pest of (Apis mellifera L.(Hymenoptera: Apidae)) Colonies. J. Insect Sci. 2021, 21, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ruffinengo, S.; Eguaras, M.; Floris, I.; Faverin, C.; Bailac, P.; Ponzi, M. LD50 and repellent effects of essential oils from Argentinian wild plant species on Varroa destructor. J. Econ. Entomol. 2005, 98, 651–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Conti, B.; Bocchino, R.; Cosci, F.; Ascrizzi, R.; Flamini, G.; Bedini, S. Essential oils against Varroa destructor: A soft way to fight the parasitic mite of Apis mellifera. J. Apic. Res. 2020, 59, 774–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wallace, R.J. Antimicrobial properties of plant secondary metabolites. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2004, 63, 621–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Aivazi, A.A.; Vijayan, V.A. Larvicidal activity of oak Quercus infectoria Oliv. (Fagaceae) gall extracts against Anopheles stephensi Liston. Parasitol. Res. 2009, 104, 1289–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Banchio, A.J.; Brady, J.F. Accelerated stokesian dynamics: Brownian motion. J. Chem. Phys. 2003, 118, 10323–10332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Ciccia, G.; Coussio, J.; Mongelli, E. Insecticidal activity against Aedes aegypti larvae of some medicinal South American plants. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000, 72, 185–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Jbilou, R.; Ennabili, A.; Sayah, F. Insecticidal activity of four medicinal plant extracts against Tribolium castaneum (Herbst)(Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2006, 5, 10. [Google Scholar]
  38. Bedini, S.; Flamini, G.; Girardi, J.; Cosci, F.; Conti, B. Not just for beer: Evaluation of spent hops (Humulus lupulus L.) as a source of eco-friendly repellents for insect pests of stored foods. J. Pest Sci. 2015, 88, 583–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bedini, S.; Flamini, G.; Cosci, F.; Ascrizzi, R.; Benelli, G.; Conti, B. Cannabis sativa and Humulus lupulus essential oils as novel control tools against the invasive mosquito Aedes albopictus and fresh water snail Physella acuta. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2016, 85, 318–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. DeGrandi-Hoffman, G.; Ahumada, F.; Probasco, G.; Schantz, L. The effects of beta acids from hops (Humulus lupulus) on mortality of Varroa destructor (Acari: Varroidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2012, 58, 407–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Rademacher, E.; Harz, M.; Schneider, S. The development of HopGuard® as a winter treatment against Varroa destructor in colonies of Apis mellifera. Apidologie 2015, 46, 748–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Reher, T.; Van Kerckvoorde, V.; Verheyden, L.; Wenseleers, T.; Beliën, T.; Bylemans, D.; Martens, J.A. Evaluation of hop (Humulus lupulus) as a repellent for the management of Drosophila suzukii. Crop Prot. 2019, 124, 104839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Iglesias, A.; Mitton, G.; Szawarski, N.; Cooley, H.; Ramos, F.; Meroi Arcerito, F.R.; Brasesco, C.; Ramirez, C.; Gende, L.; Eguaras, M.J.; et al. Essential oils from Humulus lupulus as novel control agents against Varroa destructor. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2020, 158, 113043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Iglesias, A.; Gimenez Martinez, P.; Ramirez, C.; Mitton, G.; Meroi Acerito, F.R.; Fangio, M.F.; Churio, M.S.; Fuselli, S.; Fanovich, A.; Eguaras, M.; et al. Valorization of hop leaves for development of eco-friendly bee pesticides. Apidologie 2021, 52, 186–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zanoli, P.; Zavatti, M. Pharmacognostic and pharmacological profile of Humulus lupulus L. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2008, 116, 383–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Sägesser, M.; Deinzer, M. HPLC-ion spray-tandem mass spectrometry of flavonol glycosides in hops. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 1996, 54, 129–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gorissen, H.; Bellinck, C.; Vancraenenbroeck, R.; Lontie, R. Separation and identification of (+)-gallocatechine in hops. Arch. Int. Physiol. Biochim. 1968, 76, 932–934. [Google Scholar]
  48. Malizia, R.A.; Molli, J.S.; Cardell, D.A.; Grau, R.J.A. Essential oil of hop cones (Humulus lupulus L.). J. Essent. Oil Res. 1999, 11, 13–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Eri, S.; Khoo, B.K.; Lech, J.; Hartman, T.G. Direct thermal desorptiongas chromatography and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry profiling of hop (Humulus lupulus L.) essential oils in support of varietal characterization. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 1140–1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Knez Hrnčič, M.; Španinger, E.; Košir, I.J.; Knez, Ž.; Bren, U. Hop compounds: Extraction techniques, chemical analyses, antioxidative, antimicrobial, and anticarcinogenic effects. Nutrients 2019, 11, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Babaz, Y.; Guezoul, O.; Bouras, N. Evaluation under Laboratory Conditions of the Efficacy of Four Extracts of Spontaneous Plants from the Mzab Valley (Algeria) against the Date Palm Mite (Oligonychus afrasiaticus). Tunis. J. Plant Prot. 2021, 16, 29–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Catão, H.C.R.M.; Aquino, C.F.; Sales, N.D.L.P.; da Silva Rocha, F.; Caixeta, F.; Civil, N. Hydrolats and extracts vegetable action on quality of stored castor bean seeds in non-controlled conditions. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Agrar. 2018, 13, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Aćimović, M.G.; Tešević, V.V.; Smiljanić, K.T.; Cvetković, M.T.; Stanković, J.M.; Kiprovski, B.M.; Sikora, V.S. Hydrolates: By-products of essential oil distillation: Chemical composition, biological activity and potential uses. Adv. Technol. 2020, 9, 54–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Paolini, J.; Leandri, C.; Desjobert, J.M.; Barboni, T.; Costa, J. Comparison of liquid–liquid extraction with headspace methods for the characterization of volatile fractions of commercial hydrolats from typically Mediterranean species. J. Chromatogr. A. 2008, 1193, 37–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Vilarem, C.; Piou, V.; Vogelweith, F.; Vétillard, A. Varroa destructor from the laboratory to the field: Control, biocontrol and ipm perspectives—A review. Insects 2021, 12, 800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zaitoon, A.A. Evaluation of certain plant extracts for the control of parasitic bee mites, Varroa jacobsoni. J. Pest. Cont. Environ. Sci. 2001, 9, 77–88. [Google Scholar]
  57. Damiani, N.; Gende, L.B.; Maggi, M.D.; Palacios, S.; Marcangeli, J.A.; Eguaras, M.J. Repellent and acaricidal effects of botanical extracts on Varroa destructor. Parasitol. Res. 2011, 108, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Armah, C.N.; Mackie, A.R.; Roy, C.; Price, K.; Osbourn, A.E.; Bowyer, P.; Ladha, S. The membrane-permeabilizing effect of avenacin A-1 involves the reorganization of bilayer cholesterol. Biophys. J. 1999, 76, 281–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. De Geyter, E.; Swevers, L.; Soin, T.; Geelen, D.; Smagghe, G. Saponins do not affect the ecdysteroid receptor complex but cause membrane permeation in insect culture cell lines. J. Insect Physiol. 2012, 58, 18–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Mahmoudi, R.; Amini, K.; Hosseinirad, H.; Valizadeh, S.; Kabudari, A.; Aali, E. Phytochemistry and insecticidal effect of different parts of Melissa officinalis on Tetranychus urticae. Res. J. Pharmacogn. 2017, 4, 49–56. [Google Scholar]
  61. Oh, M.S.; Yang, J.Y.; Kim, M.G.; Lee, H.S. Acaricidal activities of β-caryophyllene oxide and structural analogues derived from Psidium cattleianum oil against house dust mites. Pest Manag. Sci. 2014, 70, 757–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. de Melo, J.P.R.; da Camara, C.A.G.; da Silva Lima, G.; de Moraes, M.M.; Alves, P.B. Acaricidal properties of the essential oil from Aristolochia trilobata and its major constituents against the two-spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae). Can. J. Plant Sci. 2018, 98, 1342–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ribeiro, N.C.; Camara, C.A.; Melo, J.P.; Moraes, M.M. Acaricidal properties of essential oils from agro-industrial waste products from citric fruit against Tetranychus urticae. J. Appl. Entomol. 2019, 143, 731–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Bava, R.; Castagna, F.; Piras, C.; Palma, E.; Cringoli, G.; Musolino, V.; Lupia, C.; Perri, M.R.; Statti, G.; Britti, D.; et al. In Vitro Evaluation of Acute Toxicity of Five Citrus spp. Essential Oils towards the Parasitic Mite Varroa destructor. Pathogens 2021, 10, 1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Brasesco, C.; Gende, L.; Negri, P.; Szawarski, N.; Iglesias, A.; Eguaras, M.; Ruffinengo, S.; Maggi, M. Assessing in Vitro acaricidal effect and joint action of a binary mixture between essential oil compounds (Thymol, Phellandrene, Eucalyptol, Cinnamaldehyde, Myrcene, Carvacrol) over ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor (Acari: Varroidae). J. Apic. Sci. 2017, 61, 203–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Colin, M.B.; Ciavarella, F.; Otero-Colina, G.; Belzunces, L.P. A method for characterizing the biological activity of essential oil against Varroa jacobsoni. In New Perspectives on Varroa; Matheson, A., Ed.; Internacional Bee Research Association: Cardiff, Wales, 1994; pp. 109–114. [Google Scholar]
  67. Fernández, N.J.; Damiani, N.; Podaza, E.A.; Martucci, J.F.; Fasce, D.; Quiroz, F.; Meretta, P.E.; Quintana, S.; Eguaras, M.J.; Gende, L.B. Laurus nobilis L. Extracts against Paenibacillus larvae: Antimicrobial activity, antioxidant capacity, hygienic behavior and colony strength. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2019, 26, 906–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Larran, S.; Ringuelet, J.A.; Carranza, M.R.; Henning, C.P.; Re, M.S.; Cerimele, E.L.; Urrutía, M.I. In vitro fungistatic effect of essential oils against Ascosphaera apis. J. Essent. Oil Res. 2001, 13, 122–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Singleton, V.L.; Rossi, J.A. Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 1965, 16, 144–158. [Google Scholar]
  70. Lamuela-Raventós, R.M. Folin–Ciocalteu method for the measurement of total phenolic content and antioxidant capacity. In Measurement of Antioxidant Activity & Capacity: Recent Trends and Applications, 1st ed.; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Woisky, R.G.; Salatino, A. Analysis of propolis: Some parameters and procedures for chemical quality control. Analysis of propolis: Some parameters and procedures for chemical quality control. J. Apic. Res. 1998, 37, 99–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Le, A.V.; Parks, S.E.; Nguyen, M.H.; Roach, P.D. Improving the Vanillin-Sulphuric Acid Method for Quantifying Total Saponins. Technologies 2018, 6, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Maggi, M.D.; Ruffinengo, S.R.; Gende, L.B.; Eguaras, M.J.; Sardella, N.H. LC50 baseline levels of amitraz, coumaphos, fluvalinate and flumethrin in populations of Varroa destructor from Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. J. Apic. Res. 2008, 47, 292–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Damiani, N.; Maggi, M.D.; Gende, L.B.; Faverin, C.; Eguaras, M.J.; Marcangeli, J.A. Evaluation of the toxicity of a propolis extract on Varroa destructor (Acari: Varroidae) and Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J. Apic. Res. 2010, 49, 257–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Damiani, N.; Fernández, N.J.; Porrini, M.P.; Gende, L.B.; Álvarez, E.; Buffa, F.; Brasesco, C.; Maggi, M.D.; Marcangeli, J.A.; Eguaras, M.J. Laurel leaf extracts for honeybee pest and disease management: Antimicrobial, microsporicidal, and acaricidal activity. Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 701–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Medrzycki, P.; Giffard, H.; Aupinel, P.; Belzunces, L.P.; Chauzat, M.P.; Claßen, C.; Colin, M.E.; Dupont, T.; Girolami, V.; Johnson, R.; et al. Standard methods for toxicology research in Apis mellifera. J. Apic. Res. 2013, 52, 1–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Aupinel, P.; Fortini, D.; Dufour, H.; Tasei, J.; Michaud, B.; Odoux, J.; Pham-Delegue, M. Improvement of artificial feeding in a standard in vitro method for rearing Apis mellifera larvae. Bull. Insectol. 2005, 58, 107. [Google Scholar]
  78. Smodiš Škerl, M.I.; Rivera-Gomis, J.; Tlak Gajger, I.; Bubnič, J.; Talakić, G.; Formato, G.; Baggio, A.; Mutinelli, F.; Tollenaers, W.; Laget, D.; et al. Efficacy and Toxicity of VarroMed® Used for Controlling Varroa destructor Infestation in Different Seasons and Geographical Areas. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 8564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Hewlett, P.S.; Plackett, R.L. An Introduction to the Interpretation of Quantal Responses in Biology [Pesticides]; University Park Press: University Park, PA, USA, 1979. [Google Scholar]
  80. Stokes, M.E.; Davis, C.S.; Koch, G.G. Categorical Data Analysis Using the SAS System; SAS Institute. Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 1995; pp. 34–35. [Google Scholar]
Plants 11 03329 g001 550
Figure 1. Kaplan—Meier plot of honey bee larvae survival function on different treatment: Control with no solvent (Control), control with solvent (Control acetone), hydrolats of Cascade variety (Cascade), hydrolats of Victoria variety (Victoria), hydrolats of Spalt variety (Spalt), and hydrolats of Mapuche variety (Mapuche). The varieties that differed from the control are Cascade (Log-rank (Mantel--Cox) Test p < 0.0001) and Mapuche (Log-rank (Mantel--Cox) Test p = 0.0015).
Figure 1. Kaplan—Meier plot of honey bee larvae survival function on different treatment: Control with no solvent (Control), control with solvent (Control acetone), hydrolats of Cascade variety (Cascade), hydrolats of Victoria variety (Victoria), hydrolats of Spalt variety (Spalt), and hydrolats of Mapuche variety (Mapuche). The varieties that differed from the control are Cascade (Log-rank (Mantel--Cox) Test p < 0.0001) and Mapuche (Log-rank (Mantel--Cox) Test p = 0.0015).
Plants 11 03329 g001
Plants 11 03329 g002 550
Figure 2. Means and SD of larval weights on day 7 with different treatments: Control with no solvent (Control), control with solvent (Control acetone), hydrolats of Cascade variety (Cascade), hydrolats of Victoria variety (Victoria), hydrolats of Spalt variety (Spalt), and hydrolats of Mapuche variety (Mapuche). “*” indicate statistical differences between treatments (p < 0.05).
Figure 2. Means and SD of larval weights on day 7 with different treatments: Control with no solvent (Control), control with solvent (Control acetone), hydrolats of Cascade variety (Cascade), hydrolats of Victoria variety (Victoria), hydrolats of Spalt variety (Spalt), and hydrolats of Mapuche variety (Mapuche). “*” indicate statistical differences between treatments (p < 0.05).
Plants 11 03329 g002
Table
Table 1. Relative percentage compositions of hydrolats from Humulus lupulus female flower cones of Mapuche, Cascade, Spalt, and Victoria varieties.
Table 1. Relative percentage compositions of hydrolats from Humulus lupulus female flower cones of Mapuche, Cascade, Spalt, and Victoria varieties.
CompoundKI (Exp)KI (lit)MapucheVictoriaCascadeSpalt
%%%
Pentyl Acetate859859 20.07
Beta-Linalool108810867.3110.0949.4944.20
Trans-Linalool Oxide110011021.511.955.79
NI1120-1.432.474.05
(+)-Limonene Oxide113411382.212.27
Isothujol116011571.321.44
(+)-Alpha-Terpineol118511897.241.274.51
Methyl 8-Nonynoate11991200 2.08
NI1277-2.052.87
Limonene diepoxyde129412946.496.25
9-oxadiciclo[3.3.1]nonane-2,7-diol134613471.621.13
Tetradecane13991399 17.43
(−)Beta-Caryophyllene14311430 18.77
Alpha-Caryophyllene14691463 9.60
Globulol157615765.949.74
Caryophyllene, Epoxide1597159458.5656.0216.263.58
NI1599- 1.96
Humuladienone160816072.44 2.45
Octadecano18001800 11.13
2,6,10,14-tetrametilhexadecane18151815 10.75
NI1860-1.882.42
Table
Table 2. Content of saponins, polyphenols, flavonoids, and antioxidant capacity of the different hydrolats from Humulus lupulus female flower cones of Mapuche, Cascade, Spalt, and Victoria varieties.
Table 2. Content of saponins, polyphenols, flavonoids, and antioxidant capacity of the different hydrolats from Humulus lupulus female flower cones of Mapuche, Cascade, Spalt, and Victoria varieties.
HydrolatsSaponinsFlavonoidsPolyphenolsAntioxidant Capacity
AO µg/mLQ µg/mLAG µg/mLTROLOX µg/mL
Victoria648.75030.2507133.2043361.2587
Cascade307.59980.0631190.7868217.3193
Mapuche458.91140.008282.9924157.8787
Spalt129.96260.3261210.7487313.4731
Table
Table 3. Estimated LC50 (μL/mL) values for Varroa destructor obtained at each time interval for each hydrolats from Humulus lupulus female flower cones of Mapuche, Cascade, Spalt, and Victoria varieties.
Table 3. Estimated LC50 (μL/mL) values for Varroa destructor obtained at each time interval for each hydrolats from Humulus lupulus female flower cones of Mapuche, Cascade, Spalt, and Victoria varieties.
HydrolatsMites
LC50 (µL/mL)
24 h 48 h
Cascade 117.9 (47.6–292.0) 35.2 (19.6–63.0)
Victoria 16.1 (6.8–38.1) 1.3 (0.7–2.2)
Spalt 114.3 (25.9–503.7) 21.5 (7.6–60.7)
Mapuche 30.6 (9.5–98.5) not estimated
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Iglesias, A.E.; Fuentes, G.; Mitton, G.; Ramos, F.; Brasesco, C.; Manzo, R.; Orallo, D.; Gende, L.; Eguaras, M.; Ramirez, C.; et al. Hydrolats from Humulus lupulus and Their Potential Activity as an Organic Control for Varroa destructor. Plants 2022, 11, 3329. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11233329

AMA Style

Iglesias AE, Fuentes G, Mitton G, Ramos F, Brasesco C, Manzo R, Orallo D, Gende L, Eguaras M, Ramirez C, et al. Hydrolats from Humulus lupulus and Their Potential Activity as an Organic Control for Varroa destructor. Plants. 2022; 11(23):3329. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11233329

Chicago/Turabian Style

Iglesias, Azucena Elizabeth, Giselle Fuentes, Giulia Mitton, Facundo Ramos, Constanza Brasesco, Rosa Manzo, Dalila Orallo, Liesel Gende, Martin Eguaras, Cristina Ramirez, and et al. 2022. "Hydrolats from Humulus lupulus and Their Potential Activity as an Organic Control for Varroa destructor" Plants 11, no. 23: 3329. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11233329

APA Style

Iglesias, A. E., Fuentes, G., Mitton, G., Ramos, F., Brasesco, C., Manzo, R., Orallo, D., Gende, L., Eguaras, M., Ramirez, C., Fanovich, A., & Maggi, M. (2022). Hydrolats from Humulus lupulus and Their Potential Activity as an Organic Control for Varroa destructor. Plants, 11(23), 3329. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11233329

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop