Czech J. Anim. Sci., 2024, 69(4):155-164 | DOI: 10.17221/22/2024-CJAS

Field study: Factors influencing virgin queen bee acceptance rate in Apis mellifera coloniesOriginal Paper

Agnese Smilga-Spalvina1,2, Kriss Spalvins1, Ivars Veidenbergs1
1 Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia
2 Smilga Spalvina Llc., Incukalns, Sigulda district, Latvia

Regular replacement of old and problematic queen bees is necessary to maintain the strength and productivity of bee colonies. Beekeepers replace queen bees using queen cells, virgin queens, or mated laying queens. In this study, we explored factors influencing the acceptance of the virgin queens. A comprehensive field study was conducted in the summer of 2023, involving the introduction of 754 virgin queens of different age and 194 queen cells into mating nuclei of various states using three different methods. The article aims to provide recommendations to beekeepers for introducing virgin queens, thereby increasing the frequency of successful requeening. The duration of the colony being queenless has a significant impact on the acceptance of queens. If the colony is prepared in advance, at least five days prior, immature and mature virgin queens will be accepted equally well (60‒77%). Conversely, suppose queen replacement is done without preparation for a colony that has been queenless for one day only. In that case, the result will be significantly lower due to the short queenless period (41%), and the age factor of queen bees will come into play. If queen replacement is done with preparation, the chosen timing within the season will play a significant role, as weather conditions can influence acceptance and mating, varying from 48% to 89%. Suppose a bee colony has long lost its queen and has developed laying worker bees. In that case, there is still a 55% chance of successfully introducing a virgin queen into such a colony without using time-consuming methods.

Keywords: bee breeding; beekeeping; honey bee; introduction success; requeening; virgin queens

Received: February 16, 2024; Accepted: April 8, 2024; Prepublished online: April 23, 2024; Published: April 30, 2024  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Smilga-Spalvina A, Spalvins K, Veidenbergs I. Field study: Factors influencing virgin queen bee acceptance rate in Apis mellifera colonies. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 2024;69(4):155-164. doi: 10.17221/22/2024-CJAS.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Buchler R, Andonov S, Bienefeld K, Costa C, Hatjina F, Kezic N, Kryger P, Spivak M, Uzunov A, Wilde J. Standard methods for rearing and selection of Apis mellifera queens. J Apicult Res. 2013;52(1):1-30. Go to original source...
    2. Butler CG, Simpson J. The introduction of virgin and mated queens, directly and in a simple cage. Bee World. 1956 Jun;37(6):105-24. Go to original source...
    3. Cobey SW. Comparison studies of instrumentally inseminated and naturally mated honey bee queens and factors affecting their performance. Apidologie. 2007 Jul-Aug;38(4):390-410. Go to original source...
    4. Gray A, Adjlane N, Arab A, Ballis A, Brusbardis V, Bugeja Douglas A, Cadahoia L, Charriere JD, Chlebo R, Coffey MF, Cornelissen B, da Costa CA, Danneels E, Danihlik J, Dobrescu C, Evans G, Fedoriak M, Forsythe I, Gregorc A, Arakelyan II, Johannesen J, Kauko L, Kristiansen P, Martikkala M, Martin-Hernandez R, Mazur E, Medina-Flores CA, Mutinelli F, Omar EM, Patalano S, Raudmets A, San Martin G, Soroker V, Stahlmann-Brown P, Stevanovic J, Uzunov A, Vejsnaes F, Williams A, Brodschneider R. Honey bee colony loss rates in 37 countries using the COLOSS survey for winter 2019-2020: The combined effects of operation size, migration and queen replacement. J Apicult Res. 2023 Mar 15;62(2):204-10. Go to original source...
    5. Laidlaw HH. Queen introduction. Bee World. 1981;62(3):98-105. Go to original source...
    6. McCutcheon D. Queen introduction. Bee World. 2001;82(1):5-21. Go to original source...
    7. Oxley PR, Oldroyd BP. The genetic architecture of honeybee breeding. Adv Insect Physiol. 2010;39:83-118. Go to original source...
    8. Page RE, Peng CYS. Aging and development in social insects with emphasis on the honeybee, Apis mellifera L. Exp Gerontol. 2001 Apr;36(4-6):695-711. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Paillard M, Rousseau A, Giovenazzo P, Bailey JL. Preservation of domesticated honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) drone semen. J Econ Entomol. 2017 Aug;110(4):1412-8. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. Pankiw T. Cued in: Honey bee pheromones as information flow and collective decision-making. Apidologie. 2004 Mar-Apr;35(2):217-26. Go to original source...
    11. Perez-Sato JA, Hughes OH, Couvillon MJ, Ratnieks FLW. Improved technique for introducing four-day old virgin queens to mating hives that uses artificial and natural queen cells for introduction. J Apicult Res. 2007;46(1):28-33. Go to original source...
    12. Perez-Sato JA, Karcher MH, Hughes OH, Ratnieks FLW. Direct introduction of mated and virgin queens using smoke: A method that gives almost 100% acceptance when hives have been queenless for 2 days or more. J Apicult Res. 2008;47(4):243-50. Go to original source...
    13. Perez-Sato JA, Ratnieks FLW. Comparing alternative methods of introducing virgin queens (Apis mellifera) into mating nucleus hives. Apidologie. 2006 Sep-Oct;37(5):571-6. Go to original source...
    14. Rhodes JW, Somerville DC, Harden S. Queen honey bee introduction and early survival-effects of queen age at introduction. Apidologie. 2004 Jul-Aug;35(4):383-8. Go to original source...
    15. Szabo TI. Behavioural studies on queen introduction in the honeybee. 2. Effect of age and storage conditions of virgin queens on their attractiveness to workers. J Apicult Res. 1974;13(2):127-35. Go to original source...
    16. Szabo TI. Requeening honeybee colonies with queen cells. J Apicult Res. 1982;21(4):208-11. Go to original source...
    17. Wossler TC, Jones GE, Allsopp MH, Hepburn R. Virgin queen mandibular gland signals of Apis mellifera capensis change with age and affect honeybee worker responses. J Chem Ecol. 2006 May;32(5):1043-56. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    18. Yaniz JL, Silvestre MA, Santolaria P. Sperm quality assessment in honey bee drones. Biology. 2020 Jul;9(7):174. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    19. Zacepins A, Brusbardis V, Meitalovs J, Stalidzans E. Challenges in the development of Precision Beekeeping. Biosyst Eng. 2015 Feb;130:60-71. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content