Not the best field design, and some odd findings - ie., "There was no
difference in infection levels among bees sampled from different areas of the
hive regardless of the time of year." ???
The implication that Nosema is not a problem and to save money by not
treating to control it is in my opinion and that of some of our colleagues
"dangerous advice here .......... pretty shortsighted."
Assuming we are even partially correct about a Nosema and Virus interaction
(Cramer's inoculation trials indicated Nosema by itself had some impact,
which was intensified by the presence of IIV, and we'd think, other
viruses), Nosema may be like varroa - by itself, it may not be too bad, but
combined with viruses, its lethal.
Note, we are in the last stages of completing a rebuttal to the spate of
papers saying that IIV is not in US bees, with which we strongly disagree -
one has to explain the iridescent larvae seen by beekeepers, other
researchers, and for which we even have photos. Regardless, IIV plus Nosema
impacted the bees in lab trials. That is independent of any proteomics work,
which is the issue of debate by our critics.
We're working on trials with Nosema and virus and whole colonies this fall
- although we are having difficulty finding Nosema ceranae (so if any of
you have heavily infected bees with Nosema, we'd like a box of live bees
from you, please contact me off-list).
I've discussed the possible interaction of Nosema and virus with Higes in
Spain, and he agrees, that the presence of viruses may be a factor in
explaining why sometimes Nosema levels are high, and bees appear to be fine, and
at other times, even with low levels of Nosema, bees are impacted.
If you assume that Nosema by itself OR in combination of Nosema with one
or more viruses is not a problem, and if you don't monitor and take steps
to try to control Nosema, our opinion is that your bees are at risk.
At least there are ways to monitor and treat Nosema, although how
effective and how long the treatment lasts is something that can only be
determined by monitoring. Despite claims to the contrary, its even more difficult
to treat for viruses (and with some products purported to control virus(s)
its even more expensive). Hopefully, one of these days we will have
affordable treatments for viral infections. Until then, we recommend policing
the one pathogen that you can see.
If you treat for Nosema, it will cost you money. Reason we recommend
monitoring and only treating those colonies that need it when they need it is
to keep treatment costs down. But, we think you just may avoid widespread
and unexpected collapse if you keep your Nosema under control. Which is
more costly?? Treating and later finding out it wasn't necessary, or Not
Treating, and risking Nosema related bee loss (whether from Nosema itself, or
Nosema in combination with viruses). Frankly, I wish our critics would
spend less time wasting time, effort, and money on proving us wrong, and
more on testing whether Nosema acts like varroa with respect to viruses.
If we are wrong, time will tell. If we are right, and people don't pay
attention to Nosema and virus(s), then bees will be lost needlessly.
Finally, we lost over 90% of our own research hives in 2007. Since we've
been on top of Nosema, our 70+ colonies have had far less overwinter loss,
and the colonies do better in the summer, with less pathogen and pest
problems. (On average, we inspect our colonies every two weeks during the
growing season, keeping rigorous records of pop size, pathogens, and pests).
Jerry
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
