, Volume 100, Issue 8, pp 723–728 | Cite as

Genetic diversity affects colony survivorship in commercial honey bee colonies

  • David R. Tarpy
  • Dennis vanEngelsdorp
  • Jeffrey S. Pettis
Original Paper


Honey bee (Apis mellifera) queens mate with unusually high numbers of males (average of approximately 12 drones), although there is much variation among queens. One main consequence of such extreme polyandry is an increased diversity of worker genotypes within a colony, which has been shown empirically to confer significant adaptive advantages that result in higher colony productivity and survival. Moreover, honey bees are the primary insect pollinators used in modern commercial production agriculture, and their populations have been in decline worldwide. Here, we compare the mating frequencies of queens, and therefore, intracolony genetic diversity, in three commercial beekeeping operations to determine how they correlate with various measures of colony health and productivity, particularly the likelihood of queen supersedure and colony survival in functional, intensively managed beehives. We found the average effective paternity frequency (m e ) of this population of honey bee queens to be 13.6 ± 6.76, which was not significantly different between colonies that superseded their queen and those that did not. However, colonies that were less genetically diverse (headed by queens with m e  ≤ 7.0) were 2.86 times more likely to die by the end of the study when compared to colonies that were more genetically diverse (headed by queens with m e  > 7.0). The stark contrast in colony survival based on increased genetic diversity suggests that there are important tangible benefits of increased queen mating number in managed honey bees, although the exact mechanism(s) that govern these benefits have not been fully elucidated.


Genetic diversity Social insects Genotyping Supersedure Colony mortality 



We thank the three participating beekeepers for their assistance in this project as well as Michael Andree, Karen Roccasacca, Linda Wertz, and Nishit Patel and Nathan Rice for help in collecting and processing samples. We would like to thank Joel Caren, John Harman, Deborah Delaney, Winnie Lee, Flora Lee, Mithun Patel, and Matt Mayer for their help in DNA extractions and PCR analyses. This study was supported by the National Research Initiative of the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service, grant number 2007–02281, USDA-ARS as well as by grants from the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and the National Honey Board.


  1. Biesmeijer JC, Roberts SPM et al (2006) Parallel declines in pollinators and insect-pollinated plants in Britain and the Netherlands. Science 313(5785):351–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boomsma JJ, Ratnieks FL (1996) Paternity in eusocial Hymenoptera. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 351:947–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Delaney DA, Keller JJ et al (2011) The physical, insemination, and reproductive quality of honey bee queens (Apis mellifera). Apidologie 42:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Estoup A, Solignac M et al (1994) Precise assessment of the number of patrilines and of genetic relatedness in honeybee colonies. Proc R Soc Lond B 258:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Estoup A, Garnery L et al (1995) Microsatellite variation in honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) populations: hierarchical genetic structure and test of the infinite allele and stepwise mutation models. Genetics 140:679–695PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Fuchs S, Schade V (1994) Lower performance in honeybee colonies of uniform paternity. Apidologie 25(2):155–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gallai N, Salles JM et al (2009) Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecol Econ 68(3):810–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harpur BA, Minaei S et al (2012) Management increases genetic diversity of honey bees via admixture. Mol Ecol 21(18):4414–4421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jones JC, Myerscough MR et al (2004) Honey bee nest thermoregulation: diversity promotes stability. Science 305(5682):402–404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Linksvayer TA, Fondrk MK et al (2009) Honeybee social regulatory networks are shaped by colony-level selection. Am Nat 173(3):E99–E107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mattila HR, Seeley TD (2007) Genetic diversity in honey bee colonies enhances productivity and fitness. Science 317(5836):362–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. National Research Council (2007) Status of pollinators in North America. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  13. Neumann P, Moritz RFA (2000) Testing genetic variance hypotheses for the evolution of polyandry in the honeybee (Apis mellifera L.). Insect Soc 47(3):271–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nielsen R, Tarpy DR et al (2003) Estimating effective paternity number in social insects and the effective number of alleles in a population. Mol Ecol 12(11):3157–3164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Niño EL, Malka O et al (2012) Effects of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) queen insemination volume on worker behavior and physiology. J Insect Physiol 58:1082–1089PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Oldroyd BP (2012) Domestication of honey bees was associated with expansion of genetic diversity. Mol Ecol 21(18):4409–4411PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oldroyd BP, Fewell JH (2007) Genetic diversity promotes homeostasis in insect colonies. Trends Ecol Evol 22(8):408–413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Oldroyd BP, Rinderer TE et al (1992) Effects of intracolonial genetic diversity on honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colony performance. Ann Entomol Soc Am 85:335–343Google Scholar
  19. Page RE Jr (1980) The evolution of multiple mating behavior by honey bee queens (Apis mellifera). Genetics 96(1):263–273PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Palmer KA, Oldroyd BP (2000) Evolution of multiple mating in the genus Apis. Apidologie 31(2):235–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Palmer KA, Oldroyd BP (2003) Evidence for intra-colonial genetic variance in resistance to American foulbrood of honey bees (Apis mellifera): further support for the parasite/pathogen hypothesis for the evolution of polyandry. Naturwissenschaften 90(6):265–268PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Richard F-J, Tarpy DR, Grozinger CM (2007) Effects of Insemination Quantity on Honey Bee Queen Physiology. PLoS ONE 2(10):e980. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000980
  23. Seeley TD, Tarpy DR (2007) Queen promiscuity lowers disease within honeybee colonies. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 274(1606):67–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Solignac M, Vautrin D et al (2003) Five hundred and fifty microsatellite markers for the study of the honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) genome. Mol Ecol Notes 3(2):307–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tarpy DR (2003) Genetic diversity within honeybee colonies prevents severe infections and promotes colony growth. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 270(1510):99–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tarpy DR, Nielsen DI (2002) Sampling error, effective paternity, and estimating the genetic structure of honey bee colonies (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 95(4):513–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tarpy DR, Page RE Jr (2002) Sex determination and the evolution of polyandry in honey bees (Apis mellifera). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52(2):143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tarpy DR, Seeley TD (2006) Lower disease infections in honeybee (Apis mellifera) colonies headed by polyandrous vs. monandrous queens. Naturwissenschaften 93(4):195–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tarpy DR, Nielsen R et al (2004) A scientific note on the revised estimates of effective paternity frequency in Apis. Insect Soc 51(2):203–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tarpy DR, Caren JR et al (2010) Mating frequencies of Africanized honey bees in the south western USA. J Apic Res 49(4):302–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tarpy DR, Keller JJ et al (2012) Assessing the mating “health” of commercial honey bee queens. J Econ Entomol 105(1):20–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. vanEngelsdorp D, Evans JD, Saegerman C, Mullin C, Haubruge E, Nguyen BK, Frazier M, Frazier J, Cox-Foster D, Chen Y, Underwood R, Tarpy DR, Pettis JS (2009) Colony Collapse Disorder: A Descriptive Study. PLoS ONE 4(8):e6481. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006481
  33. vanEngelsdorp D, Lengerich E et al (2013b) Standard methods for Apis mellifera pest and pathogen research. J Apic Res 51: doi: 10.3896/IBRA.
  34. vanEngelsdorp D, Meixner MD (2010) A historical review of managed honey bee populations in Europe and the United States and the factors that may affect them. J Invertebr Pathol 103:S80–S95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. vanEngelsdorp D, Hayes J et al (2008) A survey of honey bee colony losses in the U.S., fall 2007 to spring 2008. PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0004071 Google Scholar
  36. vanEngelsdorp D, Tarpy DR et al (2013) Idiopathic brood disease syndrome and queen events as precursors of colony mortality in migratory beekeeping operations in the Eastern United States. Prev Vet Med 108:225–233PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wang JL (2004) Sibship reconstruction from genetic data with typing errors. Genetics 166(4):1963–1979PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Winston ML (1987) The biology of the honey bee. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • David R. Tarpy
    • 1
  • Dennis vanEngelsdorp
    • 2
  • Jeffrey S. Pettis
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of EntomologyNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Department of EntomologyUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  3. 3.USDA–ARS Bee Research LaboratoryBeltsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations