Respostas eletroantenográficas e comportamentais de abelhas africanizadas, Apis mellifera (Linnaeus), ao feromônio de Nasanov e ao óleo essencial de capim-limão
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12741/ebrasilis.v11i2.769Keywords:
Comportamento, comunicação química, enxame, olfatômetro, eletroantenográfia, Behavior, chemical communication, swarm, olfactometer, electroantennographicAbstract
Resumo. O objetivo do estudo foi avaliar as respostas eletrofisiológicas e comportamentais de abelhas africanizadas, Apis mellifera (Linnaeus), em duas idades, ao feromônio de Nasanov sintético (FNS) e ao óleo essencial de capim-limão (OCL), e verificar a porcentagem de ocupação de enxames em caixas de papelão com iscas de FNS comercial (Swarm Catch Lure®) ou OCL formulado em emulsão de parafina. Foram observadas as respostas eletroantenográficas (mV) e comportamentais de abelhas operárias nutrizes e campeiras (1-5 e 20-30 dias de idade, respectivamente) aos referidos compostos, em olfatômetro de dupla escolha. Os bioensaios de campo foram conduzidos em Eldorado do Sul e Minas do Leão (Brasil, RS), utilizando-se doze caixas com dois caixilhos contendo uma tira de cera alveolada cada e iscadas com OCL ou FNS ou sem tais tratamentos (controle). Não foram observadas diferenças nas respostas eletrofisiológicas e comportamentais entre operárias jovens e velhas submetidas aos voláteis de FNS e OCL. O limiar de resposta para o feromônio foi de 0,1 mg/mL e para o óleo, 10 mg/mL. O feromônio de Nasanov e o óleo de capim-limão desencadearam resposta quimiotáxica positiva nas abelhas. Caixas com FNS atraíram mais enxames que as com OCL e controle.
Electroanthenographic and behavioral responses of Africanized bees, Apis mellifera (Linnaeus), to nasanov pheromone and lemongrass essential oil
Abstract. The study aimed to evaluate and compare the electrophysiological and behavioral responses of africanized honey bees (workers), Apis mellifera (Linnaeus) at different ages, to synthetic Nasanov pheromone (SNP) and to lemongrass essential oil (LGO), as well as, to verify occupancy percentage of swarms in baited cardboard boxes with SNP commercial (Swarm Catch Lure®) or LGO formulated in paraffin emulsion. Tests were conducted to observe electroantennographic responses (mV) and chemotactic behavior of nurse and forage workers bees (1-5 and 20-30 days old, respectively), to those compounds, in two choice olfactometer. The field bioassay was conducted by using twelve cardboard boxes with two bee wax sheet foundation placed in each frame, baited with SNP or LGO or without these treatments (control), in Eldorado do Sul and Minas do Leão (Brazil, RS). The mean number of swarms found in all treatments, were checked weekly. It was not observed electrophysiological and behavioral difference responses between young and old workers subjected to SNP and LGO odors. The threshold to Nasanov synthetic pheromone was 0.1 µg/µL and to lemongrass essential oil, 10 µg/µL. Synthetic Nasanov pheromone and lemon grass oil triggered positive chemotaxis in bees. Cardboard boxes with commercial SNP were more attractive to swarms than those baited with LGO and control treatment.
References
Al-Kahtani, S.N. & K. Bienefeld, 2012. The Nasanov gland pheromone is involved in recruiting honeybee workers for individual larvae to be reared as queens. Journal Insect Behavior, 25: 392-400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-011-9307-3.
Allan, S.A., K.N. Slessor, M.L. Winston & G.G.S. King, 1987. The influence of age and task specialization on the production and perception of honey bee pheromones. Journal Insect Physiologic, 33: 917-922, 1987. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(87)90003-5.
Anfora, G., E. Frasnelli, B. Maccagnani, L.J. Rogers & G. Vallortigara, 2010. Behavioural and electrophysiological lateralization in a social (Apis mellifera) but not in a non-social (Osmia cornuta) species of bee. Behavioural Brain Research, Amsterdam, 206: 236-239, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2009.09.023.
Atterholt, C.A., M.J. Delwiche, R.E. Rice & J.M. Krochta, 1999. Controlled release of insect sex pheromones from paraffin wax and emulsions. Journal of Controlled Release 57: 233
Ayres, M., M. Ayres Junior, D.L. Ayres & A.S. Santos, 2005. BioEstat 5.0: Aplica
Betterbee, 2016. Beekeepers serving beekeepers. Dispon
Harter, W.R., A.D. Grutzmacher, D.E. Nava, R.S. Gon
Hepburn, R. & S.E. Radloff, 2011. Honeybees of Asia. Berlin, Springer, 669 p.
ISCA, 2016. Apresenta informa
Leopoldino, M. N., B.M. Freitas, R.M. Sousa & F.D.G. Paulino, 2002. Avalia
Lindauer, M., 1951. Bienentanze in der Schwarmtraube. Naturwissenschaften, 38: 509-513.
Marlebo-Souza, D. T. & R.H. Nogueira-Couto, 1998. Efeitos de atrativos e repelentes sobre o comportamento da abelha (Apis mellifera, L.). Scientia Agricola, 55: 388-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-90161998000300006.
Marlebo-Souza, D.T., A. Charlier, M.M. Rossi, A.S. Pinto & R.H. Nogueira-Couto, 2003. M
Marlebo-Souza, D.T., R.H. Nogueira-Couto & L.A. Couto, 2004. Honeybee attractants and pollination in sweet orange, Citrus sinensis (L). Osbeck. var. Pera-Rio. Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins Including Tropical Diseases, 10: 144-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-91992004000200004.
Masson, C. & G. Arnold, 1984. Ontogeny, maturation and plasticity of the olfactory system in the workerbee. Journal Insect Physiology, 30: 7-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(84)90104-5.
Masson, C., M.H. Pham-Delegue, C. Fonta, J. Gascuel, G. Arnold, G. Nicolas & M. Kerszberg, 1993. Recent advances in the concept of adaptation to natural odour signals in the honeybee, Apis mellifera L. Apidologie, 24: 169-194, 1993. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/apido:19930302.
Michener, C.D, 1975. The Brazilian bee problem. Annual Review Entomologic, 20: 399-416. DOI: http://10.1146/annurev.en.20.010175.002151.
Moore, S.J., N. Hill, C. Ruiz & M.M. Cameron, 2007. Field evaluation of traditionally used plant-based insect repellents and fumigants against the malaria vector Anopheles darlingi in Riberalta, Bolivian Amazon. Journal of Medical Entomology, 44: 624-630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jmedent/44.4.624.
Pham-Delegue, M.H., J. Trouiller, C.M. Caillaud, B. Roger & C. Masson, 1993. Effect of queen pheromone on worker bees of different ages: behavioural and electrophysiological responses. Apidologie, 24: 267-281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/apido:19930307.
Pickett, J.A., I.H. Willians, A.P. Martin & M.C. Smith, 1980. Nasanov pheromone of the honeybee, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Part I. Chemical characterization. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 6: 425-436. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-008-9505-4.
Renou, M., 2014. Pheromones and General Odor Perception in Insects, p. 23-56 - Mucignat-Caretta C, editor. Neurobiology of Chemical Communication. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press, 612 p.
Seeley, T.D. & S.C. Buhrman, 2001. Nest-site selection in honey bees: how well do swarms implement the
Seeley, T.D., P. Kirk & K.M. Passino, 2006. Group decision making in honeybee swarms. American Scientist, 94: 220-229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1511/2006.3.220.
Thi
Winston, M.L., 1987. The Biology of the Honey Bee. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, 294 p.
Wray, M.K. & T.D. Seeley, 2011. Consistent personality differences in house-huting behavior but not decision speed in swarms of honey bees (Apis mellifera). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 65: 2061-2070. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-011-1215-1.
Wright, G.A., M. Carlton & B.H. Smith, 2009. A Honeybee
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Access is unrestricted and the documentation available on the Creative Commons License (BY) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ).
I declare for proper purposes that the copyright of the submitted text is now licensed in the form of the Creative Commons License, as specified above.
The copyright of the article belongs to the authors