Use of Relay Method for Enhancing Comb Construction by Apis cerana cerana Utilizing Apis mellifera ligustica

Abstract

Italian honey bees (IHBs, Apis mellifera ligustica) exhibit superior comb-building abilities compared with Chinese honey bees (CHBs, Apis cerana cerana), which often fail to fully utilize wax foundations, resulting in incomplete comb structures. The present study aimed to accelerate comb construction in CHB colonies using IHBs. In the experiment, IHB colonies, each with approximately 42,000 adult workers, required over four hours to construct a semi-drawn comb on CHB wax foundations. These semi-drawn combs were then transferred to experimental CHB colonies, where they were left to complete the comb-building process for an additional 24 h (4 + 24 h relay). In contrast, control CHB colonies were allowed to build combs on fresh CHB wax foundations for 28 h. The results showed that the combs built by CHBs in 28 h, those built by IHBs in 4 h, and the 4 + 24 h relay combs all shared a foundation size of 41.7 cm × 19.7 cm, with average thicknesses of 10.40 mm, 5.60 mm, and 12.20 mm, respectively. The average percentage of cells built in the 4 + 24 h relay combs was significantly higher than that in the 28 h combs. Additionally, cells in the relay combs were significantly larger and deeper than those in the combs built solely by CHBs. Although these findings prove that utilizing IHB colonies to form a base structure can enhance the efficiency of comb construction in CHB colonies, further research is needed to confirm the effects of 4 + 24 h operation on brood rearing and worker bee size.

Keywords: Apis cerana cerana; Apis mellifera ligustica; comb cell; relay construct of comb.

Figure 1

Cell diameters in different directions: (A) diameter d1 in the 0° direction, d2 in the 60° direction, and d3 in the 120° direction; (B) cell depth, OP: the straight-line distance from point O to point P.

Figure 2

A semi-drawn comb constructed by an IHB colony using a movable frame with a Chinese worker bee comb foundation; the build time was four hours.

Figure 3

A semi-drawn comb constructed by an IHB colony using a movable frame with a Chinese worker bee comb foundation; the build time was less than four hours.

Figure 4

A semi-drawn comb constructed by an IHB colony using a movable frame with a Chinese worker bee comb foundation; the build time was more than four hours.

Figure 5

Beeswax particles on a semi-drawn comb.

Figure 6

A 4 + 24 h comb constructed by an IHB colony in relay with a CHB colony. The red rectangular frame highlights the gaps that were filled by the bees.

Figure 7

A finished comb constructed by an IHB colony in relay with a CHB colony; the construction time of the IHB colony was more than 4 h, while the construction time of the CHB colony was 24 h.

Figure 8

A 28 h comb constructed by a CHB colony using a movable frame with a Chinese worker bee comb foundation. The red rectangular frame highlights the gaps that were filled by the bees.

Figure 9

Comb parameters. (A) Comb length, (B) comb width, (C) comb thickness, (D) total number of cells on both sides of the comb, (E) percentage of cells built on the comb foundation, and (F) comparison of the percentage of cells built between 28 h combs and 4 + 24 h combs. The asterisk indicates significant differences (***, p < 0.001).

Figure 10

Cell parameters. (A) Comparison of diameters in different cell directions of a 28 h comb constructed by a CHB colony; (B) comparison of diameters in different cell directions of a 4 + 24 h comb constructed by an IHB colony in relay with a CHB colony; (C) comparison of the average cell diameter of a 28 h comb constructed by CHB colonies with the average cell diameter of 4 + 24 h comb constructed by IHB and CHB colonies in relay; (D) comparison of the cell depth of 28 h comb constructed by CHB colonies with that of 4 + 24 h relay combs constructed by IHB and CHB colonies. The asterisk indicates significant differences (****, p < 0.0001), while “ns” indicates not-significant differences (p > 0.05).