Industrial bees: The impact of apicultural intensification on local disease prevalence

It is generally thought that the intensification of farming will result in higher disease prevalences, although there is little specific modelling testing this idea. Focussing on honeybees, we build multi‐colony models to inform how “apicultural intensification” is predicted to impact honeybee patho...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of applied ecology 2019-09, Vol.56 (9), p.2195-2205
Hauptverfasser: Bartlett, Lewis J., Rozins, Carly, Brosi, Berry J., Delaplane, Keith S., de Roode, Jacobus C., White, Andrew, Wilfert, Lena, Boots, Michael
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2205
container_issue 9
container_start_page 2195
container_title The Journal of applied ecology
container_volume 56
creator Bartlett, Lewis J.
Rozins, Carly
Brosi, Berry J.
Delaplane, Keith S.
de Roode, Jacobus C.
White, Andrew
Wilfert, Lena
Boots, Michael
description It is generally thought that the intensification of farming will result in higher disease prevalences, although there is little specific modelling testing this idea. Focussing on honeybees, we build multi‐colony models to inform how “apicultural intensification” is predicted to impact honeybee pathogen epidemiology at the apiary scale. We used both agent‐based and analytical models to show that three linked aspects of apicultural intensification (increased population sizes, changes in population network structure and increased between‐colony transmission) are unlikely to greatly increase disease prevalence in apiaries. Principally this is because even low‐intensity apiculture exhibits high disease prevalence. The greatest impacts of apicultural intensification are found for diseases with relatively low R0 (basic reproduction number), however, such diseases cause little overall disease prevalence and, therefore, the impacts of intensification are minor. Furthermore, the smallest impacts of intensification are for diseases with high R0 values, which we argue are typical of important honeybee diseases. Policy Implications: Our findings contradict the idea that apicultural intensification by crowding honeybee colonies in large, dense apiaries leads to notably higher disease prevalences for established honeybee pathogens. More broadly, our work demonstrates the need for informative models of all agricultural systems and management practices in order to understand the implications of management changes on diseases. We use both computational and mathematical models to understand how intensification of beekeeping at apiary scales from small, low density, less connected arrangements to larger, denser, more connected arrangements might alter pathogen prevalences. We find that honeybee pathogens typically exist at very high prevalences even in low‐intensity apiaries, and that consequently the intensification of apiculture at this local scale is predicted to have little effect on epidemiology.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/1365-2664.13461
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6771535</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48579854</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>48579854</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4661-c73ca459432acf3c43c600e5a9d755a783262aa5549580a9ccda08a4d824be13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM9LwzAcxYMobk7x6EkQvHjplm9-NbkIMqZOBnrYPWRpph1dM5NW2X9va-dAL-YSSN7nfb_vIXQBeAjNGQEVPCFCsCFQJuAA9fcvh6iPMYFEKgw9dBLjCmOsOKXHqEeBSwlM9tH5tMzqWIXcFFcL5-IpOlqaIrqz3T1A8_vJfPyYzJ4fpuO7WWKZEJDYlFrDuGKUGLukllErMHbcqCzl3KSSEkGM4ZwpLrFR1mYGS8MySdjCAR2g2852Uy_WLrOurIIp9CbkaxO22ptc__4p8zf96j-0SFPglDcGNzuD4N9rFyu9zqN1RWFK5-uoCcUgJQbWzrr-I135OpRNOk2IpLhJAapRjTqVDT7G4Jb7ZQDrtmvdNqvbZvV31w3BO-IzL9z2P7l-epn8cJcdt4qVD3uOSZ4qyRn9Agurhdo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2283059419</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Industrial bees: The impact of apicultural intensification on local disease prevalence</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Bartlett, Lewis J. ; Rozins, Carly ; Brosi, Berry J. ; Delaplane, Keith S. ; de Roode, Jacobus C. ; White, Andrew ; Wilfert, Lena ; Boots, Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Bartlett, Lewis J. ; Rozins, Carly ; Brosi, Berry J. ; Delaplane, Keith S. ; de Roode, Jacobus C. ; White, Andrew ; Wilfert, Lena ; Boots, Michael</creatorcontrib><description>It is generally thought that the intensification of farming will result in higher disease prevalences, although there is little specific modelling testing this idea. Focussing on honeybees, we build multi‐colony models to inform how “apicultural intensification” is predicted to impact honeybee pathogen epidemiology at the apiary scale. We used both agent‐based and analytical models to show that three linked aspects of apicultural intensification (increased population sizes, changes in population network structure and increased between‐colony transmission) are unlikely to greatly increase disease prevalence in apiaries. Principally this is because even low‐intensity apiculture exhibits high disease prevalence. The greatest impacts of apicultural intensification are found for diseases with relatively low R0 (basic reproduction number), however, such diseases cause little overall disease prevalence and, therefore, the impacts of intensification are minor. Furthermore, the smallest impacts of intensification are for diseases with high R0 values, which we argue are typical of important honeybee diseases. Policy Implications: Our findings contradict the idea that apicultural intensification by crowding honeybee colonies in large, dense apiaries leads to notably higher disease prevalences for established honeybee pathogens. More broadly, our work demonstrates the need for informative models of all agricultural systems and management practices in order to understand the implications of management changes on diseases. We use both computational and mathematical models to understand how intensification of beekeeping at apiary scales from small, low density, less connected arrangements to larger, denser, more connected arrangements might alter pathogen prevalences. We find that honeybee pathogens typically exist at very high prevalences even in low‐intensity apiaries, and that consequently the intensification of apiculture at this local scale is predicted to have little effect on epidemiology.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2664</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.13461</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31588148</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Wiley</publisher><subject>Agricultural practices ; agriculture ; Apiculture ; beekeeping ; Bees ; Colonies ; Disease ; disease prevalence ; Diseases ; Epidemiology ; Impact prediction ; infectious disease ; intensification ; mathematical model ; Mathematical models ; Pathogens ; RESEARCH ARTICLE</subject><ispartof>The Journal of applied ecology, 2019-09, Vol.56 (9), p.2195-2205</ispartof><rights>2019 The Authors</rights><rights>2019 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society</rights><rights>Journal of Applied Ecology © 2019 British Ecological Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4661-c73ca459432acf3c43c600e5a9d755a783262aa5549580a9ccda08a4d824be13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4661-c73ca459432acf3c43c600e5a9d755a783262aa5549580a9ccda08a4d824be13</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6075-458X ; 0000-0003-1503-4871 ; 0000-0002-9233-1151 ; 0000-0002-4418-8071 ; 0000-0003-3763-6136 ; 0000-0001-9323-441X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2F1365-2664.13461$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2F1365-2664.13461$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1416,1432,27922,27923,45572,45573,46407,46831</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bartlett, Lewis J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rozins, Carly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brosi, Berry J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delaplane, Keith S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Roode, Jacobus C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>White, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilfert, Lena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boots, Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Industrial bees: The impact of apicultural intensification on local disease prevalence</title><title>The Journal of applied ecology</title><description>It is generally thought that the intensification of farming will result in higher disease prevalences, although there is little specific modelling testing this idea. Focussing on honeybees, we build multi‐colony models to inform how “apicultural intensification” is predicted to impact honeybee pathogen epidemiology at the apiary scale. We used both agent‐based and analytical models to show that three linked aspects of apicultural intensification (increased population sizes, changes in population network structure and increased between‐colony transmission) are unlikely to greatly increase disease prevalence in apiaries. Principally this is because even low‐intensity apiculture exhibits high disease prevalence. The greatest impacts of apicultural intensification are found for diseases with relatively low R0 (basic reproduction number), however, such diseases cause little overall disease prevalence and, therefore, the impacts of intensification are minor. Furthermore, the smallest impacts of intensification are for diseases with high R0 values, which we argue are typical of important honeybee diseases. Policy Implications: Our findings contradict the idea that apicultural intensification by crowding honeybee colonies in large, dense apiaries leads to notably higher disease prevalences for established honeybee pathogens. More broadly, our work demonstrates the need for informative models of all agricultural systems and management practices in order to understand the implications of management changes on diseases. We use both computational and mathematical models to understand how intensification of beekeeping at apiary scales from small, low density, less connected arrangements to larger, denser, more connected arrangements might alter pathogen prevalences. We find that honeybee pathogens typically exist at very high prevalences even in low‐intensity apiaries, and that consequently the intensification of apiculture at this local scale is predicted to have little effect on epidemiology.</description><subject>Agricultural practices</subject><subject>agriculture</subject><subject>Apiculture</subject><subject>beekeeping</subject><subject>Bees</subject><subject>Colonies</subject><subject>Disease</subject><subject>disease prevalence</subject><subject>Diseases</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Impact prediction</subject><subject>infectious disease</subject><subject>intensification</subject><subject>mathematical model</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Pathogens</subject><subject>RESEARCH ARTICLE</subject><issn>0021-8901</issn><issn>1365-2664</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM9LwzAcxYMobk7x6EkQvHjplm9-NbkIMqZOBnrYPWRpph1dM5NW2X9va-dAL-YSSN7nfb_vIXQBeAjNGQEVPCFCsCFQJuAA9fcvh6iPMYFEKgw9dBLjCmOsOKXHqEeBSwlM9tH5tMzqWIXcFFcL5-IpOlqaIrqz3T1A8_vJfPyYzJ4fpuO7WWKZEJDYlFrDuGKUGLukllErMHbcqCzl3KSSEkGM4ZwpLrFR1mYGS8MySdjCAR2g2852Uy_WLrOurIIp9CbkaxO22ptc__4p8zf96j-0SFPglDcGNzuD4N9rFyu9zqN1RWFK5-uoCcUgJQbWzrr-I135OpRNOk2IpLhJAapRjTqVDT7G4Jb7ZQDrtmvdNqvbZvV31w3BO-IzL9z2P7l-epn8cJcdt4qVD3uOSZ4qyRn9Agurhdo</recordid><startdate>201909</startdate><enddate>201909</enddate><creator>Bartlett, Lewis J.</creator><creator>Rozins, Carly</creator><creator>Brosi, Berry J.</creator><creator>Delaplane, Keith S.</creator><creator>de Roode, Jacobus C.</creator><creator>White, Andrew</creator><creator>Wilfert, Lena</creator><creator>Boots, Michael</creator><general>Wiley</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6075-458X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1503-4871</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9233-1151</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4418-8071</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3763-6136</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9323-441X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201909</creationdate><title>Industrial bees</title><author>Bartlett, Lewis J. ; Rozins, Carly ; Brosi, Berry J. ; Delaplane, Keith S. ; de Roode, Jacobus C. ; White, Andrew ; Wilfert, Lena ; Boots, Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4661-c73ca459432acf3c43c600e5a9d755a783262aa5549580a9ccda08a4d824be13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Agricultural practices</topic><topic>agriculture</topic><topic>Apiculture</topic><topic>beekeeping</topic><topic>Bees</topic><topic>Colonies</topic><topic>Disease</topic><topic>disease prevalence</topic><topic>Diseases</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Impact prediction</topic><topic>infectious disease</topic><topic>intensification</topic><topic>mathematical model</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Pathogens</topic><topic>RESEARCH ARTICLE</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bartlett, Lewis J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rozins, Carly</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brosi, Berry J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delaplane, Keith S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Roode, Jacobus C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>White, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilfert, Lena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boots, Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Wiley Free Content</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bartlett, Lewis J.</au><au>Rozins, Carly</au><au>Brosi, Berry J.</au><au>Delaplane, Keith S.</au><au>de Roode, Jacobus C.</au><au>White, Andrew</au><au>Wilfert, Lena</au><au>Boots, Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Industrial bees: The impact of apicultural intensification on local disease prevalence</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle><date>2019-09</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>2195</spage><epage>2205</epage><pages>2195-2205</pages><issn>0021-8901</issn><eissn>1365-2664</eissn><abstract>It is generally thought that the intensification of farming will result in higher disease prevalences, although there is little specific modelling testing this idea. Focussing on honeybees, we build multi‐colony models to inform how “apicultural intensification” is predicted to impact honeybee pathogen epidemiology at the apiary scale. We used both agent‐based and analytical models to show that three linked aspects of apicultural intensification (increased population sizes, changes in population network structure and increased between‐colony transmission) are unlikely to greatly increase disease prevalence in apiaries. Principally this is because even low‐intensity apiculture exhibits high disease prevalence. The greatest impacts of apicultural intensification are found for diseases with relatively low R0 (basic reproduction number), however, such diseases cause little overall disease prevalence and, therefore, the impacts of intensification are minor. Furthermore, the smallest impacts of intensification are for diseases with high R0 values, which we argue are typical of important honeybee diseases. Policy Implications: Our findings contradict the idea that apicultural intensification by crowding honeybee colonies in large, dense apiaries leads to notably higher disease prevalences for established honeybee pathogens. More broadly, our work demonstrates the need for informative models of all agricultural systems and management practices in order to understand the implications of management changes on diseases. We use both computational and mathematical models to understand how intensification of beekeeping at apiary scales from small, low density, less connected arrangements to larger, denser, more connected arrangements might alter pathogen prevalences. We find that honeybee pathogens typically exist at very high prevalences even in low‐intensity apiaries, and that consequently the intensification of apiculture at this local scale is predicted to have little effect on epidemiology.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Wiley</pub><pmid>31588148</pmid><doi>10.1111/1365-2664.13461</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6075-458X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1503-4871</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9233-1151</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4418-8071</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3763-6136</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9323-441X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8901
ispartof The Journal of applied ecology, 2019-09, Vol.56 (9), p.2195-2205
issn 0021-8901
1365-2664
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6771535
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Wiley Free Content; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Agricultural practices
agriculture
Apiculture
beekeeping
Bees
Colonies
Disease
disease prevalence
Diseases
Epidemiology
Impact prediction
infectious disease
intensification
mathematical model
Mathematical models
Pathogens
RESEARCH ARTICLE
title Industrial bees: The impact of apicultural intensification on local disease prevalence
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T15%3A20%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Industrial%20bees:%20The%20impact%20of%20apicultural%20intensification%20on%20local%20disease%20prevalence&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20applied%20ecology&rft.au=Bartlett,%20Lewis%20J.&rft.date=2019-09&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=2195&rft.epage=2205&rft.pages=2195-2205&rft.issn=0021-8901&rft.eissn=1365-2664&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1365-2664.13461&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E48579854%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2283059419&rft_id=info:pmid/31588148&rft_jstor_id=48579854&rfr_iscdi=true