Doctoral Seminar of Dept. of Agril. Entomology, Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli (M.S)

1. 1Dr. B.S.K.K.V., Dapoli

2. DOCTORAL SEMINAR
EFFECT OF ELECTROMAGNETIC
RADIATION ON HONEY BEE
ON
Presented By:
GOLVANKAR GOPAL MARUTI
Ph.D. Scholar
Dept. of Agril. Entomology
Regd. No. ADPD/16/0243
Course No.: ENT – 691
Course Instructor: Dr. A. L. Narangalkar
2

3. 3
Introduction
Case studies
Conclusion
Future thrust
CONTENTS

4. 4
 Honey bees –
• Pollinating agent in agricultural crops (80-90%)
• Make up one-third of our diet
 Products : Honey, wax, porpolis, royal jelly, sting poison etc.
 Reasons for Vanish of Honey bees –
Indiscriminate use of pesticides
Natural enemies
Pathogen
CCD (Colony Collapse Disorder) but not much focus on
effect of electromagnetic radiation on honey bee.
Introduction

5. 5
Radiation from the electromagnetic sources -
 Cell phones and cell phone towers
 Wi-Fi
 TV, AM and FM towers
 Microwave oven, Power lines etc. called EMR.
 EMR causes significantly health hazards on human
beings, animals, plants and environment.
Radiation (EMR) affects declining honey bee population
due to CCD (Colony Collapse Disorder) by 60 per cent at
US West Coast apiaries and 70 per cent along the East
Coast (Cane and Tepedino, 2001).
Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR)

6. 6
 Favre (2011) studied the dramatic impact of active
mobile handsets on the behavior of the bees, namely
by inducing the “worker piping signal” with the help
of audiograms and spectrograms.
CCD documented:
Greece, Italy, Germany, Portugal, Spain, and
Switzerland.
Navigational disorientation, Lower honey
production, and Decreased bee survivorship (Kimmel
et al. 2007).

7. Fig. 1. RF Sources in India.
New Delhi, India Kumar and Kumar (2009)
7
RF SOURCES
In INDIA
FM TOWER
(88-108 MHz)
TV TOWER
(180-220 MHz)
AM TOWER
(540-1600KHz)
Wi-Fi
(2.4-2.5 GHz)
CELL TOWER
(800,900,1800M
Hz)
MOBIL E
PHONES
PT = 10 KW
PT = 40 KW
PT = 100 KW
PT = 10- 100
mW
PT = 20 W
GSM-1800 = 1W
GSM-900 = 2W
503 TOWERS
1044 TOWERS
197 TOWERS
Wi-Fi
HOT SPOTS
4.3 LAKHS
TOWERS
600+
Millions

8. Fig. 2. Electromagnetic spectrum from the Federal Communications
Commission.
Washingtone, United State FCC (1999)

9. 9

10. 10

11. Table 1. Number of research studies (collected from Open
access Bibliographic databases) collected and
collated based on the study subjects and results
(n = 919).
Group of
organisms
Impact
No
Impact
Neutral/
inconclusive
Total
(n)
Impact
(%)
Birds 23 3 4 30 76.66
Bees 6 1 0 7 85.71
Human 459 109 174 742 61.85
Other Animals
(+Wildlife)
85 (+13) 16 (+1) 10 (+7)
111
(+21)
74.24
Plants 7 0 1 8 87.50
Total 593 130 196 919 64.52
Govt. of India MOEF Report (2010)
11

12. 12
Table 2. EMR Effect on Animals.
Effect
Chi Square
value
observed
(p)
Observation
No. of honey combs reduced .000
There is significantly high impact by tower
height
Still births .000
There is significantly high impact by tower
height
Birth deformities .613 No significant impact by tower height
Decline in general health .000
There is significantly high impact by tower
height
Impaired immune system .804 No significant impact by tower height
Reproductive and
developmental problems
.107 No significant impact by tower height
Spontaneous abortions .559 No significant impact by tower height
Anxiety and alarming nature .000
There is significantly high impact by tower
height
Frequent deaths .000
There is significantly high impact by tower
height
(P>0.05)
Mangalore, India Vijay Suchetha et al. (2015)

13. Parameter
Control (Mean ± SD)
(%)
Treated (15 min.
GSM 900 MHz exposure)
(mean ± SD and %)
Flight activity
(No. of workers bees leaving the hive
entrance/min.)
Before exposure
During exposure
35.9 ± 13
37.2 ± 12 (3.62%)
34.1 ± 10 (100%)
22.8 ± 6 (66.86%)
Returning ability
(No. of worker bees returning to the hive/min.)
Before Before exposure
During exposure
39.6 ± 13
41.3 ± 11 (4.29%)
36.4 ± 11 (100%)
28.3 ± 8 (77.74%)
Pollen foraging efficiency
(No. of worker bees returning with pollen
loads/min.)
Before exposure
During exposure
7.0 ± 2
7.2 ± 2 (2.85%)
6.3 ± 2 (100%)
4.6 ± 2 (73.01%)
Zoo. Dept. of Punjab Univ., Chandigarh Sharma and Kumar Neelima (2010)
Table 3. Changes in foraging behaviour of Apis mellifera
exposed to cell phone radiations.

14. Parameter Control (Mean ± SD)
Treated (15 min. GSM 900 MHz
exposure) (mean ± SD)
Bee strength
Start 7 frame 7 frame (100%)
End 9 frame (28.57%) 5 frame (71.42%)
Brood (cm2) Total brood
Start 2033.76 ± 182.6 2866.43 ± 169.0 (100%)
End 1975.44 ± 138.8 (97.13%) 760.19 ± 111.0 ( 26.52%)
Prolificacy (egg laying rate/day)
Start 387.24 545.9 (100%)
End 376.20 (97.14%) 144.8 (26.52%)
Honey stores (cm2) 3200 (100%) 400 (12.5%)
Pollen stores (cm2)
Start 230.5 ± 21.60 218.2 ± 17.48 (100%)
End 246.7 ± 16.94 (7.02%) 154.7 ± 7.30 (70.89%)
14Zoo. Dept. of Punjab Univ., Chandigarh Sharma and Kumar Neelima (2010)
Table 4. Changes in colony status of Apis mellifera exposed to cell phone radiations.

15. Parameters Control ( Mean ± SD)
Treated (10 min.) exposure for 10 days at
900 MHz frequency
( No. of worker bees leaving the hive entrance/ minute)
Before exposure 40.7±15 38.2±12
During exposure 41.5±14 (1.96%) 18.5±13 (48.42%)
After exposure 42.4±14 (4.17%) Nil
Returning ability
Before exposure 42.5±15 39.5±14
During exposure 43.6±14 (2.58%) 15.6±13 (39.49%)
After exposure 44.6±13 (4.94%) Nil
Bee strength
Before exposure 9 Frame 9 Frame
During exposure 9 Frame (100%) 5 Frame (55.55%)
After exposure 9 Frame (100%) 1 Frame (11.11%)
Egg laying rate of queen /day
Before exposure 365.25 355.10
During exposure 362.15 (99.15%) 198.60 (55.92%)
After exposure 350.15 (95.86%) 100.00 (28.16%)
Dept. of Zoo., S. N.College, Kollam Sainudeen Sahib (2011) 15
Table 5. Change in colony status of A. mellifera exposed to mobile phones.

16. Sr.
No.
Parameter
Test Colonies
(20 min. for 20 days)
Control
Colonies
1
Degree of Aggressive Behaviour
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
Calm
Irritated and aggressive
Irritated and aggressive
Calm
Calm
Calm
2
Disturbance
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
Calm
Disturbed and showed
behaviour as just before
swarming
Disturbed and showed
behaviour as just before
swarming
Calm
Calm
Calm
3
No. of outgoing bees/min./colony
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
25
15 (60%)
10 (40%)
28
30 (7.14%)
29 (3.57%)
Continue……..
16Punjab, India Dalio (2015)
Table 6. Change in behaviour of A. mellifera colonies exposed to cell phone
radiations.

17. Sr.
No.
Parameter
Test Colonies
(20 min. for 20 days)
Control Colonies
4
Percentage of returning bees
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
98%
70%
30%
98%
96%
98%
5
Strength of colonies
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
7 frame
5 frame (71.42%)
3 frame (42.85%)
7 frame
7 frame
8 frame (14.28%)
6
Egg laying capacity of queen
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
500 eggs/day
150 eggs/day (30%)
65 eggs/day (13%)
475 eggs/day
500 eggs/day (5.26%)
590 eggs/day (24.21%)
Continue……..
17Punjab, India Dalio (2015)

18. Sr.
No.
Parameter
Test Colonies
(20 min. for 20 days)
Control Colonies
7
Area under Brood cm2
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
1576.5 cm2
1000 cm2 (63.43%)
200 cm2 (12.68%)
1666.5 cm2
1700.5 cm2 (2.04%)
1740 cm2 (4.41%)
8
Area under Honey and nectar
stores cm2
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
1800 cm2
1000 cm2 (55.55%)
200 cm2 (11.11%)
1850 cm2
1900 cm2(2.70%)
1970 cm2 (6.48%)
9
Area under Pollen Stores cm2
Before exposure
During exposure
After exposure
200.5 cm2
150 cm2 (75%)
125.5 cm2 (62.59%)
230 cm2
226.5 cm2 (98.47%)
250 cm2 (8.69%)
Punjab, India Dalio (2015)
18

19. 19
234
214
201 206
217
255
187
173
184 177
166
158
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6
Weight(g)
Frames
Non Exposed Exposed
Fig 3. Average honey comb weight of exposed (1900 MHz
frequency) and non exposed bees colonies on
8/7/2005.
Landau, Germany Harst et al. (2006)
Total wt. 1327 g Total wt. 1045 g

20. 20
Fig 4. Progression of honey comb area (cm2) from 1/7/2005
to 8/7/2005 in non exposed and exposed (1900 MHz
frequency ) bee colonies.
Landau, Germany Harst et al. (2006)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
HoneycombArea(cm2)
Date
Non Exposed Exposed

21. Parameters in
hemolymph (mg/ml)
Treated Exposure in min. (Mean ± SD)
Control (0 min) 10 min. 20 min. 40 min.
Total carbohydrate 1.29±0.02 1.5±0.04 1.73±0.01 1.61±0.02
Glycogen 0.019±0.001 0.047 ±0.001 0.076±0.001 0.028±0.002
Glucose 0.218±0.0005 0.231±0.002 0.277±0.001 0.246±0.002
Total lipid 2.06±0.02 3.03±0.02 4.50±0.035 3.10±0.02
Cholesterol 0.230± 0.001 1.381±0.002 2.565±0.002 1.578±0.002
Total protein content 0.475±0.002 0.525±0.003 0.825±0.0001 0.650±0.0003
21
Zoo. Dept. of Punjab Univ., Chandigarh Kumar Neelima et al. (2010)
Table 7. Biochemical changes in worker honey bees
exposed to cell phone (900 MHz) radiations.

22. 22
Treatments
Number of worker bees leaving the hive per minute at
monthly interval Mean
Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May
T1 (100 m) 28.50 29.25 29.00 28.50 28.50 27.75 28.58
T2 (200 m) 30.00 31.00 32.00 32.25 31.75 28.75 30.96
T3 (300 m) 31.50 31.75 32.25 32.75 31.75 30.25 31.71
T4 (500 m) 32.25 32.50 34.50 35.50 33.00 32.00 33.29
T5 (1000 m) 31.00 32.50 32.50 34.50 32.25 31.75 32.42
S.Ed 0.78 1.01 0.90 0.70
C.D
(P=0.05)
NS NS 1.70 2.21 1.96 1.51
AAU, Jorhat, India Taye et al. (2017)
Table 8. Effect of electromagnetic radiation of cell phone tower on flight
activity of worker bees A. cerana indica of different treatments
placed at varying distance from the tower.

23. 23
Treatments
Number of worker bees returning the hive per minute at
monthly interval Mean
Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May
T1 (100 m) 18.00 19.50 19.25 19.50 21.00 20.75 19.67
T2 (200 m) 18.25 20.00 19.75 20.25 20.75 20.75 19.96
T3 (300 m) 19.75 19.75 20.50 22.75 22.25 23.50 21.42
T4 (500 m) 20.25 21.25 21.50 23.50 23.75 24.50 22.46
T5 (1000 m) 20.00 20.25 21.75 22.25 22.50 23.75 21.75
S.Ed 0.92 0.94 0.83
C.D
(P=0.05)
NS NS NS 2.01 2.04 1.81
AAU, Jorhat, India Taye et al. (2017)
Table 9. Effect of electromagnetic radiation of cell phone tower on
returning ability of worker bees A. cerana indica of different
treatments placed at varying distance from the tower.

24. 24
Treatments
Number of worker bees returning the hive with pollen
load per minute at monthly interval Mean
Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May
T1 (100 m) 6.00 7.75 6.00 7.75 6.00 7.75 6.00
T2 (200 m) 7.00 8.00 7.00 8.00 7.00 8.00 7.00
T3 (300 m) 7.50 8.50 7.50 8.50 7.50 8.50 7.50
T4 (500 m) 7.75 9.25 7.75 9.25 7.75 9.25 7.75
T5 (1000 m) 8.50 9.50 8.50 9.50 8.50 9.50 8.50
AAU, Jorhat, India Taye et al. (2017)
Table 10. Effect of electromagnetic radiation of cell phone tower on pollen
foraging efficacy of worker bees A. cerana indica of different
treatments placed at varying distance from the tower.

25. 25
Summary of articles on ecological effects of RF-EMF on Honeybee (Apis mellifera).
Continue…
Reference Country Life stage
Type of
study
Number of
subjects
Duration
Frequency
[MHz]
Wave/
modulation
Power
density
[mW/cm2]
SAR
[W/kg]
Effect
Effect
size
Westerdahl
and Gary
(1981a)
USA
Adult
foragers
Lab
50(50)
bees
30 min
for 10
days
2450
MW CW
(Mega watt
Centi
Watt)
3-50
0.075-
1.25
No impact of
radiation on
flight,
orientation
and homing
abilities at any
power density
-
Westerdahl and
Gary (1981b) USA Adult Lab
50(50)
bees
30 min
for 10
days
2450 MW CW 3-50
0.075-
1.25
No differences
in longevity
between
exposed and
sham exposed
at any power
density
-
Harst et al.
(2006) Germany Various Field
25 bees
selected
from 4
colonies
n/a 1900
DECT base
station
(mod. 100
Hz)
n/a n/a
Reduced
weight of bees.
Colony
collapse and
abnormalities
in behavior
+ (21%)
IES (CML), Leiden Univ., Netherlands Cucurachi et al. (2013)

26. Continue…
Reference Country Life stage
Type of
study
Number of
subjects
Duration
Frequency
[MHz]
Wave/
modulation
Power
density
[mW/cm2]
SAR
[W/kg]
Effect
Effect
size
Kimmel
et al. (2007)
Germany Various Field
5 at full
exposure,
3 at 50%
exposure
(8)
4 days, 2
months,
45 min
per day
1800
DECT
(mod. 100
Hz)
n/a n/a
Change foraging
flight
+ (14%)
Sharma and
Kumar
(2010)
India Various Field
2 (2)
colonies
Continu
ous for
15 min.
2xday,
2xweek,
from
Feb. to
Apr.
(11-15 h)
900 GSM 0.0086 n/a
Decline in
colony strength
and in the egg
laying rate.
 Decline in the
number of
returning bees
and total
number of
foragers.
Decline in the
storing ability of
honey
+ 62
22
16
Favare
(2011)
Switzerland Various Field 5 hives
12
experim
ents of
40 min
900 GSM n/a
0.271-
0.98
Effect on
behavior worker
piping signal
was observed 25
to 40 min after
the onset of the
mobile phone
+
IES (CML), Leiden Univ., Netherlands Cucurachi et al. (2013) 26

27. 27
Reference Country Life stage
Type of
study
Number of
subjects
Duration
Frequency
[MHz]
Wave/
modulation
Power
density
[mW/cm2]
SAR
[W/kg]
Effect
Effect
size
Kumar
et al. (2011)
India
Adult
worker
Field
10
(20) bees
40 min 900 GSM n/a n/a
Decreased lipid
level in the
organism of
exposed bees.
+
Sahib (2011) India Various Field
3 (3)
colonies
10 days,
10 min
per day
900 GSM n/a n/a
Decreased
returning ability
bees in exposed
hives; reduced
strength;
reduced egg
laying rate of
queen
+ (58%)
IES (CML), Leiden Univ., Netherlands Cucurachi et al. (2013)

28. 28

29. 29
We have to decide “Wealth or Life” ?
 The declining population of Apis mellifera and Apis
cerana indica species is a serious issue.
 The present review clears that the CCD is mainly due to
electro-pollution by increasing mobile phone tower
radiations.
 Electro-pollution has to be taken into consideration with
the other environmental pollutions as well.
 Most of the countries have restricted the use of mobile
phones, but there are no such implementations in India.
The mobile phones usage has to be minimized in order
to conserve the honey bees. 29
Conclusion

30. 30
Public awareness programs should be organized to make
people aware about EMR and their effect on human
being, animals, pollinators, plants, birds, environment
etc.
Limited use of RF source. Sharing towers by different
companies should be encourage.
Scientists has challenge to identify and develop the honey
bee species those sustain in EMR through genetic
engineering.
30
Future thrust

31. 31
ThankYou…