Small hive beetles survive in honeybee prisons by behavioural mimicry

Behavioral mimicry of eating in mice

Nonconscious behavioral mimicry is prevalent in humans and highly social animals who imitate the behaviors of others without awareness. Previous studies indicated people tended to match their amount of eating to that of their eating companions due to behavioral mimicry, however whether such phenomena were existed in rodents is still unknown. Developing a behavioral paradigm would be helpful to better understand the molecular and circuit mechanisms underlying behavioral mimicry. In this study, we examined behavioral mimicry of eating in C57BL/6J mice which had strong sociality and were widely used as animal model in researches. We set up an eating monitoring platform, and this platform could record the data of mice eating behavior in real time. We further examined the behavioral mimicry of eating in mice, and found that the mice observing eating behavior of food-restricted mice would consume more food than control mice, and visual cue with eating behavior was sufficient to increased food consumption in mice. Our study indicated behavioral mimicry of eating was existed in mice and provided a mouse model for future studies on the mechanism of behavioral mimicry of eating.

Detection of Lotmaria passim, Crithidia mellificae and Replicative Forms of Deformed Wing Virus and Kashmir Bee Virus in the Small Hive Beetle (Aethina tumida)

Knowledge regarding the honey bee pathogens borne by invasive bee pests remains scarce. This investigation aimed to assess the presence in Aethina tumida (small hive beetle, SHB) adults of honey bee pathogens belonging to the following groups: (i) bacteria (Paenibacillus larvae and Melissococcus plutonius), (ii) trypanosomatids (Lotmaria passim and Crithidia mellificae), and (iii) viruses (black queen cell virus, Kashmir bee virus, deformed wing virus, slow paralysis virus, sacbrood virus, Israeli acute paralysis virus, acute bee paralysis virus, chronic bee paralysis virus). Specimens were collected from free-flying colonies in Gainesville (Florida, USA) in summer 2017. The results of the molecular analysis show the presence of L. passim, C. mellificae, and replicative forms of deformed wing virus (DWV) and Kashmir bee virus (KBV). Replicative forms of KBV have not previously been reported. These results support the hypothesis of pathogen spillover between managed honey bees and the SHB, and these dynamics require further investigation.

Prisoners receive food fit for a queen: honeybees feed small hive beetles protein-rich glandular secretions through trophallaxis

The honeybee nest parasite Aethina tumida (small hive beetle) uses behavioural mimicry to induce trophallactic feeding from its honeybee hosts. Small hive beetles are able to induce honeybee workers to share the carbohydrate-rich contents of their crops, but it is not clear whether the beetles are able to induce to workers to feed them the protein-rich hypopharyngeal glandular secretions fed to the queen, larvae and other nest mates. Protein is a limiting macronutrient in an insect's diet, essential for survival, growth and fecundity. Honeybees obtain protein from pollen, which is consumed and digested by nurse bees. They then distribute the protein to the rest of the colony in the form of hypopharyngeal gland secretions. Using ¹⁴C-phenylalanine as a qualitative marker for protein transfer, we show that small hive beetles successfully induce worker bees to feed them the protein-rich secretions of their hypopharyngeal glands during trophallaxis, and that females are more successful than males in inducing the transfer of these protein-rich secretions. Furthermore, behavioural observations demonstrated that female beetles do not preferentially interact with a specific age cohort of bees when soliciting food, but males tend to be more discriminant and avoid the more aggressive and active older bees.

Hit-and-run trophallaxis of small hive beetles

Some parasites of social insects are able to exploit the exchange of food between nestmates via trophallaxis, because they are chemically disguised as nestmates. However, a few parasites succeed in trophallactic solicitation although they are attacked by workers. The underlying mechanisms are not well understood. The small hive beetle (=SHB), Aethina tumida, is such a parasite of honey bee, Apis mellifera, colonies and is able to induce trophallaxis. Here, we investigate whether SHB trophallactic solicitation is innate and affected by sex and experience. We quantified characteristics of the trophallactic solicitation in SHBs from laboratory‐reared individuals that were either bee‐naïve or had 5 days experience. The data clearly show that SHB trophallactic solicitation is innate and further suggest that it can be influenced by both experience and sex. Inexperienced SHB males begged more often than any of the other groups had longer breaks than their experienced counterparts and a longer soliciting duration than both experienced SHB males and females, suggesting that they start rather slowly and gain more from experience. Successful experienced females and males were not significantly different from each other in relation to successful trophallactic interactions, but had a significantly shorter soliciting duration compared to all other groups, except successful inexperienced females. Trophallactic solicitation success, feeding duration and begging duration were not significantly affected by either SHB sex or experience, supporting the notion that these behaviors are important for survival in host colonies. Overall, success seems to be governed by quality rather than quantity of interactions, thereby probably limiting both SHB energy investment and chance of injury (<1%). Trophallactic solicitation by SHBs is a singular example for an alternative strategy to exploit insect societies without requiring chemical disguise. Hit‐and‐run trophallaxis is an attractive test system to get an insight into trophallaxis in the social insects.

Age and aggregation trigger mating behaviour in the small hive beetle, Aethina tumida (Nitidulidae)

This study aimed to investigate the poorly documented reproductive behaviour of the small hive beetle, Aethina tumida (Nitidulidae), a honey bee (Apis mellifera) parasite. We described the mating behaviour in detail and tested the hypothesis that beetle aggregation plays a vital role in mating in this species. Gender preference was examined in the context of age-dependency and possible chemical communication. Beetles started mating at a high frequency 18 days after emergence from the soil but only if they were aggregated (p < 0.001); mating was infrequent when beetles were paired. Males in aggregation also tried to copulate with males and only copulated more frequently with females at 18 days after emergence from soil (p < 0.001) in contrast to newly emerged, 7-day-old and 60-day-old beetles. Males and females spent more time in social contact with the opposite sex (p < 0.01) when they were 18 days old in contrast to 7-day-old beetles. Filter papers which had been in contact with 21-day-old beetles were highly attractive to similar-aged beetles of the opposite sex (p < 0.01). This suggests that chemical substances produced by the beetles themselves play a role in mating. Mating behaviour was characterised by a short pre-copulation courtship and female aggression towards other females and copulating couples. Both behaviours may be indicative of cryptic female choice. Delayed onset of reproductive behaviour is typical of many polygamous species, whilst the indispensability of aggregation for onset of sexual behaviour seems to be a feature unique to A. tumida. Both strategies support mass reproduction in this parasitic species, enabling A. tumida to overcome its honey bee host colony, and are probably triggered by chemotactic cues..

Effect of height and color on the efficiency of pole traps for Aethina tumida (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae)

Olfactory cues released by adult bees, brood, pollen, and honey from a honey bee, Apis mellifera L., colony are the primary stimuli that guide the beetle Aethina tumida Murray (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) to host colonies. To investigate the response of adult A. tumida to visual stimuli, we tested the influence of color and height on trap efficiency. Two pole trap colors (black and white) were evaluated at three heights (46 cm, 1 m, and 3m) from October 2008 to December 2009. A. tumida were trapped in the greatest numbers between 17 April and 15 May 2009. The lowest numbers were captured during the winter and fall. The trapping results showed that both color and trap height significantly influenced capture. The average catch in the white traps (mean +/- SE, 2.47 +/- 0.30) was significantly higher than that of the black traps (1.53 +/- 0.29) probably because white is more reflective than black. Among the heights evaluated, there were more beetles caught when traps were positioned at 46 cm (the same height as the entrance of the hives) with 3.07 +/- 0.51 beetles compared with beetles captured at 1 m (1.88 +/- 0.30) or 3 m (1.06 +/- 0.18) high. Male and female beetles exhibited similar responses to trap color and height. The relationship between the numbers of beetles in colonies and capture rates in traps was very poor and did not provide a basis to evaluate trap efficiency. In addition, because capture rates seemed generally low in relationship to the number of beetles in the apiary, substantial improvements to the trap may be necessary.

Defensive behavior of honey bees: organization, genetics, and comparisons with other bees

One key advantage of eusociality is shared defense of the nest, brood, and stored food; nest defense plays an important role in the biology of eusocial bees. Recent studies on honey bees, Apis mellifera, have focused on the placement of defensive activity in the overall scheme of division of labor, showing that guard bees play a unique and important role in colony defense. Alarm pheromones function in integrating defensive responses; honey bee alarm pheromone is an excellent example of a multicomponent pheromonal blend. The genetic regulation of defensive behavior is now better understood from the mapping of quantitative trait loci (QTLs) associated with variation in defensiveness. Colony defense in other eusocial bees is less well understood, but enough information is available to provide interesting comparisons between A. mellifera and other species of Apis, as well as with allodapine, halictine, bombine, and meliponine bees. These comparative studies illustrate the wide variety of evolutionary solutions to problems in colony defense in the Apoidea.

Prison construction and guarding behaviour by European honeybees is dependent on inmate small hive beetle density

Increasing small hive beetle (Aethina tumida Murray) density changes prison construction and guarding behaviour in European honeybees (Apis mellifera L.). These changes include more guard bees per imprisoned beetle and the construction of more beetle prisons at the higher beetle density. Despite this, the number of beetles per prison (inmate density) did not change. Beetles solicited food more actively at the higher density and at night. In response, guard bees increased their aggressive behaviour towards beetle prisoners but did not feed beetles more at the higher density. Only 5% of all beetles were found among the combs at the low density but this percentage increased five-fold at the higher one. Successful comb infiltration (and thus reproduction) by beetles is a possible explanation for the significant damage beetles cause to European honeybee colonies in the USA.