Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:36:48.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

INFLUENCE OF AGE AND POPULATION SIZE ON OVARIAN DEVELOPMENT, AND OF TROPHALLAXIS ON OVARIAN DEVELOPMENT AND VITELLOGENIN TITRES OF QUEENLESS WORKER HONEY BEE (HYMENOPTERA: APIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Huarong Lin ,
Mark L. Winston ,
Norbert H. Haunerland  and
Keith N. Slessor
Huarong Lin*
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Mark L. Winston
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Norbert H. Haunerland
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6
Keith N. Slessor
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A IS6
*
1 Author to whom all correspondence should be sent at the following address: Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA 48824 (E-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We examined the factors that might influence ovary development in worker honey bees, Apis mellifera L. Queenless workers at different ages (≤ 12 h, and 4, 8, and 21 d) were tested in cages for ovarian development. Newly emerged, 4- and 8-d-old, and 21-d-old workers had medium-, large-, and small-sized ovaries, respectively, suggesting that of the worker ages tested only 4- and 8-d-old workers are likely to become egg layers in a queenless colony. Also, we compared ovarian development of newly emerged workers that were caged for 14 d and allowed to consume either pollen or royal jelly to that of another group of workers similarly caged but screened so that they could only obtain food via trophallaxis from young bees. Ovaries of newly emerged workers that received food from young bees were as well developed as those of newly emerged workers allowed to take pollen or royal jelly directly. Screened workers also had lower but still elevated vitellogenin levels compared with bees having direct access to food. These results indicate that nurse-age bees functioning as pollen-digesting units affect the ovarian development of other workers and to a lesser extent vitellogenesis via food exchange. We compared the influence of group sizes of 25, 125, and 600 bees per cage on ovarian development for 14 d. The two groups of 25 and 125 bees had similar mean ovary scores, and higher scores than a group of 600 bees. Our findings suggest that nurse-age bees could play an important role in mediating worker fertility via trophallaxis, possibly by differentiating worker dominance status, and generally only young workers become fertile when a queen is lost in a colony. Vitellogenin is a more sensitive parameter to measure bee fertility, and might be a useful tool to further explore ovary development and egg laying in worker social insects. We recommend measuring haemolymph vitellogenin titres and (or) oocyte length of workers in a group of 25 bees per cage, supplied with 50% royal jelly in honey as a standard method to assess honey bee worker fertility in future experiments.

Résumé

Nous avons examiné les facteurs susceptibles d’influencer le développement ovarien chez les ouvrières de l’Abeille domestique, Apis mellifera L. Des ouvrières d’âges divers (≤ 12 h, et 4, 8 et 21 jours) ont été placées dans des cages en l’absence de reine et leur développement ovarien a été suivi. Les ovaires étaient de taille moyenne chez les ouvrières fraîchement écloses, de grande taille chez les ouvrières âgées de 4 et 8 jours et de petite taille chez celles âgées de 21 jours, ce qui semble indiquer que seules les ouvrières de 4 et 8 jours sont susceptibles de pondre des oeufs au sein de la colonie sans reine. Nous avons également comparé le développement ovarien d’ouvrières fraîchement écloses, mises en cage pendant 14 jours et exposées à du pollen ou à de la gelée royale, avec le développement des ovaires chez les ouvrières d’un autre groupe, également mises en cage, mais sans accès à la gelée royale ou au pollen, et ne pouvant être nourries que par trophallaxie par les jeunes abeilles. Les ovaires des ouvrières fraîchement écloses et nourries par les jeunes abeilles avaient les ovaires aussi développés que ceux des ouvrières du même âge nourries de pollen ou de gelée royale. Les ouvrières sans accès direct à la nourriture avaient des concentrations de vitellogénine plus faibles, mais élevées malgré tout, comparativement aux ouvrières ayant accès à la nourriture. Ces résultats indiquent que les ouvrières qui sont en âge d’être nourricières et qui fonctionnent comme des unités digestives de pollen affectent le développement ovarien des autres ouvrières et influencent également, jusqu’à un certain point, la vitellogenèse via l’échange de nourriture. Nous avons comparé l’influence de la taille du groupe (25, 125 ou 600 abeilles par cage) sur le développement ovarien pendant 14 jours. Chez les groupes de 25 et 125 abeilles, le développement ovarien était le même (en moyenne) et plus complet que celui des abeilles du groupe de 600 individus. Nos résultats indiquent que les abeilles nourricières jouent probablement un rôle important comme médiatrices de fertilité des ouvrières par l’intermédiaire de la trophallaxie, peut-être en déclenchant la différenciation du statut de dominance des ouvrières; d’ailleurs, généralement seules les jeunes ouvrières deviennent fertiles en l’absence de la reine dans la colonie. La vitellogénine est une mesure plus sensible de la fertilité des abeilles et pourrait s’avérer un outil très utile pour étudier le développement ovarien et la ponte chez les ouvrières des insectes sociaux. Nous recommandons de titrer la vitellogénine dans l’hémolymphe et (ou) de mesurer la longueur des oocytes chez les ouvrières mises en cage en groupes de 25 et nourries de 50% de gelée royale dans du miel comme méthode standard d’évaluation de la fertilité des abeilles ouvrières.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 131 , Issue 5 , October 1999 , pp. 695 - 706
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Conover, W.J. 1980. Practical Nonparametric Statistics. New York: John Wiley & SonGoogle Scholar
Crailsheim, K. 1991. Interadult feeding of jelly in honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies. Journal of Comparative Physiology B 161: 55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crailsheim, K. 1992. The flow of jelly within a honey bee colony. Journal of Comparative Physiology B 162: 681–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deplaplane, K.S., Harbo, J.R. 1987. Drone production by young versus old worker honeybees in queenless colonies. Apidologie 18: 115–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engels, W. 1974. Occurrence and significance of vitellogenins in female castes of social hymenoptera. American Zoologist 14: 1229–37Google Scholar
Engels, W., Imperatriz-Fonseca, V.L. 1990. Caste development, reproductive strategies, and control of fertility in honey bees and stingless bees. pp. 167–230in Engels, W. (Ed.), Social Insects: An Evolutionary Approach to Castes and Reproduction. Berlin: Springer-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engels, W., Kaatz, H., Zillikens, A., Simoes, Z.L.P., Trube, A., Braun, R., Dittrich, F. 1990. Honey bee reproduction: vitellogenin and caste-specific regulation of fertility. Advances in Invertebrate Reproduction 5: 495–501Google Scholar
Hepburn, H.R., Magnuson, P., Herbert, L., Whiffler, L.A. 1991. The development of laying workers in field colonies of the Cape honey bee. Journal of Apicultural Research 30: 107–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölldobler, B., Wilson, E.O. 1990. The Ants. Cambridge: Belknap Press, Harvard UniversityCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jay, S.C. 1968. Factors influencing ovary development of worker honeybees of European and African origin. Canadian Journal Zoology 46: 345–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jay, S.C. 1970. The effect of various combinations of immature queen and worker bees on the ovary development of worker honey bees in colonies with and without queens. Canadian Journal of Zoology 48: 169–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jay, S.C. 1972. Ovary development of worker honeybees when separated from worker brood by various methods. Canadian Journal of Zoology 50: 661–64Google Scholar
Jay, S.C., Jay, D.H. 1976. The effect of various types of brood comb on the ovary development of worker honeybees. Canadian Journal of Zoology 54: 1724–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jay, S.C., Jay, D.H. 1993. The effect of kiwifruit (Actinidia deliciosa A Chev) and yellow flowered broom (Cytisus scoparius Link) pollen on the ovary development of worker bees (Apis mellifera L.). Apidologie 24: 557–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jay, S.C., Nelson, E.V. 1973. The effects of laying worker honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) and their brood on the ovary development of other worker honeybees. Canadian Journal of Zoology 51: 629–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korst, PJAM, Velthuis, H.H.W. 1982. The nature of trophallaxis in honeybees. Insectes Sociaux 29: 209–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kropacova, S., Haslbachova, J. 1970. The development of ovaries in worker honeybees in queenright colonies examined before and after swarming. Journal of Apicultural Research 9: 65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kropacova, S., Haslbachova, J. 1971. The influence of queenlessness and of unsealed brood on the development of ovaries in worker honeybees. Journal of Apicultural Research 10: 57–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kubisova, S., Haslbachova, J. 1982. Effects of fractions of larval extracts on the development of ovaries in caged worker honey bees. Acta Entomologica Bohemoslovaca 79: 334–40Google Scholar
Laemmi, U.K. 1970. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature (London) 227: 680–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lass, A., Crailsheim, K. 1996. Influence of age and caging upon protein metabolism, hypopharyngeal glands and trophallactic behavior in the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.). Insectes Sociaux 43: 347–58Google Scholar
Liebig, J., Heinze, J., Hölldobler, B. 1997. Trophallaxis and aggression in Ponerine ant, Ponera coarctata: implications for the evolution of liquid food exchange in the hymenoptera. Ethology 103: 707–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, H., Winston, M.L. 1998. The role of nutrition and temperature in worker honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) ovary development. The Canadian Entomologist 130: 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linsky, Y., Skolnik, J. 1980. Immunochemical and electrophoretic identification of the vitellogenin proteins of the queen (Apis mellifera). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology B 66: 185–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez, T., Wheeler, D.E. 1991. Effect of the queen, brood and worker caste on haemolymph vitellogenin titres in Camponotus festinatus workers. Journal of Insect Physiology 37: 347–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohammedi, A., Paris, A., Crauser, D., Le Conte, Y. 1998. Effect of aliphatic esters on ovary development of queenless bees (Apis mellifera L.). Naturwissenschaften 85: 455–58Google Scholar
Moritz, R.F.A., Hallmen, M. 1986. Trophallaxis of worker honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) of different ages. Insectes Sociaux 33: 26–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, R.E., Erickson, E.H. 1988. Reproduction by worker honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 23: 117–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pain, J. 1961. Sur quelques facteurs alimentaires, accélérateurs du développement des ceufs dans les ovaires des ouvrières d'abeilles (Apis M. L.). Insectes Sociaux 8: 33–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, G.E., Page, R.E., Fondrk, M.K. 1990. Intracolonial behavioral variation in worker oviposition, oophagy, and larval care in queenless honey bee colonies. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 26: 315–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Röseler, P.F., Röseler, I. 1977. Dominance in bumblebees. pp. 232–35 in Proceedings of the International Congress of IUSSI, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Vol. 8Google Scholar
Sakagami, S.F. 1958. The false queen: fourth adjustive response in dequeened honey bee colonies. Behaviour 13: 280–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, J.O., Buchmann, S.L. 1997. Other products of the hive. pp. 927–88 in Graham, J.M. (Ed.), The Hive and the Honey Bee. Hamilton: Dadant & SonsGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G.W., Cochran, W.G. 1989. Statistical Methods. Ames: Iowa State University PressGoogle Scholar
van der Blom, J. 1991. Social regulation of egg-laying by queenless honeybee workers (Apis mellifera L.). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 29: 341–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velthuis, H.H.W. 1970. Ovarian development in Apis mellifera worker bees. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 13: 377–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velthuis, H.H.W. 1976. Egg laying, aggression and dominance in bees. pp. 436–49 in White, D. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Entomology, Washington, D.D.Google Scholar
Velthuis, H.H.W. 1985. The honeybee queen and the social organization of her colony. Fortschritte der Zoologie 31: 343–57Google Scholar
Velthuis, H.H.W., Verheijen, F.J., Gottenbos, A.J. 1965. Laying worker honey bee: similarities to the queen. Nature (London) 207: 1314Google Scholar
Visscher, P.K., Dukas, R. 1995. Honey bee recognize development of nestmates' ovaries. Animal Behavior 49: 542–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, T.C., Williams, K.R. 1993. Royal jelly removal from honey bee (Apis mellifera) queen cells. in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America, DSP 1055Google Scholar
Wheeler, D.E. 1994. Nourishment in ants: patterns in individuals and societies. pp. 245–78 in Hunt, J.H., Nalepa, C.A. (Eds.), Nourishment & Evolution in Insect Societies. Oxford: Westview PressGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, D.E. 1996. The role of nourishment in oogenesis. Annual Review of Entomology 41: 403–31CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willis, L.G., Winston, M.L., Slessor, K.N. 1990. Queen honey bee mandibular pheromone does not affect worker ovary development. The Canadian Entomologist 122: 1093–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, E.O. 1971. The Insect Society. Cambridge: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Winston, M.L. 1987. The Biology of the Honey Bee. Cambridge: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar