A comparison of honey production in bee colonies with

A comparison of honey production in bee colonies with

Annals of Warsaw University of Life Sciences – SGGW
Animal Science No 51, 2012: 55–58
(Ann. Warsaw Univ. of Life Sci. – SGGW, Anim. Sci. 51, 2012)
A comparison of honey production in bee colonies with
instrumentally inseminated and naturally mated queens
STANISàAW HOēKO, BEATA MADRAS-MAJEWSKA, BARBARA ZAJDEL,
JOANNA ĝCIĉGOSZ
Bee-Division, Warsaw University of Life Sciences – SGGW
Abstract: A comparison of honey production in
bee colonies with instrumentally inseminated and
naturally mated queens. The study compares honey production in bee colonies with instrumentally
inseminated and naturally mated queens. Poland
has a special place in the world in terms of the
numbers of instrumentally inseminated queens.
Our country uses more of them than all other
countries taken together. The dense distribution
pattern of apiaries in Poland prevents any control over natural mating, while at the same time
many bee-keepers who look for valuable breeding
material decide to use instrumentally inseminated queens in their honey-making colonies. The
cost of purchasing an instrumentally inseminated
queen should be compensated by an increased
productivity of the colony. The study was aimed
at determining whether that was possible. The
comparison was carried out at a large professional
apiary in the season of 2008. Two comparison
groups were created of 12 colonies each. Honey
was harvested 3 times during the season. The average production of honey in the group with instrumentally inseminated queens signi¿cantly exceeded average production in that with naturally
mated queens.
Key words: queen bee, honey production, instrumentally inseminated queen.
INTRODUCTION
Instrumental insemination of queen bees
in the conditions prevalent in our country
is the only method of individual selection (JasiĔski 1972). It has resulted in a
major progress in bee breeding (Prabucki
and Chuda-Mickiewicz 1998, 2000a,
2000b). The procedure has become a
routine mating method (JasiĔski et al.
1985). It has the disadvantage of a delayed onset of brood development compared to naturally mated queens (Ruttner
1975, Moritz and Kuhnert 1984, Konopacka 1989). Instrumentally inseminated queens, which have not begun the
brood cycle yet, are more reluctantly received by the colonies, which increases
the risk of loosing some of the queens
(Marcinkowski 1982, Skubida and Pohorecka 2000). Instrumental insemination enables the creation of crossbreeds,
however, which are characterised by heterosis (Strabel 2005). Same-breed lines
can be crossed as well when the offspring is expected to display the desirable characteristics of both lines (Paleolog
2006). JasiĔski ed. (1998) reports that
instrumental insemination may result in
obtaining hybrid bees which are much
more productive than colonies with the
same queens mating naturally. Similar
results have been obtained by Cale and
Gowen (1956) in the natural environment conditions of the U.S.A. The goal
of the study was to determine whether
colonies with instrumentally inseminated
queens in average nectar Àow conditions
could produce more honey than colonies
of similar strength with naturally mated
56
S. HoĔko et al.
queens. That would enable an economic
evaluation of using instrumentally inseminated queen bees in honey-making
colonies.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Colonies with instrumentally inseminated queens produced: 8 kg from orchard,
13.5 kg from rape, 15.9 kg from linden
Àow (with 0.1 kg accuracy). Colonies
with naturally mated queens produced:
5.6, 10, 12.6 kg, respectively. In each
case, the average production of honey in
the group with instrumentally inseminated queens was higher than in the group
with naturally mated queens (Table 1).
The differences between average production in both groups were statistically
signi¿cant.
The average honey production for the
entire season was 37.34 kg in the group
with instrumentally inseminated queens,
and was approximately 32% higher compared to the group with naturally mated
queens. In the Cale and Gowen study
(1956) conducted in American conditions, in colonies with instrumentally
inseminated queens producing 99.4 kg
the difference was lower, at about 24%.
JasiĔski ed. (1998) reports that Prabucki
and Chuda-Mickiewicz harvested the
average of 80 kg honey from hybrid bees
cross-bred between the Central European
bee and the Caucasian bee. The same au-
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study was carried out at a large apiary with 280 colonies, located in the
south-eastern part of the country, in the
Roztocze region. 2 groups of 12 colonies each were selected: one with an
instrumentally inseminated queen, the
other with a naturally mated queen. The
mothers were sister Carniolan bees. Instrumental insemination was performed
with Caucasian drones, and a cross-bred
hybrid was obtained. Naturally inseminated queens mated with randomly selected drones.
The study period covered the season
of 2008. Honey production was measured
with respect to 3 honey Àows: orchard,
rape, and linden. Honey from each Àow
was harvested and weighted separately.
The average for each group was subsequently determined, and the signi¿cance
of differences was measured using Student’s t-test. Statistical calculations were
performed using the SPSS programme.
TABLE 1. Honey production from individual honey Àows
Nectar
Àows
Average (kg)
From – to (kg)
Standard deviation
Instrumentally
inseminated
7.96
Natural
mating
5.75
Instrumentally
inseminated
5.5–10
Natural
mating
3–8
Instrumentally
inseminated
1.60
Natural
mating
1.66
Rape
13.46
10.00
10–15
7–13.5
1.74
2.27
Linden
15.92
12.63
14–18
9.5–15.5
1.44
1.93
Total
37.34
28.38
–
–
–
–
Orchards
A comparison of honey production in bee colonies with instrumentally...
thor reports that cross-breeds of selected
Norwegian lines and selected lines of
the Caucasian bee produced more than
150 kg of honey per colony. Wilde et al.
(2002) harvested 29.5 kg honey from instrumentally inseminated queens of the
Kortówka line, which was 4.4 kg more
than in the control colonies.
The production of honey and differences between colonies with instrumentally inseminated and naturally mated
queens vary depending on natural conditions and the bee-keeping management
approach. JasiĔski ed. (1998) believes
that instrumentally inseminated queens
realize their potential only with intensive
bee-keeping. Thus, their introduction in
extensive apiaries will not produce the
desired results. An experimental apiary
is a rationally managed professional apiary, where the cost of purchasing instrumentally inseminated queen bees was
more than compensated by the increased
yield.
REFERENCES
CALE G.H., GOWEN J.W., 1956: Heterosis
in the honeybee (Apis mellifera L.). Genetics 41, 292–303.
JASIēSKI Z., 1972: Badania nad naturalnum i sztucznym unasienianiem matek
pszczelich. Praca doktorska SGGW, Warszawa, typework.
JASIēSKI Z. (ed.), 1998: Naturalny i kontrolowany dobór u pszczóá. Pszczelnictwo. Wydawnictwo Albatros, Szczecin.
JASIēSKI Z., TROSZKIEWICZ J., ZAWILSKI A., 1985: Naturalne czy sztuczne
unasienianie matek pszczelich. Pszczelarstwo 36 (5/6), 5–7.
KONOPACKA Z., 1989: Czynniki wpáywające nawyniki sztucznego unasieniania
matek pszczelich. Rozprawa habilitacyjna. IsiK, Puáawy.
57
MARCINKOWSKI J., 1982: Porównanie
kilku sposobów poddawania matek do
rodzin pszczelich. Pszczel. Zesz. Nauk.
26, 48–50.
MORITZ R.F.A. KUHNERT M. 1984: Seasonal effects of arti¿cial insemination
of honeybee queens (Apis mellifera L.).
Apidologie 15 (2), 223–231.
PALEOLOG J., 2006: Wybrane zagadnienia
z hodowli pszczóá. Materiaáy konferencyjne. Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy Lublin.
PRABUCKI J., CHUDA-MICKIEWICZ B.
1998: Results of the middle European
bee improvement in Western Pomerania.
Fol. Univ. Agric. Stet. 36, 27–37.
PRABUCKI J., CHUDA-MICKIEWICZ B.,
2000a: Doskonalenie towarowe uĪytkowanych w Polsce ras pszczóá. Fol. Univ.
Agric. Stet. Zootechnika 39, 131–142.
PRABUCKI J., CHUDA-MICKIEWICZ B.,
2000b: Podnoszenie wydajnoĞci miodowej uĪytkowanych w Polsce ras pszczóá.
CzĊĞü I, II. Pszczelarstwo 51 (10), 5–6;
52 (11), 5–7.
RUTTNER F., 1975: Die instrumentalle
Besamung der Bienenkoniginen. II AuÀ.
Apimondia. Verlag. Buckarest.
SKUBIDA P., POHORECKA K., 2000: Wykorzystanie róĪnych typów klateczek
i mateczników do poddawania matek.
XXXVII Nauk. Konf. Pszczel. Puáawy,
85–87.
STRABEL T., 2005: Genetyka cech iloĞciowych zwierząt w praktyce. Materiaáy do
zajĊü. Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy w Poznaniu, PoznaĔ.
WILDE J.,WILDE M., KOBYLIēSKI A.
2002: Biuletyn Naukowy nr 18.
Streszczenie: Porównanie produkcji miodu
w rodzinach pszczelich z matkami sztucznie i naturalnie unasienionymi. W pracy porównano produkcjĊ miodu w rodzinach pszczelich z matkami
sztucznie unasienionymi i z matkami naturalnie
unasienionymi. Pod wzglĊdem iloĞci sztucznie
unasienionych matek pszczelich Polska zajmuje
w Ğwiecie wyjątkowe miejsce. W naszym kraju
wykorzystuje siĊ ich wiĊcej niĪ we wszystkich
pozostaáych krajach áącznie. GĊste rozmieszcze-
58
S. HoĔko et al.
nie pasiek w Polsce uniemoĪliwia jakąkolwiek
kontrolĊ naturalnego kojarzenia, a z kolei wielu
pszczelarzy, poszukując wartoĞciowego materiaáu hodowlanego, decyduje siĊ na wykorzystanie
sztucznie unasienionych matek w rodzinach przeznaczonych do produkcji miodu. Koszt zakupu
sztucznie unasienionej matki pszczelej powinien
byü rekompensowany zwiĊkszoną produkcyjnoĞcią rodziny pszczelej. W badaniu starano siĊ
uzyskaü odpowiedĨ, czy jest to moĪliwe. Porównanie przeprowadzono w duĪej pasiece towarowej, w sezonie 2008. Utworzono dwie grupy porównawcze po 12 rodzin. Miód odbierano 3 razy
w ciągu sezonu. ĝrednia produkcja miodu grupy
z matkami sztucznie unasienionymi przewyĪszaáa
istotnie Ğrednią dla grupy z matkami naturalnie
unasienionymi.
MS. received December 2012
Authors’ address:
Pracownia Hodowli Owadów UĪytkowych
Wydziaá Nauk o ZwierzĊtach SGGW
ul. Nowoursynowska 166
02-787 Warszawa
Poland
e-mail: [email protected]