> Maybe we need to breed pesticide resistant bees.
> We have been, especially to fluvalinate and coumaphos!
> How fascinating!

Yeah, I know. Unfortunately I can't put my finger on the reference although I think Dennis vanEngelsdorp has written about the effects of coumaphos. 

However, there is a more serious issue. Evidently, some viral fragments have been found amid the honey bee genome. Whether the virus insinuates itself in, or the coding is picked up during recombination, is unclear, but these bees are genetically distinct as a result of contact with virus. 

Maori, et al (2007) states:

> Here we report a case showing not only the integration of a viral segment into the genome of its host (honeybee) but also the reciprocal integration of a host–genome segment into a virus-derived sequence. As a result of integration of a viral sequence into the host genome, a new phenotype has emerged: individual bees harboring the integrated viral sequence were found to be virus-resistant. 

There has been a lot of discussion of late about the effect of human selection on honey bees. Mostly, there is concern that inbreeding has reduced the diversity of the honey bee in the US and elsewhere. This has been pretty much laid to rest by work done by Dave Tarpy, Debby Delaney, Ben Oldroyd, Madeleine Beekman, etc. 

Another concern is the opposite: the loss of racial purity in populations as a result of mixing stock from all over the world. This is of concern less to commercial beekeepers than it is to preservationists in areas like the British Isles, Ukraine, Slovenia, etc. Brother Adam's name is associated with the pollution of the British bee, though he may have saved professional beekeeping through his importations.

Obviously, there is an effect of the thousands of years that honey bees have been associated with humans. Yet, oddly, few can agree on what the effect has been and whether it has been beneficial or not. It appears clear that the European bee is now dependent on us for their survival unless it would be in drastically reduced numbers.

Hypothetically, if we were to withhold treatment altogether the population of bees would fall to say 1 to 5 % of what it is now. The remaining bees would survive either because of resistance or because the density of colonies was so sparse that disease would no longer easily spread from colony to colony. 

Of course, the most radical things we have done to affect the bee population of the world have been: 1) introduce European bees into Asia, thereby causing varroa mites to host shift from Asian bees to European. This is irrevocable. 2) introduce African bees into America, causing tropical and subtropical America to be overrun by this invasive species. 

Many have proposed that these two events could culminate in the African bee being the solution to the varroa mite, through some kind of breeding program to produce a SuperBee possessing the vigor of the African bee -- of course, without all the flaws. Purists the world over cringe at such a prospect, though it is hardly unprecedented, given the degree of genetic modification of species we have already seen (that is, through conventional breeding and high tech genetic recombination)

The question for many is: have we already arrived in the new world of genetically altered honey bees, now that the genome has been altered by viruses, rendering moot any condemnation we might wish to inveigh against the deliberate alteration of the bees' genes. 

Peter Loring Borst

             ***********************************************
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

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L