KEYSTONE SPECIES ARTICLE REVIEW

1. Advanced Ecology
Article Reviews
FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE POPULATION DECLINE OF
THE KEYSTONE SPECIES—HONEYBEE (Apis mellifera)
Louie Jane T. Eleccion
Master of Science in Education, Biology
elouiejane94@gmail.com
Sainuden (2011) conducted a research about the impact of Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) of
mobile phones on the density of honeybees (Apis millefera) in India. Wu et al., (2011) mentioned sub-
lethal effects of pesticide residues in brood comb on worker honey bee. And Williams et al., (2014)
described infra-population and community dynamics of parasites Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae,
and consequences for honeybee hosts.
Honeybees, according to Albert Einstein, if it will to disappear from earth, humans would be dead
within four years. This statement must have been alarming that it brought experts for so many years to
investigate, monitor and identify factors that affect the decline of honeybees’ population.
Honey bees are social insects that live in colonies, consisting of a single queen (a sexually
developed female) whose sole function is egg laying, hundreds of male drones (sexually developed
males) and 20,000 to 80,000 female worker bees (sexually immature females). Each honey bee colony
also consists of developing eggs, larvae and pupae. The bees cluster loosely over several wax combs,
the cells of which are used to store honey (carbohydrate food) and pollen (protein food) and to rear
young bees to replace old adults (MAAREC, 2017).
Honeybees are pollinators. They are essential contributor to global nutrition and food security.
Fruits, vegetables and nuts which provide key vitamins, minerals, fats and other macronutrients are
particularly dependent on pollinators, in fact, about a third of the world’s food supply benefit from them.
Thus, a decline or even a loss of such population could be very fatal to the environ. Hence, honeybees
are accounted keystone species in the ecosystem, that is, it has a disproportionate role relative to its
size in the community and the removal of such could destabilize the entire system (Crowder, 2014).
There have been studies that highlights the decline of honeybees’ population, especially the
most common, Apis mellifera, in the different parts of the world. And studies have pointed out factors—
physical, chemical and biological—that increased the mortality of honeybees.
A study in India by Sainuden (2011) stressed out a physical factor, affecting honeybee
population, such that mobile phones’ radiation alter the navigational skill of bees, preventing them to
return to their hives. Same way, thriving hives suddenly left with only queens producing only fewer eggs
per day (100) compared to the control (350). Sainuden explained that there is low rate of egg laying in
queens exposed to high voltage transmission lines or exposure of the queen bees to cell phone
radiation. Thus, Exposure of bees from Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) causes Colony Collapse
Disorder (CCD) or the disappearance of worker bees, leaving only the queen in their hives, plenty of
food and few nurses to care for the remaining immature bees. However, the mechanisms of bees
affected by radiation is not clearly understood and effects mentioned became nearly assumptions for
the author did not describe the latter in details. Moreover, the study is fascinating as it utilizes modern
technologies such as mobile phones and correlates mobile phone radiation to the bees’ rummaging
behavior.

2. Here comes another study by Wu et al., (2011) mentioning chemical factors, such that,
pesticides—fluvalinate, coumaphos and coumaphos oxon metabolite—used in apiculture left residues
in brood comb, thereby interfering growth of worker honeybees, delaying larval development and
shortening adult longevity. In effect, it shifts honeybees hive roles and foraging activities. It also reduce
egg laying capabilities of queen bees, thus, decreasing honeybee population. Nonetheless, although it
was mentioned that pesticides affect development, the physiologic effects brought by the
aforementioned chemicals were poorly discussed by the author and focus more on the mortality rates
of bees, leaving imprecise conclusions.
Lastly, in the study of Williams et al., (2014), he described a biological factor, emphasizing that
the myriad explanation of the increased mortality of Apis mellifera population in many regions of the
world is caused by gut parasites, N. apis and N. cerenae, mostly affecting honeybee workers. However,
the biology of N. apis and N. cerenae is not discussed and is poorly understood, hence, the results may
not be very conclusive as it lacks validity of the parasites physiology. Nevertheless, the article is a gate
for further research on parasitic species Nosema and the organisms it will infect besides honeybees.
Literature Cited
Mid-Atlantic Apiculture Research and Extension Consotium, MAAREC (2017). agdev.anr.udel.edu.
Honey Bee Biology Retrieved 21 September 2018, from
https://agdev.anr.udel.edu/maarec/honey-bee-biology/
Crowder, B. (25 September 2014). “The Honey Bee Is The Glue That Holds It All Together”. Retrieved
from https://savannahbee.com/blog/the-honey-bee-is-the-glue-that-holds-it-all-together/
Sainuden, S. (2011). Impact of Mobile Phones on the Density of Honeybees. Journal of Public
Administration and Policy Research 3(4) pp.117-131. Retrieved from
http://www.academicjournals.org/jpapr
Williams Gr, Shutler D, Burgher-Maclellan Kl, Rogers Rel (2014). Infra-Population and -Community
Dynamics of the Parasites Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae, and Consequences for Honey
Bee (Apis mellifera) Hosts. PLoS ONE 9(7): e99465. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099465
Wu Jy, Anelli Cm, Sheppard Ws (2011). Sub-Lethal Effects of Pesticide Residues in Brood Comb on
Worker Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Development and Longevity. PLoS ONE 6(2): e14720.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0014720