Evaluation of the Shaking Technique for the Economic Management of American Foulbrood Disease of Honey Bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shaking is a nonantibiotic management technique for the bacterial disease American foulbrood (AFB) (Paenibacillus larvae sensu Genersch et al.), in which infected nesting comb is destroyed and the adult honey bees, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae), are transferred onto uncontaminated nesting material. We hypothesized that colonies shaken onto frames of uninfected drawn comb would have similar reductions in AFB symptoms and bacterial spore loads than those shaken onto frames of foundation, but they would attain higher levels of production. We observed that colonies shaken onto drawn comb, or a combination of foundation and drawn comb, exhibited light transitory AFB infections, whereas colonies shaken onto frames containing only foundation failed to exhibit clinical symptoms. Furthermore, concentrations of P. larvae spores in honey and adult worker bees sampled from colonies shaken onto all comb and foundation treatments declined over time and were undetectable in adult bee samples 3 mo after shaking. In contrast, colonies that were reestablished on the original infected comb remained heavily infected resulting in consistently high levels of spores, and eventually, their death. In a subsequent experiment, production of colonies shaken onto foundation was compared with that of colonies established from package (bulk) bees or that of overwintered colonies. Economic analysis proved shaking to be 24% more profitable than using package bees. These results suggest that shaking bees onto frames of foundation in the spring is a feasible option for managing AFB in commercial beekeeping operations where antibiotic use is undesirable or prohibited.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".