BORN TO “B”: WHAT’S HOT AND NOT AFTER 50+YEARS BEEKEEPING

Dr. Medhat Nasr Apiculturist, St. Albert, Alberta, Canada [email protected] HELLO “I am “Medhat Nasr” THE BEGINNING

0 2011 Geologr .com THE BEGINNING

Marsa fa Arab Al L..o,. KafrTahlah Muqabilah Bahnay .w,,_.s .st.,, Toukh S~n oy~l.h..b .,._JI J.,._.... t.,b Al Ahraz Samadun Al Farauniyyah ,_,,,IA-, AJI )lp\JI GOVERNORATE Shibin Al Subk Al Ahad j Qanatir .1.>\Jl.!L....u ;bt....JI...... , Ashmun __,.I I Qaha Abou Gha!eb ...... Jlcj.>1 Sarawah o,1,.o Tanan Abu Zabal ul.l, ~.. j-11 Al Khankah A~;a MENOFIAGOVERN .ORATE Qalama w, .S.,WI AIQanatirAI GIZA GOVERNORATE Khayriyyah _,1,1...JI Qalyub .,,.,_JI ._,,J., #1-LQ#I-L yUBI"- ooV Birqash _,.,b,, qfiJR(I Cairo (;A\ROGOVER Al Marj International Sphinx Airport ~ I Airport ~,u.. o,,&Wl)lho ...,J,..JI Shubra Al Ain Shams ..,J,..JI Q Ausim Khaymah ~~ Q ,,.....,,1 ~II~ Al Qubbaah Palace ...JI,...

AL REHAB Sheikh v~) Nas r City Zayed City Cairo ~~..l.o CI....J.l.o o_,.;:,WI .,_,1;~1 New ' THESTH Cairo City SETTLEMENT ~- - ! ..:II -:' , Nubian De5er1 The TEARS of RE THE BEGINNING

Beekeeping in Ancient Egypt 2400 B.C.

This reconstruction of 26th Dynasty hieroglyph depicts a 26th Dynasty hieroglyph scene involving beekeepers depicting a beekeeper collecting honey with their hives of bees Traditional Beekeeping in Egypt MY INTRODUCTION TO BEES ABOUT ME AND THE BEES

1977 - M.Sc. Factors Affecting the Mating of Honey Bee 04 Queens. Entomology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, +Cairo University, Giza, Egypt 03 1972 - 1979. Assistant Lecturer, Entomology Department, +Faculty of Agriculture, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt 02 1972 - B. Sc. Entomology and Pesticide Toxicology – Faculty of +Agriculture, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt 01 1960’s - Introduction to bees, traditional beekeeping and insects +world. Mansouria, Giza, Egypt PROGRESS STUDYING HONEY BEE QUEENS IN EGYPT

M W O S V DL E G +5- frame nucs are the most suitable size for mating nucs +Chemical changes in queens during sexual maturity and after mating periods PICTURE OF THE YEAR TIME LINE IN NORTH AMERICA- 1997- Present

◄ti

1979 1990 1994 2000 2002 2019 Present UC Davis, CA 1979-1990

• Semen collection in the air • Queen reproductive physiology “Hormone regulations of vitellogenin production and egg laying”. • Enhancing honey bee pollination of almond and kiwi in California: – Bee cluster size/colony strength – Feeding sugar syrup – Pollen trap – Colony location and dispersal • Breeding bees for pollen hoarding • Bee nutrition: Pollen digestibility by bees UC Davis, CA 1979-1990

• Tracheal mite diagnoses- 1984 University of Guelph: 1990-1994 q Breeding bees for tracheal mite resistance using 2-way breeding system Ø Ontario - NY stock q Assist in introducing and establishing Buckfast bees in Canada q Study tracheal mite biology and behaviour 2-WAY BREEDING PROGRAM FOR HBTM- NY: 1990-1994

Before we talk I have to know if youfor have mites been tested 2-WAY BREEDING PROGRAM FOR HBTM- NY: 1990-1994

1992 • 2000 100 - 50 • • BKPR-1 BKPR-4 V BKPR-7 "' BKPR-2 BKPR-5 0 BKPR-8 • ■ • 40 • 80 ■ BKPR-3 0 BKPR-6 0 BKPR-9 • :;] lla.rll.ll..,,..■ 11■ 111~"'.■ 119'1 ■ 111 11 ■ 1ti'■ lll oill ..,. ■ II ■ '-' • 0 0 • 30 ::J • ■ ..., i 60 - 80 • • . ~ 0 •• :J • • IIDDIIIIIIIIIIIDIDIIIIJlauu■111111..DID: 20 :I • • 40 -. 1::1 •• • .. Mite Prevalence Mite 10 20 l'.J 0 ■ 0 10 20 30 40 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Average Number of Mites / Bee ESTABLISHED THE 1ST TECH- TRANSFER PROGRAM IN ONTARIO BEEKEEPERS' ASSOCIATION ONTARIO IN 1994 About the Tech-Transfer Program The Ontario Beekeepers’ Association (OBA), Technology Transfer Program (TTP) was established in the early 1990’s by Dr. Medhat Nasr. The mandate of the TTP is: - to conduct APPLIED research for Ontario’s beekeeping industry, - to FACILITATE AND SUPPORT development of a honey bee breeding program in Ontario, - to TRANSFER information, teach, and develop beekeepers’ skills. ADDING SELECTION FOR HYGIENIC BEES INTPORDUCTION OF NY STOCK AND RUSSIAN BEES TO ONTARIO TM Abundance Strain N % Removed Mean ± std Strain pupae Russian 5 2.7 ± 0.94 (Mean ± std error) R x O 6 2.4 ±0.66 Russian 75 ± 3 O x R 7 2.3 ± 1.05 Ontario * 1 2.7 ± 0.97 Ontario x Russian 73 ± 2 Buckfast 25 2.2 ± 0.85 Selected Ontario 9 2.0 ± 1.08 Russian * Ontario 71 ± 3 Selected 3 2.0 ± 0.90 Ontario 53 ± 3 Carniolan DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS FOR MITES IN BEES

1) Formic Acid 2) Essential oils: - Apilife-Var -Thymol 3) Oxalic acid

Multiple application single application MiteWipe pad MiteAway pad RUTGERS UNIVERSITY 2000 -2002

Colony Pine Barrens strength evaluation ALBERTA PROVCINCIAL APICULTURIST 2002-2019 HEALTHY INDUSTRY

Sustainable Competitive Growth Capacity

Risk Management ALBERTA PROVCINCIAL APICULTURIST 2002-2019

Research Tech-Transfer

Regulatory IPM: DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE CONTROL OPTIONS FOR VARROA

Thymovar Formic Acid HopGuard Apivar Ø Thymol product Ø Registered Ø Hops product Ø Registered Ø Best applied Ø Treated with from BetaTec Ø 4 strips left between 20C and 2 x 40mL Ø Undergoing in for 6 25C pads/colony registration in weeks Ø Currently being once a week USA registered in for 3 weeks. Ø Four strips left Canada in for 6 weeks Ø Wafers left on for 6 weeks STUDY EFFICACY OF 4 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL METHODS FOR VARROA

Spring Treatment --- • r

3 t'..-19

1 l M 31· 6,.Jun 12. Jun l l STUDY EFFICACY OF 4 ALTERNATIVE CONTROL METHODS FOR VARROA

- ~ -- Control • -- • FonnicAc.id -HopGurd'- ...... lhymova,. Fall Treatment Apivar (87.07 ± 2.69%) Formic acid (78.48 ± 8.47%) Thymovar (88.91 ± 8.47% HopGuard (42.96 ± 6.46%),

0 Control (28.69 ± 7.33%). u 2S :... 20

lS

10 s 0------>Sal> S-Ott 11-0ct 17-0ct DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW APPLICATION METHOD: HOPGUARD2 EFFICACY OF HOPGUARD2 TREATMENTS IN ALBERTA AND SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA, FALL 2013

98 100 97 92 96.95 100 92.3 ~ ;;;;' 80 90 ~ "0 -~ ... 80 ta ,, :::, 60 ... (!) res 70 CL ::::, 0 (!) 60 a. 40 0 50 =0 :I: >, ....0 40 " 20 >, :l I.) 30 IE res w I.) 20 5: 0 w 10 Contro l (No HopG uard 11- HopGuard 11- HopGuar d 11- Treatment) one two th ree 0 application applications applications HopGuard II- one HopGuard II- two HopGuard - three applicat ion appli catio ns-10 days applications-5 days

Saskatchewan Alberta EFFICACY OF HOPGUARD2 TREATMENTS IN ALBERTA, CANADA, SPRING 2014

Hopping mad at HopGuard 100 90 I put off writing this post for a very long 80 time—since November, actually. 70 60 52 -so-~ 49 Although I often display irritation in my u>- 44 ~ 40 posts, I try damn hard to remain civil. But :f the makers of HopGuard have pushed my w 30 20 17 civility to the limit. 10 0 ., ~,q ~q R., R., i::,., ,:.., t::-" ~ ,.;:: ,.,:: ~o ,to~ ~e I had to cool down for months before I '?., ...~ ½., ~ § .... '\,., ""' ~,!J ~<, ~e ,,,qI Rq Rq could write something that wouldn’t get "-"' "-"' ~o .,+"- R+ ,.+ ~,q ....,'-,:: '-~q me banned from the Internet. '?,. ...½.,. Oxalic acid applications Spraying, Trickling, sublimation

30 EFFICACY OF OXALIC ACID SUBLIMATION

Before: 40 M=19.08±9.00 Before Treatment 35 -I- --- I ■□ After: After Treatment 30 M=1.37±1.42 25 Efficacy: 20 M=93.8±7.4 15 10

Varroa Infestation (%) 5 0 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Hive Number

31 SCREENING MITICIDES WITH DIFFERENT MODES OF ACTIONS

Evaluation of a potential miticide toxicity (LC50 and LD50) to Varroa mites and bees

a l 100 a e~ :i: w 80 ! -0'" :.; ; 60 u -0 ~ 40 ! 0 w VI +I 20 C ..'" ~ 0 Candidate2 Candidate 1 Candidate3 PICTURE OF THE YEAR CCD: WHAT IS CCD?

CCD

Healthy

HONEY BEE HEALTH STATUS IN FALL 2007

PROVINCIAL RESULTS - 2007 Beekeeper # of samples Mean Nosema infection Mean HBTM Mean Varroa checked per bee (millions) % % 1714 samples from 40 1 12 0 0.8 1.39 2 30 3.1 2.7 6.1 3 12 1.4 0 1.59 operations: 4 20 58.04 0 0.13 5 24 3.8 0.42 0.03 - 4- 47 samples /operation (300 - 6 30 0.2 0 0.9 7 8 0.5 10 0.1 400 bees/hive) for varroa 8 24 0.8 0.3 10.8 9 30 11.9 0.9 6.7 - 4-47 samples / operation for 10 20 0.2 0 0.52 nosema (100 bees/hive) 11 4 11.35 0 0.27 12 24 3.1 6.7 6.6 13 12 0.5 13.3 0.03 14 30 0 4.5 12.3 15 30 2.5 1.1 3.5 16 30 0 17.3 2.9 17 30 0.9 2.1 10 18 12 2.9 2.9 0.16 19 30 0 9.9 2.4 20 12 0 5.8 0.19 21 30 3.9 0.4 17.7 c=J 60% Varroa mite infestation ≥1% (24/40) 22 30 0.8 5.8 2.6 23 24 2.6 2.9 6.8 c=J 24 24 2.9 4 5.7 47.5% Nosema infestation ≥1mil (19/40) 25 24 3.2 0 0.2 26 8 6.4 2.5 24.21 30% Nosema and varroa ≥ ETT (12/40) 27 24 4.7 2.1 0.73 c=J 28 16 8.6 0 0.23 29 24 49.2 13.8 1.46 1111 15% HB tracheal mite ≥ 10% (6/40) 30 24 1.2 0 4.2 31 30 2 13.7 8.1 32 12 0.6 17 0 c=J 17.5% HEALTHY COLONIES (7/40) 33 18 NA 1.39 20.73 34 30 0.2 NA 2.6 35 20 0 0 5.6 36 24 0 2.2 5.5 37 4 NA 0 5.21 38 14 0 2.5 0.1 39 6 10.5 0 15.1 40 47 0.01 NA 0.8 HONEY BEE HEALTH STATUS IN FALL 2010

Fall Inspection Results 2009 Fall Inspection Results 2009

Nosema Prevalnce Varroa Nosema Prevalnce Varroa 10.3 Beekeeper Mil/ Bee Nosema % average CJ 39% Varroa mite infestation ≥ 1% Beekeeper Mil/ Bee Nosema % average 34 0.00 8 1.77 Varroa Infestation % 18 Varroa mite infestation ≥1-3 35 0.09 17 9.53 8.8 CJ 1 0.06 25 0.31 36 0.00 17 2.31 2 0.02 25 4.63 37 0.52 75 0.16 35.3 Nosema 21 % Varroa mite infestation ≥ 3% 3 0.00 0 11.79 38 0.15 33 0.08 CJ 4 0.01 42 0.60 39 0.02 50 0.58 40 0.01 25 1.50 5 0.00 0 1.19 Varroa and 41 0.48 33 1.91 1.5 % Nosema infestation 0.9 mil 6 0.01 16 1.78 CJ 42 0.11 50 0.23 Nosema 7 0.00 0 0.48 17.6 43 0.00 8 0.09 HBTM 0% Nosema and Varroa ≥ ETT 8 0.00 0 1.61 44 0.01 33 2.30 9 0.08 20 0.11 45 0.01 25 0.07 10 0.12 25 0.28 46 0.02 17 0.17 47 0.13 25 8.35 Healthy 11 0.16 67 0.14 CJ 51% HEALTHY COLONIES 48 0.01 25 3.38 12 0.10 50 0.23 49 0.21 33 0.72 13 0.10 58 1.97 50 0.00 8 5.88 27.9 14 0.06 25 0.2 51 0.04 27 6.89 5% Varroa mite infestation 15 0.15 17 1.09 52 0.03 17 0.17 Fall 2007 and Apivar Application 16 0.06 33 0.44 53 0.08 17 2.99 17 0.01 17 3.18 54 0.05 50 0.83 I 55 0.00 8 3.70 18 0.26 50 0.14 56 0.01 25 4.87 19 0.01 33 0.02 57 0.01 17 0.57 4% 20 0.39 33 0.00 58 0.00 0 1.77 16% 21 0.07 8 0.29 59 0.00 8 0.18 22 0.02 25 2.34 60 0.00 0 0.07 23 0.02 8 1.19 61 0.01 8 0.00 62 0.00 0 0.56 24 0.00 25 0.36 63 0.01 25 9.89 25 0.08 16 0.58 64 0.05 16 0.10 80% 26 0.90 25 0.17 65 0.01 17 13.74 27 0.07 17 7.47 66 0.01 16 1.19 28 0.00 8 0.40 67 0.01 16 0.2 Spring 2010 29 0.14 25 0.18 68 0.02 42 0.00 69 0.00 0 7.16 30 0.55 66 NS 70 0.00 8 0.95 31 0.19 75 6.61 71 0.00 16 0.36 32 0.57 50 0.18 72 0.00 0 0.62 33 0.00 8 0.70 Average Totals 0.09 22.91 2.20

CANOLA POLLINTION IN ALBERTA CA,Eh

USA REGULATORY ACTIVITIES

C Administration of the Bee Act and Regulations C Pest and disease surveillance: Blueberry and bee pollination, SHB, AFB, etc. C Annual winter losses and management survey C Drug free honey (Food Safety Program) C Bee Biosecurity Program C New market opportunity Bee Health App

Keep bee health abuzz with the new Finding honey bee health Bee Health App information has never been easier. from Alberta Agriculture and Forestry Get bee disease diagnosis and treatment informa tion wi th the tap of an app.

Download the free Bee Health app today:

www agr1culture alberta ca/beeapp

Contact info: Bee@go v.ab.ca Phone: 310-FARM

Fund ing for this App provkied by Growing Forward 2 a federa l-provincial-terntorial initiative and Alberta Crop Industry Fund Beekeeping Industry in Alberta Number of Bee Colonle5 and Beekeeper5(1924 to 2017)

3 50,000 12000 Beekeepers - Bee Colonies 300,000 10000

.,.250 ,000 CII 8000 ~ 41,1 ·c: Q. ~ 200,000 41,1 u 41,1 Cl) 6000 ~ Cit ~ 150,000 Cl) 0 0 z 4000 z 100,000

2000 50,000

0 ll~tu ,111111111111 1111m11111111111111111,,,11111110

Year