This message was originally submitted by [log in to unmask] to the
BEE-L
list at LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU. t was edited to remove HTML formatting.
----------------- Original message (ID=1165129C) (461 lines)
------------------
From: "Mike Allsopp" <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: ARC PLANT PROTECTION
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 09:35:17 +0200
Subject: African Bee Briefing - Reply
Dear Barry & everyone else
I have returned from a couple of days away to a pretty challenging
post from Barry Sergeant. I will try to answer the questions posed.
Apologies to those not at all interested in these South African
issues, and apologies also to the moderators for the use of quotes
(otherwise, my response would make no sense)
> Last week Mike Allsopp posted the Africa issues on BEE-L
> he thought he had best comment, and in some cases
>set the record straight. Perhaps he could kindly continue in this
>vein in respect of the following.
> 1. South Africa faces more bee pests/diseases/problems than
> any other country in the world? The exception would be pure
>capensis colonies in native capensis territory, a relatively small
>area of the country.
No, I wouldn't say so. We don't have American Foulbrood; tracheal
mites appear innocuous in South Africa; European Foulbrood is
innocuous; hive beetles are not an issue.
> 2. The country's single biggest current problem is the ever-
> increasing wholesale - if not industrial - destruction of scutellata
> colonies by capensis laying workers?
I agree that the biggest beekeeping problem in South Africa is the
Capensis Problem, closely followed by vandalism/theft. In time,
however, varroa mites might be the most serious of all.
> 3. The said capensis problem is the single biggest problem in
> SouthAfrican beekeeping history?
I agree.
> 4. Capensis worker laying behaviour - however delayed - has
>become the dominant characteristic of wild and managed
> scutellata colonies?
This is certainly true of managed colonies. Sooner or later,
capensis laying worker problems seem to occur in commercial
apiaries. BUT there are lots of hobbyist beekeepers in the affected
areas that have 20-colony-strong apiaries and have never had the
Capensis Problem. Why? Because they don't move around, they
don't stress their bees, and because there are no other beekeepers
nearby. The Capensis Problem is a problem of commercial
apiaries, and of commercial beekeepers. As for the wild population,
capensis problems have penetrated to some extent, but there is
no evidence that these problems persist. For example, capensis
laying worker problems have not spread into our neighbouring
countries, nor into honeybee populations in nature reserves (and
hence removed from the possible proximity of commercial
beekeeping activity). Conclusion - much of the wild honeybee
population is still "pure" scutellata, unaffected by capensis
problems.
> 5. It is unlikely that any pure scutellata can be found anywhere
> in South Africa today? It is generally believed that all "wild"
> scutellata are hybridised to varying degrees with capensis?
> Separately, the latter phenomenon comprises the capensis
> "timebomb" within all scutellata colonies?
Answered above.
> 6. South Africa is the only country in the world - where varroa is
> found - where varroa is not the main problem?
I wouldn't think this is true of most of the South American
countries, of most of the Asian countries, and perhaps also, of
countries such as the UK and Canada. And give varroa in South
Africa time; it is only a recent visitor. It might well give us more
problems that we would wish.
> 7. South Africa's varroa is the most virulent strain, the so-called
> verroa destructor 'Russian' type?
Correct. It is Varroa destructor.
> 8. The mechanism by which capensis workers clone themselves
> has yet to be explained?
Not true. The "cloning" mechanism of capensis workers is
reasonably well understood, at least at the proximate level. The
original conclusions from cytological evidence of Verma & Ruttner
have proved to be correct. That is, automictic thelytokous
parthenogenesis, the fusion of two central pronuclei in Meiosis II. A
considerable amount of work on this subject has been completed
in recent years by Moritz, Haberl, Kryger, Greeff and Solignac,
and probably others. The ultimate causation of the characteristic,
however, remains obscure.
> 9. No non-private sector research conducted on solving the so-
> called capensis problem has ever yielded any practical solutions
> whatsoever?
The Capensis Research Programme yielded some valuable
insights into how commercial beekeepers might operate better so
as to reduce capensis problems (things like reducing the stress on
colonies, less migratory beekeeping, keeping smaller colonies).
But it is true that no "solutions" to the problem have yet been
found.
> 10. Mr Allsopp and his colleagues at the PPRI, ARC (Plant
> Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Council) live
> and work in Stellenbosch, South Africa, deep in native capensis
> territory. This, along with other factors, would imply that any
> further attempts by the PPRI to find a solution to the capensis
> problem have been totally abandoned? This one really needs a
> unequivocal answer?</color>
PPRI has two bee sections, one in Stellenbosch and the other in
Pretoria (pretty much in the centre of the capensis problem area). I
am the only researcher in Stellenbosch while, until recently the
Pretoria unit had three researchers, all working on the Capensis
Problem.
It is true, however, that the Capensis Research Programme (and
funding for it) has now ended, while the problems persist. This
situation is to be addressed in a meeting in early August, and
hopefully further research into the Capensis problem will be
forthcoming.
> 11. Further, by implication, all other research bodies in South
> have abandoned attempts to solve the capensis problem?
> Mr Allsopp has stated, separately, that "PPRI has not been part
> of the government for a long time." Does this have any bearing on
> the PPRI's constituent donors' expectations of the PPRI's bee
> research focus areas?
PPRI became a parastatal in 1992, and has to earn a sizeable
proportion of its funds from contract research. Just like all other
institutions in South Africa, "transformation" issues have a high
priority in PPRI at present. For the bee sections, this means the
development of rural and small-scale beekeeping, and much of our
time at present is taken up in this regard. However, the point has
been made that these efforts will be fruitless if all our bees die
because of capensis problems and/or varroa, and I am hopeful that
we will soon be able to pay more attention to our core business -
that is, research into capensis and varroa problems. Like
everything else, this is dependent on funding.
> 12. In order to secure on-going funding from donors ambivalent to
> the value of bees in South Africa, bodies such as the PPRI have
> a vested interest in the capensis problem continuing, not in it
> being solved? This is a tough one all right.
This suggestion is, at best, mischievious and at worst, slanderous.
It is well-known that I have often not agreed with the workings on
the Capensis Working Group (who controlled the research into the
capensis problem) as I often felt they were pre-occupied with the
academic elements of the problem, and not with finding solutions.
Any suggestion that the Working Group have ever wanted the
Capensis Problem to continue is, however, both malicious and
completely incorrect. It should be pointed out that the Capensis
Working Group, right from the beginning, has been made up from
researchers, government officials and commercial beekeepers, the
latter comprising almost 50% of the group.
> 13. If it is true that all non-private sector attempts to solve the
> capensis problem have been abandoned, would bodies such as
> PPRI suppress private sector attempts? Would PPRI, for
> example, oppose an ApiCrown (i.e., pure private sector) attempt
> to import pure scutellata from Kenya? Scutellata for research
> purposes to test domestic scuts for capensis and varroa
> resistance? Instrumentally inseminated queens accompanied by
> an international health certificate issued by ICIPE
> (www.icipe.org)? Eggs in comb? Bee semen? Would government
> itself suppress such bona fide attempts?
I have no doubt that all legimate attempts to find solutions to the
Capensis Problem would be welcomed. Decisions on the
importation of bees or genetic stock, however, rest with the
Department of Agriculture. PPRI is sometimes asked to advice the
government in this regard. In terms of the examples that you give,
and speaking only for myself, I would require some evidence to
suggest that bees from Kenya would be resistant to Capensis
Problems before I would be able to support the importation of such
stock as a measure to counter capensis. (Obviously!)
> 14. As to cell size, Mr Allsopp quoted figures for scuts that are
> likely dated; viz., pre-capensis (1990) and pre-varroa (1995)? This
> is not to imply that either would initiate a change in cell size. But
> just how valid are his supplied figures at 4.85-4.9mm? I live and
> work deep in scutellata country and I am not a scientist. I have
> examined brood nests of millions of wild scutellata trapped near
> Piet Retief in the past four months or so. I stand by my finding
> that scutellata are retooling, and downsizing cell size. I stand by
> my statement on BEE-L on 12 July 2001, viz.: "we are very
> worried that the dual influence of varroa and capensis could lead
> to a deep depletion in wild swarms" in traditional scutellata
> countryside. That there are still swarms in relative abundance in
> 2001 must constitute some proof that scutellata are truly tough.
> But even scutellata have a breaking point. Is it time for South
> African research entities to make serious inroads into the
> damage man has occasioned scutellata in one of its home
> countries?
If selection pressure from varroa mites is, indeed, causing
scutellata colonies to reduce cell size, then this would obviously be
of great interest to us. It has not been my experience, but if Barry
has such colonies, then I would urge him to make them available
to us so that we might be able to test these colonies in a
controlled manner.
All the best
Mike Allsopp
Stellenbosch
Mike Allsopp tel (27)(21) 887-4690
Honeybee Research Section fax (27)(21) 883-3285
Plant Protection Research Institute pmail plant3/vredma
Agricultural Research Council email [log in to unmask]
P/Bag X5017
Stellenbosch 7599
South Africa
|
