Michael Goblirsch

Summary: CRISPR-Cas9 (clustered, regularly interspaced, short palindromic repeats with CRISPR-associated protein 9) is a powerful, versatile, and cost-effective molecular tool that can be used for genetic engineering purposes and beyond ¹ and is especially suited for non-model organisms ² . Effective delivery of this system, however, remains a challenge for in vivo genetic manipulation of specific tissues ³ , particularly the brain ⁴ , and in adult indivuduals ^5,6 . We designed a new CRISPR-Cas9 plasmid that was inserted into a baculovirus vector to knockdown the octopamine beta subtype 2 receptor ( AmOctβ2R ), a transmembrane protein found in the mushroom body neurons of the honey bee ( Apis mellifera ) brain, to determine if octopamine plays a role in appetite regulation. We first confirmed that gene editing of AmOctβ2R is possible with Sanger sequencing. We then demonstrated expression of the CRISPR-Cas9 system with the baculovirus vector in vitro using live cell imaging, flow cytometry analysis, and in vivo using confocal imaging, showing widespread expression in the cells and throughout the honey bee brain, three days post treatment. There was also in vitro and in vivo knockdown of AmOctβ2R three days post-infection, that corresponded with appetite suppression in starved forager bees. Our findings suggest that we successfully delivered the CRISPR-Cas9 system and knocked down AmOctB2R in neuronal cells of the honey bee brain that were previously inaccessible due to the blood brain barrier and lack of infectivity of lentivirus vectors ⁷ . The newly characterized AmOctβ2R ⁸ can now be assigned a functional role and other targets for gene editing are now possible using this CRISPR-Cas9 system. Graphical

The western honey bee, Apis mellifera L., is a eusocial insect that plays major roles in ecosystem balances and pollination of plants and food crops. Honey bees face multiple biotic and abiotic stressors, such as pathogens, diseases, chemical pesticides, and climate change, which all contribute to honey bee colony loss. This study investigated the impacts of multiple pharmacological and pesticide molecules on honey bee survival and gene regulation responses. In an 11-day cage experiment, sublethal doses of tunicamycin, thapsigargin, metformin, paraquat, hydrogen peroxide, and imidacloprid were administered to newly emerged sister bees. Daily treatment consumption and mortality were recorded, as well as the transcription expression of twelve major genes ( AChE-2 , Apisimin , Apidaecin , mrjp1 , Sodq , cp450 , SelT , SelK , Ire1 , Xbp1 , Derl-1 , Hsc70 ), some of which are markers of oxidative and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stresses in honey bees. At day 9 of the treatments, protein damage was quantified in caged bees. Kaplan-Meier model indicated significant ( p < 0.001) toxicological effects of paraquat, H ₂ O ₂ and tunicamycin on bee survivorship compared to controls with better survivals for other molecules. Post-ingestive aversion responses were recorded only in the case of tunicamycin, hydrogen peroxide and imidacloprid. Nonetheless, significantly higher protein damage on day 9 was only identified in bees exposed to paraquat and imidacloprid. Some antioxidant genes significantly regulated vis-à-vis specific treatments. Our results reveal age-related regulation of other major genes with significant inter-gene positive correlations.

Mushroom extracts have been shown to contain bioactive compounds that confer health benefits to humans and animals, including honey bees. Honey bees are often challenged simultaneously with several abiotic (e.g., pesticides and poor nutrition) and biotic (e.g., parasites and pathogens) stressors. Mushroom extracts, for example, those made from Agaricus bisporus, may hold the potential to mitigate the negative effects of these stressors through actions on the honey bee’s immune system, metabolism, and other physiological processes. Exploring the health benefits of mushroom extracts for honey bees requires a basic understanding of their bioactive properties at the cellular level. The aim of the present study was to evaluate, for the first time, the genotoxic and antigenotoxic potential of A. bisporus on the honey bee cell line AmE-711 using the comet assay. Three increasing concentrations of A. bisporus water extract (100, 200, and 400 µg/mL) were tested. The cells in the negative control group were not treated either with A. bisporus extract or with H₂O₂. In the positive control group, DNA damage was induced with 100 µM H₂O₂. For antigenotoxic effect, tested extracts were mixed and incubated with H₂O₂. None of the tested concentrations exerted genotoxic potential, but all showed antigenotoxic effects against H₂O₂-induced DNA damage. The concentration of 200 μg/mL A. bisporus extract was the most effective in its action against DNA damage. To conclude, A. bisporus extract did not demonstrate genotoxic effects but showed promising antigenotoxic properties. AmE-711 cell line may serve as a cell culture system for genotoxicity investigations.

One of the main contributors to poor productivity and elevated mortality of honey bee colonies globally is insecticide exposure. Whole-organism and colony-level studies have demonstrated the effects of insecticides on many aspects of honey bee biology and have also shown their interactions with pathogens. However, there is a need for in vitro studies using cell lines to provide greater illumination of the effects of insecticides on honey bee cellular and molecular processes. We used a continuous cell line established from honey bee embryonic tissues (AmE-711) in assays that enabled assessment of cell viability in response to insecticide exposure. We exposed AmE-711 cells to four formulations, each containing a different insecticide. Treatment of cells with the insecticides resulted in a concentration-dependent reduction in viability after a 24-h exposure, whereas long-term exposure (120 h) to sublethal concentrations had limited effects on viability. The 24-h exposure data allowed us to predict the half-maximal lethal concentration (LC50) for each insecticide using a four-parameter logistical model. We then exposed cells for 12 h to the predicted LC50 and observed changes in morphology that would indicate stress and death. Reverse transcription–quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis corroborated changes in morphology: expression of a cellular stress response gene, 410087a, increased after an 18-h exposure to the predicted LC50. Demonstration of the effects of insecticides through use of AmE-711 provides a foundation for additional research addressing issues specific to honey bee toxicology and complements whole-organism and colony-level approaches. Moreover, advances in the use of AmE-711 in high-throughput screening and in-depth analysis of cell regulatory networks will promote the discovery of novel control agents with decreased negative impacts on honey bees. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:88–99. Published 2022. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Honey bees use several strategies to protect themselves and the colony from parasites and pathogens. In addition to individual immunity, social immunity involves the cumulative effort of some individuals to limit the spread of parasites and pathogens to uninfected nestmates. Examples of social immunity in honey bees that have received attention include hygienic behavior, or the removal of diseased brood, and the collection and deposition of antimicrobial resins (propolis) on interior nest surfaces. Advances in our understanding of another form of social immunity, social fever, are lacking. Honey bees were shown to raise the temperature of the nest in response to temperature-sensitive brood pathogen, Ascosphaera apis. The increase in nest temperature (−0.6 °C) is thought to limit the spread of A. apis infection to uninfected immatures. We established observation hives and monitored the temperature of the brood nest for 40 days. This observation period was broken into five distinct segments, corresponding to sucrose solution feedings—Pre-Feed, Feed I, Challenge, Feed II, and Post-Feed. Ascosphaera apis was administered to colonies as a 1% solution of ground sporulating chalkbrood mummies in 50% v/v sucrose solution, during the Challenge period. Like previous reports, we observed a modest increase in brood nest temperature during the Challenge period. However, all hives presented signs of chalkbrood disease, suggesting that elevation of the nest temperature was not sufficient to stop the spread of infection among immatures. We also began to explore the molecular mechanisms of temperature increase by exposing adult bees in cages to A. apis, without the presence of immatures. Compared to adult workers who were given sucrose solution only, workers exposed to A. apis showed increased expression of the antimicrobial peptides abaecin (p = 0.07) and hymenoptaecin (p = 0.04), but expression of the heat shock response protein Hsp 70Ab-like (p = 0.76) and the nutritional marker vitellogenin (p = 0.72) were unaffected. These results indicate that adult honey bee workers exposed to a brood pathogen elevate the temperature of the brood nest and initiate an immune response, but the effect of this fever on preventing disease requires further study.

Throughout a honey bee queen’s lifetime, she is tended to by her worker daughters, who feed and groom her. Such interactions provide possible horizontal transmission routes for pathogens from the workers to the queen, and as such a queen’s pathogen profile may be representative of the workers within a colony. To explore this further, we investigated known honey bee pathogen co-occurrence, as well as pathogen transmission from workers to queens. Queens from 42 colonies were removed from their source hives and exchanged into a second, unrelated foster colony. Worker samples were taken from the source colony on the day of queen exchange and the queens were collected 24 days after introduction. All samples were screened for Nosema spp., Trypanosome spp., acute bee paralysis virus (ABPV), black queen cell virus (BQCV), chronic bee paralysis virus (CBPV), Israeli acute paralysis virus (IAPV), Lake Sinai virus (LSV), and deformed wing virus master variants (DWV-A, B, and C) using RT-qPCR. The data show that LSV, Nosema, and DWV-B were the most abundant pathogens in colonies. All workers (n = 42) were LSV-positive, 88% were Nosema-positive, whilst pathogen loads were low (6 genome equivalents per pooled worker sample). All queens (n = 39) were negative for both LSV and Nosema. We found no evidence of DWV transmission occurring from worker to queen when comparing queens to foster colonies, despite DWV being present in both queens and workers. Honey bee pathogen presence and diversity in queens cannot be revealed from screening workers, nor were pathogens successfully transmitted to the queen.

Failure of the queen is often identified as a leading cause of honey bee colony mortality. However, the factors that can contribute to “queen failure” are poorly defined and often misunderstood. We studied one specific sign attributed to queen failure: poor brood pattern. In 2016 and 2017, we identified pairs of colonies with “good” and “poor” brood patterns in commercial beekeeping operations and used standard metrics to assess queen and colony health. We found no queen quality measures reliably associated with poor-brood colonies. In the second year (2017), we exchanged queens between colony pairs (n = 21): a queen from a poor-brood colony was introduced into a good-brood colony and vice versa. We observed that brood patterns of queens originally from poor-brood colonies significantly improved after placement into a good-brood colony after 21 days, suggesting factors other than the queen contributed to brood pattern. Our study challenges the notion that brood pattern alone is sufficient to judge queen quality. Our results emphasize the challenges in determining the root source for problems related to the queen when assessing honey bee colony health.