Threats to Wild and Commercial Bees Today Research (Research Paper Sample)

Threats to Wild and Commercial Bees Today
On February 19, 2014 a report showed that Deformed Wing Virus (DMV), a disease that affects commercial honeybees is likely spilling over from commercial hives into wild populations. Results of a study carried out by Mark Brown an ecologist at Royal Holloway University of London, and his colleagues infected wild bumble bees, Bombus terrestris, with DMV in the laboratory. They found that the diseased bumble bees’ lifespan was reduced by six days. A field bumblebee worker lives for 21 days. Brown mentioned in his press conference that for every bee that has this virus, you’re losing about a third or a quarter of all the food it would bring back to the nest to help the nest grow (Krens 2014).
The Deformed Wing Virus (DWV) is an RNA virus affecting the honeybee (Apis Mallifera). The virus was first isolated from a sample of honeybees from Japan in the early 1980s and is currently distributed worldwide. It is found also in pollen baskets and commercially reared bumble bees (Graystock et al 2013). Its main vector is the Varroa Mite. It is a contributor to Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), a phenomenon in which worker bees from a beehive or European honey bee colony abruptly disappear (De Souza 2014). Colony collapse is significant economically because many agricultural crops worldwide are pollinated by European honey bees. From the Studies carried out by Brown et.al, it was concluded that highly infected individuals have deformed wings and are incapable of flight. The virus also leaves bee workers paralyzed, while the virus kills young queen larvae. The deformed wing virus interferes with the development of workers who are born with malfunctioning wings, Coelho (2009), thus the decline in the production of the honey bee.
Brown’s group conducted a large survey across Great Britain and the Isle of Man to compare the prevalence of the disease in honeybees and bumblebees. Mapping out where the disease was present in each species showed an overlap in its distribution, indicating that there might be disease transmission between the two species. Wild bumblebees have suffered declines in their populations since the introduction of the disease. Commercial bee populations in Europe have decreased by 45 percent since 2010.
It was also proven that the increase of the DWV in commercial honeybees increased the prevalence of the disease in wild bees and other pollinating insects. “A spillover of emerging infectious diseases could represent a major cause of mortality of wild pollinators wherever managed bees are maintained.”(Brown 2014). A threat such as emerging infectious disease to the bee population world-wide could have adverse effects environmentally as the world might face the possibility of losing a substantial proportion of the world’s flora and possibly the world’s food supply. Declines in the production of honey will also have other adverse effects such as the loss of nutrients beneficial to the human population health-wise as it has been proven that honey can be used to treat infections (Nordqvist 2013).
Other threats to bee populations have been reported in other countries such as Australia, Canada and the USA. There were reports in early January 2014 in the USA about a new threat to commercial bees known as the “Zombie Bee” (Fox News 2014). Fox News reported that a beekeeper, Anthony Cantrell, Burlington, discovered zombie bees in his hive in October 2013, which was the first time they had been found in the eastern United States however John Hafernik, a professor from San Francisco State University, discovered the first zombie bees in 2008. A fly called Apocephalus borealis attaches itself to the bee and injects its eggs, which grow inside the bee. This is believed to cause neurological damage resulting in erratic, jerky movement and night activity, "like a zombie," and bees usually die withing hours of having such symptoms (Hafernik 2014).
The Apocephalus borealis is a species of North American parasitoid phorid fly that has been known to parasitize bumblebees, honey bees and paper wasps. Other neurologic effects that have been reported include other behavioral anomalies such as bees seeking to fly out at night. Scientists believe the parasitic fly discovery may help explain why bees quit their hives and disappear at night or what has been reported by other sites and sources as “flight of the living dead” (Coghlan, 2012). Since the discovery, the parasitic flies have been found at 77 per cent of sites in San Francisco Bay, and in hives in South Dakota. Parasitic flies that turn honeybees into night-flying zombies could provide another clue to cracking the mystery of colony collapse disorder. Since 2007, thousands of hives in the US have been decimated as bees suddenly go missing overnight (Coghlan, 2012). Scientists and beekeepers fear that the problem may not be taken seriously by the public as the thought of “zombie bees” may sound amusing but as Englert (2014) says, it is a problem that needs to be faced and figured out instead of laughing it off.
While commercial bees face such eminent threats, urban bees face other urban and human-related threats. In 2009 it was reported that the urban use of mobile cellular phones had adverse effects on the health and mortality of the urban bee. Studies brought out evidence to support the theory of colony collapse disorder (CCD) among honeybees due to bioactive microwave radiation from cell phones and their relay towers (Mercola 2009). Experiments found that worker bees failed to return to their hives when their navigation skills were interfered by the mobile microwaves. Cell phones were placed near beehives and it was noted that hives collapsed totally within 5 to 10 days and the worker bees failed to return to their homes. As reported by Mercola, electromagnetic radiation also caused damage to the nervous system of the bee and it became unable to fly.
In a study led by Daniel Favre, 2011 it was realized that bees sensed the signals transmitted when mobile phones rang, and emitted heavy buzzing noises during the calls. It was discovered that mobile calls act as an instinctive warning to leave the hive, but the frequency confuses the bees, causing them to fly erratically (Zimmer 2011). Similar studies were carried out and it was confirmed that a cellular phone placed immediately next to a beehive and emitting a frequency of 900 Mega Hertz in 10-minute bursts over a short period of 10 days caused honey production to cease during each 10 minute interval. The Queens in the test colonies produced significantly fewer eggs per day compared to the Queens unexposed to cellular radiation (Halter 2011). Cellular electromagnetic radiation was also linked to the prevalence of CCD (Colony Collapse Disorders) and thus could be a serious threat to bee populations in the urban world and even in the rural areas as cellular phone towers emit high frequencies of radiation as they provide coverage over across landmasses.
Besides most of the recent problems and threats faced by bees other threats date as far back as the 1990’s. According to Thompson (1999), there were concerns about the potential impact of pesticides on other bees such as the bumble bee. It was reported that severe declines in the bumblebee populations dated back thirty years. Bumblebees, just like honeybees, are important pollinators of many crops and wild flowers and, therefore, there are both conservation and economic reasons for taking action to assess the impact of pesticides on bumble bees.
Bumble bees are generally more fast foragers than honey bees, visiting more than two times more flowers per minute than honeybees and twice as many foraging trips per day compared to honeybees (Thompson 1999). Bumble bees also have at least twice the nectar carrying capacity of honey bees and thus the effects of pesticides on the bumble bees are a major concern.
Studies showed that bumble bees were likely to forage on many of the crops on which pesticides were regularly applied and the greatest concern raised by insecticide applications were due to their inherently greater toxicity to bees (Thompson 1999). It was also discovered that the loss of several workers from a bumble bee colony was likely to have greater impact than the loss of the same number of honey bees as bumble bee colonies are generally smaller than honey bee colonies in terms of the number of workers per colony. A review by Thompson (1999) showed that there are a number of routes of exposure of bumble bees to pesticides through foraging on crops or flowering weeds with both Queens and workers likely to be exposed and may result in mortality of individuals.
Bumble bees, unfortunately aren’t the only ones at risk of exposure to pesticides, even the honey bees as well. In the agricultural sector, beekeepers are being advised that, should an insecticide of high toxicity to bees be used in an area close to where their bees are foraging, they should be prepared to reduce the risk of poisoning. One of the most important steps in protecting bees is the selection of an apiary location with low pesticide risk (Krupke et.al 2012). Beekeepers should notify growers and applicators in the area, the county agent, and the State Apiary Inspector of the location of the hives. According to Krupke et.al, if commercial honeybees are at risk of exposure to pesticides beekeepers can chose other methods of protection such as moving the bees out of the risk area and the new site must be at least three miles away to prevent the bees from returning to the old site.
Currently the EPA carries out Pollinator Protection Actions for the reduce the pesticide risk on pollinating insects. Pollinator Protection Actions today include working with the U.S Department of Agriculture to develop and apply technologies to reduce pesticide...