Seriousness of Honeybee "Colony Collapse Disorder" wildly overblown?

[mike_c]

That's the title of an email I recently received on an entomological mailing list. I thought I'd repost it here (with names removed) to provide some additional background on this issue, since I know several here are interested in the topic.

Today on the [e-mail] listserve, an experienced beekeeper who received the Maine State Beekeepers Association Beekeeper of the Year Award for 2000 explained why he thinks the seriousness of the "Colony Collapse Disorder" seems more to be agenda driven than factual.

Subject: Sanity
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 09:19:1
From: XXXX
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>

I love the Internet but it tends to amplify, as does the 24 hour news cycle.

So far my informal poll has not pointed out a serious problem. I will have the results out next week.

Which prompted me to look closely at what we think we know about losses and you glean the following.

News reports about CCD from those supposedly close to the problem seem to be coming to a maximum of 25% killed and even that is a guess.

Currently we lose about 20% each year. 25% is not that unusual, especially compared to the early days of Tracheal Mites when 80% was thrown around. (Where do they get those numbers?) Interesting that before mites winter losses were still in the 10-25% area.

I know that some of the reported CCD cases were caused by mites, so the numbers are suspect and probably why no one wants to commit. You are trusting the word of a person who possibly will be reimbursed if it is CCD but not if it is mites. (I am not saying all, just some.)

Bob has pointed out that some commercial operations intentionally reduce to 50% for winter and some to 100% , as did many Canadian beekeepers before the border was closed. (I know the problem with CCD is the when.)

Breeders do not seem to be having a problem supplying bees. At least they are not acknowledging problems.

Almonds were pollinated and blueberries will be even with CCD and mites.

So all this excessive noise about the death of the commercial/factory/towel thrower/destroyer of the universe/takes candy from babies/ beekeeping seems more to be agenda driven than factual. There is a problem, what it is no one knows, but it or something very similar has happened before and commercial beekeeping is still sustainably pollinating and so are the bees.

XXXX
Bath, Maine

[hlthe2b]

1. Not my field of expertise, for sure...

But something about this email strikes me as so very familiar-- so similar to those denying global warming effects or the role of man made influences. Some of the tactics also seem similar (blending a previously known problem, i.e., mites, with a new phenomenon--CCD and the major loss of bees without seeing dead bees).

I have to wonder about the accusations of an agenda driving this all? Whose agenda is driving the debate if that is the case? So, with all due respect to the "2000 Maine beekeeper of the year" award-winner, but I'm guessing that the science of beekeeping and entomology is a bit broader and more technical (to put it mildly) than his local expertise may include.


Just my 2cents...

[mike_c]

5. I doubt that the gentleman who wrote that letter has any interest...

...in covering up CCD or denying it per se, and he does note at the bottom that a problem exists. Beekeepers and entomologists are aware of MANY problems and potential problems with the honeybee population.

I don't know the author of this letter personally, but I know him by reputation and he is well respected in the beekeeping and entomological communities. Certainly no one in my profession has any interest is denying CCD-- rather, we're interested in understanding it, and determining whether it is a new phenomenon or one that we've seen before.

[hlthe2b]

8. I don't doubt the man is honorable. He is the one stating an agenda

is behind this discussion of CCD and inherent warnings.

I do, however trust the global scientific community and peer-reviewed literature (it is NOT just wonks sending up warnings on the internet) quite a bit more to assess this situation. As a local beekeeper--no matter how experienced and successful he might be--his perspective is limited.

[Dover]

2. The 'amplification' of this issue is not simply driven by the internet.

Major publications have done stories about it.

[mike_c]

11. true, but few have had any real appreciation of the phenomenon....

A lot of hyperbole has been substituted for science, and a great deal of the press was initially generated by the bogus "cell phone" story-- that's the sort of sensationalism that the media understands implicitly. I believe that episode WAS driven by reporters searching the internet for any information they could find about disruptions of honeybee colonies, followed by their gross misinterpretation of the study they dug up.

[Dogmudgeon]

3. An agenda? What agenda?

The Association for the Abolition of Honey and Wax?

--p!

[hlthe2b]

4. The Association for the promotion of worldwide starvation...

perhaps...:eyes:

I suppose this issue is so frightening that it drives some to try hard to refute the evidence or downplay... On this, I'm going to trust the global scientific community and not some local "beekeeper of the year," though I certainly would prefer that the latter be correct.

[mike_c]

7. well, since you've decided to elevate the discussion to the level...

...of innuendo, let me point out that you did admit this isn't your field. Given your admitted ignorance, what is the basis for that statement? I am not aware of any evidence, at present, that suggests any failure or imminent failure of pollination, even in areas reporting some incidence of CCD.

[hlthe2b]

10. I am trained in science and thus the importance of

scientifically peer-reviewed literature over the assumptions or anecdotes of a few.

I sense that because you know this gentleman you are taking offense at me questioning his views. No offense was intended towards this man nor his opinions, but they are just that--his opinions.

[Dover]

6. wikipedia >

Colony Collapse Disorder (or CCD) is a poorly understood phenomenon involving the massive die-off of a beehive or bee colony. CCD is alternatively referenced as Vanishing Bee Syndrome (VBS). Apparently, CCD was originally found only in colonies of the Western honey bee in North America<1>, but European beekeepers have recently claimed to be observing a similar phenomenon in Poland, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, with initial reports coming in from Switzerland and Germany, albeit to a smaller degree<2>. The cause (or causes) of the syndrome is not yet well understood and even the existence of this disorder remains disputed. Theories include environmental change-related stresses<3>, malnutrition, unknown pathogens (i.e., disease<4>), mites, pesticides such as neonicotinoids, emissions from cellular phones or other manmade devices,<5> and genetically modified (GM) crops<6> (how about ALL of the above?).

..snip..

Honey bees are not native to the Americas, therefore their necessity as pollinators in the US is limited to strictly agricultural/ornamental uses, as no native plants require honey bee pollination, except where concentrated in monoculture situations - where the pollination need is so great at bloom time that pollinators must be concentrated beyond the capacity of native bees (with current technology).

They are responsible for pollination of approximately one third of the United States' crop species, including such species as: almonds, peaches, soybeans, apples, pears, cherries, raspberries, blackberries, cranberries, watermelons, cantaloupes, cucumbers and strawberries. Many but not all of these plants can be (and often are) pollinated by other insects in small holdings in the U.S., including other kinds of bees, but typically not on a commercial scale. While some farmers of a few kinds of native crops do bring in honey bees to help pollinate, none specifically need them, and when honey bees are absent from a region, there is a presumption that native pollinators may reclaim the niche, typically being better adapted to serve those plants (assuming that the plants normally occur in that specific area).

However, even though on a per-individual basis, many other species are actually more efficient at pollinating, on the 30% of crop types where honey bees are used, most native pollinators cannot be mass-utilized as easily or as effectively as honey bees - in many instances they will not visit the plants at all. Beehives can be moved from crop to crop as needed, and the bees will visit many plants in large numbers, compensating via sheer numbers for what they lack in efficiency. The commercial viability of these crops is therefore strongly tied to the beekeeping industry...>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Collapse_Disorder

[Adsos Letter]

12. Within the last week

I recall seeing a news report of this phenomenon occurring across Taiwan. It would be an interesting study to see what the correlation of GM crops to areas affected is.

[mike_c]

14. so far the consensus is that GM crops are an unlikely agent...

...for several reasons, including 1) none of the recovered bees or colonies from which bees are lost shows symptoms that can be correlated with things like Bt toxicity; 2) the phenomenon has been reported in areas having no GM crops that express insect toxicity, and conversely, is not observed in many areas that have extensive GM plantings; and 3) similar phenomenon, known for decades under other names, predate the widespread planting of GM crop varieties.

[Adsos Letter]

18. Thanks for the answer! n/t

[Odin2005]

25. It's not like the anti-GMO people care about facts,anyway

They'll jump on any oppertunity to whine and bitch.

I'm guessing it's some new pathogen going around, it's some side effect of climate change, or prehaps it's some new pesticide orchard owners are using.

[poopfuel]

27. Oh? Facts?

GM crop taints honey two miles away, test reveals

The Sunday Times, September 15, 2002
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-416027,00.html

EVIDENCE that genetically modified (GM) crops can contaminate food supplies for miles around has been revealed in independent tests commissioned by The Sunday Times.

The tests found alien GM material in honey from beehives two miles from a site where GM crops were being grown under government supervision. It is believed to have been carried there by bees gathering pollen in the GM test sites.

The disclosure, showing that GM organisms can enter the food chain without consumers — or even farmers — knowing they are present, will undermine assurances by Tony Blair and ministers that such crops can be tested in Britain without contaminating the food chain.

The test results come as ministers, under pressure from the American agrochemical lobby, mount a huge consultation exercise to persuade the public of the virtues of GM foods. They have previously given assurances that consumers “are not being used as guinea pigs”.

The GM material was found in honey sold from farmer David Rolfe’s hives at Newport-on-Tay in Fife, almost two miles from one of 18 sites holding trials of GM oil-seed rape.

A test carried out by GeneScan, a respected independent laboratory in Bremen, Germany, checked for traces of an NOS terminator, one of four modified genes which make the crop resistant to pesticides. This proved positive.

A second test confirmed that GM material in the honey could have come only from oil- seed rape grown at Wester Friarton, in Newport-on-Tay, by Aventis, one of the world’s biggest biotechnology firms. The fact that the GM material travelled such a distance makes a mockery of the government’s 50m-200m crop-free “buffer” zones that were created around GM sites to protect neighbouring farms. Critics have claimed that the GM crop trial sites are too close to other farms. America has buffer zones of up to 400m, Canada up to 800m, and the European Union recommends a 5km (three-mile) zone for GM oilseed rape.

When Rolfe first raised his concerns, government officials said that although it was not possible to rule out cross-pollination, they did not believe it should be “a source of concern”.

“I’m very angry and disappointed,” Rolfe said last week. “I feel I’ve been denied the right and freedom to eat my own GM-free produce. Now we can’t eat the honey or sell it.”

This weekend Defra, the ministry responsible for the crop trials, said: “We have not seen the results of the study but will treat any such findings extremely seriously.”

In the case of GM rape, like most GM products, there is no evidence that contamination poses a health risk. Concern centres on maintaining the integrity of traditionally produced products.

Tim Lang, professor of food policy at Thames Valley University, said: “The early assurances from the industry and the government that a buffer zone would allow safety and choice for consumers are falling apart. It raises environmental health worries, and what we don’t yet know is whether these warnings will translate into a risk to human health.”

Britain has imposed a moratorium on the widespread planting of GM crops until it has analysed the impact of GM crop trials at 18 farm-scale sites around Britain.

However, The Sunday Times’s tests confirm earlier work that was carried by Friends of the Earth, the environmental group, and will increase pressure on the government to scale down its support for the GM industry.

It will also come as a personal setback to Blair, who is determined that British companies will win a share of the potentially lucrative bioscience industry. In May the prime minister attacked GM protesters as part of an “anti-science fashion” in Britain.

The tests will bring pressure on Aventis, which was accused of a “serious breach” of regulations earlier this year after GM trials in 12 sites were contaminated with antibiotic genes. These are controversial because of the danger of gene transfer to bacteria in animals and humans, who could become immune to common life- saving antibiotics.

While the government tends to support the GM lobby, food retailers have been more cautious. The big supermarkets insist that such products are properly labelled and refuse to take honey from within six miles of UK test sites.

In Canada, a leading cultivator of GM crops, sales of honey have plummeted by 50% amid concern that the integrity of the product has been compromised.

A spokesmen for Aventis said: “We would be very interested in looking at both the origin of the honey sample and how the tests were carried out. We would like to look at this further

Source: Norfolk Genetic Information Network (ngin),
http://www.ngin.org.uk

[tubbacheez]

9. This is a classic case of "minimization"

Minimization is where one downplays the importance of something. Here, the author used a misleading statistic (the "25%" alleged overall loss of bees), and compares it to the "normal" winter loss of ~20%. Doesn't seem like much in this light.

But bees don't fly with unlimited range and speed. So analysis at the overall level is inappropriate. Apiaries in some states have lost over 90% of their bees. Those states are going to have an agricultural mess in the coming years. Those states have populations to feed.

Pressures on chaotic non-linear systems (like nature) doesn't always result in predictable linear effects. The author has made the implicit assumption that small changes don't matter, without any justification for assuming so.

Plus, that "25%" number is suspect. Again, no support for it.




(edited to fix horrible typo)

[mike_c]

13. yes, he is certainly trying to minimize the case that CCD poses a major risk...

...to pollination. And as has been pointed out elsewhere in this thread, his experience is anecdotal. Still, he is a respected authority in beekeeping circles, so his views deserve a respectful hearing, at least.

Part of the current debate among entomologists studying CCD has to do with whether or not it is a new phenomenon, or whether it is part of the natural variance in phenomena that have been reported for years, e.g. dwindle disease, disappearing disease, etc. One of the points made in this letter is that he doesn't believe the impact will be as great as frightening media stories suggest-- if beekeepers routinely reduce their colony sizes by 50% or greater as part of the normal management cycle, then dwindle disease or CCD losses are unlikely to have severe impacts on pollinator services unless they become quite extreme.

[hlthe2b]

15. Mike_C, there is a work group studing this problem at Penn State

They are inviting beekeepers participation in ongoing surveys. Perhaps your colleague might want to take part. The following is their mission and a link to more information follows:

To better understand the cause(s) of this disease and with the hope of eventually identifying
strategies to prevent further losses, a group of researchers, extension agents, and regulatory
officials was formed. This group represents a diverse number of institutions including Bee Alert
Technology, Inc. (a bee technology transfer company affiliated with the University of Montana),
The Pennsylvania State University, the USDA/ARS, the Florida Department of
Agriculture, and the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture.

http://www.ento.psu.edu/MAAREC/pressReleases/ColonyCollapseDisorderWG.html

They are trying to establish the magnitude of the problem in this country in concert with others around the world. For all of our sakes, I prefer that your colleague's initial assessment that this is all overblow, be true. But, it seems there is sufficient cause for concern.

edited for typos...

[mike_c]

16. I know, and so does he....

Don't worry, the entomological community is very interested in this topic now. I started this thread because much of the information people receive about it is filtered through the media, which does a poor job of reflecting the discussion and debate going on in the scientific community, IMO. I thought it would be useful to see some of that debate in raw form. I've posted other such emails recently, too.

[hlthe2b]

17. agree with you there...

re: much of the information people receive about it is filtered through the media, which does a poor job of reflecting the discussion and debate going on in the scientific community...

The hype behind the cell phone story alone was pretty darned irresponsible, given a total lack of evidence, IMO

[theoldman]

19. An article in our local newspaper put the blame on a

pesticide that is used in the Almond groves. If this is correct a solution is just around the corner, stop using the pesticide.

[applegrove]

20. I read part of a long article that went into it. It is still a mystery so how

could it be overblown? So much colony collapse is a horror regardless of why. They are not sure yet what it is..but it is something different.

[mike_c]

22. not necessarily "something different" at all....

Several colony collapse diseases have been reported in the past-- they go by names like disappearing disease, fall dwindle disease, spring dwindle, etc. One of the open questions at the moment is whether CCD is anything new at all, or just a bad patch of dwindle disease, for example.

[Mojorabbit]

21. They also think a fungus may be part of the problem

Some snips from the LA paper
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-bees26apr26,0,896792.story?coll=la-home-headlines

But the current loss appears unprecedented. Beekeepers in 28 states, Canada and Britain have reported large losses. About a quarter of the estimated 2.4 million commercial colonies across the United States have been lost since fall, said Jerry Hayes of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services in Gainesville.

"These are remarkable and dramatic losses," said Hayes, who is also president of the Apiary Inspectors of America.
snip
Other researchers said Wednesday that they too had found the fungus, a single-celled parasite called Nosema ceranae, in affected hives from around the country — as well as in some hives where bees had survived. Those researchers have also found two other fungi and half a dozen viruses in the dead bees.
snip
Researchers now think the foraging bees are too weak to return to their hives.

DeRisi and UCSF's Don Ganem, who normally look for the causes of human diseases, were brought into the bee search by virologist Evan W. Skowronski of the U.S. Army's Edgewood Chemical Biological Center in Maryland.

Dr. Charles Wick of the center had used a new system of genetic analysis to identify pathogens in ground-up bee samples from California. He found several viruses, including members of a recently identified genus called iflaviruses.

It is not known whether these small, RNA-containing viruses, which infect the Varroa mite, are pathogenic to bees.

Skowronski forwarded the samples to DeRisi, who also found evidence of the viruses, along with genetic material from N. ceranae.

"There was a lot of stuff from Nosema, about 25% of the total," Skowronski said. "That meant there was more than there was bee RNA. That leads me to believe that the bee died from that particular pathogen."

If N. ceranae does play a role in Colony Collapse Disorder, there may be some hope for beekeepers.
A closely related parasite called Nosema apis, which also affects bees, can be controlled by the antibiotic fumagillin, and there is some evidence that it will work on N. ceranae as well.



I am following it closely. I only have one hive but as I become a more proficient beekeeper I plan to have a few more. An amateur here and still learning about these wonderful creatures.

[mike_c]

23. more Nosema RNA than bee RNA...!

Wow. I'd seen reports suggesting that Nosema cerane was a possible agent, or at least contributor, but that result is pretty spectacular. That strongly suggests that N.ceranae was cranking out copies within infected bee cells.

[Odin2005]

26. More VIRUS RNA then bee RNA? Holy fucking shit!

:wow:

[mitchtv]

24. I am happy to report that local bees

have come to visit my Palo Verde trees in large numbers. They were late this year, and I was beginning to worry