Will Engineering a "Flexi-bee" Save Colonies from Collapse?
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 08.17.08
While there remains some discussion over the exact cause of the mysterious epidemic -- known as "colony collapse disorder" (CCD) -- that has been decimating the U.S. honeybee population, most entomologists now believe the varroa mite, a parasite that makes bees more susceptible to disease, is implicated.
Because of its relative isolation, Australia has so far been spared CCD's reach. That could all change very soon, however, according to scientists from the country's top research institution.
Image from toholio
A "flexi-bee" to the rescue?
Predicting that Australia would likely succumb to the destructive parasite any day now, Max Whitten, the former head of entomology at CSIRO, said his country should engineer a bee to be resistant to the mite to protect its honey and pollination industries, reports ABC's Anna Saleh. This so-called "flexi-bee" would have a gene for resistance that could be turned on and off by a chemical used by the beekeepers.
To minimize the risk of the flexi-bee escaping into the wild and spreading the gene to other populations, it would be engineered such that the bee would only be resistant to the varroa inside the hive managed with the chemical. Whole hives of varroa-resistant honeybees could be grown in as little as three weeks if a new queen bee received the gene.
Since some bee species are already known to be naturally resistant to the mite, scientists could identify the gene responsible for this resistance and transfer it to other honeybees -- a task that will be made much easier by the fact that the entire honeybee genome has been sequenced. While it may sound straightforward enough, putting this plan in action won't be so easy.
Not so fast, say some
A number of factors, least of which is Whitten's hypothesis that the bee's resistance relies on a single gene, could complicate the scheme. Controlling who the queen bees mate with is no simple task, and using artificial insemination techniques is extremely expensive. Furthermore, to ensure that the resistance trait gets passed on, the gene would have to be dominant (if not, the resistance won't be expressed in the queen bee's offspring).
An alternative, knock-out scheme
Ben Oldroyd of the University of Sydney thinks a better idea might be to target the gene responsible for emitting the chemical signal needed by varroa mite to lay their eggs on the bees. Assuming a single gene controls the signal, knocking it out should be enough to prevent the mite from laying their eggs on the bees, he says.
As Warren wrote about last month, the consequences of inaction could be extremely detrimental for the Australian economy:
"The apiarists who managed the 673,000 registered hives in Australia, producing over 30,000 tonnes of honey annually, worth about $50 million AUD, have had keen eyes on a parliamentary committee who recently handed down their report on the bee industry.
The committee’s chair Dick Adams said, “It's a little bit too simple to say without bees there's no food but there's a lot less food if you don't have a good bee population.”
The spokesman for the Australian Honey Bee Industry Council (AHBIC) released a media statement saying, “The first year of the introduction of varroa destructor mite into Australia could cost the Australian economy as much as $1.7 billion, as a result of the loss of pollination services and the flow on costs to the horticultural and plant industries”"
Via ::ABC Science: 'Flexi-bee' could pre-empt varroa mite (news website)
More about colony collapse disorder (CCD) and honeybees
::Haagen Dazs' Help The Honeybees: Bee Boy Mayhem
::The Latest on the Disappearing Honeybee Mystery
::Will Mankind Be Extinct In Four Years If We Lose Our Honeybees?
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Michigan Teens Build Butterfly Houses and Plant 26,000 Native Plants through the Zaagkii Wings and Seeds Project
- Stunning Photographs Illustrate Sensitive Dependence Between Children + Planet
- Does Green Greeting Cards Mean E-Greeting Cards?
- 20% Renewable Energy for South Australia, 10 Years Ahead of Schedule
Roundup kills honeybees. How about a switch to organic farming?
Genetically engineering honeybees- gee, what could possibly go wrong?
As bad as CCD might be, it seems the unintended consequences of tampering with bee genetics could be far worse. Would it not be a more prudent idea to switch commercial colonies over to the bees that have natural varroa resistance?
Sounds like "Roundup Ready" meets bee-keeping if you ask me.
Once you let them engineer the genes and begin the reliance on a chemical to control it, you are basically giving a corporation the ability to steer the future of Honey. Realize that these companies base all their decisions on their bottom line, and perpetuating the need for their product.
Maybe I'm paranoid, but I don't think any company should be in the position to profit from or control something as central to life on Earth as pollination.
I'm starting to understand that the worse our environment gets, the worse people's ideas will be to fix it.
Crystal - totally right on.
Do we need Monsanto type control over bees now?
I would err on the side of utilizing the bees that are already resilient and integrate different colonies. Always thought that Darwin was on point when he declared genetic diversity as core part of a species survival and resilience.
This has got to be the most barmy and dangerous idea for GM yet. Monsanto's Roundup and possibly GM crops weaken bees immune systems - so the solution is for Monsanto to engineer bees.
Can we please stop letting the lunatics run the asylum?
While I'm not against genetic alteration altogether (it helped one of my relatives hear for the first time and saved the life of a close friend) I've gotta say, there isn't a very good track record when messing with bees.
Last time we tried something like this, we ended up with KILLER BEES. We INVENTED them by crossbreeding, something we should have been MUCH more careful about. I'd be willing to let small time research try to find a way around this, but for gods sake, make sure it's contained this time.
Anyone tried true organic beekeeping? Most of you don't know that virtually all bees are treated with a variety of chemicals to treat a variety of maladies. True organic honey is extremely rare, and organic bees don't get CCD.
Am I the only one with images of horror movies come to life after reading this?
COME ON people!
Any chance you can throw a gene in there that tells the gm bees to attack their inventors (and their inventors only)?
WiredForStereo is right. Organic bees are already resistant to CCD. It shouldn't really be surprising either when you think about it. Bees have evolved over millions of years to where they are now. It is likely that bees have dealt with these mites in the past and have adapted and evolved to be resistant to them. Here we come along forcing certain requirements onto them and then wondering why they're getting sick.
It's quite likely that genetic engineering will not outdo millions of years of evolution. And we may actually be in the process of creating a larger problem. Who knows?
And really this is just another result of overpopulation and overconsumption. Quite the difficult problem indeed.
Horrifying, these ideas. Leave the bees alone. Why not identify why this "varroa" mite is suddenly proliferating? What did we humans (most likely) do to help it get out of balance? And let's find natural ways to keep the bees healthy and strong instead of scientifically manipulating them. Just, so disgusting - is this the best humanity can do? Keep hoping that scientists will genetically engineer everything now thru each environmental disaster? AGH. Irresponsible (as usual.)
Some beekeepers suggest that it isn't necessary to use 'organic bees'. You just have to let the bees choose the size of their comb cells. Evidently most colonies are forced to build larger comb cells through the use of 'foundation' with pre-printed cells that the bees build up. The king-sized cells results in king-sized bees, but also means that mites are more likely to get a foothold.
By allowing bees to build smaller cells they are better able to avoid mite problems.
I'm not a beekeeper yet, so I can't say how much merit there is to this idea, but it seems like a better idea than GM bees that require you to keep buying chemicals from some corporation.
I am a beekeeper, and organic beekeeping encompasses all the things you are talking about, however, organic beekeeping relies in large part on survivor genetics, not just smaller cells though small cells are part of the picture.
The funny thing is that current beekeeping practices already require you to buy a wide variety of chemicals to keep your bees alive and "healthy." This nonsense is just more of the same. Organic beekeepers like myself have made the choice to let dying colonies die without perpetuating weak genetics by propping up dying colonies with chemicals.
After some time, what remains are survivors, bees naturally resistant to disease and mites, and chemical free hives and honey are better for it.