Bee pathogen transmission dynamics: deposition, persistence and acquisition on flowers

Infectious diseases are a primary driver of bee decline worldwide, but limited understanding of how pathogens are transmitted hampers effective management. Flowers have been implicated as hubs of bee disease transmission, but we know little about how interspecific floral variation affects transmissi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences Biological sciences, 2019-05, Vol.286 (1903), p.1-9
Main Authors: Figueroa, Laura L., Blinder, Malcolm, Grincavitch, Cali, Jelinek, Angus, Mann, Emilia K., Merva, Liam A., Metz, Lucy E., Zhao, Amy Y., Irwin, Rebecca E., McArt, Scott H., Adler, Lynn S.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Ecology
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 9
container_issue 1903
container_start_page 1
container_title Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences
container_volume 286
creator Figueroa, Laura L.
Blinder, Malcolm
Grincavitch, Cali
Jelinek, Angus
Mann, Emilia K.
Merva, Liam A.
Metz, Lucy E.
Zhao, Amy Y.
Irwin, Rebecca E.
McArt, Scott H.
Adler, Lynn S.
description Infectious diseases are a primary driver of bee decline worldwide, but limited understanding of how pathogens are transmitted hampers effective management. Flowers have been implicated as hubs of bee disease transmission, but we know little about how interspecific floral variation affects transmission dynamics. Using bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), a trypanosomatid pathogen (Crithidia bombi) and three plant species varying in floral morphology, we assessed how host infection and plant species affect pathogen deposition on flowers, and plant species and flower parts impact pathogen survival and acquisition at flowers. We found that host infection with Crithidia increased defaecation rates on flowers, and that bees deposited faeces onto bracts of Lobelia siphilitica and Lythrum salicaria more frequently than onto Monarda didyma bracts. Among flower parts, bracts were associated with the lowest pathogen survival but highest resulting infection intensity in bee hosts. Additionally, we found that Crithidia survival across flower parts was reduced with sun exposure. These results suggest that efficiency of pathogen transmission depends on where deposition occurs and the timing and place of acquisition, which varies among plant species and environmental conditions. This information could be used for development of wildflower mixes that maximize forage while minimizing disease spread.
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_jstor_primary_26665508</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26665508</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26665508</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-jstor_primary_266655083</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYuA0NDE31DWyNDVhYeA0sDQz0rUwMTXiYOAqLs4yMDCwNLUw5WRQckpNVShILMnIT0_NUygpSswrzs0sLs7Mz1NIqcxLzM1MLuZhYE1LzClO5YXS3Ayybq4hzh66WcUl-UXxBUWZuYlFlfFGZmZmpqYGFsaE5AEVgCtF</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bee pathogen transmission dynamics: deposition, persistence and acquisition on flowers</title><source>PubMed Central</source><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Figueroa, Laura L. ; Blinder, Malcolm ; Grincavitch, Cali ; Jelinek, Angus ; Mann, Emilia K. ; Merva, Liam A. ; Metz, Lucy E. ; Zhao, Amy Y. ; Irwin, Rebecca E. ; McArt, Scott H. ; Adler, Lynn S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Figueroa, Laura L. ; Blinder, Malcolm ; Grincavitch, Cali ; Jelinek, Angus ; Mann, Emilia K. ; Merva, Liam A. ; Metz, Lucy E. ; Zhao, Amy Y. ; Irwin, Rebecca E. ; McArt, Scott H. ; Adler, Lynn S.</creatorcontrib><description>Infectious diseases are a primary driver of bee decline worldwide, but limited understanding of how pathogens are transmitted hampers effective management. Flowers have been implicated as hubs of bee disease transmission, but we know little about how interspecific floral variation affects transmission dynamics. Using bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), a trypanosomatid pathogen (Crithidia bombi) and three plant species varying in floral morphology, we assessed how host infection and plant species affect pathogen deposition on flowers, and plant species and flower parts impact pathogen survival and acquisition at flowers. We found that host infection with Crithidia increased defaecation rates on flowers, and that bees deposited faeces onto bracts of Lobelia siphilitica and Lythrum salicaria more frequently than onto Monarda didyma bracts. Among flower parts, bracts were associated with the lowest pathogen survival but highest resulting infection intensity in bee hosts. Additionally, we found that Crithidia survival across flower parts was reduced with sun exposure. These results suggest that efficiency of pathogen transmission depends on where deposition occurs and the timing and place of acquisition, which varies among plant species and environmental conditions. This information could be used for development of wildflower mixes that maximize forage while minimizing disease spread.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0962-8452</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-2954</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Royal Society</publisher><subject>Ecology</subject><ispartof>Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences, 2019-05, Vol.286 (1903), p.1-9</ispartof><rights>2019 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26665508$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26665508$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,783,787,58566,58799</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Figueroa, Laura L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blinder, Malcolm</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grincavitch, Cali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jelinek, Angus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mann, Emilia K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merva, Liam A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Metz, Lucy E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Amy Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Irwin, Rebecca E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McArt, Scott H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adler, Lynn S.</creatorcontrib><title>Bee pathogen transmission dynamics: deposition, persistence and acquisition on flowers</title><title>Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences</title><description>Infectious diseases are a primary driver of bee decline worldwide, but limited understanding of how pathogens are transmitted hampers effective management. Flowers have been implicated as hubs of bee disease transmission, but we know little about how interspecific floral variation affects transmission dynamics. Using bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), a trypanosomatid pathogen (Crithidia bombi) and three plant species varying in floral morphology, we assessed how host infection and plant species affect pathogen deposition on flowers, and plant species and flower parts impact pathogen survival and acquisition at flowers. We found that host infection with Crithidia increased defaecation rates on flowers, and that bees deposited faeces onto bracts of Lobelia siphilitica and Lythrum salicaria more frequently than onto Monarda didyma bracts. Among flower parts, bracts were associated with the lowest pathogen survival but highest resulting infection intensity in bee hosts. Additionally, we found that Crithidia survival across flower parts was reduced with sun exposure. These results suggest that efficiency of pathogen transmission depends on where deposition occurs and the timing and place of acquisition, which varies among plant species and environmental conditions. This information could be used for development of wildflower mixes that maximize forage while minimizing disease spread.</description><subject>Ecology</subject><issn>0962-8452</issn><issn>1471-2954</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNpjYuA0NDE31DWyNDVhYeA0sDQz0rUwMTXiYOAqLs4yMDCwNLUw5WRQckpNVShILMnIT0_NUygpSswrzs0sLs7Mz1NIqcxLzM1MLuZhYE1LzClO5YXS3Ayybq4hzh66WcUl-UXxBUWZuYlFlfFGZmZmpqYGFsaE5AEVgCtF</recordid><startdate>20190522</startdate><enddate>20190522</enddate><creator>Figueroa, Laura L.</creator><creator>Blinder, Malcolm</creator><creator>Grincavitch, Cali</creator><creator>Jelinek, Angus</creator><creator>Mann, Emilia K.</creator><creator>Merva, Liam A.</creator><creator>Metz, Lucy E.</creator><creator>Zhao, Amy Y.</creator><creator>Irwin, Rebecca E.</creator><creator>McArt, Scott H.</creator><creator>Adler, Lynn S.</creator><general>Royal Society</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20190522</creationdate><title>Bee pathogen transmission dynamics</title><author>Figueroa, Laura L. ; Blinder, Malcolm ; Grincavitch, Cali ; Jelinek, Angus ; Mann, Emilia K. ; Merva, Liam A. ; Metz, Lucy E. ; Zhao, Amy Y. ; Irwin, Rebecca E. ; McArt, Scott H. ; Adler, Lynn S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-jstor_primary_266655083</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Ecology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Figueroa, Laura L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blinder, Malcolm</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grincavitch, Cali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jelinek, Angus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mann, Emilia K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merva, Liam A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Metz, Lucy E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Amy Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Irwin, Rebecca E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McArt, Scott H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adler, Lynn S.</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Figueroa, Laura L.</au><au>Blinder, Malcolm</au><au>Grincavitch, Cali</au><au>Jelinek, Angus</au><au>Mann, Emilia K.</au><au>Merva, Liam A.</au><au>Metz, Lucy E.</au><au>Zhao, Amy Y.</au><au>Irwin, Rebecca E.</au><au>McArt, Scott H.</au><au>Adler, Lynn S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bee pathogen transmission dynamics: deposition, persistence and acquisition on flowers</atitle><jtitle>Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences</jtitle><date>2019-05-22</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>286</volume><issue>1903</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>9</epage><pages>1-9</pages><issn>0962-8452</issn><eissn>1471-2954</eissn><abstract>Infectious diseases are a primary driver of bee decline worldwide, but limited understanding of how pathogens are transmitted hampers effective management. Flowers have been implicated as hubs of bee disease transmission, but we know little about how interspecific floral variation affects transmission dynamics. Using bumblebees (Bombus impatiens), a trypanosomatid pathogen (Crithidia bombi) and three plant species varying in floral morphology, we assessed how host infection and plant species affect pathogen deposition on flowers, and plant species and flower parts impact pathogen survival and acquisition at flowers. We found that host infection with Crithidia increased defaecation rates on flowers, and that bees deposited faeces onto bracts of Lobelia siphilitica and Lythrum salicaria more frequently than onto Monarda didyma bracts. Among flower parts, bracts were associated with the lowest pathogen survival but highest resulting infection intensity in bee hosts. Additionally, we found that Crithidia survival across flower parts was reduced with sun exposure. These results suggest that efficiency of pathogen transmission depends on where deposition occurs and the timing and place of acquisition, which varies among plant species and environmental conditions. This information could be used for development of wildflower mixes that maximize forage while minimizing disease spread.</abstract><pub>Royal Society</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0962-8452
ispartof Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences, 2019-05, Vol.286 (1903), p.1-9
issn 0962-8452
1471-2954
language eng
recordid cdi_jstor_primary_26665508
source PubMed Central; JSTOR
subjects Ecology
title Bee pathogen transmission dynamics: deposition, persistence and acquisition on flowers
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-11-17T23%3A32%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bee%20pathogen%20transmission%20dynamics:%20deposition,%20persistence%20and%20acquisition%20on%20flowers&rft.jtitle=Proceedings%20of%20the%20Royal%20Society.%20B,%20Biological%20sciences&rft.au=Figueroa,%20Laura%20L.&rft.date=2019-05-22&rft.volume=286&rft.issue=1903&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=9&rft.pages=1-9&rft.issn=0962-8452&rft.eissn=1471-2954&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor%3E26665508%3C/jstor%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-jstor_primary_266655083%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26665508&rfr_iscdi=true