Bee-ware: Antibiotics and Gut Health

Thursday, 26 June 2025

Antibiotics play a critical role in managing bacterial and parasitic infections that may threaten colony health. They are an important tool that beekeepers use to manage disease, but their effects can extend beyond harming pathogens. These treatments may also disrupt the beneficial microbes that bees rely on for digestion, immunity and survival.

Bee-ware: Antibiotics and Gut Health

To treat Nosema disease in honey bees, the only approved antimicrobial in North America is Fumagillin-B ®. This compound, derived from the fungus Aspergillus fumigatus, has been shown to reduce the prevalence and intensity of Nosema spp. infections 1. Fumagillin is typically administered in the fall or spring, depending on colony needs and label recommendation 1. Fumagillin-B works by targeting a protein in the parasite called methionine aminopeptidase type 2 (MetAp-2) 2 . This protein is essential for Nosema spp. spore development, and by inhibiting it, Fumagillin disrupts the parasite’s life cycle 2. 

Figure 1: Picture of Nosema spp. spores viewed under a microscope (400x). As an example, the arrow indicates a single spore (ATTTA©, 2025)

Another antibiotic that is used in beekeeping is oxytetracycline hydrochloride (OTC). It has been used to manage European Foulbrood (EFB) and American Foulbrood (AFB) 3. Oxytetracycline works as a bacteriostatic antibiotic, meaning it restricts the bacteria from growing and interferes with protein synthesis 3. However, it has also been found to reduce core gut bacteria like Bifidobacteria , which supports digestion and immune signaling 4. Bifidobacteria is an important bacterium that plays a role in the digestion and metabolism of a variety of plant-produced carbohydrates 8.

This disruption of the gut microbiome, known as dysbiosis, can have serious consequences. For example, a study showed that honey bees treated with an antibiotics, penicillin-streptomycin, showed reduced expression of genes responsible for producing antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), compared to bees who were infected with Nosema ceranae 5. This can lead to a weakened immune system, as AMPs play a critical role in immune defense 5. Another study found that bees infected with Nosema spp. and treated with antibiotics had higher spore loads and more severely disrupted gut bacteria 6. Long-term use of antibiotics like oxytetracycline has also been linked to a reduction in genetic diversity among core bacteria, such as Gilliamella 7. This bacterium is important for producing pyruvate, which is essential for the break down of glucose 11.

The effects of dysbiosis go beyond just gut health. A disrupted microbiome, whether caused by disease or antibiotics, may lead to greater susceptibility to pathogens, disrupted expression of developmental genes, and compromised immune function 8. Disruption of the gut microbiome has also been associated with increased loads of other parasites, such as Lotmaria passim, in adult honey bees 9. These effects can weaken the entire colony, especially if antibiotics are used without a plan.

Another concern with frequent antibiotic use is the development of antibiotic resistance. In both North America and Argentina, where oxytetracycline is commonly used, resistance has been reported in Paenibacillus larvae, the bacteria which causes American Foulbrood 9. Following antibiotic use, resistance genes in the gut microbiome have been shown to increase 10. These genes may spread between colonies through cross-contamination, and residues of antibiotics have been detected in the environment 9. When antibiotics are overused, pathogens can evolve resistance, making it significantly more difficult to treat infections effectively.

That is why it is so important to only treat when necessary and to support bees afterwards. A healthy gut microbiome is one of the best defenses bees have against diseases. Unnecessary antibiotic use can compromise colony health by disrupting the balance in the bee’s gut microbiome. Maintaining a healthy gut year-round helps reduce the pressure of pathogens and the need for antibiotics. There are other ways to ensure gut health is being supported in bees, which will be discussed in a future blog.  

Written by Kaitlyn Newton, ATTTA Seasonal Apiculturist 

Connecting with ATTTA Specialists

If you’d like to connect with ATTTA specialists or learn more about our program, you can:

visit our website at https://www.perennia.ca/portfolio-items/honey-bees/

Email attta@perennia.ca

References:

1.      Prouty, C., Jack, C., Sagili, R. and Ellis, J.D., 2023. Evaluating the efficacy of common treatments used for Vairimorpha (Nosema) spp. control. Applied Sciences13(3), p.1303.

2.      Peirson, M. and Pernal, S.F., 2024. A systematic review of fumagillin field trials for the treatment of Nosema disease in honeybee colonies. Insects15(1), p.29.

3.      Masood, F., Thebeau, J.M., Cloet, A., Kozii, I.V., Zabrodski, M.W., Biganski, S., Liang, J., Marta Guarna, M., Simko, E., Ruzzini, A. and Wood, S.C., 2022. Evaluating approved and alternative treatments against an oxytetracycline-resistant bacterium responsible for European foulbrood disease in honey bees. Scientific Reports12(1), p.5906.

4.      Baffoni, L., Alberoni, D., Gaggìa, F., Braglia, C., Stanton, C., Ross, P.R. and Di Gioia, D., 2021. Honeybee exposure to veterinary drugs: how is the gut microbiota affected?. Microbiology Spectrum9(1), pp.10-1128.

5.      Romero, S., Nastasa, A., Chapman, A., Kwong, W.K. and Foster, L.J., 2019. The honey bee gut microbiota: strategies for study and characterization. Insect molecular biology28(4), pp.455-472.

6.      Li, J.H., Evans, J.D., Li, W.F., Zhao, Y.Z., DeGrandi-Hoffman, G., Huang, S.K., Li, Z.G., Hamilton, M. and Chen, Y.P., 2017. New evidence showing that the destruction of gut bacteria by antibiotic treatment could increase the honey bee’s vulnerability to Nosema infection. PloS one12(11), p.e0187505.

7.      Luo, S., Zhang, X. and Zhou, X., 2024. Temporospatial dynamics and host specificity of honeybee gut bacteria. Cell Reports43(7).

8.      Raymann, K. and Moran, N.A., 2018. The role of the gut microbiome in health and disease of adult honey bee workers. Current opinion in insect science26, pp.97-104.

9.      Mosca, M., Gyorffy, A., Milito, M., Di Ruggiero, C., De Carolis, A., Pietropaoli, M., Giannetti, L., Necci, F., Marini, F., Smedile, D. and Iurescia, M., 2025. Antibiotic Use in Beekeeping: Implications for Health and Environment from a One-Health Perspective. Antibiotics14(4), p.359.

10. Baffoni, L., Alberoni, D., Gaggìa, F., Braglia, C., Stanton, C., Ross, P.R. and Di Gioia, D., 2021. Honeybee exposure to veterinary drugs: how is the gut microbiota affected?. Microbiology Spectrum9(1), pp.10-1128.

11. Kešnerová, L., Mars, R.A., Ellegaard, K.M., Troilo, M., Sauer, U. and Engel, P., 2017. Disentangling metabolic functions of bacteria in the honey bee gut. PLoS biology15(12), p.e2003467.

Early Season Regional Trends in Varroa Mite Populations

Thursday, 19 June 2025

The Atlantic Tech Transfer Team for Apiculture is continuing with their second year of a regional varroa mite survey. This survey aims to determine seasonal trends in varroa mites across the region, and help assess the efficacy of mite management. This week’s blog will explore early season trends in varroa mite populations across our Maritime region, and discuss how this year’s mite levels compare to 2024, and other regions within Canada.

Early Season Regional Trends in Varroa Mite Populations

For the second season, ATTTA is conducting a regional varroa mite survey to assess temporal trends in mite levels and to assess the efficacy of amitraz (active ingredient in Apivar® - a synthetic miticide). This year, the survey consists of 20 beekeepers (7 in Nova Scotia, 9 in New Brunswick, and 4 on Prince Edward Island). For trial one, which took place mostly before colonies went to wild blueberry pollination, there was a total of 71 samples/colonies included.

Overall, the average mite load for trial one (April 30, 2025 – May 28, 2025) was 0.02%, 96% of colonies had 0% mite load, and no colonies had a mite load greater than 1% (Figure 1). The average number of bees per sample for trial one is 278, with a target sample size of 300. In comparison, in 2024, the average mite load for trial one (May 16, 2024 – June 25, 2024) was 0.09%, 93% of colonies had 0% mite load, and 5% colonies had a mite load greater than 1% (Figure 1). More data is needed to help establish a baseline for mite levels in spring across our region. Although there is a decrease in the percentage of colonies with detectable varroa, and the percentage of colonies with mites levels above 1%, between 2024 and 2025 (Figure 1), additional data is needed to support a downward trend, or assess if levels are potentially increasing or remaining stable from year to year.

Figure 1. Comparison of varroa mite loads in the Maritime region between 2024 and 2025.

It is important that beekeepers understand that 0% mite load, as determined by an alcohol wash, does not mean that no mites are present within the colony. There is always a background population of varroa mites within a single colony, and without frequent and representative monitoring the population can quickly increase above the level of detection. Beekeepers should manage their mite levels to be below 1% all throughout the beekeeping season, and intervene with treatment if levels reach/surpass 1% (1 mite per 100 bees).

A recently published study which took place in Ontario beekeeping operations (2015-2019) demonstrated a similar seasonal pattern in varroa mite populations, as observed from ATTTA’s research in 2024, and preliminary data for 2025 (Sobkowich et al. 2025). This seasonal pattern can be described by an initial spike in early spring around hive opening, followed by a sharp decline due to initial spring treatments, succeeded by a gradual population increase over the summer, leading to exponential growth in the mite population in early fall. This seasonal trend is consistent with previous knowledge on varroa mite population dynamics and global observations based on reported mite levels to the World Organization for Animal Health (Fanelli and Tizzani, 2020).

The Maritime industry must remain vigilant regarding the efficacy of Apivar® (active ingredient amitraz) as this is the only recommended synthetic miticide available, and widespread resistance is being reported across the globe. Following severe colony losses reported in early 2025 across the United States, researches of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), analyzed honey bee samples from 6 large commercial beekeeping operations and have submitted their results for publication. These operations represent a collective summertime high of 183,750 managed colonies, which is roughly 6.8% of all managed colonies in the United States. One of the preliminary results of this research is that 100% of the sampled varroa mites (n = 39) had amitraz resistant genetics.

Overall, although the early season trends in varroa mite populations across the Maritime region seem well managed, beekeepers must remain vigilant when monitoring for mites, and practice integrated pest management in all aspects of their mite management. For questions regarding mite management and treatment please reach out to the ATTTA team. We would like to thank all beekeepers who participated in trial one of our survey. We will be reporting on trial two of our survey later this summer.

Connecting with ATTTA Specialists

If you’d like to connect with ATTTA specialists or learn more about our program, you can:

visit our website at https://www.perennia.ca/portfolio-items/honey-bees/

Email attta@perennia.ca

References

Fanelli, A., & Tizzani, P. (2020). Spatial and temporal analysis of varroosis from 2005 to 2018. Research in Veterinary Science131(January), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2020.04.017

Sobkowich, K.E., Berke, O., Bernardo, T.M., Pearl, D.L. and Kozak, P., 2025. Time series analysis of Varroa destructor counts in Ontario honey bee colonies and their association with weather variables. Journal of Apicultural Research, pp.1-8.