Between Dec 19, 2024 and Jan 2, 2025, datasets can be submitted to DRUM but will not be processed until after the break. Staff will not be available to answer email during this period, and will not be able to provide DOIs until after Jan 2. If you are in need of a DOI during this period, consider Dryad or OpenICPSR. Submission responses to the UDC may also be delayed during this time.

Browsing by Author "Gilliam, Martha"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Facultative expression of hygienic behaviour of honey bees in relation to disease resistance
    (Taylor and Francis, 1993) Spivak, Marla; Gilliam, Martha
    Four experiments were conducted to examine factors that influence the expression of hygienic and non-hygienic behaviour in honey bees, Apis mel/itera, and to examine the correlation between this behaviour and resistance to chalkbrood, Ascosphaera apis. Colonies were headed by instrumentally inseminated queens selected on the basis of uncapping and removal behaviour expressed by their progeny. In the first experiment, colony strength was altered by transferring hygienic and nonhygienic colonies from 1O-frame field hives to 2-frame observation hives. This treatment significantly reduced the hygienic response of the hygienic bees but did not affect the response of the non-hygienic bees. In the second experiment, hygienic and non-hygienic bees displayed different responses to freeze-killed and live brood which had been partially or entirely uncapped. Both lines of bees recapped both partially and entirely uncapped live brood, but non-hygienic bees also recapped partially uncapped freeze-killed brood, suggesting that non-hygienic bees either could not detect dead or diseased brood or avoided it by sealing it within a comb cell. The third experiment tested whether the degree of hygienic behaviour could be increased by adding hygienic bees to non-hygienic colonies. Adding 20-30% young hygienic bees to nonhygienic colonies did not increase the degree of hygienic behaviour, but adding young nonhygienic bees to hygienic colonies suppressed the behaviour. The results suggest that although hygienic behavior is genetically determined, its expression depends on colony strength and composition of workers within the colony. In the fourth experiment, the hygienic and non-hygienic colonies were fed with pollen patties containing A. apis spores. The weak correspondence that was observed between removal behaviour and physiological resistance to chalkbrood suggested that few colonies are both highly hygienic and physiologically resistant to chalkbrood. Selection against uncapping and removing diseased brood might occur if this behaviour also promotes the spread of disease through the colony. This possibility is discussed in relation to avoidance behaviour of other social insects toward pathogens.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Hygienic behaviour of honey bees and its application for control of brood diseases and varroa: Part I. Hygienic behaviour and resistance to American foulbrood
    (International Bee Research Association, 1998) Spivak, Marla; Gilliam, Martha
    There have been very few studies on hygienic behaviour as a mechanism of resistance to American foulbrood since Park, Woodrow, Rothenbuhler, and Rothenbuhler’s students published their seminal work.The studies outlined in this part of the review form the core of information from which all later studies on hygienic behaviour have been based.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Hygienic behaviour of honey bees and its application for control of brood diseases and varroa: Part II. Studies on hygienic behaviour since the Rothenbuhler era
    (International Bee Research Association, 1998) Spivak, Marla; Gilliam, Martha
    Part I of this review summarized the initial research on hygienic behaviour of honey bees, Apis mellifera. This early work that concerned hygienic behaviour as a mechanism of resistance to American foulbrood (AFB) has been the foundation for all subsequent research on hygienic behaviour. In Part II, research on hygienic behaviour in relation to other bee diseases and to Varroa jacobsoni and in Apis species and subspecies is reviewed. In addition, techniques to screen bee colonies for the behaviour are detailed, and practical applications of breeding bees for hygienic behaviour are given. A section on neuroethology demonstrates how modern neurobiological techniques are being used to detect the reasons for differences in responses of hygienic and non-hygienic bees to abnormal brood.