Department of Entomology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
J Econ Entomol. 2019 Aug 3;112(4):1509-1525. doi: 10.1093/jee/toz088.
The parasitic mite Varroa destructor (Acari: Varroidae) is a major cause of overwintering honey bee (Apis mellifera) colony losses in the United States, suggesting that beekeepers must control Varroa populations to maintain viable colonies. Beekeepers have access to several chemical varroacides and nonchemical practices to control Varroa populations. However, no studies have examined large-scale patterns in Varroa control methods in the United States. Here we used responses from 4 yr of annual surveys of beekeepers representing all regions and operation sizes across the United States to investigate use of Varroa control methods and winter colony losses associated with use of different methods. We focused on seven varroacide products (amitraz, coumaphos, fluvalinate, hop oil, oxalic acid, formic acid, and thymol) and six nonchemical practices (drone brood removal, small-cell comb, screened bottom boards, powdered sugar, mite-resistant bees, and splitting colonies) suggested to aid in Varroa control. We found that nearly all large-scale beekeepers used at least one varroacide, whereas small-scale beekeepers were more likely to use only nonchemical practices or not use any Varroa control. Use of varroacides was consistently associated with the lowest winter losses, with amitraz being associated with lower losses than any other varroacide product. Among nonchemical practices, splitting colonies was associated with the lowest winter losses, although losses associated with sole use of nonchemical practices were high overall. Our results suggest potential control methods that are effective or preferred by beekeepers and should therefore inform experiments that directly test the efficacy of different control methods. This will allow beekeepers to incorporate Varroa control methods into management plans that improve the overwintering success of their colonies.
寄生螨瓦螨(蜱螨目:瓦螨科)是导致美国越冬蜂群(Apis mellifera)大量损失的主要原因,这表明养蜂人必须控制瓦螨种群以维持蜂群的生存。养蜂人可以使用几种化学杀螨剂和非化学方法来控制瓦螨种群。然而,目前还没有研究调查美国大规模控制瓦螨的方法模式。在这里,我们利用来自美国各地所有地区和经营规模的养蜂人进行的 4 年年度调查的回复,研究了控制瓦螨的方法以及与使用不同方法相关的冬季蜂群损失。我们专注于七种杀螨剂产品(咪鲜胺、残杀威、氟胺氰菊酯、胡麻油、草酸、甲酸和百里酚)和六种非化学方法(雄蜂幼虫清除、小巢框、有孔垫板、糖粉、抗螨蜜蜂和分蜂),这些方法被认为有助于控制瓦螨。我们发现,几乎所有的大型养蜂人都至少使用了一种杀螨剂,而小型养蜂人更有可能只使用非化学方法或不使用任何瓦螨控制方法。使用杀螨剂与最低的冬季损失相关联,其中咪鲜胺与任何其他杀螨剂产品相关联的损失都更低。在非化学方法中,分蜂与最低的冬季损失相关联,尽管单独使用非化学方法的损失总体上较高。我们的结果表明了养蜂人有效或偏好的潜在控制方法,因此应告知直接测试不同控制方法效果的实验。这将使养蜂人能够将瓦螨控制方法纳入管理计划,从而提高其蜂群的越冬成功率。