Co-Authors:
Plettner, E., Department of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Dr., Burnaby, BC, Canada
Eliash, N., Department of Entomology, Institute of Plant Protection, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, PO Box 6 50250, Bet Dagan, Israel
Singh, N.K., Department of Entomology, Institute of Plant Protection, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, PO Box 6 50250, Bet Dagan, Israel
Pinnelli, G.R., Department of Chemistry, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Dr., Burnaby, BC, Canada
Soroker, V., Department of Entomology, Institute of Plant Protection, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, PO Box 6 50250, Bet Dagan, Israel
Abstract:
Honey bees and their ectoparasite Varroa destructor communicate through chemical signals among themselves, but they also eavesdrop on each other’s chemical cues. We summarize semiochemicals of honey bees and Varroa, and their roles in honey bee-Varroa interactions. We also give an overview of current Varroa control methods, which can be classified into three categories: (1) chemical control methods with acaricides, (2) biotechnical intervention, and (3) bee breeding programs. Widely used synthetic chemical acaricides are failing due to the emergence of resistant mites. Therefore, new methods are being sought for Varroa control, and methods that target the semiochemical interactions between bees and mites are among the candidates. We review our discovery of compounds that alter the host choice of Varroa mites (from nurse to forager) in laboratory tests. Any semiochemical-based methods are still in the experimental stage and need validation in the field. © 2016, INRA, DIB and Springer-Verlag France.
תפריט נגישות
ניגודיות עדינה
מונוכרום
הדגשת קישורים
חסימת אנימציה
פונט קריא
סגור
איפוס הגדרות נגישות
להורדת מודול נגישות חינם
