Microclimate, Colonization, Colony Strength and Absconding of Apis mellifera adansonii Reared in Hives with Modified Entrances

INTRODUCTION

The issue of poor colony establishment of the African honeybees (Apis mellifera adansonii) is one of the major challenges facing the apicultural sector in Africa (Ononye and Akunne, 2017). This is why humans have been making several inputs to optimize and sustainable the artificial honey hives for optimal production of honey and other hive products (Akunne et al., 2015). However, the type of hives used for rearing honeybees affects the beekeeper’s income. For instance, the types of hives used in traditional beekeeping are the reasons for the low productivity, loss of colonies and poor processing of hive products. This is why top bar hives are now used in modern beekeeping as an improvement over the traditional method (Babarinde et al., 2012).

Maintaining honeybees in a suitable hive is a promising method for trapping them and enhancing their performance (Ononye and Akunne, 2017). Hitherto, farmers find it difficult to select and construct suitable hives for their beekeeping activities (Magnum, 2001). Even though more farmers are interested in rearing honeybees as a way to increase their income (Alamu et al., 2014), their ignorance of the number of hive flight entrances to adopt, inappropriate skill on bee management practices, colony absconding, poor design of modern hives and low honey yield has constrained them (Kumsa and Takele, 2014).

In past several studies and efforts had been made with respect to hive types (Ande et al., 2008b), hive dimension and flight entrance (Babarinde et al., 2012) on colony establishment of African honeybees. Researchers have reported low rates of colonization and high absconding rate (Adedeji and Aiyeloja, 2014) of African honeybees. Based on the paucity of information on the proper hive entrances, we evaluated the effects of different entrance positions on microclimate, colonization, colony strength and absconding of Apis mellifera adansonii in Awka, South-eastern Nigeria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hive treatment and installation

A total of 12 modified top bar hives were constructed and then grouped into four treatments namely: T1, T2, T3 and T4 (see Fig. 1) were constructed for this study. Each hive treatment was replicated three times and labelled as T1_I-III, T2_I-III, T3_I-III and T4_I-III. The T1 had one flight entrance on the hive floor; T2 had one entrance each at the right and left edge of the hive floor; T3 had one flight entrance at the middle of the hive wall and T4 had two flight entrances on the hive wall and right edge of the hive floor. These top bar hives were constructed with hard woods. The timber boards used for the hive construction were piled with spacers in well aerated timber shed to dry for a period of four months (Mbobua, 2013). Each hive consisted of the bottom board (53.34 cm L, 35.56 cm W), main cover board (55.88 cm L, 38.1 cm W), brood chamber (52.07 cm L, 36.83 cm W, 24.9 cm H). The main cover board was made of wood covered with corrugated iron sheets. Each hive comprises of 8 top bars of 2 cm width and hive entrance (s) of 4×1 cm with a bee space of 3 mm between the top bars.

Fig. 1.

Position of honey bee entrances in hive treatments (T1, T2, T3 and T4).

Each of the hives were cleaned, baited and weighed. The hives were baited between 6:00 hrs: 8:00 hrs with 40 g of beeswax which was melted and smeared on the hive entrances, top bars and the main cover boards with the help of a brush. The hives were allowed to dry after which the hives were installed (Ande et al., 2008a). The baited hives were kept on a metallic stand (46 cm high) under tree shades in the month of May, 2016. The hives were randomly placed at a distance of 4 m from each other while hive entrances were faced to the east (Babarinde et al., 2012). During this experiment, the hive’s environment was kept clean before and after colonization (Adedeji et al., 2014).

RESULTS

Temperature inside hive was not significantly different among treatments (p=0.08) (Table 1) though T4 had the highest temperature (30.63±0.69℃), followed by T1 (30.49±1.37℃) while T2 had the least (30.13±1.24℃). However, temperature variation was varied among treatments (p=0.01) (Table 1). Temperature variation was the highest in T3 (5.38℃) followed by T1 (5.34℃) while the lowest (4.10℃) in T2 (Table 1).

Table 1.

Average minimum and maximum hive temperature, temperature variation, ambient temperature and mean hive temperatures

Table 2 revealed that T3 had the highest (77.94±5.13%) relative humidity followed by treatment 2 (77.30±5.98%) while T1 had the least (75.04±4.89%) without significant differences (p=0.12). However, relative humidity was found significantly different among treatments (p=0.03) (Table 2). The highest (24.12%) relative humidity variation was found in T2, followed by T1 (23.16%), and the lowest (18.41%) was in T3.

Table 2.

Average minimum and maximum hive humidity, humidity variation, mean ambient humidity and mean humidity of the four treatments

Table 3 revealed that colonization of the African honeybees was observed in T2, T3 and T4 but no colonization was observed in T1 during the study period. The colonization rate was highest (66.67%) in T3 and T4 followed by T2 (33.33%) while none was recorded in the T1 (0.0%) without statistical differences among treatments (p=0.08) (Table 3). Fig. 2 showed that treatments 3 and 4 were colonized by African honeybees in the study area. There was no significant difference between the colonization rates of the hive treatments (p=0.08). The colony strength of treatment 4, 3, 2, and 1 were excellent, good, poor and zero, respectively Fig. 3 showed the number of honeybees covering the combs formed in T3 and T4.

Table 3.

Effect of hive entrances on the colonization and colony strength of African honeybees

Fig. 2.

Colonized T3 and T4 with showing honeybees at the hive entrance.

Fig. 3.

Comb showing the distribution of honeybees in T3 and T4.

Absconding rate of honey bees was significantly different among treatments (p=0.03) (Fig. 4). Abscond of honeybee was occurred in T2, T3, and T4 during the study period. The absconding rate was the highest (100%) in T2 and T3 while the least (50%) in T4.

Fig. 4.

Effects of hive entrances (T1, T2, T3, and T4) on absconding of African Honeybees.

DISCUSSION

The result of this study revealed that the hive entrances did not significantly affect the hive temperature. Meanwhile the mean hive temperature values (30.13~30.63℃) recorded during this study fall within the range recommended for brood development of the honeybees. Literature revealed that the brood nest needs temperature of 30~36℃ to develop the brood (Abd-Elmawgood et al., 2015). Petz et al. (2004) recommended that the suitable range of internal temperature for maintaining honeybee colony is 33 to 36℃. This temperature when constant is crucial for the normal growth and development of the brood (Abd-Elmawgood et al., 2015).

The result revealed that treatment 3 had the highest relative (77.94±5.13%) humidity followed by treatment 2 (77.30±5.98%) while treatment 1 had the lowest. However, hive entrances did not significantly affect the internal relative humidity of the hives and ranges between 75.04~77.94%. This range is above that recommended by Ellis (2008) who reported that the humidity in the brood nest of a healthy honeybee colony to be between 50 and 60%. The reason for the variation in the relative humidity could be as a result of difference in the climatic conditions of the study areas. However, hive entrances significantly affected both temperature and relative humidity variations of the hives during the study period. This observation is similar to the observation of Mogbo (2014) who reported that housing types influenced micro climates for snail houses.

Colonization of the African honeybees was not significantly affected by hive entrances during the study period. This is in line with the findings of previous studies (Babarinde et al. 2012; Ononye and Akunne, 2017) who reported that colonization is not dependent on the entrance of beehives. However, treatment 4 had excellent colony strength during the study which could be attributed to its population. Previous studies on colony strength showed that hives with high population are usually stronger than those with low population (Getachew et al., 2015).

The absconding rate of African honeybees was higher (100%) in T2 and 3 than T4 (50%). The least absconding rate observed in T4 is an indication that African honeybees do prefer hives with two entrances (one at the right edge of the bottom board and the other at the middle of the hive wall) for better colony establishment. Previous studies revealed that African honeybees have a natural tendency to abandon their hives completely (Buckley et al., 2004; Kamatara, 2007). The result of this study is in contrast with the report of Adedeji et al. (2014) who stated that honeybees in all the hives were remarkably stable and agile in their activities and operations with 0% absconding rate. Kugonza et al. (2009) observed absconding rate of 29.2% in their study which was attributed to post-colonization insect.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that hive entrances do not significantly affect the colonization and absconding of honeybees but significantly affected the microclimate (especially temperature and relative humidity variations) of hives. The colonization rate was highest in T3 and T4 (66.67%) while lowest in T1. T4 resulted in stronger colony strengths. The absconding rate was highest in T2 and treatments with T3 (100%) while least in treatment with one entrance each at the right and left edge of the hive floor (50%). Based on these observations, T4 was recommended since the colony trapped in it had excellent strength and reduced absconding rates. However, T3 could also be adopted by beekeepers but strategies to prevent absconding should be employed.

References

• Abd-Elmawgood, B. H., M. A. Al-Rajhi, and A. O. El-Ashhab, (2015), Effect of the internal size and thermal insulation of the hive on bee colonies, Egypt J. of Agric. Res., 93(1), p185-196.
• Adedeji, G. A., A. A. Aiyeloja, S. L. Larinde, and G. E. Omokhua, (2014), Effect of seasons on colonisation and suitability of Triplochiton scleroxylon K. Schum. Wood for beekeeping in Rivers State, Nigeria, Nat. Sci., 12(8), p117-122.
• Adedeji, G. A., and A. A. Aiyeloja, (2014), Preference and suitability of nigerian grown Gmelina arborea Linn. Roxb. and Vitex doniana sweet woods for beekeeping in Imeko, Nigeria, Int. J. Sci. and Eng. Res., 5(5), p1484-1493.
• Akunne, C. E., (2015), The rudiments of beekeeping, Divine Press and Publishers, Awka, Nigeria, p52.
• Akunne, C. E., A. U. Akpan, and B. U. Ononye, (2016), A checklist of nectariferous and polleniferous plants of african honeybees (Apis mellifera adansonii L.) in Awka, Nigeria, J. Apic., 31(4), p379-387. [https://doi.org/10.17519/apiculture.2016.11.31.4.379]
• Akunne, C. E., T. C. Mogbo, S. C. Ewuim, A. N. Ufele, M. C. Abajue, and K. C. Okafor, (2015), Relationship between ambient and top-bar hive temperature in relation to optimal production of honey in fallow and cassava plots at science village, Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka, Nigeria, J. Int. Acad. Res. Multi., 3(3), p95-100.
• Alamu, O. T., B. O. Omoayena, and A. O. Amao, (2014), Flight activity of african honeybee in response to changes in colony size and weather variables during honey flow period in the Northern Guinea Savanna, Nigeria, Int. J. Api Res. Tech., 3(3), p122-130.
• Ande, A. T., A. A. Oyerinde, and M. N. Jibril, (2008a), Comparative study of the efficacy of six different baiting materials on bee colony performance in traditional and modern hives, Bio Res., 2, p13-16.
• Ande, A. T., A. A. Oyerinde, and M. N. Jibril, (2008b), Comparative study of the influence of hive types on bee colony establishment, Int. J. Agri. Biol., 10, p517-520.
• Aregawi, G., M. Tilahun, S. K. Gangwar, G. Gebresamuel, and G. Tesfay, (2014), Performance of Apis mellifera spp. on honey and beeswax production in different type of beehives in Enda Mekoni Woreda, Tigray Region, Ethiopia, G. J. Biosci. Biotech., 3(3), p324-329.
• Babarinde, S. A., A. F. Odewole, O. Oyegoke, and O. Amao, (2012), Impact of hive dimension and flight entrance on hive colonization, pest infestation and hive weight gain in Apis mellifera adansonii (Hymenoptera: Apidae), Munis. Ent. Zoo., 7(1), p634-641.
• Buckley, A., N. Saville, T. Carroll, and G. Rita, (2004), An introduction to beekeeping, progressive interventions, the enterprise development agency, Retrieved from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd22/5/okwe22086.htm Assessed on 24 April, 2017.
• Ellis, J. D., K. S. Delaplane, R. Hepburn, and P. J. Elzen, (2008), Efficacy of modified hive entrances and a bottom screen device for controlling Aethina tumida (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae) Infestations in Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies, J. Econ. Ento., 96(6), p1647-1652. [https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/96.6.1647]
• Getachew, A., A. Assefa, H. Gizaw, N. Adgaba, D. Assefa, and Z. Tajebe, (2015), Comparative analysis of colony performance and profit from different beehive types in Southwest Ethiopia, G. J. Ani. Sci. Res., 3(178), p178-185.
• IBM Corp. Released, (2011), IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 20.0, Armonk, NY, IBM Corp.
• Kamatara, K. B., (2007), Days to colonization and absconding of different hives in Central Uganda, In Kugonza 2009. Beekeeping practice and theory, Fountain Publishers Ltd., Kampala, Uganda. 106.
• Kugonza, D. R., K. B. Kamatara, D. Nabakabya, and S. Kikonyogo, (2009), Effects of hive type and tree shade on colonization rate and pest prevalence of honeybee (Apis meillifera) colonies in Central, Afr. J. Ani. Biomed. Sci., 4(2), p87-92.
• Kumsa, T., and D. Takele, (2014), Assessment of the effect of seasonal honeybee management on honey production of Ethiopian honeybee (Apis mellifera) in modern beekeeping in Jimma Zone, Res. J. Agri. Env. Mgt., 3(5), p246-254.
• Magnum, W., (2001), Top-bar hives in the USA, Bees Dev. J., 58, p3-5.
• Mbobua, S., (2013), Response to warre experience in Africa, Bees Dev. J., 106, p12.
• Mogbo, T. C., (2014), Comparison of the growth performance of Achatina fulica and Achatina achatina as influenced by housing types, D. Res. J. Agric. & Sci., 2(1), p1-7.
• NSB, (1998), National Statistical Book, National Stational Book for Anambra State, p453.
• NSB, (2010), National Statistical Book, National Stational Book for Anambra State, p23-342.
• Ononye, B. U., and C. E. Akunne, (2017), The effects of time and beehive entrance on colony establishment of african honeybees, Apis mellifera adansonii, J. Apic., 32(1), p21-28. [https://doi.org/10.17519/apiculture.2017.04.32.1.19]
• Onyido, A. E., C. C. Zeibe, N. J. Okonkwo, I. K. Ezugbo-Nwobi, C. M. Egbuche, O. I. Udemezue, and L. C. Ezeanya, (2011), Damage caused by the Bean Bruchid, Callosobruchus maculatus (Fabricius) on different legume seeds on sale in Awka and Onitsha Markets, Anambra State, South Eastern Nigeria, Afr. Res. Rev. B., 5(21), p116-123.
• Petz, M., A. Stabentheiner, and K. Crailsheim, (2004), Respiration of individual honeybee larvae in relation to age and ambient temperature, J. Com. Phys. B., 174, p511-518.