Effects of Nosema ceranae and Lotmaria passim infections on honey bee foraging behaviour and physiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nosema ceranae and Lotmaria passim are two commonly encountered digestive tract parasites of the adult honey bee (Apis mellifera L.). Although these parasites are associated with colony losses, little is known about how they affect individual bee physiology and behaviour at the colony level. Using locally obtained isolates, we investigated the effects of both single and mixed infections of L. passim and N. ceranae on honey bee vitellogenin (Vg) expression and foraging behaviour. At the first instance of foraging, bees inoculated with either parasite had significantly lower Vg expression than uninoculated bees, with bees from the mixed infection treatment having the lowest Vg expression. Bees from the mixed infection treatment also had significantly higher densities of N. ceranae spores and numerically greater densities of L. passim cells per bee compared with bees inoculated with either parasite alone. In addition, bees from the mixed infection treatment had a significantly younger average foraging age compared with uninoculated bees from the same cohort. Although we did not find any effect of treatment on foraging effort, we discovered that bees inoculated with L. passim alone, or together with N. ceranae, had higher returning rates of foragers than control bees or bees inoculated with N. ceranae alone. Our findings indicate that both parasites can alter individual bee physiology, leading to individual changes in behaviour that could alter colony foraging dynamics. These have the potential to result in smaller, less productive colonies, decreased colony survivorship and reduced income for beekeepers.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".