# Varroa Destructor Paper



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

This is the best paper on Varroa Destructor I've read. It will make me change some of my treatments and assumptions on this mite.

http://www.circlesevenhoneyandpollination.com/varroa-destructor.html


----------



## Rick 1456 (Jun 22, 2010)

Hard read for "layman". (no offense to anyone) It answered a lot of my questions and concerns. told me I'm doin some things right, some things that i should be aware of. Bottom line seems to be,,,we just do not have the answers,,,,mostly direction. Gota start some where.
Thanks for the post.


----------



## Rick 1456 (Jun 22, 2010)

Doesn't it make sense, that there is no answer? The solution is, there is no one solution. Amazing grasp of the obvious again. There are so many things that can "play" into this. How does any one isolate one thing? Research hasn't gone that far yet. Getting close maybe. I always wondered about the Hygenic test. Killing brood to see if the bees would remove it. It tests to see if bees will remove dead brood. The mite doesn't kill the brood,,,am I wrong? 
Hope this stimulates others to read the article in it's entirety for comment.
Thanks


----------



## TxFirefighter (Dec 14, 2010)

The one thing everyone needs to realize. These things are here to stay...in my mind..the only true way to deal with them is to quit treating for them and let the survivors survive..the non survivors die.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I'm with you TX. By treating, we are allowing for wimpy bees and beefy mites. Treating very literally selects for the strongest possible mite. And an animal which has such a short reproductive period has a high capacity for adaptation just like bacteria. The only real and permanent solution is to stop treating altogether. And no one needs to say it won't work, I've been doing it for nine years. It is very possible, yet somewhat painful. That's life.


----------



## Rick 1456 (Jun 22, 2010)

thank you thank you thank you

Rick


----------



## rkereid (Dec 20, 2009)

TxFirefighter said:


> The one thing everyone needs to realize. These things are here to stay...in my mind..the only true way to deal with them is to quit treating for them and let the survivors survive..the non survivors die.


Yep!!


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

I have over the last 3 years, tried some hives with non-treatment. Just lost a pretty good hive I didn't treat in the last couple weeks, even in this mild winter. Bottom board is full of mites. My treated hives are doing quite well. I still have a couple of no treat hives alive. I will take them through another winter and, if they survive, graft queens off them. However, my experience is not good and I'm not hopeful. I find that 2 years is the time that no treat hives collapse. One can usually get them through the 1st year and start to feel confident.

I agree if one has 1 -10 hives it's probably possible to have no treat hives. However, when you get over 50 and do pollination and try to make money off them I don't see it as a possibility. I have only queened with queens from no treat producers and still need to treat. I also think that - if the paper is correct - and such a large % of the mites are in the brood that even the survivors are damaged more than most beeks realize by the mites. Couple that with the virus that the mites vector, throw in a little nosema and you have a deadly ****tail for the hive. Because of the possibility that so many mites are in the brood, I have lowered my threshold to 1-2 mites in an alcohol wash.

I will continue to treat. This year I will use formic. Last year I used OA vapor. I expect to rotate these methods every year. I do not yet treat for nosema. However, my counts are presently ok.


----------



## BEES4U (Oct 10, 2007)

The paper does provide a lot of information!
Does anyone know what a sodium recepter is?


----------



## JohnAllen (Jul 2, 2010)

Excellent post - many thanks!!!:thumbsup:


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

BEES4U said:


> The paper does provide a lot of information!
> Does anyone know what a sodium recepter is?


Try these:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21377491
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16367782
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11982625


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Interesting and thorough. A must read for any beekeeper who wants to fully understand varroa. But my cursory reading of it is that it is pretty much a compilation of a lot of previous research and dosent really break any new ground. If Im missing something, as there is a lot of information here, I would encourage someone to point it out. 
For those "let them die and breed from survivors" advocates I can only restate my long held belief that the collateral damage is a loss of genetic diversity. What is slowly but surely happening in the industry is many beekeepers are having very good success in dealing with varroa through different management techniques coupled with the properly timed and much safer treatment options now available. It may not make for great headlines for those looking for drama and proof that our bees are dying from this or that but the state of bee health in the US is on an uptick and the current bee supply situation the past two years in California is the "lay your cards on the table" proof of it.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

I agree Jim, not much new here, but a lot of things I had not read yet. It's as thorough a review on Varroa as I've read and that's why I posted it. It's difficult to read everything and when something like this comes along it's a goldmine to me.

I notice that nuc requests are starting to dwindle, and coupled with all the hives available in CA I totally agree with your statement about the bee supply.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Best ever article. Much thanks Cam.

And of course much thanks to the folks who actually wrote it, a lot of work and dedication required.

As to the treat / don't treat argument that has been brought up in this thread, one of the issues the paper dealt with is the two main varroa strains present in North America. One being considered "less" virulent and almost a non issue for bees. This less virulent strain is not present in my country, we only have the more virulent one. In my country there are still some areas with no varroa. But for the rest of the country you treat, or you lose the hives. The presence of the two strains in North America may explain why some beekeepers are able to go treatment free, and some are not. Plus is also a plausible explanation why no migratory operations can survive treatment free, the bees are exposed to more mite types.

Like most beekeepers, I'm very interested in finding some way to go treatment free. But mite types are not even discussed in treatment free circles, the information available from these people pretty limited at best, sometimes not going much further than "just do it". Also people who do treat are often demonised, being painted as people who are producing better mites. In fact the mites produced by treatment resistance are better at resistance to treatment, but unlikely to be better at anything else. 

The paper gives a lot of useful information, even discussing some of the differences in resistance methods used by cerana, and melifera.


----------



## Rick 1456 (Jun 22, 2010)

If it was in the article I missed it. How can you find out which specie of mite exists in your hives. It is an excellent point that treatment free success could/does hinge on which specie you deal with. If one had bees that groom, and attack the mite, would matter not which specie seems to me. Creatures are amazing. We evolve a bee that will do that, the mite will evolve a way to defeat it. Hopefully it will be tit for tat. Some days chickens, some days feathers


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

It's a big paper! 

The differing varroa types are discussed on pages one and two.

Information exists elsewhere as to how to determine different mite types, but right now I don't have time to search it for you. There's an Aussie scientist done some good work on it you may be able to find it.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

"Japanese/Thailand haplotype
also infests and reproduces on A. mellifera. However,
this haplotype has a more restricted distribution than the
Korean haplotype and is considered less virulent"


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Several takeaways for me from the paper.

There is no data that the mite is becoming less virulent.

Older brood cells are more attractive to mites.

mellifera is 2x more attractive to the mites than scutellata

a 7% infestation of winter bees almost always leads to collapse.

parasitized workers forage earlier, have a significantly reduced life span, and a lower return to the colony.

Colder regions have higher mite levels.

Removal of 3-4 completely capped drone combs reduces final mite population 50 - 70%

Up to 90% of the mite population can be in the brood at one time.


----------



## Rick 1456 (Jun 22, 2010)

Found this in an article:
Varroa destructor resembles V. jacobsoni, with which it was confused until the end of the 20th century. Relative to V. jacobsoni, V. destructor is significantly larger and differs substantially with respect to mtDNA COI sequence, as well as at other genetic loci investigated. Varroa jacobsoni is rarely found on A. mellifera. Only a couple of lineages of V. destructor appear to have shifted hosts from A. cerana to A. mellifera. Varroa destructor now occurs nearly everywhere A. mellifera is found, but as of 2010 it had not yet been detected in Australia.
If the two species were confusing to the experts for years, (taxonomic difference) leaves me out I've given up the idea of writing the book, "Ricks' Guide to Backyard Mite Identification."


----------



## Moccasin (May 18, 2010)

There are several things that I firmly disagree with in common bee literature. One of them is that Varroa Jacobsonii made a jump and became Varroa Destructor. I know it wasn't given a name until 1999 and didn't start killing bees until the late 80's in the countries that it mysteriously migrated to. Another thing that is never mentioned is not only do they breed in drone cells, but they are mostly carried by drones from hive to hive. Another thing, which is not related, is drone congregation areas. I do not believe that queens fly miles away from their hives to meet with drones in these areas then, fly home. I am certain that queens mate immediately above the hive. The genetic diversity comes from the fact that drones fly frantically for a couple of hours every afternoon from hive to hive. This ensures genetic diversity, not drone congregation areas. This is what carries mites from hives to hives as well. I also suspect Varroa Destructor could be genetically modified.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

If you read the paper it delineates the various types of Varroa mites and DOES NOT say that Jacobsoni became Destructor.

I agree that many queens mate above the mating yard. Some [not me] have witnessed it.

I have no opinion on genetic modification of mites.:scratch:


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

One of the interesting things I read was the repellant effect of chemicals found in the queen's supply of royal jelly.


----------



## oblib (Oct 28, 2011)

"One of the interesting things I read was the repellant effect of chemicals found in the queen's supply of royal jelly."


I would think royal jelly means "still too long before this brood is capped" to the mites as all bees get it for the first few days. Once they are swapped over to the regular brood food then it's time for the mites to move in before it gets capped.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Moccasin said:


> Another thing, which is not related, is drone congregation areas. I do not believe that queens fly miles away from their hives to meet with drones in these areas then, fly home. I am certain that queens mate immediately above the hive.


 I wont hijack this thread with that discussion but I would like to hear, perhaps in the queen forum, more about your degree of certainty on this.


----------



## Rick 1456 (Jun 22, 2010)

I also suspect Varroa Destructor could be genetically modified. 
I have wondered about that myself actually. Anyone familiar/remember with the way they controlled the screw worm fly? Sterile male technique. Obviously not the same but someone figured it out. The industry was being devastated. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterile_insect_technique
Maybe we need to modify the bee


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

jim lyon said:


> For those "let them die and breed from survivors" advocates I can only restate my long held belief that the collateral damage is a loss of genetic diversity.


Jim,
Sometimes a population changes when there's acute, intense pressure on it (varroa on _apis mellifera_) naturally. If fitness causes a skewing in the overall population's expression of "diversity" so be it--until co-evolutionary processes begin and the pressure lessens (mites get less irritating) and the bees become more tolerant. This cannot happen however, if one is artifically propping up the population. (Removing all the mites).

We use the "Bond" method or similar name for running untreated, and once we stabilized and our colonies weren't crashing left and right we begain to bring new blood back in, all the while making sure that the tolerant stuff was passing along tolerance to the new stuff.

It takes awhile, but the results are a tolerant population, low mite levels and productive colonies. As long as there's "fresh" gene flow at some point before patterns go South, one can breed for tolerance and maintain productivity. The "loss of diversity" that you speak of isn't permanant--just a reshuffling of genetic combinations. The combinations are what one wants: the GOOD ONES! 

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I've been doing the same thing Adam, however on a smaller scale.


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> I've been doing the same thing Adam, however on a smaller scale.


Right on!

Another interesting facet of Varroa and _apis Mellifera_ is the mites' role in transmitting virus. With the latest molecular tools and techniques, insect virus research has made a giant leap. I'm sure we'll be seeing very interesting papers coming out in the next few years on honey bee virus.

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

I believe there has been some pretty good work in this area already. I also have to disagree with you Adam about the Bond method with hives going into pollination. No chance for their survival IMO. I keep trying it and keep losing the hives I don't treat. Even though my queens all come from no treat producers. No disrespect intended but until you can send those bees into pollination in a couple different areas [almonds or blueberries] with hundreds/thousands of hives around you and survive with the bond method, it's not sustainable. I still have one hive with a 2 year old queen alive that went into cranberry pollination last summer and apple pollination with no treatment. all the others have succumbed in the last couple weeks after dwindling. On the other hand, the treated hives are all thriving at this writing with no losses. 



adamf said:


> Another interesting facet of Varroa and _apis Mellifera_ is the mites' role in transmitting virus. With the latest molecular tools and techniques, insect virus research has made a giant leap. I'm sure we'll be seeing very interesting papers coming out in the next few years on honey bee virus.
> 
> Adam Finkelstein
> www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Adam: Maybe we arent really that far apart in our approaches. Being migratory brings a lot more variables into the equation however. What we have been able to do and continue to do is to ratchet down our use of treatments while still maintaining strong healthy hives. We havent used anything harsher than oxalic acid or Thymol for over 5 years now. I do get a bit edgy, however, if I feel that our operation, which he have devoted a tremendous amount of work and energy into building up, gets stereotyped as being just one of those big commercials that "dumps tons of chemicals into their hives" (at least that is how I have heard it described on here more than once) by some that may have never walked into any commercial bee yard before. Its just not that way with us. If the question is, though, is it in the best interest of your operation to let hives live or die sans treatment then my answer has and always will be no. I cant believe that nothing is lost in that process, and I know of operations that went out of business because they failed to adapt, they simply lost so many bees that they were financially unable to continue. But then I guess until someone has experienced the responsibility of making a living for you and your employees it is difficult to simplify the issue down to the point where anyone who has ever treated gets accused of being part of the problem. If what we have done in the past 22 years is simply to create wimpy bees and super mites then I am not seeing the proof of it in our outfit. Adam I congratulate you for your success I think that what your are doing is commendable but I doubt that you were faced with the same scenarios in your management decisions that I have had to face.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

I will back Jim up.....The sloppy commercial beekeepers are all gone now. Only those that keep top notch outfits and manage them with all the t's crossed and i's dotted survive. AND THAT MEANS NOT DUMPING HARSH CHEMS in beehives. Those days went out the door. Our use of chems is of those softer types combined with bees that do have more resistance that those in the earlier days of first contact. Good Varroa control is achieved by a varied approach, an IPM-(intergrated pest management approach). You have to be flexible and vigilant regardless of what methods you choose. To accuse commercial beekeepers of being the problem because we treat is wrong. I can turn that around and state that those that do not treat are just a constant source for mites and problems. Either statement is inflammatory at best and sets beekeepers poles apart. Thus we do not work together and find a real control for the problem--VARROA MITE. Ted Kretschmann


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

camero7 said:


> I believe there has been some pretty good work in this area already.


From the almost zero research on insect virus ten years ago to what's out now, not much is out yet. There will be though. The molecular techniques
and sequenced Honey Bee genome will really accelerate the rate of good data to be analyzed. 




camero7 said:


> I also have to disagree with you Adam about the Bond method with hives going into pollination. No chance for their survival IMO. I keep trying it and keep losing the hives I don't treat. Even though my queens all come from no treat producers. No disrespect intended but until you can send those bees into pollination in a couple different areas [almonds or blueberries] with hundreds/thousands of hives around you and survive with the bond method, it's not sustainable. I still have one hive with a 2 year old queen alive that went into cranberry pollination last summer and apple pollination with no treatment. all the others have succumbed in the last couple weeks after dwindling. On the other hand, the treated hives are all thriving at this writing with no losses.


No disrespect taken. 

Since I don't pollinate I don't have the experience and knowldege. However, I do know a few beekeepers who have 1000s of hives that use mite tolerant stock in their queen programs and they say that their treatments have been reduced with the addition of VSH stock.

Adam
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

jim lyon said:


> Adam: Maybe we arent really that far apart in our approaches. Being migratory brings a lot more variables into the equation however. What we have been able to do and continue to do is to ratchet down our use of treatments while still maintaining strong healthy hives. We havent used anything harsher than oxalic acid or Thymol for over 5 years now. I do get a bit edgy, however, if I feel that our operation, which he have devoted a tremendous amount of work and energy into building up, gets stereotyped as being just one of those big commercials that "dumps tons of chemicals into their hives" (at least that is how I have heard it described on here more than once) by some that may have never walked into any commercial bee yard before. Its just not that way with us.


Jim,
Operations like yours are really something and you folks are the best
beekeepers--I've only been impressed by how efficient and knowledgeable you
and other like you are with your bees and their management. That you are
keeping an open mind and watching how you treat, using IPM, observation and
breeding to keep your bees fit is great! Kudos to you and the others like
you!

Observation is the key--if there are great combinations out there, find and
segregate them, then breed from them. Or maybe have someone test them
untreated and if they pass muster, return a breeder queen or two.



jim lyon said:


> If the question is, though, is it in the best interest of your operation to let hives live or die sans treatment then my answer has and always will be no. I cant believe that nothing is lost in that process, and I know of operations that went out of business because they failed to adapt, they simply lost so many bees that they were financially unable to continue. But then I guess until someone has experienced the responsibility of making a living for you and your employees it is difficult to simplify the issue down to the point where anyone who has ever treated gets accused of being part of the problem. If what we have done in the past 22 years is simply to create wimpy bees and super mites then I am not seeing the proof of it in our outfit. Adam I congratulate you for your success I think that what your are doing is commendable but I doubt that you were faced with the same scenarios in your management decisions that I have had to face.


Certainly so! Thank goodness there's specialization in agriculture. You do
stuff in your operation I'd never do or even want to do--the same is true
in ours. However, I think we can use these differences to enhance both our
successes--your numbers are what gives selection from your stock, power.
Our specialization can take those combinations, fix them and then propagate
them into something desirable, returning them to you. I'd rather have bees
bred from what I already find desirable and I bet you would too.

Biologically, in principle, if there was no treatment for honey bees in the
face of varroa in the USA, bees would either go extinct, or adapt. My bet
would be that they would adapt. That's in the wild, or in some unrealistic
theoretical scenario though. Non-treatment bee management can exist and
help out with other outfits. Eventually, as you have observed, the
treatments in operations that cannot afford losses, will lessen as the bee
population stabilizes. Man I sure hope so!


Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> I will back Jim up.....The sloppy commercial beekeepers are all gone now. Only those that keep top notch outfits and manage them with all the t's crossed and i's dotted survive. AND THAT MEANS NOT DUMPING HARSH CHEMS in beehives. Those days went out the door. Our use of chems is of those softer types combined with bees that do have more resistance that those in the earlier days of first contact. Good Varroa control is achieved by a varied approach, an IPM-(intergrated pest management approach). You have to be flexible and vigilant regardless of what methods you choose. To accuse commercial beekeepers of being the problem because we treat is wrong. I can turn that around and state that those that do not treat are just a constant source for mites and problems. Either statement is inflammatory at best and sets beekeepers poles apart. Thus we do not work together and find a real control for the problem--VARROA MITE. Ted Kretschmann


I'm with you--nobody keeps bees like you guys do.

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Nice post Adam, I hope so too.


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

I was interested in a post by someone recently but can't remember who or which topic it was posted under.

The question asked was about hygienic bees and the uncapping and removal of varroa infested brood the main point being when testing for hygenic behaviour the brood is killed whereas the brood that has varroa is not dead so how do you know you are testing for the right behaviour?

Another thing I've wondered is the thought that grooming of varroa off the bees bodies is a good thing in the fight against varroa but I dont understand how the act of grooming can reduce mite populations.

I would have thought that the bees wouldn't even have the ability to actually kill a mite by biting or am I wrong?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Frazz:Not sure I am quite following you on the hygienic testing. The tests I have seen run involve killing a certain area of a comb of sealed brood via needle insertion and testing the ability of the hive to recognize and clean out those individual cells. As far as the grooming behavior, I am not sure I have ever seen proof that bees are actually able to kill mites by biting them but I have seen pics of mites with bite marks on them. At the least it seems that they can make life difficult enough for them to disrupt their ability to easily move about and invade open larvae.


----------



## Rick 1456 (Jun 22, 2010)

There was a short piece in the Varroa paper that dealt with the hygienic test, killing a section of brood. It did comment/question whether it was testing for a behavior that would deal with brood affected by mites unless the brood was dead. (As I read it) I don't know how hard the mite exoskeleton is. Maybe someone will weigh in on that. Bees can shred paper, break sugar blocks down. Mine remove pieces of sugar from the hive sometimes. They have mandibles. They have the ability to bite, whether it would be a lethal blow, I can't say. I have read that is does not too much damage to a female to "mess up" her reproductive abilities. whether that would result from a bee bite, again, I don't know. Just throwing it out there
Off topic a little here maybe. I'm in Adams corner with respect for the commercial guys. We may have differences in approaches to various things, but I believe the sincere goals are the same. I wonder how far us backyardigans would be without the commercial push? JMHO


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

jim lyon said:


> Frazz:Not sure I am quite following you on the hygienic testing. The tests I have seen run involve killing a certain area of a comb of sealed brood via needle insertion and testing the ability of the hive to recognize and clean out those individual cells.


Hi Jim, I was trying to say how does testing for hygeinic behaviour by killing the brood equate to bees removing live brood that happen to have a varroa mite entombed with them? 

On the one hand the bees are cleaning out dead brood but will they remove live brood the same? is it there something that happens to dead brood that alerts the bees to the fact they are dead? if so what is it that causes the bees to remove live brood that have varroa?

I still dont know if that makes any sense!

cheers


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Oh I see.....but I don't know the answer to whether mite stressed pupae would be removed as readily as dead pupae, good question.


----------



## D Semple (Jun 18, 2010)

frazzledfozzle said:


> Hi Jim, I was trying to say how does testing for hygeinic behaviour by killing the brood equate to bees removing live brood that happen to have a varroa mite entombed with them?
> 
> On the one hand the bees are cleaning out dead brood but will they remove live brood the same? is it there something that happens to dead brood that alerts the bees to the fact they are dead? if so what is it that causes the bees to remove live brood that have varroa?
> 
> ...


From what I've read from the Scientific papers the short answer is there is about a 70% correlation between Hygenic Behavior and (VSH) Varroa Sensitive Hygene. 

http://www.apidologie.org/index.php...es/apido/full_html/2010/03/m09147/m09147.html

It's very interesting to read what the German breeders are doing.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

I can answer the question. If the larvae or pupae is dying or dead the bees readily remove it. Sometimes the colony will freak out and remove just about all the brood in the colony. So you will walk into the yard and the place will have a putrid smell. So then you freak out, "OMG, did my preventative program of antibiotics not work?" "Am I now totally infested with AFB" Then you walk around and look outside the entrances of your colonies and there is pupae and larvae that the bees have pulled out laying everywhere on the ground. The bees are still flying normally. When you examine the colony, the queen has a new cycle of brood laid up and the colony is going again.....This is Varroa Sensitive Hygenic Behaviour to the extreme. It is not a normal response to the problem and occurs when there is too much of the VSH genetics in your bees. I see this in late June or July when the weather is hot and the mite population is on the rise. Usually the colony or yard is basically "shot" for the rest of the season as far as honey production is concerned. TED


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

Ted that would totally freak me out, have never heard of such a thing!


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

And when I first saw this extreme behaviour, it did me too!! I have seen this several times over the past several years. I saw it twice this past summer. I always catch myself saying out loud-Have you bees gone stupid?? TED


----------

