The hall of the Grand Tournament smelled of roses - Marille de Comte had just personally selected and...
At present, the task of preserving the purebred bees is more urgent than ever. Sa-mym effective method absolute control over mating and the only way to do this is (IO). The main value of AI is accurate information about the origin of the parents.
In the journal “Beekeeping” (No. 2, 2001), an article by the Ukrainian scientist V. Brovarsky begins with the phrase: “Despite the great importance and promise of the method of instrumental insemination, it has not found wide distribution. We see the main reasons for this in the imperfection of technology and equipment, which leads to large labor and time costs for obtaining fetal queens. Further, the author proposed his own version of the machine for this operation.
More than 12 years have passed since then, and nothing has moved! To date, certain successes in instrumental insemination of queens have been achieved in Poland, the Czech Republic, and Germany. We are informed that up to 80 thousand instrumentally inseminated queens are produced annually in Poland, which is about 80% of all produced in the world. There, AI has long been an indispensable element of technology and is widely used not only in breeding work, but also in practical beekeeping for the mass production of breeding queens. The literature reports on the great efficiency of instrumental insemination and the production of quality queens through the use of sperm from purebred drones bred in selected colonies.
From time to time, information about the practical application of this method appears in our periodicals on beekeeping. Classes on the AI technology of queens are held at the Academy of Beekeeping. The technology has long been mastered in FSUE PPH "Maikopskoe". In the magazine “Beekeeping” (No. 2, 2001) they wrote about the use of AI in Belarus.
The beekeeper V. Peretrukhin in the magazine “Beekeeping” (No. 5, 2010) described several options for the machines designed and manufactured by him and the necessary equipment for AI. The well-known beekeeper V. Krivchikov made a video about the use of the Czech machine by V. Vesela with elements of his modifications, which describes in detail the preparation of the equipment and the insemination operation.
In 2011 and 2012 beekeeping enthusiast K.V. Bogomolov organized in Russia master classes of AI specialist, Professor Jerzy Grabski (Poland). These courses, unfortunately, did not differ in mass attendance, but the book "Breeding bees and hatching early queens using instrumental insemination" (A. Borodachev, K. Bogomolov, E. Grabsky, S. Gurov), published after these events, caused great interest among beekeepers in Russia and the CIS. It is necessary to select families according to economic characteristics, it is necessary to breed queens and drones from the best maternal and paternal families. Next, you need a controlled mating process. This can only be achieved using instrumental insemination. But there are also opponents of interference in nature, for example, the apitherapist A.A. Gribkov (zh-l "Beekeeping" No. 1, 2013).
Many beekeepers are ready to master and apply AI technology in their apiaries, but the cost of the equipment stops them first of all. The German P.Schey machine costs 129 thousand rubles; Polish equipment - 96 thousand rubles; John Grim machine tools - 100 thousand rubles; Russian-made machine "Pchelarium" - 52 thousand rubles. Some have purchased the necessary equipment, but admit that they are not able to master the technological cycle for instrumental insemination of queens, since there are no accompanying recommendations. For them, this book was a great help. And the next master class on AI, held this summer in the Vladimir region, satisfied the curiosity of everyone. There were already 14 of them (data from K.V. Bogomolov).
I will express my personal opinion about this technology. Participating in the master class of E. Grabsky, he could not adapt to the provided equipment. Possibly poor eyesight is to blame. But, observing the work of other operators and analyzing the technological operations, I decided that something needs to be radically changed. It is not possible to work with the instrument with the hands when preparing the uterus for surgery and at the same time constantly adjust the focus and sharpness with the microscope adjustment knobs.
And most importantly, I was not satisfied with the reception of a rough, purely mechanical, with the help of gears and levers, the introduction of a capillary into the uterine vagina. After much experimentation, I decided to take the handle of the capillary in right hand, fixing it on a reliable stand, and with your fingers feel and direct the act of entering the capillary into the genital tract of the uterus. To enter at the right time the sperm of the drone and for its selection, he designed a special motorized micro-syringe. The suction-pressure command is given to it from the foot pedal. At the same time, the operator's hands were freed to carry out the necessary manipulations.
The necessary magnification of the object during the operation was achieved using modern optical devices — a head magnifier and glasses of 20x magnification with illumination (Fig. 1). This made it possible to abandon the expensive stereoscopic microscope and significantly reduce the cost of all equipment. There was no need to control the handles of the microscope to focus and sharpen. This is done by tilting the head closer to or further away from the object. Among the shortcomings of the glasses, plastic lenses, a rather small focal length and field of view should be noted. But since the procedure for inseminating the uterus itself takes about one minute, this can be completely neglected and adapted. For convenience, it was necessary to make capillaries with a nose bent at a certain angle, which did not affect the procedure at all. Of course, modern medical head loupes can be used. But this leads to a significant increase in the cost of equipment.
In addition, they do not have the necessary magnification for our operation.
In the autumn of 2012, he conducted all trial experiments. During the winter, I picked up the necessary Chinese-made components of decent quality at an affordable price.
Everything is ready for spring. On May 1, the first batch of queens was laid (Fig. 2). The apiary is located at a latitude of 46°.
Starting from mid-May, he regularly conducted test selections of sperm from drones (Fig. 3). Investigated its presence, quantity and quality, as well as methods of its storage and transportation. From May 23 and for two months, he painstakingly worked out the operation according to (Fig. 4).
Hopes for the success of this method were justified. Currently, successfully inseminated queens work successfully in families, and they will have to be carefully monitored throughout their lives. In the process of work, many observations appeared that are far from in favor of the mass introduction of instrumental insemination. It's all about the huge labor costs, and even in the most stressful period for the beekeeper. It is problematic to grow and select drones of the right age. It takes a catastrophic amount of time to collect sperm from them; besides, if you check everyone in a row, then by May 25 you can select mature sperm from only every tenth drone. In June-July, the indicators are better, but in any case, it takes several tens of minutes to select the required dose of sperm. So the 100 inseminated queens a day presented by the Poles is, in my opinion, a very big advertising exaggeration, even if the inseminator will be assisted by several assistants.
A beekeeper who takes up the development of AI queens is driven by love for his work, a huge interest in something new and a desire to understand how promising this direction is. Some beekeepers, having tried to master such a delicate matter, are inclined to believe that this is a whim, stupidity, self-indulgence, a waste of time and effort. Partly agree with this. Moreover, one should not dream of any “miracle queens”. Instrumentally inseminated queens are subject to the same defects and diseases as naturally inseminated ones. They are very poorly accepted in families, in addition, they begin to lay eggs later.
When he shared his findings with those who promote AI to the masses, he received the answer: “It takes three to five years to master the technology of instrumental insemination of queens.” Of course, it must be a special specialist. Young, with sharp eyesight and a firm hand. But back in the 1980s, there were attempts to introduce a regular unit into bee-breeding farms - a queen bee inseminator. It didn't stick then.
Certainly needed, but improved. First of all, technology should be at the service of scientists involved in experiments and experiments. Let the inquisitive people master it. But matkovodu, who in the hot season every hour counts, is unlikely to be able to do it. Instrumental insemination is also unprofitable for economic reasons, since there are a lot of expenses, and we do not have subsidies, unlike the EU countries. I declare this consciously, having spent a whole year on mastering IO.
An interesting opinion about the mass introduction of a candidate of biological sciences, a leading researcher at the Institute of Experimental Veterinary Medicine. Ya.R. Kovalenko (VIEV) RAAS Z.N. Sayfutdinova. As a geneticist, she is categorically against the mass, uncontrolled distribution of the technology of instrumental insemination of queen bees, since the consequences can be unpredictable. Apparently, it is worth listening to such statements.
V.V.YARANKIN
j-l "Beekeeping" No. 10, 2013
The topic of artificial insemination of queens is rarely covered in magazines for beekeepers. Too few people can be found who are eager to know the details of this case, as they are sure of its uselessness, complexity and futility. (Interest in this topic in Russia is currently quite large - ed.). Once, in a conversation on this topic, a familiar beekeeper, trying to generalize and simplify it, referred to everyday experience. There was, they say, a time when artificial insemination of cows in their village was in great fashion. The visiting specialist (whose appearance in the village, by the way, was always accompanied by jokes, jokes and bearded anecdotes) famously coped with his duty, but over time the matter came to naught - he could not stand the competition with the local thoroughbred, well-groomed and quite contented with life bull Atil. The villagers, according to him, were convinced that the offspring from conception in a natural way came out more viable and productive. So this is a cow, but what about the queen bee, where the technique of the insemination process is several orders of magnitude more complicated.
Talk about the unnaturalness, the complexity of the process, the vagueness of goals are often intertwined with ethical moments, which are expressed by the words “rape”, “gross interference with nature”, and even “depriving the uterus of the only joy in life. Hence the unambiguous conclusion - what good can be expected after all this?!
Particularly informed opponents of artificial insemination will certainly point out that the first successful experiments in this direction were carried out as early as 1927. However, since then, neither scientists nor practicing enthusiasts have achieved any special results - artificial insemination of queens (domestic production) is practically not on sale, there is no information about their outstanding or even exclusively positive qualities. On the contrary, there are rumors that such queens do not live long, often fly to mating, they are poorly received, or the bees get rid of them in a quiet shift. Then the question is - why all this? Artificial insemination of queens is guaranteed to match the breed, you say? But, firstly, how and by whom is this guaranteed? And, secondly, is there an equal sign between thoroughbredness and productivity? Will anyone really buy into an ad like “I am changing an extremely thoroughbred Carpathian for an exceptionally productive mongrel”?
You can also refer to world experience, which suggests that artificial insemination of queens has not been widely used on the globe, and even the Germans, who for a long time were world leaders in this direction, gradually lost interest in it, especially with regard to mass reproduction. And even, while conducting a tribal business, they prefer to move to the islands, and not persist in this dead end direction. So, it turns out that instrumental insemination of queens is a whim, stupidity, a waste of time and effort? It is strange, are there not many fools, including among scientists who defended on this topic doctoral dissertations, German professors and thousands of enthusiastic practitioners around the world?
Is purebred the key to productivity?
A beekeeper who has set out to conduct serious selection work in his apiary (whether for himself or for sale) usually begins with the selection of a breed. Most often, he stops at a bee that corresponds to the geographical location of his apiary, and this is commendable. Next, we face the question: how, in the process of breeding queens, to at least preserve, and as a maximum, improve their purebredness? After all, it is known that drones, making mating overflights of the territory, are able to fly away from their native family even for 15 kilometers! At the same time, the uterus during mating receives sperm from 5-10 males. In our conditions of a high density of bee colonies and a motley "male public" in the sky, it is almost impossible to guarantee that the queen will absorb the sperm necessary to maintain the purity of the breed. More often the opposite happens - in the womb of the queen there is a real "sperm vinaigrette". I'm not talking about closely related mating. It turns out that it is almost impossible to select for the purity of the breed. Indeed, in no area of animal breeding is selection at all impossible if we do not reliably know the paternal breed and characteristics!
Naturally, each matkovod tries to get out of this situation with the least losses. The easiest way is to convince yourself that alien drones that have flown in from nowhere are rare. Secondly, you can take care of a large number of drone brood in paternal families in your own apiary. It is good if it is at least on one side protected by water - drones and queens avoid flying over it, and such an obstacle (at least a kilometer long) is practically insurmountable for them. Thirdly, by hook or by crook, nomads should be kept away from the apiary, and the closest colleagues - "stationary workers", if possible, should be convinced of the advantages of the breed you have chosen, for prevention along the way and popularly explaining why backfast is "bee AIDS", plus insist on accepting gifts in the form of their own fetal queens.
Even easier is to conduct selection based solely on field trials. It winters well, brings a lot of honey, does not get sick, is not evil, which means that it is purebred.
The first approach, unfortunately, still does not give a 100% guarantee of maintaining the purity of the breed, the second - even more so. But to use non-pedigreed queens for breeding is a dead end. Science confidently says that even the most outstanding family in terms of economic characteristics is not able to pass on useful qualities to descendants if it is not purebred - splitting is inevitable. Therefore, in serious breeding farms, such a family is not allowed for selection.
Therefore, if a matkovodist (especially a professional one) plans serious breeding work, if for him such concepts as “linear selection”, “creation of analogue groups”, “paratype”, “genotype” are not empty sounds, and even more so if he wants achieve a fully controlled mating process, and so that a guaranteed purebred material participates in it, then artificial insemination of queens can become an indispensable tool that will significantly speed up and improve the quality of work.
Tribal work in the apiary
Now there are more and more beekeepers who are testing various lines of krainok and other imported breeds in their apiaries. More and more confident voices are heard claiming that these bees show the best results. What's the matter here? It seems to me that one of the important reasons is that European queens are more qualitatively selected, and this is a considerable merit of the fact that Western breeders have long and skillfully used artificial insemination. Yes, of course, it is not a panacea for all problems, but that which speeds up the selection process, contributes to its quality, that's for sure.
Yes, we love to talk about the virtues and advantages of Ukrainian and Carpathian women. But what, besides slogans, calls for patriotism and horror stories about a terrible tomorrow in the event of the expansion of imported breeds, can we answer? Flawless breeding material? Advanced technologies? The predominance of the scientific approach over the commercial one? Oh is it? Therefore, specialists in artificial insemination of queens could provide an invaluable service to serious breeders working with our domestic bees.
Enthusiasts
What motivates beekeepers who undertake to master the method of artificial insemination of queens? I think that, first of all, love and interest in something new, interesting, unusual. You can even call such people real naturalists. For some, artificial insemination of queens is rather an end in itself or seems to be a kind of exam for a professional. After all, indeed, the task is extremely difficult, but, having solved it at the proper level, having achieved success, you will easily get a pass to the “elite division”.
But not for everyone this activity is akin to a hobby. Many believe that they will get a truly effective tool, which, in the end, will significantly improve the quality of queens and, as a result, will determine the subsequent commercial benefit.
Polish example
After all, before our eyes is an eloquent example of neighboring Poland, where more than 40 breeders (only officially registered) have successfully bred and sold artificially inseminated queens without any problems. In this regard, they became one of the leaders, inseminating about 80 thousand bee queens per season, which is 90% of all queens fertilized in this way in the world! The Poles work mainly with several lines of the Krajina breed. However, not only - there are also lovers of Caucasian women in this country, who are also artificially inseminated. (Caucasian drone sperm is most often used to inseminate Krajina queens when obtaining first-generation custom queens - ed.)
An interesting detail is that the majority of artificially inseminated queens in Poland are sold without scarring test. After insemination, they are placed in isolation rooms with a small (20-25 pieces) number of bees, and then in a strong colony. There can be from 30 to 60 such insulators in one family. There they are kept for at least 48 hours, after which they are labeled. (Polish specialists in the overwhelming majority of cases mark queens at the stage of insemination - ed.), are transferred to forwarding cells and sent to the consumer. Thus, time, labor costs are saved, there is no need to maintain a large number of cores. All this makes it possible to keep relatively low prices for products - about 12 dollars per queen.
If the queen has not begun to worm or the bees have not accepted it, the manufacturer changes it to another. There is little marriage, within 10-15%. On sale there is also artificial insemination of queens with a scarring test, but they cost 4 times more.
In Poland, anyone can easily begin to master the process of artificial insemination of queens. It offers various courses, lectures, master classes on this topic, you can easily buy all the necessary equipment. However, if a beekeeper decides to sell his products, he must obtain a license, which is issued by the Ministry of Agriculture. To do this, you must officially complete the courses, pass the state exam, while fulfilling a number of requirements and conditions. For example, he is obliged to work only with breeds permitted for distribution in Poland. The work of such matkovod is under constant control. In turn, the state encourages the country's beekeepers to buy purebred artificially inseminated queens by returning the funds spent on their purchase (this practice also applies to veterinary drugs).
Yes, of course, we know our country well, so we don’t have much hope that the state will take upon itself to stimulate the purchase of purebred queens. This significantly undermines the prospects. But, having cast aside doubts, we can see the main thing - the experience of Poland eloquently indicates that it is quite possible to achieve success working with artificial insemination with queens. The Poles successfully coped with the stereotypes and negativity attributed to artificial insemination of queens. They have won the trust of consumers in the country. And they began to use it not only as breeding material with subsequent use for breeding their own purebred queens, but also for working in the honey collection.
Where to begin?
A few years ago, a friend and I set out to master artificial insemination of queens. Looking ahead, I’ll say that, having gone a short way from theory and buying equipment to the first experiments, I cooled down to this idea. According to my observations, such a fate awaits 90% of all who undertake artificial insemination. My friend remains so far among the few who continue the work they have begun - so far without any special results, but one can envy his determination.
We are self-taught. Of course, learning artificial insemination of queens from experienced teachers, one could quickly and deeply master the process, but this is not easy. Today you can take courses in Poland or Germany, but it's expensive, and besides, you have to come there with your own queens, drones, and preferably with your own artificial insemination machine or buy it on the spot - all this costs a decent penny. For example, German equipment costs about 15 thousand hryvnias. (In Russia, equipmentP. Schleycosts at least 80 thousand rubles - ed.).
We started by reading articles and watching videos. Those who are friendly with the Internet will find there enough material on the topic of interest. In theory, everything looks pretty simple, but after watching the video, it seems elementary in general. In practice, everything turned out to be much more complicated. In the process, sometimes the impression was created that the authors of articles and videos deliberately kept silent about important points and even deliberately introduced confusion. Therefore, many secrets and nuances, by trial and error, reached themselves. The process was full of difficulties, and at different stages - from obtaining sperm to replanting "artificial" queens in families.
Machine
One of the keys to success in any business is a quality tool. Any master of his craft will confirm this to you. The artificial insemination of queen bees is no exception. And although I am not inclined to overestimate this factor, nevertheless, I must admit that without it, the work of the matkovod would not be possible.
There are many manufacturers of devices, prices vary greatly, but in design they do not really differ from each other. The main operating elements of the device are as follows: a retainer or holder of the uterus in the form of a special plastic tube; stingy (dorsal) and ventral (abdominal) hooks; a glass micro-capillary (aka a syringe with a very thin needle). Since the work to be done is the thinnest, akin to jewelry, where any careless movement is unacceptable and even the slightest trembling of the hand leads to the most unfortunate consequences for the uterus, all moving elements are guided and fixed on hinges. The kit also includes a microscope, because the work is carried out at a magnification of 8-12 (20) times. After the uterus is placed in the holder, it is necessary that it stops moving, otherwise all the work will inevitably go down the drain. Therefore, the uterus is put to sleep with the help of anesthesia - carbon dioxide. To do this, use a cylinder with the mentioned substance and a reducer that doses the amount of gas. And to top it off, for better visibility, the kit includes a cold light lamp that does not give ultraviolet radiation.
When we first started, it seemed to us that the main thing in the matter of artificial insemination of queens is to have a device and tools. And when, finally, everything was ready, the equipment, shining with its sterility, was impatiently waiting for the start of the new season together with us, it seemed to us that the main difficulties were already behind us. How wrong we were...
We take from the drone ...
The first serious problem that had to be faced was the selection of sperm. Everything would be much easier if any male bee that we managed to identify in the apiary would suit us for the purpose of artificial insemination. However, insects are suitable for us, bred only in paternal families designated for this purpose, which are distinguished by their purebred and high productivity. And here is the problem, which stems from the fact that the bee "men" are real cosmopolitans. Having taken off from one family, having flown, stretching their wings properly, but not fulfilling their “marital duty”, they, apparently, in the hope of great luck, can easily fly into another family. The guard bees do not interfere with this. Such migration is carried out constantly, and almost any family is full of a motley male public, flown not only from nearby hives, but even from neighboring apiaries. In addition, as you know, the drone becomes sexually mature on the 12-14th day after birth, at the same time, it is also not recommended to use drones older than 21 days for artificial insemination - its sperm is already of little use for procreation. It is unrealistic to determine his age and readiness to become a father by external signs, which means that it is impossible to exclude the senseless death of too young and old drones during sperm sampling. How to get out of this situation?
There are two ways
First. In paternal families, drone-inoculated combs are placed in an isolation room, where, as they are born, the drones are marked with paint of various colors at an interval of once every two days. Then, when their time comes, scattered males are collected in different families and used for their intended purpose.
Second. The entrances of paternal families are blocked by dividing bars. Born drones do not have the opportunity to fly out, and other drones - to penetrate into the family. In order to make it easier to search for sperm-bearers, the drone brood is often isolated (with Hahnemannian lattices) in one of the hive bodies, where potential successors of the bee genus subsequently and massively accumulate.
Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages. So the first, despite the fact that it is much easier to mark drones than queens, is quite laborious; in the second case, some of the drones often die, getting stuck in the slots of the dividing grid, it is more difficult to determine their exact age, and besides, before sperm sampling, they need an artificially organized cleansing flight.
The technique for collecting sperm is simple. Drones are taken with fingers and kneaded very easily. After a slight pressure on the chest and abdomen, the drone throws out the genital organ and quickly (as in natural mating) dies. Continuing to knead it, we achieve the appearance of sperm. It is not always of the right quality. If the sperm is very liquid, almost white or slightly creamy, it is not ripe; if thick and closer to a light brown color - overripe. In both cases, it cannot be used. Creamy yellow sperm (the color of fermented baked milk) is ideal. The literature says that the mass of semen released in this way is about 1.7 mg. In reality, an average of 1.0 mg can be collected with a capillary. At the same time, one must be extremely careful and attentive. Mucus accompanying the release of sperm, air should not get into the tube. Complete sterility is important - sperm should not come into contact with foreign objects, such as glass, skin, nails, etc.
It is known that for the fertilization of the uterus, it is necessary to enter 8 mg (microliters - ed.) sperm. It turns out that for this we need to use eight drones. It seems to be a little. But it only seems. In practice, I was simply shocked at how many "empty" drones there really are (naturally, from among those who should already be sexually mature by age). It was possible to get at least some sperm only by passing a dozen or even more males! And suitable sperm was even rarer! It turned out that in order to collect the necessary portion for the insemination of a single queen, it was necessary to destroy an unthinkable amount of the "male" population of the hive! It became somehow uncomfortable from almost half a bucket of material used and a lot of time spent and meager results.
And also the obvious approach of the “drone default”. Okay, when you are studying and you can use any bee “in pants” to acquire skills, but in practice you will have to work with breeding drones exclusively from paternal families - how much will it take ?!
I have not learned how to determine the sexual maturity of a drone by its external signs (with the exception of very young and old individuals), probably it is impossible. The information that such drones accumulate at extreme limits and in weak families did not help to increase productivity - my experience does not allow me to confirm this.
Added work and the need to often go to the extraction of drones. After all, being outside the family, the drone becomes sterile after 15 minutes. You can increase this time to an hour by placing the drones in a box with a honey frame.
It is often said that the process of insemination of the uterus is a matter of minutes. Yes, this is true, if you do not count and do not take into account the time spent collecting or harvesting sperm. A specially trained assistant can partially solve the problem, but it's all time, money and additional difficulties ...
We give the uterus
If you suffer for a long time, something will work out: with difficulty, but our capillary is finally full of the prescribed dose of sperm.
Ahead is the culmination of the process - its introduction into the womb of the queen bee. The process, devoid of even the shadow of a sacrament, is sheer mechanics. The uterus is placed in the holder of the apparatus, lulled by the supply of carbon dioxide, the vagina is opened with the help of the dorsal and abdominal hook, the capillary is very carefully brought in, and sperm is introduced into the body of the uterus. The operation site is illuminated with a beam of cold light, and a microscope is used for better visibility. I describe this process schematically, it is difficult to convey it in words, seeing once is better than hearing a hundred times. Therefore, for those who come to practice, I would advise you to see how an experienced matovod does it with his own explanations, or, in extreme cases, watch a video on this topic. I want to talk about some of the nuances and difficulties that may arise during this operation. And, despite their apparent simplicity, there will be many.
Unfortunately, you can't expect that with all your diligence and skill, you will be able to inseminate better than a drone does. The corresponding organs of the uterus are very thin and delicate, therefore, with all diligence, damage is inevitable, and our task is to ensure that, as the forensic experts say, "the resulting injuries are compatible with life." And for this it is necessary that the movements are error-free. The slightest inaccuracy leads to sad for future mother consequences. In addition, you must act quickly: you cannot keep the uterus under anesthesia for more than two minutes.
Complete sterility to match the operating room is important. Therefore, no matter how much one wants and no matter what additional costs it leads to, all actions related to artificial insemination of queens will have to be transferred from the favorite workplace of most beekeepers - the roof of a neighboring hive - to a specially equipped laboratory.
Difficulties can arise, as they say, out of the blue. So, one colleague said that from the very first steps he encountered the following problem: after immobilization, the uterus decreased in size, shrank, the chitinous body lost its elasticity, and it was almost impossible to work with it. Later, the reason was found out: the carbon dioxide, leaving the cylinder, was cold and simply froze the insect, causing a corresponding reaction. Correcting the situation is simple - the outgoing gas is allowed through a glass filled with water heated to 40 ° C. Water also helps determine the right dose of carbon dioxide - the gas should rise from the bottom of the glass at a rate of 2 bubbles per second.
Or this problem: in the literature on artificial insemination it is said that it is better to inseminate queens on the 11-13th day from birth. There are beekeepers who strictly follow this rule. I don’t know how they do it, but I ran into the problem that already on the 6-7th day, young queens, following the call of nature, strove from the nucleus to fly around. However, a grate blocked their way. For many queens, such mocking imprisonment ended badly - they died. It is possible that bees also contributed to their death, which regarded the impossibility of the successor of the genus to fly around as an inferiority.
After the uterus has received its portion of sperm, the gas supply is stopped. The queen bee begins to move, and she is placed in a large cage along with 20-25 bees and then - per comb in a strong colony. Bees should help the progenitor get rid of excess sperm. If this is not done, there is a great threat that the uterus will not start to worm - microscopic doses of semen, being where they are not supposed to be, are able to block the testicles. In the cell of the uterus, it is necessary to stay for about 48 hours, while it is desirable that the retinue consists of young bees that are able to feed the ward with royal jelly in plenty. Otherwise, the uterus will not gain required mass and physiologically not prepared for motherhood. (According to Polish technology, immediately after insemination, the queen is placed in an entomological cage with 350 bees. In such cages there are small areas of combs, which makes it possible to track the start of oviposition - ed.).
And now, finally, the artificially inseminated uterus is ready to perform its direct duties.
The replanting of such a queen in a family requires more care than in the case of a naturally inseminated one. The bees, apparently, sensing a catch, cannot decide whether the marriage loss of their new mistress was successful or not. As a result, they may refuse to feed her with royal jelly, prepare a replacement by pulling away the fistulous queen cells, or simply kill her. And the uterus itself, deprived of satisfaction with mating games, does not feel adequately filled with the male fraction necessary for a long and happy motherhood, often flies away for mating, during which it dies. To avoid this, replanting must be carried out, I repeat, with special care, it is better to layer on a young bee, and close the notch (at least before the beginning of scarring) with a dividing grid.
Debut - it is the most difficult
The hardest part about artificial insemination is the beginning. My first queens died while still in the nuclei, waiting for the scheduled date of the operation. Many of them departed during and immediately after it. Part became infertile, flew off, were changed, and so on ... However, if in the debut, during the period of the emergence of problems and the search for their solutions, queens who laid their heads on the altar of progress and in the name of my personal experience, there were a lot, then gradually, with experience, they became less. After 2-3 seasons, I achieved my best result - 70-80% of successful inseminations. The volumes were small - no more than 50 queens per summer.
Of course, the results could have been more impressive if I had had a mentor or had I taken appropriate training courses, or if I had approached the matter more thoroughly. Moreover, I think that this path is more correct, and I would recommend it to everyone who decides to do this business. I was driven, first of all, by interest, and also by the desire to understand how promising this direction is, whether it has a future and how bright it is.
bright spot
Nowadays, buying a device and everything necessary for artificial insemination of queens is not a problem. There is no shortage of information, with a strong desire, you can take the appropriate courses in Poland, Germany, Russia, or master the process yourself. However, there are still few beekeepers involved in this business. I have not seen in the media advertisements for the sale of artificially inseminated queens. Why it happens?
My experience is that the cost of artificially inseminated queens is higher than with natural crossing. After all, it is necessary to take into account the cost of the equipment itself, the time and labor spent on mastering the technology. yes and exit finished products with natural insemination, it is higher than with artificial insemination (the best queen breeders of the country, with one or two assistants, are able to give out 4-5 thousand fetal queens - a result that is unthinkable with artificial insemination). I have not noticed that artificial insemination of the uterus has a higher productivity or some other superior qualities, so it is not necessary to expect that consumers, burning with impatience, will be ready to overpay. Especially in the atmosphere of persistent prejudice towards such uterus in Ukraine. And it is unlikely to pass quickly, given that it is difficult to achieve a consistently high result with a minimum amount of marriage. That is, the mass reproduction of artificially inseminated queens is not economically profitable. “But what about the Polish experience?” - you ask. Probably, we should not forget the main thing - in this country there is a powerful support for the industry by the state and the European Union. In particular, it reimburses the beekeeper for the money spent on the purchase of purebred queens, which fundamentally changes the situation.
Only one thing remains - artificial insemination in the service of breeders who are seriously involved in breeding. We have already said how successful this tool is in the hands of a competent specialist. What opportunities does it give in maintaining purebreds, creating lines, hybrids, and so on. I won't tell you about all matkovodov, but none of the known to me uses artificial insemination. This is considered pampering, unnecessary complexity, unpromising, and so on. Kill the season for the development of technology?! This is unthinkable! “We live well without it” - this is, perhaps, the main thing from the generalized opinion. Few of them try to look far ahead and educate themselves scientific approach to the point. Most are busy with pressing problems, the main of which is the maximum increase in production volumes with a minimum drop in quality. Purebred, and of course, is implied, but not particularly pursued. The golden calf grounds even dreams. “So that the May demand and the price of queens remain until August” - this is the most rosy of them.
I don’t have the right to condemn and lecture, and I don’t want to, but I’ll share my fear: probably, the result will be that very soon Western breeds of bees, selected more qualitatively and soundly (including with the use of artificial insemination technologies) will begin to displace the Carpathian and Ukrainian steppe . The consequences can be bleak, both for the future of our breeds, and for the breeders known today. However, such words and fears do not really work on them, breaking into condescending “enough for our lifetime” or “let's move on to the edge, business is something ...”.
Myths and reality
Now I am not engaged in instrumental removal of queens.
The case, no doubt, entertaining, but time-consuming. I prefer to remove queens in a natural way, as it is simpler. But I appreciate the experience gained during artificial insemination, I don’t regret the time spent, I’m not going to sell the device - everything is changeable in this world ...
In conclusion, I want to dispel a few myths associated with artificial insemination of queens. I noticed that more often the attitude towards them is polar - from enthusiastic, when all unthinkable virtues are attributed to them, to sharply negative. At the same time, rarely does anyone refer to their own experience, more often - they heard, read, I guess.
So some believe that artificially inseminated queens practically do not swarm and show record honey yields. There is even a version that the low swarming of bees is due to the fact that the uterus was subjected to anesthesia. And high performance is attributed to another victory of the human mind. At the same time, another strong opinion is that instrumentally inseminated queens do not live long, a maximum season, or even less. Personally, it was strange for me to hear this from the lips of pundits ...
My experience is that artificially inseminated queens in work are practically no different from ordinary ones. And they swarm, it happened, in the second year, and both turned out to be among the record holders and demanded an early replacement due to low productivity. It happened that they quickly died, and sometimes lived up to 4 years. In a word, everything is as usual. So if you are hoping that by mastering artificial insemination and thus obtaining a miracle queen that can easily be equated with an extra can of honey, my advice is not to have any illusions.
V. Karasev, Kharkiv region
Pasichnik, No. 6 (87),
june
b 2011
of the year
(abbreviated before posting on the site)
Go to section heading: Bees
Mating in bees
Sexual maturity of drones occurs on the 8-14th day after they leave the cells. In quiet warm weather, they fly out several times a day at a distance of up to 4 km from the hive. Mating of queens with unrelated drones, as a rule, occurs only in the air, outside the hive. At the age of 3-5 days, in good weather, young queens also fly out of the hive in the usual approximate flight, during which they get acquainted with the location of the hive and the notch. After several such flights, on the 7-10th day of life, the uterus already makes mating flights, lasting 15-20 minutes. Bad weather can delay the departure of queens for mating, sometimes by 2-3 weeks. Mating of queens with drones usually takes place during the warmest hours of the day at a temperature not lower than 25°C. Most queens fly out to mate 1-2 times, and some queens - up to 3-4 times. On average, a queen mates with 6-8 drones.
Previously, it was believed that the uterus mates with only one drone. Later, it was found that during one flight, she mates with several drones and flies out to mate not once, but several times. During mating with all drones except the last one, the uterus does not clamp the stinging chamber to such an extent that the copulatory organ of the drone is torn off. After its detachment, further mating of the queen becomes impossible, and she returns to the hive, having a “sign of fertilization”, or a “train”, a white film protruding from the end of her abdomen. From this film, the uterus is released in the hive after a few hours.
Drones usually fly at a height of 10-12 m, gathering in large numbers in certain places. Infertile queens secrete an aromatic secret that attracts drones. Drones and queens avoid flying near bodies of water; they don't fly over water. This is explained by the fact that during mating, the queen, together with the drone, fall to the ground, and, having fallen into the water, the queen would inevitably die.
During the mating of the uterus, the sperm of the drone, collected in the seminal vesicles, enters with force into the ejaculatory canal. The mucus of the accessory glands is pushed out after the sperm, moving it forward. Sperm is sprayed into the paired oviducts of the uterus. After mating, in the hive, the sperm slowly flows out of the paired oviducts, and part of it penetrates through the canal into the seminal receptacle. If in one flight the uterus received an insufficient amount of sperm, then on the second day it flies out again. During the mating period, 5-7 million spermatozoa are collected in the uterus in the seminal receptacle.
If the queen does not mate with drones within 30-35 days, then she usually loses her ability to mate, stops flying out of the hive and becomes drone (lays unfertilized eggs from which drones develop).
In higher animals, the process of fertilization of the egg occurs after mating. However, in the queen bee, these two processes are separated in time. At the beginning of her life, the queen mates with the drones, and no fertilization occurs. The eggs are fertilized as the queen lays eggs throughout her life. In higher animals, eggs acquire the ability to develop only after fertilization. In bees, as in many other insects, the eggs laid by the queen are capable of development without fertilization. These unfertilized eggs develop into drones. Female individuals; (queens and worker bees) develop from fertilized eggs.
How we achieved success in the insemination of queen bees
To develop new lines and breeds of farm animals with better hereditary inclinations and higher production, livestock breeders widely use selection work. They cross one or another animal of their choice with each other, get offspring from them, check its productivity, cross again, and in this way finally fix the desired qualities in one or another line. In all these cases, the breeder must know both the father and the mother of the resulting offspring well. For this purpose, manual mating is used, that is, the creation of a meeting between a male and a female in an isolated pen with the indispensable control of a person.
In beekeeping, breeding work has not been carried out so far in the Union. A small individual beekeeping farm could not create the conditions for its deployment.
Rice. 1. Uterus brought for the operation of artificial insemination
Only now are the first steps towards its organization being taken. Tribal work in beekeeping in the very near future should take on a wide scope and gain great importance.
The beekeeping industry has a number of advantages over others. The uterus is able to lay a lot of eggs, which accelerates the rate of reproduction of the material from the breeding uterus by dozens of times; drones inherit properties only from their mother, since, developing from unfertilized eggs, they, as is known, do not have a father. This greatly facilitates the selection work.
Producers, i.e. queens and drones, as well as worker bees, grow out of the egg very quickly: the uterus at 17 days, the bee-21, the drone-24. Puberty also quickly sets in: in the uterus after 7-10 days, in the drone - in 10-14 after leaving the cell.
Despite these features, we also have negative sides. Bees have one feature that greatly complicates the selection work. This feature lies in the fact that the uterus mates with the drone outside the hive and even outside the apiary - in the air. This makes it now impossible to cover the uterus with the drone we would like to cover it, and excludes the possibility of choosing a male to cover the uterus. This feature greatly hinders the ability to create new breeds of bees.
For a long time (more than a hundred years), various researchers have attempted to solve the problem of controlling the mating of queens and drones. Prof. I. M. Kulagin and others suggested releasing selected queens and drones for mating late in the evening, that is, when the years of drones usually stop in the apiary. Others tried to achieve mating in large greenhouses, in rooms, on a leash, in beehives, on ships taken far out to sea, on an isolated island or in deserts, in special chance points, etc.
In all cases, some success was achieved. However, it is clear that with these methods we can only follow the origin of the drones, but we cannot ensure the mating of the queen with one specific drone chosen by us.
Further, attempts were made to introduce into the genital tract of the uterus either directly the organ of the drone, or the sperm of the drone using a pipette or syringe. Such attempts have been made for a long time, including in the former. Russia (P.R. Shumilin, Shirokov, O.N. Paleyachuk, Prof. Malyshev and others) with partial success.
Rice. 2. Brood of artificially inseminated queen N° 44 during her stay in the nucleus
Pvc. 3. Brood of artificially inseminated queen No. 88
Only in 1926, the American Watson put this matter on a practical footing by constructing a special glass syringe. Insemination of queens with this syringe gave him partial success, although, however, most of the queens, along with fertilized eggs, also carried unfertilized ones.
Watson's method from 1928 to the present was tested and applied in the USSR by A. S. Mikhailov, who worked until 1931 at the Tula beekeeping station (now the Institute of Beekeeping). He managed to achieve 25% success, but the percentage of queens that carried fertilized eggs after the operation did not exceed 10%.
In 1931, I. L. Lysenko, who worked with A. S. Mikhailov, proposed at the Institute of Beekeeping to inseminate queens by inserting the everted penis of the drone into the genital opening of the uterus expanded with the help of tweezers and transferring the seed drone by further pressing on the belly of the drone. fluid (sperm) of it into the genital tract of the uterus. When tearing off its head, a full-grown drone, as you know, quickly twists its organ. The method itself is not new. However, I. A. Lysenko used a Watson machine for the operation, in which, just as during insemination with a syringe, he tied the uterus with a thread (Fig. 1). In this way it was inseminated in 1931. 13 queens and of them gave brood of 3 queens, or 23% of the number of operated ones. The experience of 1931 resolved the issue in principle and proved the possibility of successful insemination of queen bees by direct insertion of the male genital organ into the reproductive tract of the uterus.
The simplicity of the method and its availability raised the question of its verification and further development. The syringe and all the equipment associated with it is now an unnecessary add-on, with the exception of hybridization experiments, when we cannot directly insert the male genital organ, for example, due to its large size and must use a syringe.
Here it would be appropriate to emphasize the difference between the goals that artificial insemination sets for itself in animal husbandry and beekeeping. In animal husbandry, it pursues the goal of using male sperm more economically to inseminate more females. We do not have this goal at all.
Rice. 4. Brood of artificially inseminated queen No. 85
On the other hand, during insemination (especially with a syringe), one sometimes has to use the sperm of not one, but two or more drones. Here the goal is to achieve control over mating, i.e., artificial insemination of queens achieves what manual mating gives in animal husbandry. This fundamental difference cannot be ignored.
The test of the method was scheduled for 1932. Unfortunately, I. A. Lysenko refused to go with us and (the team of the Institute of Beekeeping on 20/II 1932 went to the Tsyurupinka bee incubation station. None of us owned the equipment Nevertheless, this did not bother us and we decided to develop the intended topic.D.N. Kozlov and K.A. Muzalevskaya pretty soon mastered the technique of so-called "manual" insemination (this is not entirely true, because how, in addition to hands, tweezers take part in the operation) and things went smoothly.
However, with the percentage of luck, things were at first glance very bad. Of the 85 queens inseminated on May 31, only one queen (Fig. 2) was inseminated and gave exclusively bee offspring (Fig. 2), the fourth inseminated in order (No. 4).
We knew the reason for this failure, and even at the Institute of Beekeeping we pointed out shortcomings in the technique of inseminating queens. The fact is that before us, both A. Mikhailov and Watson and others took uteruses 7 days and older for surgery. It was assumed that such uterus is suitable for surgery. But it is clear that success depends on how far we have caught the state of sexual hunting of the uterus. It is known that the success of artificial insemination of agricultural crops depends entirely on this. animals.
In queens, sperm, as you know, is sucked into a special sac-semen duct and from there, as needed, it is spent to fertilize the eggs when they pass through the unpaired oviduct. Nevertheless, we know that under the influence of sexual arousal, the uterus flies out to mate. Obviously, some, yet unknown to us, maturation of the reproductive system in the uterus takes place. The fact that we do not know the details of this process does not give us the right to ignore it.
Rice. 5. Nucleuses, with queens intended for artificial insemination, are equipped with B. M. Muzalyavsky’s system
By the end of May, our team accepted the proposal of D. I. Kozlov to inseminate only such queens that stubbornly strive to exit the nucleus through the Hahnemannian lattice and thereby prove that they are in a state of stalemate hunting. On May 31, 5 such queens under guard were inseminated. The result exceeded all expectations. Of the 5 queens, 4, or 80%, gave normal bee brood. At the same time, one entered 3 days after the operation, two after 4 days and one after 14. At the same time, we reported this exceptional success to Prof. G. A. Kozhevnikov.
In June, the next batch of 9 queens was inseminated. They gave bee brood 4 or 44%. In the process of work, B. M. Muzalevsky proposed a simple mother trap. shown in fig. 5 and 6. With a narrow hole, it is inserted into the notch of the core, and in the last wide one a dividing grid is inserted. The bees pass through the lattice, and the queen, which entered under the influence of hunting for mating, being unable to pass through the lattice, usually runs along the upper grid, where it is easily noticed by the on-duty observer. In July, 15 queens were inseminated, which entered such traps, and 7 of them gave birth to a bee race. True, two of these seven queens, after two days of operations, again showed a hunt, were re-inseminated, and both were introduced. Thus, from the number of operations (15 + 2 = 17), seven ma-currents give 41% of luck.
In total, out of 29 queens (31 operations), inseminated in a state of estrus and checked, 15 entered and gave birth to bee brood. This is 51.7% of the number of queens, and 48.4% of the number of operations. In total, 33 queens were inseminated in the state of sexual hunting, but four of them were killed by bees or fell in the first three days after the operation and therefore are considered unverified.
We owe our success to the correct use of the queen bee's estrus. This can be seen, among other things, from the following figures.
Rice. Fig. 6. General view of a group of experimental cores with mat traps
T. Kozlov teaches the technique of artificial insemination vols. Tsaregrodtseu (Vyatka) and Bovin
On Sev. Caucasian zonal beekeeping station when inseminating queens in the same way, but without taking into account sexual hunting, out of 65, 6 fetal ones were obtained (9.5% luck). I. A. Lysenko in 1932 at the Institute of 23 inseminated received 3 fetal, or 13%. It is important to note that when queens are inseminated by the introduction of the drone's genitals, almost all queens produce exclusively bee brood. We had 12 such queens for 16, or 75% (16 is obtained because queen No. 4 was added, inseminated not in hunting). We explain this as follows. Drone sperm has a certain density. As a result, each drop of it, released by a naturally inseminated uterus, contains sperm
matozoids. When taking semen into a syringe, we involuntarily create a mixture of semen with the mucus of the accessory glands. Droplets of such "sperm" often do not contain spermatozoa at all, and for this reason, part of the eggs of the uterus are laid unfertilized. With the introduction of the organ, we do not violate the composition of the sperm.
Some of our queens (nos. 4, 71, 96, 89) were transplanted into normal colonies and they produced brood for incubation. The average daily laying of eggs of the uterus N "4 is equal to more than 1,000 eggs during the month, but we are not able to expand on this issue in detail in this article.
The tray mother trap is of great methodological importance. It allows you to objectively observe the manifestation of estrus, to study its dependence on the weather, the age of the queens, the time of day and other factors. We collected interesting material on this issue in 1932. There is no doubt that 1933 will allow to finalize the work begun and to transfer to socialist beekeeping science an accessible method of artificial insemination of queen bees, which will make it possible already in the second five-year plan to expand and put breeding work in beekeeping to the proper height, to begin serious and promising work on the qualitative improvement of bees.
B. M. Muzalevsky and D. N. Kozlov
Magazine "Beekeeping", No. 2, OGIZ SELKHOZGIZ, Moscow, 1933
Dear visitor, you have entered the site as an unregistered user. We recommend that you register or enter the site under your name.
ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION OF QUEES The first attempts at artificial insemination of queens by hand were made by McLean (1887). The development of modern instrumental equipment for artificial insemination was first started by Watsan (1927), later improved by Nolan (1937), Mackenzie and Roberts (1948) and others. Equipment for artificial insemination of queen bees consists of: 1) installation for anesthesia of the uterus with carbon dioxide; 2) devices for holding and fixing the uterus in an appropriate position on the plinth; 3) three working instruments with mechanical adjustment of movement (dorsal and abdominal hook and graduated syringe); 4) a binacular loupe for carrying out work under a magnification of 6-20 times. Changes have been made to the usual technique of instrumental insemination of queen bees. In the Mackenzie-Roberts apparatus, the syringe holder was attached not directly to a vertical rod, but to a thin, oblique rod that allowed side sliding and finer adjustment. In addition, the glass capillary of the syringe is bent at the upper end and its two parts are connected to each other by a flexible plastic tube. The glass tip of the syringe is made from capillaries with an outer diameter of 1.6 mm and an inner diameter of 0.9 mm. Then the capillaries are drawn out by heating on a small gas flame, while their inner diameter is reduced to 0.18 mm. During insemination, the tip of the syringe is directly inserted into the vagina by means of a rotational movement. Experiments were carried out on the storage of sperm of drones, which showed that canned sperm can be successfully used for insemination of queens. Sperm was preserved with streptomycin sulfate, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, or a mixture thereof and stored in sealed glass ampoules at temperatures of 24 and 13–15 C. For artificial insemination of queens, sperm was taken 1 3, 1 7, 2 1 and 3 5 weeks after storage. The best ability for insemination after 35 weeks was preserved in semen stored in streptomycin sulfate at a temperature of 13-15 °C. From 6 queens artificially inseminated with this sperm, 35 queens-daughters were bred. Artificially inseminated queens in terms of life expectancy in bee colonies are not inferior to naturally mated ones. Positive results were obtained during the storage of drone sperm by deep freezing in liquid nitrogen (-19 6 °C) and its successful transportation to various countries. Using diluents (bicarbonate-phosphate medium for bull sperm and medium for sheep sperm according to S. P. Belyakov), it is possible to inseminate several barren queens with the sperm of one drone when it is necessary to achieve particularly close inbreeding. Artificial insemination will find great application in the linear breeding of bees. Artificial insemination of queens does not require special skill, but it must be carried out quickly, without hesitation and without wounding the uterus. It is more convenient to perform this operation with two people. The uterus is recommended to be euthanized with CO2. Such anesthesia has almost no effect on the subsequent behavior of the uterus; after the use of other anesthetics, the uterus begins to lay eggs only 30-50 days after insemination. The amount of sperm introduced with each injection should not be too large. The best results are achieved with two inseminations 24 hours apart, using 4 mm3 of semen each. When collecting sperm from drones, care should be taken to ensure that mucus that differs in color from semen does not get into the syringe. The uterus is inseminated only after they reach puberty, which occurs at different times, depending on the season of the year and weather conditions. Drones are taken at the age of 12-20 days after they emerge from pupae. With strict adherence to the rules for artificial insemination queens get almost 100% success rate. Homogeneous mixing of semen from a large number of drones in the spermatheca of the uterus is effective tool increasing the population of bees during their breeding and allows to reduce inbreeding. According to a number of researchers, such mixing does not occur during instrumental insemination. By washing and centrifugation a homogeneous mixing of the seed was achieved. It has been proven that due to this treatment there is a uniform distribution of the seed in the spermatheca of the uterus. Apis mellifera's sperm speed is very slow (0.017 mm/min), so mixing of drone sperm is difficult. According to Martinho (1979), within 20 days the eggs receive only sperm from one or two drones. It is believed that the spermatozoa of each drone are formed inside the spermatheca into aggregates. The formation of seed agglomerates leads to the fact that even when mating a queen with 17 drones, the resulting worker bees are often the daughters of only one or two drones. The Polish scientist Woike (1982) made an interesting experiment. 160 queens instrumentally inseminated 3 mm3 of semen. Queens were placed in honeycomb cores containing a different number of worker bees - from 0 to 1000 (8 groups). The nuclei were outside. 2 days after insemination, 5 out of 20 queens without bees died. The rest contained some semen in their oviducts. Almost all queens surrounded by 100 or more worker bees noted the absence of semen in the oviducts. The smallest number of spermatozoa (1.4 and 1.2 million) got into the spermatheca of queens kept in honeycomb nuclei without bees. The presence of 50 worker bees doubled the number of spermatozoa entering the spermatheca (2.6 and 2.7 million). A further increase in the number of worker bees to 1000 did not increase or only slightly increased the number of spermatozoa in the spermatheca. h A gradual increase in the bee population led to an increase in temperature in the club from 18 to 31.6 °C. Thus, it was concluded that in order to ensure a normal amount of spermatozoa in the spermatheca of instrumentally inseminated queens kept in nuclei outdoors, at least 350 worker bees should be in the retinue. A noticeable seasonal effect on the success of insemination was found: it decreased at later insemination dates. The period between insemination and oviposition increased towards the end of the season (from 5.7 days in April to 14.3 days in September). Instrumentally inseminated queens start laying eggs 3-5 days later than naturally mated ones. The best results were achieved when the queens were inseminated in the spring - on the 10-12th day, and in June and July - on the 5-6th day after their hatching. The death of artificially fertilized queens can be caused by trauma to the uterus during manipulations, the introduction of too much sperm, the attack of worker bees, etc. oviducts. For prevention purposes, it is recommended to increase the number of bees accompanying the queens in the cells (this will contribute to more thorough care and cleaning of the queens) or to add an antibiotic to the sperm. Mortality of artificially inseminated queens depends to a large extent on their age. Thus, during the insemination of queens at the age of 1 to 4 days, their highest mortality was observed (40-85.9%), and the number of spermatozoa in the spermatheca was small (2.658 million on average in 1 spermatheca). The mortality of old queens (21-47 days) was low (0-26.7%), but the number of spermatozoa in the spermatheca was also low (2.356 million). These indicators were the most optimal in queens 4-15 days of age: mortality is below 25%, the number of sperm is about 4 million. Based on the results obtained, artificial insemination is recommended for queens 5-14 days of age. Recently, artificial insemination of queens has been increasingly used in beekeeping practice. This is due to a number of reasons: Insemination of the uterus with not one, but several (7-10) drones makes it difficult to control the mating of producers and prevents the selection necessary for selection work. The use of random points is not effective enough, because in conditions of high saturation with bees it is often difficult to find zones free from alien drones with an isolation radius of at least 10 km. Using artificial insemination, it is possible to obtain fetal queens regardless of weather conditions. It is not particularly difficult to hatch drones and infertile queens in the spring, however, due to low temperatures, natural mating during this period is impossible. With the help of artificial insemination, it is possible to obtain fetal queens in early dates, in particular, by the beginning of the formation of spring layering. With artificial insemination, there is no need for nuclei, and the loss of queens from damage and diseases arising in the process of insemination is insignificant and does not exceed 10%. It is noticed that varroatosis significantly affects the quality of the resulting queens. In families, their self-change is often observed. This may be due to the low quality of drones due to their significant damage by mites. Artificial insemination of queens provides reliable control over both the quality of the drones themselves and the amount of injected sperm. At the apiary of the Institute of Beekeeping in the Ryazan region, strong families that have come into a swarm state are used as a foster family to breed queens. Queen cells are laid on 12-hour grafted larvae. On the 10th day after inoculation, the queen cells are enclosed in cells and placed in foster colonies between frames with brood of different ages. The cells are supplied with food, and 8-10 bees from the same family are previously given to each cell. After leaving the queen cells, the infertile queens are culled. The host family contains up to 50 queens for the entire period during which they are inseminated. This method, in comparison with the common method of keeping in nucleuses, provides easy access to the queens, eliminates losses during departures, allows you to maintain the optimal mode regardless of the external temperature, does not require the cost of bees, honeycombs, food. In the late spring to receive a large number drones in a short time, it is advisable to keep the queens on a drone comb in an insulator for 2-3 days. Then the comb with eggs is removed from the insulator and left in the nest. Two days before the release of the drones, this comb is again placed in an insulator and every two days the emerging drones are marked with colored paints. With another method, such a comb is given to a special family for education, and all drones and mature drone brood that are there are destroyed. A drone trap is placed on the entrance of the hive to prevent drones of unknown origin from flying in. In the nest of paternal families there should be at least 10 kg of honey and two full bee-bread frames. With a lack of pollen, bee colonies will not grow the required number of drones; moreover, males that have experienced pollen starvation during the first 6-7 days of life do not produce the amount of sperm that is necessary for the full insemination of the uterus. Bees can expel drones in the middle of summer with a temporary cessation of honey collection. Therefore, paternal families during these periods are fed with a mixture of honey and pepper. If this process has begun, then layers with a uterus are formed from the family: only in this case the drones can be saved. Drones raised in colonies affected by varroatosis are lighter in weight and produce small amounts of often non-viable sperm. Artificial insemination is carried out in the laboratory at a temperature not lower than 25 °C. In the laboratory, it is necessary to have a thermostat, a machine for artificial insemination of queens, an MBS-1 microscope, a CO2 cylinder, a reducer, a two-necked Tishchenko jar, cages, an oxygen cushion, rubber connecting hoses, tweezers, bottles, saline, cotton wool, gauze, distilled water; for disinfection - a bactericidal irradiator, 96-degree alcohol, nitro-colors of different colors, foil tags, shellac, special pins with a handle. Before starting work, the room is disinfected with a bactericidal irradiator for 10 minutes. Zatolokin O. A. Beekeeping. Practical guide.- D .: "Publishing house Stalker", 2003.- 352 p.
