# What is Nosema and how can we control it?



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Newly emerged bees are always free from infection. Spores must be swallowed by a bee for the infection to be initiated. Spores germinate quickly after entering the ventriculus, and the epithelial cells of the ventriculus are infected when the vegetative stage is introduced by way of the hollow polar filament. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosema_apis)

So the Fumagillin treatment inhibits the spores from progressing into its vegetative state and multiplying. 

How long is the vegetative state of Nosema? 

What is activating those spores to germinate in the bee and how long can a Nosema spore hang around in the bee's system before germination?


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

some experiments [which have been repeated] in Ontario show that treating with fumagilan does reduce nosema a lot, BUT the treated hives ended with much higher counts than the non-treated hives a couple of months later. the non-treated were fine, the treated hives were much worse off than pre-treatment a couple of months later... probably the best way to control nosema is healthy well fed bees..


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

My question then; is that fumagillin treatment catching all the spores? or just the ones available to be treated at THAT point of time. Then with componding issues to follow


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

It is my understanding that fumagillian kills the nosema in the bees along with other desireable stuff. some low level of nosema is there all the time. so no, treatment will not make the problem go away in the long term. the suggestion is that as the desirable bugs are killed this allows a worse nosema situation to come back.


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

Do we need to control n. ceranae? Particularly, do we need to control it in the north?


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

healthy well fed bees control nosema.


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

Ian have you ever run a comparison, not using fumigillian on a yard or two and see what the difference is in your colonies. I have never used any of it and don't know that I have missed it. I once bought some and never used it. I realize you as a commercial producer have to reduce all possible variables. I just question whether you actually are.


----------



## NY_BLUES (May 14, 2009)

Vance, 2 years ago I treated 2 yards with fumigillian and left 2 untreated. I treated in may, and took spore counts in july. Spore counts came back from beltsville lab and I had a 9x higher spore count in the treated hives vs. the untreates hives.


----------



## grozzie2 (Jun 3, 2011)

Ian said:


> My question then; is that fumagillin treatment catching all the spores? or just the ones available to be treated at THAT point of time. Then with componding issues to follow


I have a more fundamental question. Is a high nosema count the cause of problems in the hive, or, is it just another symptom of a more fundamental problem ? If it's the latter, then treating to fix the symptom, doesn't address the root cause of the problem, just hides the symptom and potentially leaves one with a 'feel good' because you have done something.


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

grozzie that is the question.. evidently if the counts get high enough you loose the hive. if you treat you better solve the under lieing problems quick. you also could be getting on a retreatment tread mill. it is best not to get into this tread mill. what I know about this is from time spent directly with the Ontario bee tech transfer team. look up Ontario bee association, they did the research. last summer they were not sure of a perfect answer to this.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

zhiv9 said:


> Do we need to control n. ceranae? Particularly, do we need to control it in the north?


I guess it depends IF you believe Nosema negatively contributes to the overall health of our bees. If you do not see it, and do not understand what influence it has interacting with other disease pressures, then it becomes a mute point I guess.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

grozzie2 said:


> Is a high nosema count the cause of problems in the hive, or, is it just another symptom of a more fundamental problem ?


I assume your referring to the bee's intestinal micro flora health. 
Assuming the bee has a healthy micro flora population, but the bee has a back ground level of nosema which is persistent and the bees cant shed it like nosema ceranea symptoms tend to be. That healthy micro flora population is going to do a better job at completing with the nosema for nutrition. Yet the back ground levels of nosema still persist. Now next down the chute is a bombardment of virus from what ever source... instant pathway into the bees system as the nosema penetrates the bees gut walls. The bees ability to shed the viral infection through waste is now compromised because of the action of nosema present in the system...

Healthy micro flora population will contribute to hopefully out competing the nosema for resources, but the infection still remains to cause the damage else where.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Vance G said:


> Ian have you ever run a comparison, not using fumigillian on a yard or two and see what the difference is in your colonies. I have never used any of it and don't know that I have missed it. I once bought some and never used it. I realize you as a commercial producer have to reduce all possible variables. I just question whether you actually are.


That's a good point and the reason I asked the original questions. Am I actually reducing the population of nosema in my bees systems using fumigillin? Is that method of administering the treatment actually doing what I want it to? If that application is only covering 35% of the available spores during treatment, and killing off lot of the beneficial organisms in the bees intestinal tract at the same time, then I can see more unintended harm resulting from this treatment method. nothing left to naturally out compete and counter the continued infections.

Are my assumption based correctly?


----------



## Allen Martens (Jan 13, 2007)

Fumigillian kills the vegetative stage not the spores. The spores are an indication of actively growing vegetative state.

Once the fumigillian is gone, the spores can reinfect and beneficial microbe populations are out of whack as well.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Allen Martens said:


> Fumigillian kills the vegetative stage not the spores. The spores are an indication of actively growing vegetative state.
> 
> Once the fumigillian is gone, the spores can reinfect and beneficial microbe populations are out of whack as well.


Let me challenge that though to help me understand what Fumagillin is actually doing. 
I had thought the fumagillin treatment did not kill anything but rather inhibited its growth into its reproductive state. But I guess suppressing the activated spores ability to reproduce would send it through to its expiry state and die. 

What is activating the spores in the bees gut, and what is keeping other spores dormant? If all the spores germinated once released into the gut, then a prolonged fumagillin treatment should pretty much cease growth on all nosema growth present as it follows through its life cycle. Right? unless spores lay dormant inside for some reason.

How long is the reproductive life cycle of Nosema?


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

Fumagillin may inhibit or disrupt the Nosema life cycle, but not for long. Reinfestation can occur from spores present in the colony/environment. IMO, it is a piece of the puzzle, but not the main picture. If there are other stresses involved then perhaps Nosema has a greater impact. What are the long term gains or costs to applying Fumagillin?


----------



## Allen Martens (Jan 13, 2007)

Ian said:


> Let me challenge that though to help me understand what Fumagillin is actually doing.
> I had thought the fumagillin treatment did not kill anything but rather inhibited its growth into its reproductive state. But I guess suppressing the activated spores ability to reproduce would send it through to its expiry state and die.


lol I thought about going back to change kill to treat but was to lazy.

I know nothing about the mechanisms Fumagillin uses to treat nozema. I always assumed it killed the actively growing, spore producing stage.

If in reality Fumagillin only inhibits that actively growing stage from producing spores while it is present, then it is truly a waste of time as a fall treatment. 

I can see it being useful in spring and early summer with multiple treatments if levels are extremely high as a first step in returning a beehive/ beeyard to a healthy existence.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

When I check my bees I get my highest nosema counts in late summer. By first frost my hives tend to be pretty much nosema free. I think the infected foragers are all gone by then and the winter bees I check seem to be pretty much free of infection. I get a slow buildup in the spring. I believe that most of the nosema I see in my scope is ceranae and freezing tends to destroy it.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Does anyone have answers for my original 2 questions?


----------



## ccar2000 (Aug 9, 2009)

Ian said:


> Does anyone have answers for my original 2 questions?


I do not have an answer. However, I am enjoying this thread. I have read of others reporting sucess with the Fumagilin application as well. I tried a regiment last year of feeding Fumagilin in January, drenching with it in February then drenching with Nozevit in October. In my opinoin it worked well for me. This year I have a four out of five survival rate. Of course there are likely a multitude of other factors possible. Is anyone else using the Nozevit in this manner?


----------



## Allen Martens (Jan 13, 2007)

Ian said:


> Does anyone have answers for my original 2 questions?


Not sure there is an answer Ian.

The bee ingests a spore and once the spore is in the gut of the bee it begins developing. If the bee's immunity is compromised due to poor nutrition, wrong enzymes, microbial imbalance, high number of spores ingested, etc., the development continues and after 48+ hours more spores are produced. Some of the newly form spores are passed out of the gut by the bee and some reinfect the bee before they are passed out. As a result the infection continues and intensifies. If the bee is confined for a long period of time, the spores stay in the gut and reinfect the bee.


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

How long is the vegetative state of Nosema? 

Depends on colony conditions. I am not certain this is accurate for N. ceranae as I am not certain it is well understood for N. apis, but it is a matter of hours to days.

What is activating those spores to germinate in the bee and how long can a Nosema spore hang around in the bee's system before germination?

Ditto... "Gut juices" and spores germinate rather quickly, hours.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I read somewhere that the full life cycle (that pic I posted) takes 21 days. 
So if I am understanding this right, the spores once released germinate immediately and out of that 21 day cycle the fumagillin is targeting those spores over one or two days within that cycle, ?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Call me CRAZY, but is treating with fumagillin by drench or through the syrup kinda like drizzling Oxalic over a heavily brooding nest?


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

Bees continuously ingest spores while cleaning combs. Once inside the bees the spores "germinate" rather quickly, but think of this as an ongoing process. Again, my understanding may be outdated, but it was, perhaps still is, thought that fumagillin inhibits DNA replication for the Nosema once it enters the epithelial cells. That is where the cycle is interrupted if treated. If Nosema goes through its cycle, some spores are produced that "germinate" quickly inside the same bee and other spores are more "rugged" and pass through the feces to infest other bees that ingest them during the cleaning process. 

If bees are able to defecate away from the hive it seems this would help a lot. But in confined wintering instances perhaps this is a challenge.


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

Defecate away from hives is good. One deadly event is in wet yards with water puddles, bees defecate in water puddle, bees drink said water, nosema thrives. These wet, cool yards are always problematic in this area. Some years worse than others.

Jean-Marc


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

These spores must stay dormant at particular times of the year. Otherwise how the heck are my hives sitting on a moderate nosema infection without exploding? 
Like everything else in life, mouths need to be fed. And during the winter where limited food is being ingested, these spores must be sitting waiting until some kind of stimulation activates them, like fresh spring food.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

jean-marc said:


> Defecate away from hives is good. One deadly event is in wet yards with water puddles, bees defecate in water puddle, bees drink said water, nosema thrives. These wet, cool yards are always problematic in this area. Some years worse than others.
> 
> Jean-Marc


good point, I had not thought of that.


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

Jean-Marc,

Yes, dating back to the early 1900's, infected combs were identified as perhaps the major source of reinfection, followed by water sources as you describe.

Ian,

Look at it as expansion and contraction, as the bees expand the brood nest in the spring, the may encounter nooks and crannies not visited for a while. Or, in the sense of prolonged winter confinement, the infection rate rises as does the risk of infection when bees encounter feces inside the hive or on the entrance.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

how about the continued cycle inside the bee as the nosema continues to multiply, exponentially. Right now my bees have no way of expelling their waste, and with it nosema spores. 
I'm going to take another sample late March just before I put them out and get real busy to see how much of an increase my counts actually get before they can start purging it from the nest.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I have been getting emails about Thymol treatments used to control Nosema. Through syrup and others treat with wafers or strips. The wafers and strips are more so for varroa mites but they claim zero nosema spore counts.

What is it about the thymol treatment that would be countering nosema infections?


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Ian asked:

is that fumagillin treatment catching all the spores? 

My opinion is yes and no. While Fumagillin levels are high enough, it does a very good job, but since there are many steps to the reproduction cycle, it misses the spores that where not spores when levels where high.

Ian also asked:

How long is the vegetative state of Nosema? 

It is a large assumption, but there are about 11 panels in your original post, and I might assume that each represent a day.

Is not the vegetative state all states NOT a spore?

I must find some hard data before I speak further. I'll be back.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Roland said:


> Is not the vegetative state all states NOT a spore?


Can you elaborate on that thought?


----------



## Allen Martens (Jan 13, 2007)

To use an analogy of a plant.

The spore is like the seed.

The vegetative stage is like the growth stage of the plant. The vegetative stage last about 2-3 days for a given spore that develops. However new vegetative stages are starting continuously during an infection.

Treatment acts on the vegetative stage not the spore.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Allen Martens said:


> Treatment acts on the vegetative stage not the spore.



"So the Fumagillin treatment inhibits the spores from progressing into its vegetative state and multiplying."


The way I understand it, the treatment has to catch the spores. So if the treatment is not administered long enough, it will miss treatment on many of the spores being developed though out its life cycle. 

How long does that treatment need to be to ensure complete coverage?


----------



## Allen Martens (Jan 13, 2007)

My recollection of nosema infection agrees with what Joe stated earlier:

"fumagillin inhibits DNA replication for the Nosema once it enters the epithelial cells. That is where the cycle is interrupted if treated."

My interpretation is that the spores "germinate" and die as they can't progress, not go into a holding pattern. I may be wrong, but I see little benefit to fall treatment if it is a holding pattern until fumagillin is gone.

Spores that have been produced in the bee are not affected by the treatment. If bees can't take cleansing flights the spores remain in the bee or they defecate the viable spores inside the hive.

Lots of opportunity for re-infestation from spores in frames and feces in the hive. 

Most of the research we have applies to n. apis. Much of this may not apply to n. ceranae.


----------



## RAK (May 2, 2010)

How can you control Nosema? I believe that a strong immune system in bees helps them control Nosema themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxBvxxou1tU#t=158


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

Ian, how about contacting Medhat Nassar(sp) he has posted on some of this stuff before


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

I use thymol on a regular basis and it dose not control nosema. I've have very good results feeding fumagillin dry. Getting ready to start supering the singles with last years dead outs so doing a treatment before hand to account for any thing in the combs. The mix is 7 liters drivert per large bottle. I lost the original web site where I got the info when I changed phones. Just orderd a pallet of drivert from COSTCO good price.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ian said:


> I have been getting emails about Thymol treatments used to control Nosema. Through syrup and others treat with wafers or strips. The wafers and strips are more so for varroa mites but they claim zero nosema spore counts.
> 
> What is it about the thymol treatment that would be countering nosema infections?


We have been using thymomite strips (none in syrup) for quite a number of years and our fall counts are usually pretty low, this past fall we saw quite a number of "zero" readings, for whatever that's worth. I know its just anecdotal but I find that a good reason not to change much that I'm doing.
I claim no expertise in nosema, it's always struck me as a fickle moving target that's really difficult to quantify. Were I wintering bees in a harsh climate where they would be confined for long periods of time I would probably be more apt to treat but it's kind of expensive and I can't help but suspect that there may be subtle long term effects if overused.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes (Nov 10, 2014)

Those guys http://www.advancescience.com/hive-alive claims that they have a product, Macro Algae, that increases spore reduction of 91% http://www.advancescience.com/images/Scientific_Data/Costa et al. 2012 Italian Trials.pdf


----------



## Allen Martens (Jan 13, 2007)

Jim and Davids results agree with much of the research out there for thymol and nosema: Yes it does; no it doesn't; who knows.

Jim anecdotes are very valuable in this industry. Much what I do comes from anecdotes. My preference is anecdotes from beekeepers far away from me. I know what the beeks are doing around me, but practices from other areas contain the most new ideas (and surprises) for me. If I can find field test run by researches to validate these practices, all the better. I find basic research very interesting, leads to some interesting field trials by academia and beeks, and helps me evaluate anecdotes and make a more informed decision, however, rarely will I base change a practice based upon basic research alone. (In case someone construes this to mean I feel basic research is useless, nothing is further from the truth. However, I do like seeing validated by more studies and applied research.) 

Which is a long winded way of saying, I think we still have many gaps in our understanding of nosema and treatment and I like to hear others success/failures in this area.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

A few years ago when the nosema ceranae hysteria was at its peak I bought a microscope and started testing a lot myself (all responsible beekeepers do that, right??). I felt I was real diligent in how I sampled and in how I made the readings but the results were mostly pretty low with an occasional higher reading. Later that fall I received test results from samples taken and run by the state and they were all pretty low. Nothing over about 3 million if I recall correctly. I called to chat up our state inspector Bob Reiners about the results to get some perspective and to find out how they compared with the results of others. He said mine were among the lowest he had seen and he was interested in what I was doing. I just laughed and said "here is where I should make up a big story about my genius as a beekeeper but the truth is I don't have a clue because I didn't do anything". So there ya go.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Allen Martens said:


> Jim and Davids results agree with much of the research out there for thymol and nosema: Yes it does; no it doesn't; who knows.


All these anecdotal operation experience are extremely important, but like most anecdotal opinions on such things it can be conflicting and extremely confusing. Like Jim mentioned " for whatever that's worth". Its worth a lot. And I am hearing back from others who are seeing the same thing. But I cant help but think, is this efficacy a result of the Thymol treatment or rather the variability we are seeing with nosema ceranae itself? Nobody actually knows because of all the email contacts on this topic, nobody actually counts spores to help quorate treatment with lowering spore count, or how the actual spore count relates to hive performance and the conditions the hives experience. So then we are left with is a bunch of assumptions and questions which lead to our own opinions. 

With my little nosema treatment and sampling exercise, I came up with a bunch of test results and documented observations but it means nothing because I did not run the proper controls. So what was really the point of me running the exercise? I came out of it with pile more questions than answers. But one thing it has done is it stripped my initial assumptions right off the page. 

I am tierd of people telling me this study says this, where as the other study tells me another... Its time for us to test out these studies in our own apiaries and prove what the studies are telling us and not just reading them. 



Allen Martens said:


> Which is a long winded way of saying, I think we still have many gaps in our understanding of nosema and treatment and I like to hear others success/failures in this area.


I second that comment


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I received an interesting strategy today, applies to California and Migratory beekeepers. 

Colonies are raised to huge populations on well fed bees to meet the almond pollination. After the bloom these hives are managed one of two ways, either they are shaken down and sold as packages or shipped south to be split off as many ways as possible. Nosema hangs around in older bees, as we all know. Shake off those bees into packages and your effectively selling off the infected stock leaving the hive remaining with a higher population of young bees. With nucing out the hives, overall pest population is cut down and divided up, and the units are sent into growth mode out pacing the pest pressures. 

Our season is short up here on the Canadian prairies but one fact that all beekeepers know it the time spent on nucs will pay off the following year with huge honey producing hives. This is a strategy that might just need to be exploited for more than just keeping mite pressures under control.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Hey, I just remembered I actually did run a side by side test way back in the 70's when wintering up in central Minnesota. Dick Hyser, the state inspector at the time, suggested I try fumidil feeding before winter. I took 4 yards of approximately 30 hives each (dont remember the exact numbers) and used medicated feed on half the hives and unmedicated feed on the other half in each yard. The next spring the losses were almost identical in each group and my seat of the pants assessment of the survivors was that there was no discernible difference in colony strength either. Thats the last time I used it, save one year when some people started screaming NOSEMA CERANAE RUNNNNN!!!!!


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

I almost agree with Jim's comment about Nosema ceranae being difficult to quantify. I would say it is not all that difficult to collect bees and do Nosema counts. It is those results and their interpretation that are difficult to interpret. This month past we took 43 composite samples of bees. Each sample was made by removing tarps on hives , opening all 4 hives under said tarp (just to see what was alive or not and relative strength) then 15-20 bees were placed in a paper bag from 1 of the 4 hives in the pallet. Samples were made up from 5 randomly selected pallets so at the end of the day each paper bag had 75-100 bees collected from 5 different hives located on 5 different pallets, all within a yard. I instructed our guy doing this to get 1 sample for every 100 hives. We had 4500 going into winter. He collected 43 samples, I thought pretty good... no misunderstanding.

one lab got 17 samples. Of those 7 were positive. 4 of the positive were in our weakest yards, a little more than 1 million spores. In one of our strongest yards 2 of the 4 samples were positive , a little less than 1 million spores. One yard was sky high at 5 million spores on average but the bees are pretty good in that yard.

The other lab got 26 samples 3 were positive. one was around 5 million spores, the other was 4 million, lastly 1 million. The rest were negative. The first lab was recently equipped with plenty of taxpayer shinola, for which I am grateful... and is reflected in what appears to be a higher prevalence of Nosema in the bees.

Some of the samples were deliberately spiked with bees with high levels of Nosema. The population had reduced to nothing and the colony was near death. Unfortunately we did not label our "spiked" samples. It would be nice to know if our sky high levels matched our spiked levels.

One yard gave us 4 samples and the levels were somewhat high, bee population a little on the weak side. Winter losses higher than average. This yard is close to a river and windy. One could think "Aha nosema gotcha". Yet 2 miles further west same river, maybe a little less wind, maybe a little more shade, somewhat similar lower population hives, yet all 4 samples of Nosema in the second yard is negative. So go figure. To Ian I say i my experience Nosema levels can be all over the place. Too many sky high positives usually means trouble. Levels drop inlater spring and summer as the bees get to fly often and defecate. The rest is best not to fret too much over.

Oh and I do use thymol strips like Jim in the fall. I conclude that one should not make too many conclusions about Nosema levels.How's that for sitting on the fence?

Jean-Marc


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

jean-marc said:


> To Ian I say i my experience Nosema levels can be all over the place.
> 
> Oh and I do use thymol strips like Jim in the fall. I conclude that one should not make too many conclusions about Nosema levels.How's that for sitting on the fence?
> 
> Jean-Marc


I would not call it fence sitting, rather trying to be objective. lol

oh all this fret is the reason my hives sit pretty


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

Certainly one reason. At least when you are fretting, it means hives are being opened and observed. If you spot problems you can usually do something about it. Sounds like you do and the repay the favors. A little help from Mother Nature goes a long way as well. We still need to control the things we can like feeding, controlling mites etc...

Jean-Marc


----------



## grozzie2 (Jun 3, 2011)

jean-marc said:


> I conclude that one should not make too many conclusions about Nosema levels.How's that for sitting on the fence?


The flip side to that, it's not possible to do anything, if you dont do the counts. Doing the counts, and acting on them, are two different items, but you cant act on information you dont have.


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

fair enough. I suppose that is a reason or the reason we look. When I look closely levels are all over the place. Then we treat and they still seem to be all over the place, generally levels drop after treatments but still appear to be all over the place. Flying weather helps but levels appear all over. That is the one thing that is a slight thorn in my side. Generally Nosema levels are low but there are some here and there that are sky high. The only thing for sure is that they are sky high just because they can be.

Jean-Marc


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

This kind of reminds me of the pollen nutrition conversation we had a while back. Information in hand, how is this information useful or even relevant to our day to day apiary work.?  
Well getting hold of that information is the first step, understanding what the information represents is the second step, identifying issues and using that information to solve problems is the third step.


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

All very interesting, so what do you do? I dunno... 

On a side note, my interest in this area comes from a genetic and nutrition standpoint. A few years ago, I tried to get things worked out with some beekeepers over on the western side of Canada to get queens from them. There is a slight genetic component to Nosema levels and my thinking was that bees wintered under pretty harsh shed conditions might be a good place to start for screening such a challenge as Nosema. So, if any of you Canadian beekeepers would be interested in working on something like that, please let me know.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

What are the current restrictions for queens heading south?


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

When I last checked, shipping from Canada into the US required a provincial apiarist inspection within about 10 days of shipment and notify APHIS of the incoming shipment as to the port of entry, number, etc. It does take a little paperwork, but seemed doable.


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

Doable indeed. PITA, requires an inspection of colonies just prior to shipping. Need varroa levels below 1% me thinks. It's all the usual stuff that is required of people wanting to ship bees across the world or imaginary lines.

Jean-Marc


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

jean-marc said:


> Doable indeed. PITA, requires an inspection of colonies just prior to shipping. Need varroa levels below 1% me thinks. It's all the usual stuff that is required of people wanting to ship bees across the world or imaginary lines.


So true, so true  I have had this conversation with queen producers wanting to ship into Canada and I think most know what it takes to get mite levels below 1%. Which is worse, the disease or the cure?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I finally found where the diagram I found floating around facebook originally came from. The credit on the pic was too small for my eyes to make out. The link below credits http://scientificbeekeeping.com/the-nosema-twins-part-1-2/ which credits © Springer Life Sciences for the diagram I posted above; 

http://adventuresinbeeland.com/2012...ning-revision-post-nosema-acarine-and-amoeba/

An interesting quote from the above link which explains the reason why nosema shortens the lifespan of adult worker bees. This makes a lot of sense;

"Nosema ceranae also suppresses the vitellogenin (Vg) gene in nurse bees, a gene which paces the onset of foraging and influences worker longevity. When Vg expression is suppressed, nurse bees transition to become foragers more quickly than a healthy bee would, resulting in a shorter lifespan."

Dave Crushman's writings has answered some of my specific questions quite nicely; 

http://www.dave-cushman.net/bee/nosema.html

"Spore germination is initiated by a signal from the species' environment; the exact nature of these signals is not known for certain"

"Once inside a cell, the vegetative stage increases in size and multiplies, effecting an apparent reduction of RNA synthesis in the host cell. In 6-10 days the infected host epithelial cell becomes filled with new spores. "

"Under normal conditions honey bee epithelial cells shed into the ventriculus (stomach), burst, and release their contents including digestive juices. However, when the cells are infected with N. apis the parasite develops and multiplies in the cytoplasm and form after about 5 days. The spore-filled cells are shed into the lumen. Some cells pass into the rectum and are voided. The spore-filled cells burst and release infective spores rather than digestive juices."

I love the way Randy can frame things that really brings the message home;

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/the-nosema-twins-part-1-2/

"But when a bee’s got dysentery from nosema she just can’t hold it. The house bees then say “OhMyGod, somebody’s pooped in the hive!” The insidious thing is that cleanup is a job delegated to newly emerged bees, who then ingest the spores in the process, and the infection thus moves from older bees to the very youngest. When this happens, nosema can go epidemic in the hive, with dire results."

" the life spans of infected young bees can be reduced by up to 78%, plus they are unable to feed brood!"


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

You can certainly understand why a bee would easily fall into a state of mal-nourishment when heavily infected with Nosema. The competition for nutrients puts a heavier emphasis on making sure the bee has adequate food available.

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/the-nosema-twins-part-1-2/

"This means that if you want a colony to brood up after a dearth, or after winter, and the population consists of older bees infected with nosema, they aren’t going to be able to do it, no matter how well they are fed!"

When we start putting some of our gathered disease surveillance information, hive activity and observations together, answers might just start appearing to explain why at times some real troubling hive conditions appear. The response I get back from this kind of comment is 'so what can be done about it, so why does it matter'. The point is knowing why so we either can develop a strategy to counter the problem, or just plain out know so the problem is addressed properly.


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

Ian said:


> 'so what can be done about it, so why does it matter'


Glad you found what you were looking for and you took the words right off of my keyboard. What conclusions have you drawn and how will this affect your management style? I think this is part of why beekeeping can be challenging. Visible symptoms do not always produce constant and reproducible outcome. There are just so many factors to account for and they are constantly changing...


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

JSL said:


> There are just so many factors to account for and they are constantly changing...


On this side of the keyboard its hard to hear tone, so I will read your message as an agreement instead of a challenge.  This forum has gained tendentious depth with the caliber of knowledge shared between some real diverse opinions. I take advantage of this forum by tapping into this place to challenge my opinions, appropriately. 

So for the sake of discussion, taking that comment as a challenge, I would reply; is it not in our best interests to know some of those factors/conditions to help better understand what the (heck) is going on? 
I make this comment in direct response to beekeepers who know nothing about their disease and nutritional status of their hives, yet make quick and definite accusations towards one problem sickening their hives. (neonics)


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ian said:


> On this side of the keyboard its hard to hear tone, so I will read your message as an agreement instead of a challenge.  This forum has gained tendentious depth with the caliber of knowledge shared between some real diverse opinions. I take advantage of this forum by tapping into this place to challenge my opinions, appropriately.
> 
> So for the sake of discussion, taking that comment as a challenge, I would reply; is it not in our best interests to know some of those factors/conditions to help better understand what the (heck) is going on?
> I make this comment in direct response to beekeepers who know nothing about their disease and nutritional status of their hives, yet make quick and definite accusations towards one problem sickening their hives. (neonics)


Ha ha. Yes, blaming bee health issues on parasites isn't very trendy or satisfying. I have studied both varroa and nosema with a microscope and have yet to spot a deep pocket.  But we digress....


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

JSL said:


> What conclusions have you drawn and how will this affect your management style?


This is where things get interesting. The only conclusion I have drawn from all this is the certainty I thought I had on the issue just slipped away. 

thoughts at hand;

Improve the application of fumagillin to ensure complete coverage of the nosema spore. Make sure the treatment covers the entire life cycle

Incorporate Thymol into a fall treatment plan and see if I can glean the same efficacy as many have been suggesting

focus on contaminated comb replacement or sterilization. 

Keep in place a well rounded disease surveillance program in my apiary and keep ontop of other pathogens. 

step up hive nutrition surveillance and try to better target supplements during dearths. Might need to include fall feeding some years

I am going to keep testing for spore counts, but also have a control included to help better understand what effect the treatments have done

try some out of the box thinking, trying to incorporate methods other beekeepers use which provide instant advantages. Like shaking bees 


Just a few thoughts


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

jim lyon said:


> I have studied both varroa and nosema with a microscope and have yet to spot a deep pocket.  But we digress....


Nor does the beekeeper or their industry supports have a deep pockets! lol


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Ian, just wondering if most of your nosema issues are from indoor wintering. Here in MA which is pretty cold I historically have very low nosema counts in the late fall and winter. I believe that the cold kills it. However, I often see nosema spores rise in the early and mid summer. I think many of the infected foragers fly off and die in the fall and the winter bees don't seem to be so susceptible. I know others have seen similar results.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

JSL said:


> There are just so many factors to account for and they are constantly changing...





Ian said:


> This forum has gained tendentious depth with the caliber of knowledge shared between some real diverse opinions.


i heartily agree with those sentiments jsl and ian.

i follow this and other threads with great interest and i am very thankful for everyone's contributions.

i can't shed any light on the questions posed, but i'll put out a little food for thought. 

nosema is one of many microbes present in the hive microbiota. it is reasonable to assume that in a healthy hive nosema is kept in check by complex interactions including but not limited to competition with other microbes. when we as beekeepers introduce factors that influence the microbial landscape we can potentially shift the balance in favor of those organisms which cause disease.

since the exact workings of the microbiology of the hive has yet to be elucidated it's hard for us to know just how much or how little we should be concerned about possible undesirable side effects from our interventions.

for example, the finding that nosema counts rebound like they do post fumagillin treatment could hypothetically have more to do with an organic acid treatment for mites wiping out competing microbes to nosema, thereby giving nosema the opportunity to go virulent. the same could be said about a feeding regimen that was just different enough from natural forage to throw the biochemistry off in a way that favors undesirable organisms.

this is not meant to be a criticism of any particular interventions, but rather just making the point that with such a complex superorganism and without a more complete understanding thereof it's really hard to know what causes what.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

> for example, the finding that nosema counts rebound like they do post fumagillin treatment could hypothetically have more to do with an organic acid treatment for mites wiping out competing microbes to nosema, thereby giving nosema the opportunity to go virulent. the same could be said about a feeding regimen that was just different enough from natural forage to throw the biochemistry off in a way that favors undesirable organisms.


Square, in my reading of the studies controls did not have the rebound effect... so I don't feel this is a valid point. I do agree wholeheartedly that we have a very small understanding of the issues and biochemistry of the hive.


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

Ian,

No disrespect written or implied.  I admire your approach. Speaking for myself, when I think I have the system figured out, I start to worry. No two seasons are alike, but I think that may be what draws beekeepers in. We like a challenge!


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

thanks cam, and that makes sense. alternatively it might be hypothesized that the fumagillin wiped out nosema's competitors which were unable to rebound as fast as nosema. again, just throwing out some food for thought. thanks for taking the post in the spirit in which in was intended.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

JSL said:


> Ian,
> 
> No disrespect written or implied.


oh I know that, just un sure at time if comments are made as an agreement or a challenge, lol

After all, its the challenge's that keep forums like this busy and from my perspective , productive


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

squarepeg said:


> a healthy hive nosema is kept in check by complex interactions including but not limited to competition with other microbes. .


in my readings I came across an interesting article (somewhere lol) speaking on higher levels of amoeba found in bees with higher levels of nosema. Nobody knows what that means, if its a good thing or a bad thing, but its is just a thing they observed... Interesting eh?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

yes, that is interesting ian. wouldn't it be weird if we figure out that a certain level of nosema is important for keeping some other pathogen in check? i'm just kibitzing here in the commercial forum, but i think if i were faced with the same considerations that you are i would also be looking mostly at what other successful operations have achieved proven results with. good thread.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

> alternatively it might be hypothesized that the fumagillin wiped out nosema's competitors which were unable to rebound as fast as nosema


hadn't considered that. Thanks


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

we had nosema-apis a few years back, this seems to have been replaced by nosema-ceranae. maybe 75 percent nosema-c. now, they look almost alike under the microscope, and are similar but different. fumagillin is what kills both, but after a couple of months treated hives have much more than untreated ones. I do not think we have a clear best answer about what to do, except that healthy well fed bees do not have a big problem with this generic term of nosema.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Matheson wrote:

I do not think we have a clear best answer about what to do, except that healthy well fed bees do not have a big problem with this generic term of nosema.

Be carefull, I have reason to believe that there are many flavors of Nosema. Ours killed 90 percent a year, no matter how heathy/well fed they where. Too many holes in their stomachs to stay ahead of the pathogen.

Crazy Roland


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

Ill have to agree with Roland a few years ago I had a set of hives that I was sending regular samples to Dave Wick and watched as nosema and virus levels skyrocket till they died. When I see levels rise over 1M any where in any sample I treat because I think the rest are not far behind.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I have been getting a tonne of feedback from this topic. Calls and emails all across the states, folks very seriously concerned with their overall hive health. I had not heard any of these beekeeper mention pesticide once in our conversations...

These folks are testing their hives for disease levels and finding high mites virus and nosema. One fellow I was talking to suggested that mite control had been a challenge lately, but their treatment efforts had gotten populations back in check. They sent samples away for a viral analysis, and in the samples there were most of the viruses present in their bees probably as a result from the mites. He mentioned guys who treated with fumagillin to hammer down high nosema levels have good looking hives in the area, where as others who have not considered nosema control have crashing hives and are in serious condition. A direct result of viral infection. Its not the nosema killing the hives, its the virus using the nosema to aid infection which is killing the hives.

He was stressing the drench treatment, and the treatment must be done 4-6 times over a three week period. Just like targeting mites, he stressed that targeting nosema is the same, as you need to catch the spores throughout its life cycle. 

I did not get the treatment dosage he was using. To me this kind of treatment dosage makes much better sense as not only does it target throughout the life cycle, but the chance of residues would be greatly decreased. Anyone with thoughts on treatment dosage using a drench method?

Does anyone have information on the viability of fumagillin once consumed and stored ?

Off label use of anitbiotics is not recommended, is there work being done right now in the industry to amend and update these treatment recommendations? It seems beekeepers are ahead of the industry on this. We need work done in this area to help lead everyone down the right path.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

camero7 said:


> I think many of the infected foragers fly off and die in the fall and the winter bees don't seem to be so susceptible. I know others have seen similar results.


yes, I would agree with that statement. For colonies with a higher nosema count, focusing on this fact, we should be able to stall development of the nosema spore and have it fly away late fall and throughout the early part of winter leaving the young free of the infection.
I understand your line of thinking in regards wintering outdoors and the cold killing Nosema on the comb. Interesting thought. Nosema sprores on the comb might be the reason for it's seemingly presistant nature to hold lingering levels through out the year, and managing hives in cold climate might be one reason the severity is not observed the same as in warmer type climates.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

Ian said:


> Off label use of anitbiotics is not recommended, is there work being done right now in the industry to amend and update these treatment recommendations? It seems beekeepers are ahead of the industry on this. We need work done in this area to help lead everyone down the right path.


If you are referring to the drench as being off label, it is on the label as of a few years ago, last time I looked. I just can't remember if I looked at the Canadian or US label, I do remember their being a difference, that was why I was looking at both labels. The drench I use is at higher than recommended label rate, and done more often than called on the label. I have not tested the hives drenched after. I also was in most cases using it for other problems than Nosema.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

what is the label recommendation for drench treatment?


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

Ian said:


> what is the label recommendation for drench treatment?


I had posted it on beesource once but can't find it or my label but figured you would ask so here is one official site.
http://www.drugs.com/vet/fumagilin-b-soluble-powder-can.html

Heavily infested colonies that will no longer take in syrup may be sprayed repeatedly, directly onto the bees, frame by frame with 1.1 sugar syrup (one part sugar to one part water) containing 2 g of Fumagilin-B per litre of syrup

http://medivet.ca/pdf/Fumagilin-B and Nosema in Bees.pdf

this has more information but the information is sideways


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Please correct me if I am wrong, our recommended treatment is 25mg per liter of syrup, feeding 8 liters of medicated syrup to a large wintered colony to have it stored for a prolonged treatment period. Nothing on Drench

---- thanks for the link, I stand corrected! Perfect, 

"Heavily infested colonies that will no longer take in syrup may be sprayed repeatedly, directly onto the bees, frame by frame with 1.1 sugar syrup (one part sugar to one part water) containing 2 g of Fumagilin-B per litre of syrup."


----------



## ccar2000 (Aug 9, 2009)

duplicate post, sorry


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

Ian said:


> I have been getting a tonne of feedback from this topic. Calls and emails all across the states, folks very seriously concerned with their overall hive health.


How do the feedback layout geographically? Is both N. cerunae more virulent and treatment more effective in the south?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I don't really know, they mention the bees are carried all across the states. To pollination


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

Talked to Frank Eisham last week and in his trials the bees that got timely feed ,mite treatments and fumagillin did the best out of all groups.


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

Hmmm, imagine that. I don't that is a big surprise. At least research confirms what beekeepers already know.

Jean-Marc


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

davidsbees said:


> Talked to Frank Eisham last week and in his trials the bees that got timely feed ,mite treatments and fumagillin did the best out of all groups.


David, did his fumagillin treatments do anything to the nosema counts?


----------



## davidsbees (Feb 22, 2010)

Just talk with Frank tonight if I would read this post earlier I could have asked. I'll see if I can get a answer to the question.


----------

