Geoffrey R. Williams

SummaryA variety of methods are used in honey bee research and differ depending on the level at which the research is conducted. On an individual level, the handling of individual honey bees, including the queen, larvae and pupae are required. There are different methods for the immobilising, killing and storing as well as determining individual weight of bees. The precise timing of developmental stages is also an important aspect of sampling individuals for experiments. In order to investigate and manipulate functional processes in honey bees, e.g. memory formation and retrieval and gene expression, microinjection is often used. A method that is used by both researchers and beekeepers is the marking of queens that serves not only to help to locate her during her life, but also enables the dating of queens. Creating multiple queen colonies allows the beekeeper to maintain spare queens, increase brood production or ask questions related to reproduction. On colony level, very useful techniques are the measurement of intra hive mortality using dead bee traps, weighing of full hives, collecting pollen and nectar, and digital monitoring of brood development via location recognition. At the population level, estimation of population density is essential to evaluate the health status and using beelines help to locate wild colonies. These methods, described in this paper, are especially valuable when investigating the effects of pesticide applications, environmental pollution and diseases on colony survival.

SummaryMethods are described for working with Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae in the field and in the laboratory. For fieldwork, different sampling methods are described to determine colony level infections at a given point in time, but also for following the temporal infection dynamics. Suggestions are made for how to standardise field trials for evaluating treatments and disease impact. The laboratory methods described include different means for determining colony level and individual bee infection levels and methods for species determination, including light microscopy, electron microscopy, and molecular methods (PCR). Suggestions are made for how to standardise cage trials, and different inoculation methods for infecting bees are described, including control methods for spore viability. A cell culture system for in vitro rearing of Nosema spp. is described. Finally, how to conduct different types of experiments are described, including infectious dose, dose effects, course of infection and longevity tests.

SummaryAdult honey bees are maintained in vitro in laboratory cages for a variety of purposes. For example, researchers may wish to perform experiments on honey bees caged individually or in groups to study aspects of parasitology, toxicology, or physiology under highly controlled conditions, or they may cage whole frames to obtain newly emerged workers of known age cohorts. Regardless of purpose, researchers must manage a number of variables, ranging from selection of study subjects (e.g. honey bee subspecies) to experimental environment (e.g. temperature and relative humidity). Although decisions made by researchers may not necessarily jeopardize the scientific rigour of an experiment, they may profoundly affect results, and may make comparisons with similar, but independent, studies difficult. Focusing primarily on workers, we provide recommendations for maintaining adults under in vitro laboratory conditions, whilst acknowledging gaps in our understanding that require further attention. We specifically describe how to properly obtain honey bees, and how to choose appropriate cages, incubator conditions, and food to obtain biologically relevant and comparable experimental results. Additionally, we provide broad recommendations for experimental design and statistical analyses of data that arises from experiments using caged honey bees. The ultimate goal of this, and of all COLOSS BEEBOOK papers, is not to stifle science with restrictions, but rather to provide researchers with the appropriate tools to generate comparable data that will build upon our current understanding of honey bees.

Queen health is crucial to colony survival of social bees. Recently, queen failure has been proposed to be a major driver of managed honey bee colony losses, yet few data exist concerning effects of environmental stressors on queens. Here we demonstrate for the first time that exposure to field-realistic concentrations of neonicotinoid pesticides during development can severely affect queens of western honey bees (Apis mellifera). In pesticide-exposed queens, reproductive anatomy (ovaries) and physiology (spermathecal-stored sperm quality and quantity), rather than flight behaviour, were compromised and likely corresponded to reduced queen success (alive and producing worker offspring). This study highlights the detriments of neonicotinoids to queens of environmentally and economically important social bees, and further strengthens the need for stringent risk assessments to safeguard biodiversity and ecosystem services that are vulnerable to these substances.

Insects provide crucial ecosystem services for human food security and maintenance of biodiversity. Therefore, major declines in wild insects combined with losses of managed bees have raised great concern. Recent data suggest that honey bees appear to be less susceptible to stressors compared to other species. Here, we argue that eusociality plays a key role for the susceptibility of insects to environmental stressors due to superorganism resilience, which can be defined as the ability to tolerate the loss of somatic cells (= workers) as long as the germ line (= reproduction) is maintained. Life history and colony size appear critical for such resilience. Future conservation efforts should take superorganism resilience into account to safeguard ecosystem services by insects.