KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1

The Relationships Between Propolis Collecting Capability and Morphometric Features of Some Honey Bee Races and Ecotypes in Anatolia

Meral KEKEÇOĞLU
Nazife EROĞLU
Merve KAMBUR
Münir UÇAK
Sayfa
71–77
Yayın Tarihi
2020-03-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Therefore, it seems that the enlargement of certain morphological properties with genetic tendency of the honey bee races and ecotypes, primarily the legs and wings, can lead to better propolis collecting capability.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Propolis collecting capacity of the honey bee race, Apis mellifera L., distributed across Anatolia and Thrace regions of Turkey was investigated and correlated with morphometric characteristics.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The mean yield of annual propolis was recorded as the following; Yığılca ecotype (111.6±27.5 g colony) A. m. caucasica (104±20.7 g colony), Muğla ecotype (103±34 g colony), A. m. carnica (91.16±17.6 g colony), and A. m. syriaca (74±6.4 g colony) in descending order.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Therefore, it seems that the enlargement of certain morphological properties with genetic tendency of the honey bee races and ecotypes, primarily the legs and wings, can lead to better propolis collecting capability.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Propolis harvesting · Morphometric characteristics · Correlation

Abstract

Propolis collecting capacity of the honey bee race, Apis mellifera L., distributed across Anatolia and Thrace regions of Turkey was investigated and correlated with morphometric characteristics. Thus, the propolis collecting behaviour of honey bee races and ecotypes naturally have been in Turkey, Apis mellifera caucasica, Apis mellifera carnica, Apis mellifera syriaca and Yığılca and Muğla ecotype of Apis mellifera anatoliaca were monitored. The mean yield of annual propolis was recorded as the following; Yığılca ecotype (111.6±27.5 g colony) A. m. caucasica (104±20.7 g colony), Muğla ecotype (103±34 g colony), A. m. carnica (91.16±17.6 g colony), and A. m. syriaca (74±6.4 g colony) in descending order. The highest propolis collecting activity was recorded for the Yığılca ecotype of A. m. anatoliaca and A. m. caucasica. Morphological features of honey bee samples were evaluated by classic morphometric technique to correlate propolis collecting capability and morphological features. Morphometric results of the present study showed that the largest wing and leg lengths belonged to Yığılca ecotype of A. m. anatoliaca and A. m. caucasica. Furthermore, Pearson correlation showed a significant relationship between some morphometric characteristics including the proboscis and mandibular sections, wing length (WL), wing width (WW), femur length (FL), tibia length (TL), basitarsus length (BL), basitarsus width (BW), and propolis collecting capability (P<0.05). Therefore, it seems that the enlargement of certain morphological properties with genetic tendency of the honey bee races and ecotypes, primarily the legs and wings, can lead to better propolis collecting capability.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KEKEÇOĞLU, M., EROĞLU, N., KAMBUR, M., UÇAK, M. (2020). The Relationships Between Propolis Collecting Capability and Morphometric Features of Some Honey Bee Races and Ecotypes in Anatolia. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1, 71–77. https://ajindex.com/articles/178367

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (9)

  1. Abu Fares R J, Nazer I K, Darwish R M, & Abu Zarga M (2008). Honey bee hive modification for Propolis Collection. Jordan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 4(2): 138-147
  2. Adam B (1983). In search of the best strains of honey bee. Dadant Sons, Hamilton Illons, N. Bee Books, West Yorkshire Ajao A M, Oladimeji Y U, Babatundel S K & Obembe A (2014). Differential morphometric patterns of Apis mellifera and adaptation to climatic variations Global. Journal of Bioscience and Biotechnology 3(1): 34-40
  3. Alpatov W W (1929). Biometrical studies on variation and races of the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.). The Quarterly Review of Biology 4(1): 1-58
  4. Andrich G, Fiorentini R & Consiglieri A (1987). [Characteristics of some samples of propolis from the Ligurian Coast] Caratteristiche di alcuni tipi di propoli della Riviera Ligure. Citta delle Api 28: 30-38
  5. BAB Imaging Systems, Bab Ltd, 1993. Model Bs200Pro. www.bab.com.tr Buttel-Reepen H V (1906). Apistica. Beiträge zur Systematik, Biologie, sowie zur geschichtlichen und geographischen Verbreitung der Honigbiene (Apis mellifera L.) ihrer Varietaten und der ubrigen Apis-Arten. Mitteilungen Zoologisches Museum Berlin pp. 117-201 Calderone N W & Page Jr R E (1988). Genotypic variability in age polyethism and task specialization in the honey bee, Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 22(1): 17-25
  6. Goodman L (2003). Form and Function in the Honey Bee, (completed and edited by Richard Cooter and Pamela Munn). International Bee Research Association, Cardiff, U.K. Crane E (1990). Bees and beekeeping: science, practice and world resources. Heinemann Newnes Çakmak I (2005). The biodiversity of honey bee races in Turkey. In 3rd European Congress on Social Insects 2005: 58 De Souza D A, Wang Y, Kaftanoğlu O, De Jong D, Amdam G V, Gonçalves L S & Francoy T M (2015). Morphometric Identification of Queens, Workers and Intermediates in In- Vitro Reared Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.). PloS one 10(4): e0123663 Engel M S (1999). The taxonomy of recent and fossil honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae; Apis). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 8(2): 165-196
  7. Fletcher D J C (1978).
  8. The African bee, Apis mellifera adansonii, in Africa. Annual Review of Entomology 23: 151-171
  9. Garcia R C, Oliveira N T E D, Camargo S C, Pires B G, Oliveira C A L D, Teixeira R D A & Pickler M A (2013). Honey and propolis collecting, hygiene and defense behaviors of two generations of Africanized honey bees. Scientia Agricola 70(2): 74-81 Ghisalb