Queen Mating and laying problems

QUEENS-POOR MATING AND LAYING. By Roger Patterson

History

I started keeping bees in 1963 and at one time had 130 colonies, and have always raised my own queens on a regular basis. For a number of reasons I had a spell where I had no bees myself for about 15 years until restarting in 2002, but retained interest in my local Association, and continued to attend meetings. At one stage I could expect a success rate of getting queens mated from a sealed cell well in excess of 90%, but since returning to active beekeeping that success rate has dropped alarmingly, in my own experience to 50% or less.

When restarting I obtained 5 colonies from various sources and rigourously culled the poorer queens. In doing this I realised there was a problem in achieving the level of successful matings I had previously enjoyed.

In the Dec 2004 issue of BBKA News I wrote an article on my experiences, and asked if the problems were related to varroa. I received several replies and these fell largely into two groups, those who had kept bees for around 15 years or more and agreed with me that there was a problem, and those with less experience who indicated that my experiences were “normal”, which is understandable if that is all they had known. One person who regularly raised a large number of queens appeared to have a success rate as low as 15%.

I received references to research work that had been done abroad, and there were indications from what I considered to be reliable sources that varroa and it’s treatment may be a contributory factor, and in a variety of ways.

Drones that were parasitized by varroa as larvae may have reduced sperm and lower viability if, indeed, they managed to survive to sexual maturity, and it appears that some treatments may accumulate in beeswax, and possibly cause the following problems:-

· Reduced sperm count in drones.

· Reduced queen mating success.

· Reduced queen weight.

· High queen mortality.

· Physical abnormalities in queens.

I am not qualified to make comment on the above findings and they may well be superceded by later information. We should also remember that the work was done abroad and may have involved treatments that are not cleared for use in the U.K.

I had become convinced that varroa was the cause because the queen mating problem appeared to have gone up the country at roughly the same rate as the spread of varroa, and there were no problems before it’s arrival. I accept that in normal circumstances something occasionally goes wrong, but not at the current rate. If you think about it bees will not survive many generations with such a low reproductive rate, and we must have had spells of weather during the time bees have been in this country that were very much worse for successful mating than we have had over the last few years.

The reason for this document.

I believe the problem is very serious and poses a threat to beekeeping in this country, but of course it must first be recognised, which is not easy when so many dismiss it as being caused by the weather, or birds taking the queens on the wing, which are the traditional reasons for queens not getting mated or quickly failing. Firstly the weather has got far more bee friendly over my time in beekeeping, and results should be better, not worse, and secondly I don’t believe that birds are taking 4-5 times as many queens as they used to. If that was the case they would be taking workers as well and colonies would be much weaker.

My initial warnings did not set off the alarm bells in the places I would have expected them to. There seemed little evidence that others had noticed the same problems I had, and when I spoke to beekeepers there was initially denial, then when I explained the symptoms I had a different response. In my locality many people are noticing problems in getting queens mated, but only after I have alerted them. I assume that will be the same in other parts of the country.

I had done nothing different than I had always done and I was sure that if I had difficulties then others were as well, it was simply that very few others had noticed them.

Judging from my own experiences and having a mathematical brain I could see real difficulties ahead, especially for those with only a handful of colonies.

It quickly became obvious to me that there was possibly a big problem, and if nothing was done a large number of colonies would be lost. If it was related to varroa I couldn’t understand why there was little mention from other countries where they had varroa some time before us.

I hope that these notes will firstly alert beekeepers to the threat, and secondly offer advice in order to minimise the effects until the problem can be investigated thoroughly. It is in a form that can be easily printed so that local associations can distribute to their members.

Symptoms

It does not seem to matter if the cells are swarm, emergency, or artificial. They all result in failure, and in roughly the same proportions. When raising queens myself my preference is for the punched cell method and the “take” has still been very good. I normally have 10 cells in a cell raising colony and it has always been normal to lose one or two.

I list below all the things that I have experienced:-

Queens emerging with deformed or stubby wings. This has now become quite common. Fig 2. shows one from a batch of 18 sealed cells that was raised in my local Assn apiary, see ** below. I believe this may be a virus similar to Deformed Wing Virus, although I have had queens like this that have been raised from colonies where the workers show no visible signs of DWV, as this one had. You will see another one if you go into www.shef.ac.uk/uni/projects/taplab/jantonio.html and click on "pictures" and look at the third one down on the right. It is obvious these queens can’t fly and I am sure that many virgin queens that “disappear” have been sufferers and not been noticed.
Queen cells with dead and decomposed larvae in them.
Instances where a queen has obviously emerged but never starts to lay. This could be connected to 1. above
Queens getting mated, but laying a variable amount of drone eggs in worker cells. The amount can vary from the odd few to 50% or so. These are easy to see due to the raised cappings. Make sure they are actually worker cells though. Don’t forget it is rare for drone cells to be on their own, they are usually in patches. Fig 1 shows an example, and it is obvious that these drones are in worker cells.
Patchy brood. I am not sure why this is as the cases I have seen are not always linked with something obvious such as chalk brood. The egg laying pattern is often good, suggesting that the eggs are not viable and are removed by the bees.
Recently mated queens laying eggs either off centre in the base of the cell or two eggs in a cell. This is not to be confused with laying workers. Often there are other problems as well such as drone brood in worker cells. Often the larvae develops off centre as well. This may be because the queens are smaller than they should be and they are unable to locate the correct part of the cell.
Queen cells being built soon after a queen commences to lay, in some cases in small colonies. This is sometimes in colonies where there appears to be no visible problem with the brood. I assume that for some reason there is a problem with the queen substance or the amount that the queen is producing.
Queens “disappearing”. This happened twice in one week in my local Assn apiary with the current seasons queens (2005), one in a colony on 4-5 frames and one with 7-8 frames. In both cases there was a problem with the brood. I also had the same in my own apiary with two colonies, one with a current seasons queen (2005), and the other with the previous seasons (2004), both with perfect brood. Both colonies had given around 60-80lb of early honey and had 4 full supers on. They had both yielded around 150lb of honey. In none of them was the timing right for a queen to be lost or killed during manipulation.
Young queens freely laying drone eggs only, but both sides of a brand new wire Q/E! This suggests that queens are smaller than they should be.
Young queens quickly turning into drone layers.
Some young queens laying in drone cells only.
Queens stopping laying. I have only seen this where there is a problem with the brood. If they restart it is usually with a high percentage of drone brood.
A high percentage of undersized drones in colonies. This I think must be the result of drones being reared in worker cells.
Brood cappings that are domed more than normal worker, but less than normal drone brood. I have not investigated this much to find out what bees are produced.

Have YOU seen any of these problems?

If so please contribute to the forum or contact me.

** The queen cells from this batch went to several beekeepers and I have not been able to track them all, as some have been on holiday, but apart from the queen in Fig 1, I have seen:-

Two Q/C’s taken by one member and neither emerged. On opening one there was a brown decomposing larva where the outlines of an adult were recognisable, and a guess would be that it was about 12/13 days old. The other had a very small coloured “queen” that had not decomposed, but with no wings, probably 14/15 days old.

Three others had the cells bitten down by the workers, and two more had decomposed larvae in sealed cells. That makes at least eight of the eighteen that have failed.

The one in Fig 1 also had a deformed abdomen that was curved.

Other reported cases

In case there are unrelated reasons for queen failure things that have been reported by other people that I haven’t experienced myself are listed here, together with their location.

Diploid drones. West Country

What are the causes?

I think that we can largely discount the weather, and it seems logical to me that there is a possibility that the problems are caused by varroa or it’s treatment in some way. The problems on the current scale have only appeared since the arrival of varroa and travelled up the country at roughly the same rate as it’s spread.

There are several issues involved and they may not be related, which is why it is important to establish the reasons at an early stage.

The main issues I think we should concentrate on are:-

· Larvae or pupae dying in the cell.

· The emergence of deformed queens.

· Failing queens.

I have theories for the reasons for all of these, but would rather not mention them at this early stage in case it influenced anything.

What is being done?

I have been in contact with both NBU and BBKA. It seems to me that BBKA are the organisation that should drive any investigation, although we must accept that apart from paid staff all other work is done on a voluntary basis. They do of course have connections and these will be vital.

This document will be updated when there is new information, and there is a link to the forum where beekeepers can make a contribution.

Beekeeping magazines will be kept updated, but I don’t know them all, so if you are an Editor then please e-mail me so I can put you on the list.

We are in a very early stage and I hope there will be swift progress.

What do I think needs to be done?

· We need to establish that there is a much higher failure rate in getting queens mated successfully in other parts of the country. There is no doubt at all in my mind, as I have spent a lot of time during the summer of 2005 helping beekeepers locally overcome the problem. At the time of writing we have 19 colonies in our local Assn apiary and we have had problems with around 15 queens. I have seen in excess of 50 colonies with problems during 2005. Now I have highlighted the problem I am getting more reports from other parts of the country.

· Convince beekeepers there is a problem that is effectively a new disease, and that they will need to address it, otherwise they may lose their bees.

· Establish a network of knowledgeable beekeepers throughout the country and beyond who are regular queen raisers. They can hopefully supply statistical information.

· Obtain up to date information by conducting a literary search.

· Identify suitable research facilities and possible funding.

· Offer advice on colony management until the causes are determined.

· Train RBI’s and local experts on recognising the symptoms.

· Encourage beekeepers to look much more closely at their bees.

· It is going to be much more difficult for beekeepers with, lets say, less than four colonies to cope so I think there is a role for beekeepers to raise queens in a group situation. I see the possibility of local Associations raising queens and “banking” some in nuclei for when failures occur.

· Bring several organisations together in order to take advantage of their expertise.

· Provide a source of readily available information for beekeepers.

What should beekeepers be doing?

Management techniques will be developed, but until then can I suggest that beekeepers take the following steps:-

· Make sure that you can recognise healthy brood and know what a good pattern should be like. It is surprising how many fairly experienced beekeepers can’t! In the booklet "Foul Brood Disease of Honey Bees: Recognition and Control" published by C.S.L. there are some very good photographs of healthy brood.

· As often as possible for 12-14 days after your queen is due to emerge check around the hive for a small cluster of bees. On several occasions I have seen a virgin queen in such a cluster, and not always at the front of the hive. This should alert you to the fact that her wings are deformed and she can’t fly. See Fig 2.

· Once a queen is successfully mated and laying well it makes sense to keep her as long as possible. Any problems so far have shown soon after a queen has mated. There is little point in replacing a good queen with something else that may fail. There are strains of bees where the queens are known to be long lived and with low swarming tendencies. Perhaps we should concentrate our efforts on propagating these.

· I have taken the attitude that there is going to be a high failure rate and that I should make allowances to cover it, so I am changing my way of thinking. I have 12 colonies and next year I intend to run an extra four smaller ones in pairs. I will still have the 12 for honey production and the others will be “floaters”. I will make 4 x 4 frame nuclei fairly early in the year, and put my 4 worst queens from my main colonies in them. In the colonies they were taken from I will introduce previously started queen cells. If they mate successfully I will leave them alone. If they fail then I will introduce queens, possibly in a nucleus, from the “bank” and unite the remainder with the other one in the pair until I have further queen cells, when I will split it again. That way I hope to have 12 productive colonies all the time and the back up ones for emergencies. This can be done with differing numbers of colonies, and those with only one or two can work together. There is also scope for an Association to do the same in their teaching apiary, so that members can make use of spare queens.

· I see no problems in using queen cells that are built in a colony where the queen is laying a high proportion of drones in worker cells, but you must make sure that there are no drones in the cells.

· Put queen cells in cages so that they can be seen when they emerge and the ones with deformed wings can be discarded.

· When raising queens aim for at least double the number you need.

· When you do have failures try to keep basic records as you may have vital information that will help in any research.

· Alert others to the problems and ask your local Association to make members aware of them. Make sure your officials follow the suggestions set out below.

· Check the BBKA website regularly, and make sure you have the latest version of these notes.

· Take photos of any of the above problems and send them to me preferably by e-mail. If you are unable to do it yourself then please ask someone who can. Ideally I would like deformed queens, brood, and queen cells complete with the contents. Please also include the area of the country.

Advice and suggestions for local Associations.

· Advertise the existence of these notes in your newsletters, websites and meetings.

· Try to provoke discussion, as at the moment I believe it will affect a lot of beekeepers.

· Bring the problem to the attention of your members, and encourage them to be much more vigilant when inspecting the brood in their colonies.

· Print off copies of the latest version of these notes and distribute to members who haven’t got internet access.

· Appoint an experienced member to learn about the problems and the suggested management techniques, so that they can help the membership, and possibly contribute to investigations.

· Encourage members to overcome the problems, rather than ignore them or give up.

· Have a regular queen rearing programme in your teaching apiary, and have a reasonable number of queens in small colonies to distribute to members. We are doing this at Wisborough Green.

The future.

If the problems are varroa related then it might be long term, but no doubt management techniques will be developed to overcome them.

At a guess I would expect initial losses to be high until beekeepers firstly accept the problems, and secondly learn how to deal with them.

If my assessment is correct it is going to take some time to investigate the issues, and we may not be able to attract any organisation to do the research work needed, especially as I think there are several issues involved.

I have seen some very good queens reared recently so it is not all doom and gloom. We must be positive, as I am sure that with sensible measures the problems will be kept to a minimum.

We must strongly resist any calls to panic and import queens, as I am sure other countries with varroa will have the same problems, and it is looking as if the importation of bees may have caused the problem in the first place. Apart from that it has always been beyond me why some people think that imported bees are better than those we already have, but that is another issue.

Don’t think that if you don’t raise your own queens you are free of the problem. Every time a queen gets mated there is the chance of failure.

It is expected that these pages will be updated on a regular basis. In time they may be superceded by some from official sources.

References

Dec 2004 BBKA News Roger Patterson

“ “ Francis Ratnieks

Feb 2005 BBKA News Roger Patterson

June 2005 BBKA News Tom Robinson

Aug 2005 BBKA News Roger Patterson

Aug 2005 Bee Craft Roger Patterson

Roger Patterson.

Tel 01403 790 637

Fax 01403 700 001

e-mail r.patterson@pattersonpressings.co.uk

Issue. 001 01/08/05