[HN Gopher] Scientists identify culprit behind biggest-ever U.S....
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Scientists identify culprit behind biggest-ever U.S. honey bee die-
       off
        
       Author : pseudolus
       Score  : 160 points
       Date   : 2025-07-01 10:35 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.science.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.science.org)
        
       | sylvainkalache wrote:
       | I live in Florida. Both my neighbor and I lost our hive q few
       | weeks apart. It happened very quickly and what the article
       | mentioned is most likely what they got. We knew about the sharp
       | die-off across the U.S. so decided to hold off bee keeping until
       | it is figured out.
        
         | mistrial9 wrote:
         | there is a survey slideshow and a raw research paper linked in
         | that article. these colony numbers are beyond awful.
        
       | mitchbob wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/tGxRx
        
         | aspenmayer wrote:
         | https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.05.28.656706v1 (
         | https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.05.28.656706 )
         | 
         | > Viruses and vectors tied to honey bee colony losses
         | 
         | > Zachary S. Lamas, Frank Rinkevich, Andrew Garavito, Allison
         | Shaulis, Dawn Boncristiani, Elizabeth Hill, Yan Ping Chen, Jay
         | D. Evans
        
       | AdmiralAsshat wrote:
       | > U.S. beekeepers had a disastrous winter. Between June 2024 and
       | January 2025, a full 62% of commercial honey bee colonies in the
       | United States died, according to an extensive survey. It was the
       | largest die-off on record, coming on the heels of a 55% die-off
       | the previous winter.
       | 
       | Christ, do we even have any bees left at this point?
        
         | milliams wrote:
         | It would need to be put in the context of what a normal annual
         | die-off is. I expect it's not 0%, and perhaps it's normal for
         | keepers to need to re-establish some fraction of their hives
         | each year.
         | 
         | Of course, 50-60% sounds alarmingly high, but I don't know
         | enough to be sure.
         | 
         | Actually, I just followed the link in the article (good job
         | detailing their sources!) and it looks like 40% is pretty
         | typical, but with large error bars. 62% is definitely high, but
         | not as earth shattering as it first appears.
        
         | RangerScience wrote:
         | AFAIK, this is only _commercial_ bees, which have a pile of
         | stressors (such as being shipped places frequently). Non-
         | commercial bees are doing  "better" (I remember hearing that
         | they're doing fine, but poking around now that doesn't seem to
         | be the case).
         | 
         | The other issue is crop pollination, which AFAIK has heavy
         | reliance on commercial bees.
        
           | maxerickson wrote:
           | Most staples wind pollinate (corn, wheat, etc). Bees are
           | needed for a lot of fruit and nut production though.
        
           | tptacek wrote:
           | To a first approximation ~all honeybees in North America are
           | commercial honeybees; the way it was put on EconTalk a couple
           | years back is, "if you see a honeybee in your yard, somebody
           | owns it."
        
         | humblebeekeeper wrote:
         | In the US, honeybees aren't native, and the bees we really need
         | to protect are the native bees.
         | 
         | That said, most beekeepers expect to lose 30-50% of their hives
         | every year. But most honeybee hives can be split into two hives
         | every year. So if you can double (or even potentially triple,
         | quadruple) each hive every year, a loss of 50% isn't
         | catastrophic.
        
           | mistrial9 wrote:
           | you mean after the modern practice of truck shipping hives
           | was commercially accepted, then "most beekeepers" expect that
           | ??
        
             | humblebeekeeper wrote:
             | Prior to the langstroth hive, European beekeepers destroyed
             | the hive entirely to harvest the honey. Mites and disease
             | were less prevalent and insects were FAR less stressed by
             | the environment.
             | 
             | The Langstroth hive was invented in the 1850s, and the
             | first migratory commercial hives started in the US 50 years
             | later.
             | 
             | In the 1940s we saw a steady decline in hives, but the
             | hives _really_ started seeing massive die offs in the
             | 2000s.
             | 
             | So no, the timelines are not really due to shipping
             | commercial hives. There's other, stronger factors at play.
        
         | taeric wrote:
         | Framing of this fact is one you need to be careful with.
         | Consider that your skin is replaced every 28 days. Stated
         | differently, you completely lose all of your skin every month
         | or so. Of course, it is replaced as rapidly, but if you only
         | discuss the die off...
         | 
         | That is, you almost certainly need to know a lot more facts
         | about bees before knowing the die off rate is useful.
        
       | westurner wrote:
       | How to plant a pollinator garden?
       | 
       | How to counter parasitic mites? Aren't there new LLM applications
       | for chemicals discovery?
       | 
       | > _According to a preprint posted to the bioRxiv server this
       | month, nearly all the dead colonies tested positive for bee
       | viruses spread by parasitic mites. Alarmingly, every single one
       | of the mites the researchers screened was resistant to amitraz,
       | the only viable mite-specific pesticide -- or miticide -- of its
       | kind left in humans' arsenal_
       | 
       | "Viruses and vectors tied to honey bee colony losses" (2025)
       | https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.05.28.656706v1....
        
         | GuinansEyebrows wrote:
         | > How to counter parasitic mites? Aren't there new LLM
         | applications for chemicals discovery?
         | 
         | hard to imagine that additional hubris will solve problems
         | created by hubris
        
           | westurner wrote:
           | "Chemical knowledge and reasoning of large language models
           | vs. chemist expertise" (2025)
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44275471
        
             | westurner wrote:
             | From (2025)
             | https://www.statnews.com/pharmalot/2025/04/11/fda-animals-
             | do... :
             | 
             | > _[FDA] will encourage researchers to use computer
             | modeling and artificial intelligence to predict how a drug
             | will perform, as well as organs-on-a-chip, which are
             | miniaturized devices that mimic organs and tissues. And to
             | determine effectiveness, the FDA will begin using existing,
             | real-world safety data from other countries where a drug
             | has already been studied in humans._
             | 
             | Also from 2025: "FDA to Use A.I. In Drug Approvals to
             | 'Radically Increase Efficiency'"
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44252183
             | 
             | (Edit)
             | 
             | From FDA > "Artificial Intelligence for Drug Development"
             | https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/center-drug-evaluation-and-
             | res... :
             | 
             | > _FDA published a draft guidance in 2025 titled,
             | "Considerations for the Use of Artificial Intelligence to
             | Support Regulatory Decision Making for Drug and Biological
             | Products."_
        
         | franktankbank wrote:
         | Native pollinators don't give a shit about mites. Don't spray
         | herbicide and nature will do the rest.
        
           | westurner wrote:
           | What in nature eats the mites that are killing the bees?
        
             | franktankbank wrote:
             | Nothing needs to eat them, they just need to be manageable
             | for the bee pops. The way that native colonies work, it
             | just doesn't matter. The colonies size is essentially never
             | greater than a few and often don't form colonies at all, so
             | mites don't have really any good transmission vector.
        
       | oezi wrote:
       | There are some technological ideas to help bees be healthier such
       | as special bee hives which have more natural topology and help
       | the bees spend less energy on cooling/heating the hive. Example
       | for a cylindrical hive: https://www.hiive.eu/en/
        
         | tantalor wrote:
         | We could install HVAC in each hive.
         | 
         | Can heat pumps be scaled down to that size?
        
           | colanderman wrote:
           | Peltier heat pumps, though less efficient than other types,
           | can be made very small and have no moving parts.
        
             | joshstrange wrote:
             | > though less efficient than other types
             | 
             | IIRC they are _massively_ less efficient. Relevant
             | Technology Connections video:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnMRePtHMZY
        
           | newsclues wrote:
           | there are simple, no power, designs that have existed for a
           | long time that would be a better way to go.
           | 
           | kiss
        
             | aspenmayer wrote:
             | I'm thinking something like a wind-powered rotating attic
             | fan.
        
               | newsclues wrote:
               | No power and no moving parts are good design goals.
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windcatcher
               | 
               | Perforated Double Skinned Exterior
               | 
               | Lots of cool tech from the past
        
               | aspenmayer wrote:
               | Sometimes the old ways are best. To paraphrase Jerry
               | Seinfeld, sometimes the road less traveled is less
               | traveled for a reason, or they'd just call it _the way_.
               | 
               | Who benefits most from old methods and tech remaining a
               | historical footnote, but the very people selling their
               | new whiz-bang solutions for modern problems, which are
               | themselves inherent to using their products and energy
               | production and consumption supply chain?
        
           | cogman10 wrote:
           | You don't typically have just 1 hive. It's usually a group of
           | them.
           | 
           | You wouldn't need an HVAC per hive, but rather 1 HVAC for the
           | swarm. Get a water mass, HVAC it to the right temperature,
           | and then pump the water through the hives to maintain a good
           | temp.
           | 
           | It'd be somewhat more expensive and you'd have to have enough
           | insulation to make sure the water isn't prematurely cooling
           | before reaching the hive.
           | 
           | Hives also tend to be really cheap. They are simply wood
           | boxes. So you'd be competing with $100 wood box with $200
           | wood box and $1000 HVAC and plumbing.
        
           | waffletower wrote:
           | There may be passive geothermal heat pump architectures that
           | would be a good fit. Surprised that you can still learn about
           | geothermal heat pumps from the U.S. government:
           | https://www.energy.gov/eere/geothermal/geothermal-heat-pumps
        
             | ted_dunning wrote:
             | Commercial hives need to be portable. Geothermal isn't
             | that.
        
         | drtgh wrote:
         | I searched about this and found a German beekeeper with such
         | hives,
         | 
         | In [1] he can not detect the Varroa within the hive,
         | nevertheless he notice the behavior of the hive is as if it had
         | it. In [2] the hive is already dead, then is when he find the
         | Varroa. In the comments on [2], one beekeeper explains that
         | when the combs are twisted the mites fall into the combs rather
         | than onto the floor which is traditionally used to detect them
         | ( The sugar [3] or CO2 technique to detect Varroa in any type
         | of hive is recommended by other beekeepers in the comments).
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYKL7hrp23k HIIVE Confusion
         | 
         | [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsdHyRdpfB0 All the bees
         | dead - why Varroa was so treacherous here
         | 
         | [3] By comments on other videos about the topic, this needs
         | around 200 bees which are placed in a container with grids to
         | which sugar is added. When shaken, the Verroa falls and a count
         | can be made. The topology of this hive makes it difficult to
         | gather this amount of bees (in the video [2] one can see that
         | the hive would have to be dismantled).
        
       | serguzest wrote:
       | There's a truth we're rarely taught in school and I find it
       | deeply poetic: The vivid colors we see in flowers, even those
       | beyond our vision in the ultraviolet, and the delicate fragrances
       | that drift on the breeze they're not for us.
       | 
       | They are nature's love songs, composed to seduce insects. All
       | this beauty is a grand performance, meant to charm bugs into
       | becoming messengers of life, carrying pollen from bloom to bloom.
       | 
       | Bees, though precious, are just one part of this ancient dance.
       | Moths, beetles, butterflies, each plays a role in this quiet
       | symphony of survival.
       | 
       | And yet, this balance is being disrupted. Greedy and short-
       | sighted actions are damaging ecosystems that are far more complex
       | than we understand.
       | 
       | But here's the humbling part: Nature will endure. She always has.
       | She'll shake us off like dust, heal in silence, and bloom again
       | with or without witnesses.
        
         | esafak wrote:
         | So we're waiting for bees to evolve resistance to these mites?
        
           | serguzest wrote:
           | bu yazdiklarimdan onu mu anladin aq otistigi. Hepimizi
           | geberip gidecegiz doga devam edecek
        
           | svota wrote:
           | No, we're waiting for humans to die off so that bees don't
           | live in these conditions. Eventually something will start to
           | eat those mites, or the commercial honeybee will go extinct.
           | One way or another, this problem won't exist.
        
       | GeekyBear wrote:
       | The standard practice for commercial crops is to bring in
       | commercial hives of bees for pollination season that are shipped
       | together via truck from crop to crop and region to region.
       | 
       | https://sweetharvestfoods.com/the-commercial-honey-bee-trave...
       | 
       | That sounds like a great opportunity to spread the resistant
       | parasites from hive to hive and region to region.
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | Doesn't even seem like this is something that couldn't or
         | shouldn't be region locked.
         | 
         | These companies are likely aren't saving more than a few
         | percentage by centralizing and distributing.
        
         | Spivak wrote:
         | Unless we change our farming practices there isn't much else
         | you can do. You have acres and acres of land that are
         | completely dead (as far as pollinators are concerned) for
         | almost all of the year and then suddenly every plant blooms all
         | at once and then goes away.
        
           | humblebeekeeper wrote:
           | This is what so few people realize -- farming, as it's
           | practiced in the US, is basically mining.
           | 
           | It might appear to be lush nature, but the places we farm are
           | deserts in many ways. We kill insect life, birds, mammals,
           | and other supporting species. We remove most of nutrients
           | from the soil and replace them chemically. A commercial
           | orchard might as well be an Amazon datacenter from an
           | environmental standpoint.
           | 
           | If we want to change things, we need to fundamentally alter
           | the way we grow food. It will be a bit harder -- we'll need
           | regenerative methods, less reliable methods, more human
           | labor, more weed prone, etc. -- but we can build food
           | production into something that's much more sustainable and
           | ecologically sound.
           | 
           | Some farmers are already doing this, or experimenting with
           | it, and I think there's at the very least a growing soil
           | health mindset among small farmers.
        
             | pstuart wrote:
             | And the only way for that change to happen is to bake in
             | monetary incentives that help drive it, whilst doing so in
             | a political climate that is just fine with the way things
             | are.
        
               | humblebeekeeper wrote:
               | I disagree. We can also continue to engage in
               | revolutionary thought and practice locally. We can decide
               | that collective and community health and wellbeing are
               | more important than individual success. It's a more
               | _difficult_ road, but the capitalist mode of  "just tweak
               | the financial curves" is not the _only_ way we can
               | approach this problem. Just the most well supported
               | today.
        
             | nancyminusone wrote:
             | I like to bring this up in regards to livestock. "If we
             | shouldn't eat chickens, then why are they food shaped?"
             | Well, they are food shaped! Most of the animals we eat are
             | designed to be eaten, born and bred over thousands of years
             | to achieve that goal. A chicken is a most unnatural animal.
             | No other bird has any reason to lay 300 eggs per year.
             | 
             | Livestock is as GMO as they come, just on a longer scale.
        
               | sophacles wrote:
               | What a strange response to "monocropping is bad, we
               | should probably follow the science and farm in a way that
               | keeps pollinators around and soil healthy". They didn't
               | say anything about not having chickens or cows.... in
               | fact most regenerative farming practices need chickens
               | and cows (and pigs and goats) to make the soil healthier
               | and keep pollinators healthy.
        
               | datameta wrote:
               | This reads as a kneejerk reaction to the mention of GMO
               | as if the person you responded to has an agenda. I think
               | their point is that we need to be aware of what is
               | natural (aka tested to equilibrium over huge periods of
               | time) and what is artificial (propped up by human
               | practices on the relatively short timescale of centuries
               | and millenia).
               | 
               | It seems the baseline drifts and we could stand to take
               | certain environmental cycles and/or livestock lifecycles
               | for granted as though they exist purely through evolution
               | or untouched ecological processes.
        
               | humblebeekeeper wrote:
               | FWIW, I do object to the _industrial_ raising of animals
               | for food as well.
               | 
               | Have a few pigs rummaging around your food forest? Some
               | sheep to keep grasses and weeds in check? Some poultry to
               | remove pests and aerate the soil? Sure! Love that, it's
               | using behaviors in complementary ways to create a
               | healthier system.
               | 
               | Cram thousands of animals into cubes and process them
               | with machinery? Truly awful in my view.
        
               | triceratops wrote:
               | The comment you responded to didn't say anything about
               | GMO
        
               | datameta wrote:
               | The comment GP responded to was talking about how we have
               | modified the environments of farms - talking about GMO
               | livestock is a stone's toss away.
        
               | humblebeekeeper wrote:
               | FWIW, I am not opposed to GMOs broadly. But I _am_
               | opposed to GMOs for the purpose of enabling more
               | industrialization in agriculture. I don 't see, e.g., red
               | grapefruits as bad, even though they used an early form
               | of genetic engineering (seeds were exposed to radiation
               | in hopes of creating random mutations.)
        
               | datameta wrote:
               | I think I see your viewpoint and agree with it. It isn't
               | a matter of "do we modify or not" but rather "how, when,
               | and for what purpose? who benefits? does this damage the
               | land or species lineage? etc"
        
             | anon84873628 wrote:
             | Exactly. Honeybees are a monoculture bandaid slapped on top
             | of the monoculture farming problem, and ultimately suffer
             | the same fate.
             | 
             | Many people don't realize that honeybees are _not_ native
             | to North America. Bringing them in massive numbers crowds
             | out the native species and causes further ecosystem
             | breakdown. It 's good that people now understand that
             | pollinators are important and insects need to be protected.
             | But that means prioritizing the health of native species
             | and creating a healthier ecosystem from the ground up
             | (literally).
        
             | panarchy wrote:
             | I actually think this is where smaller more "organic" type
             | robots and AI will play a role. We can do more restorative
             | and mixed farming and then have a legion of robots doing
             | all the picking. The way agricultural automation is
             | currently with equidistant rows all with the same type of
             | plant because it's basically impossible to make a machine
             | that can take apples off a tree and pick blueberries but
             | you can make a very optimized machine that can do either.
             | Kind of like 10,000 cheap drones or 1 fighter jet.
        
           | GeekyBear wrote:
           | From what I've read, the hives that are seeing these severe
           | die offs are the commercial hives that are being shipped
           | around.
           | 
           | It is possible to have local beekeepers who don't ship their
           | hives across the country, and there are still untended wild
           | hives. Those seem to be in better shape.
        
             | timr wrote:
             | Untended wild hives are probably also more genetically
             | diverse, and therefore more robust to parasites and
             | viruses.
        
             | ted_dunning wrote:
             | To be clear, the hives that are systematically _reporting_
             | these severe die-offs are largely commercial hives.
             | 
             | There isn't a reporting structure for hobbyists. Look down-
             | thread for an example of a hobbyist who lost their hive
             | (and whose neighbor lost their hive).
             | 
             | This isn't limited to big operators.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | Try this: go find a place that sells honeybee nucs (a
               | starter hive). Then go to Archive.org and compare the
               | prices 10 years ago. I took the first "storefront" hit on
               | Google, and found archived pages back to 2016 --- in
               | 2016, a queen was $40; today, $42.
               | 
               | If it's a collapse it seems like a slow collapse.
        
         | humblebeekeeper wrote:
         | This has been the practice for more than a century. We saw the
         | steepest declines post 2000s. While it almost certainly isn't
         | helping, it's not the one root cause.
        
           | GeekyBear wrote:
           | The practice wouldn't be problematic until after the
           | parasites you are shipping with the hives evolve pesticide
           | resistance/immunity.
           | 
           | As soon as that gene arises, spreading it across the country
           | becomes a bad idea.
        
           | Calwestjobs wrote:
           | hives not open whole year have no mites.
           | 
           | im not providing anything to anyone. i live with this
           | statement as a fact. i will not comment anymore in this
           | discussion. be(e) free to downvote.
        
             | humblebeekeeper wrote:
             | This is simply, objectively false.
        
         | timr wrote:
         | Varoa mites are incredibly hard to control. Back in undergrad I
         | worked in a fruit fly lab, and we would periodically have
         | outbreaks, despite being about the most isolated, sterile
         | population of insects you can imagine.
         | 
         | I doubt that there's any hope at all of controlling mites in
         | free-roaming honeybees. I'd wager that we've done damage with
         | overuse of miticides (which are _insecticides_ , btw -- the
         | article doesn't connect those dots) in a misguided attempt to
         | control nature.
        
           | GeekyBear wrote:
           | > I doubt that there's any hope at all of controlling mites
           | 
           | I'm more interested in no longer spreading the mite gene(s)
           | for pesticide immunity across the country.
        
             | timr wrote:
             | Well that's easy: stop using miticide.
             | 
             | The resistance genes are not spreading due to physical
             | transport, they're spreading because of evolutionary
             | selection.
        
               | GeekyBear wrote:
               | I would say that the pesticide immunity genes arise
               | because of evolutionary selection, but once they come
               | into existance commercial beekeeping practices quickly
               | spread those genes from hive to hive and across the
               | country.
        
               | timr wrote:
               | You might be right that the physical distribution plays a
               | role, but the partial selective pressure of insecticide
               | is like a resistance-generating machine -- as anyone who
               | has tried to kill cockroaches will tell you.
               | 
               | Regardless, I think we both agree that the extremely
               | unnatural pressures of industrial agriculture are a root
               | cause here.
        
               | GeekyBear wrote:
               | Certainly.
               | 
               | For example, Scandinavian countries that have made a
               | concerted effort to only prescribe antibiotics to humans
               | when they are medically necessary saw the genes for
               | antibiotic resistance becoming less prevalent.
               | 
               | Unfortunately, America still allows agribusiness to feed
               | livestock a constant stream of lower dose antibiotics,
               | because doing so makes animals more efficient at turning
               | feed into muscle.
        
           | ne0flex wrote:
           | There's a company called, Greenlight Biosciences, that's
           | developing an RNA-based pesticide for Varroa Mites. Last I
           | spoke with the CEO, he mentioned positive results from
           | trials.
           | 
           | https://www.greenlightbiosciences.com/in-the-pipeline-
           | protec...
        
             | timr wrote:
             | That's cool, in a "better living through chemistry", 1950s
             | man-in-a-white-labcoat sort of way. But when it comes to
             | this stuff, I tend to be a bit like Ian Malcolm in Jurassic
             | Park: they're so focused on whether they _could_ , that
             | they never considered if they _should_.
             | 
             | Probably the better solution here is to stop trying to do
             | industrial farming of bees, and move to a system where
             | local populations of pollinators are cultivated and
             | maintained year round. But sure, RNAi is probably better
             | than the chemicals they're using now.
        
           | shellfishgene wrote:
           | > miticides (which are insecticides, btw Mites are not
           | insects, so miticides are not necessarily insecticides, no?
        
         | drtgh wrote:
         | OffTopic: Something similar to fishing vessels,
         | 
         | Fishing vessels are spreading parasites at hyper-accelerated
         | speeds. This happens when they clean the guts of infected fish
         | at sea without prior treatment and when they discard untargeted
         | fish in the same way; The parasites disperse exponentially,
         | within a loop, when such parasitised food spreads through the
         | trophic. This has already happened on a planetary level.
         | 
         | Also, to note, I think that if they start droping frozen guts
         | into the sea as a treatment, our main defensive barrier at home
         | (to froze fish some days before consumption) will eventually
         | disappear when the parasites adapt (ie. not freezing them long
         | enough until they die due neglect, would progressively disperse
         | freeze-resistant strains in the wild).
        
           | ponector wrote:
           | First time I hear someone is freezing fresh fish at home.
           | Everyone I know tries to eat fresh never-frozen fish.
           | 
           | I thought the main barier is to apply intense heat to the
           | fish, not to freeze it.
        
             | Thimothy wrote:
             | In places where fish is eaten raw (or lightly pickled) you
             | NEED to freeze it before preparing it. Anisakis is no joke.
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisakis
        
               | taeric wrote:
               | The first time we tried to pan sear some fresh salmon was
               | about the last time we ever tried fresh salmon. Holy crap
               | that is an eye opener. Took a long time to get over that
               | feeling of seeing the parasites and learning that that is
               | basically expected in wild fish.
        
             | dzhiurgis wrote:
             | In NZ if you do your own fishing you freeze guts and frames
             | so you don't stink your rubbish bin and you drop it back to
             | ocean on your next trip. Keeps chilly bin cold too.
        
       | foundart wrote:
       | TLDR: "According to a preprint posted to the bioRxiv server this
       | month, nearly all the dead colonies tested positive for bee
       | viruses spread by parasitic mites. Alarmingly, every single one
       | of the mites the researchers screened was resistant to amitraz,
       | the only viable mite-specific pesticide--or miticide--of its kind
       | left in humans' arsenal."
        
         | Modified3019 wrote:
         | I'm an agronomist and ~ten years ago attended an yearly
         | industry meeting where there are various presentations that we
         | sit in on and gain "credits" to maintain various state licenses
         | used to legally recommend and/or apply fertilizers and
         | pesticides.
         | 
         | The one presentation I recall from that far back was a bee
         | researcher that basically said exactly what you posted,
         | whenever his team investigated colony collapses from varroa
         | mites (as opposed to poor treatment from being moved to
         | California), they'd find markers for multiple previously
         | unknown viruses. Honeybees were basically having to contend
         | with previously isolated viruses they never evolved to resist,
         | all at once.
         | 
         | I also remember the xerces society trying protest and interrupt
         | his talk because they wanted to blame (and therefore ban)
         | pesticides only, specifically neonicotinoids. I generally
         | really appreciate the work they do, but in this case they
         | really came away as being dogmatic instead of helpful.
         | 
         | What gets less attention though are the many dozens of native
         | pollinator bees that also were/are hard hit and driven to
         | full/near extinction. These species _also_ have to contend with
         | food source loss, because they are very selective about the
         | flowers they will pollinate because the require a certain
         | nutritional profile. I can't stop viruses or varroa mites, but
         | I can at least recommend planting wildflower mixes native to
         | your local area.
         | 
         |  _edit_ Rediscovered some old blog posts I found looking into
         | the issue at the time and found enlightening. It's a great
         | example of the observation work that makes a good agronomist.
         | Bear in mind these are from 2012, so no idea if they've updated
         | their thoughts to something different.
         | 
         | https://scientificbeekeeping.com/the-extinction-of-the-honey...
         | 
         | https://scientificbeekeeping.com/neonicotinoids-trying-to-ma...
        
         | spookie wrote:
         | You don't need that stuff. Oxalic acid or formic acid does the
         | job.
        
       | arealaccount wrote:
       | I love that they attach a big $ number to the alarm in hopes that
       | it will resonate with the powers at be.
       | 
       | > Tracking the rise of miticide resistance is critical, experts
       | say. Honey bees pollinate more than 90 commercial crops in the
       | United States, generate between $20 billion and $30 billion in
       | agricultural revenue
        
         | lapetitejort wrote:
         | The only large number that would make the general populace care
         | would be $30 watermelons.
        
       | osigurdson wrote:
       | Anecdotally, it seems that the bee population has been increasing
       | in the past few years - though still much lower than 20 years
       | ago.
        
       | Finnucane wrote:
       | "The USDA and university labs are key components."
       | 
       | Well, then, we're fucked.
        
       | rich_sasha wrote:
       | Can drones help?
        
         | ted_dunning wrote:
         | Not really. Once they mate and the queen is all set to produce
         | new workers, the drones are expendable.
        
       | WalterBright wrote:
       | I've let my yard grow wild, and there are a lot of flowers and a
       | constant hum of bumblebees in the summer.
        
       | mrweasel wrote:
       | As a Danish beekeeper: Who the hell uses a pesticide in their
       | beehives?
       | 
       | I agree that keeping mites under controls is tricky at best, but
       | I've never heard of anyone using a pesticide. Normal practise,
       | even for commercial beekeepers is to use oxalic acid. That's not
       | really something mites become resistant to. The other option is
       | brood control, where you basically do a period of time with no
       | brood, leaving the mites without the ability to reproduce. I can
       | see the later not being tricky for commercial beekeepers as that
       | is a lot of hives to manage. The same goes for removing drone
       | brood during the summer, it helps a lot, but I wouldn't want to
       | do it to hundreds of hives.
       | 
       | More and more I feel like the right option is the breeding of
       | mite restistant bees, but that would entail doing nothing for a
       | long period of time or crossing European honeybees with Asian
       | varieties that can remote the mites themselves. The work is
       | already being do, but it's still years away. We have found wild
       | beehives, including abandoned beehives, which are fairly mite
       | resistant.
        
         | spookie wrote:
         | You can use formic acid too
        
         | ted_dunning wrote:
         | What are the bees in your hive doing when you are using this
         | oxalic acid?
         | 
         | Or if you have no brood for a period of time, I can see that
         | this would decrease the mite population in the empty hive, but
         | wouldn't the brood carry the mites with them wherever they have
         | gone?
         | 
         | (these are serious questions, not challenges)
        
           | mrweasel wrote:
           | You put the acid in the hive, in an evaporator. The air in
           | the hive then becomes acidic enough to burn through the
           | exoskeleton of the mites. Technically it also damages the
           | exoskeleton of the bees, but that's thick enough that the bee
           | doesn't notice. You normally do this over a period of 14 days
           | in late summer, early autumn. As the other commenter points
           | out formic acid is also an option.
           | 
           | For brood control, you have two options. One is to insert
           | special frames in the hive, these are designed to encourage
           | drone brood to go in those frames. Mites (Verrora) attack
           | drone brood more as the cells are bigger and can better
           | accommodate the mites. So you concentrate the mites in those
           | frames. Then every week you remove 1/3 of those frames and
           | discard it. That's normally enough to keep the mites at bay.
           | The second option is to trap the queen, she stays in the
           | hive, but she's restricted from moving around and laying
           | eggs, i.e. you keep her away from the cells in the frames. A
           | brood cycle is 28 days, but mites don't live that long.
           | Without any new brood continuously cycling, they can't
           | reproduce as they mature in the brood cells. The down side is
           | obviously a large temporary drop in you bee population,
           | meaning less pollination, and less honey. I don't know many
           | who do this, but from what I'm told it is very effective. I
           | my guess is that you probably only want to do this to fairly
           | strong/highly populaces hives.
           | 
           | The acid and drone frames are normal practise, carried out by
           | all beekeepers. Minus those who experiment with breeding mite
           | resistant bees.
           | 
           | So the hive is never empty, you just create an environment
           | that's harmful to the mites. Either by being to acidic or not
           | providing a place for their eggs to hatch.
        
         | drtgh wrote:
         | > We have found wild beehives, including abandoned beehives,
         | which are fairly mite resistant.
         | 
         | It seems that some Apis Cerana (Japonica?) are fairly mite-
         | resistant; they bite and kill the mites (except for those
         | within the drone cells, as far as I read). This, could be
         | combined also with rising the hive temperature along two hours
         | to temperatures able to kill the mites, included the ones
         | within the cells.
         | 
         | PS: I have only read a little about the matter.
        
       | rob_c wrote:
       | A branch of US farming again reaping the rewards of non selective
       | non food-chain-toxic (not a phrase but for simplicity sake)
       | chemical use.
       | 
       | These chemicals would have lasted much longer and resistance
       | would have been much slower in coming (if ever) if they were kept
       | in reserve rather than used by default...
       | 
       | It's asif nobody learned anything from monsanto
        
       | paul_h wrote:
       | From a few weeks ago - https://civileats.com/2025/06/11/honey-
       | bees-learn-to-fight-d....
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-01 23:02 UTC)