It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Apart from the efficiency of coumaphos against Varroa mites, its impact on the oxidative status and survival of the honey bee (Apis mellifera) was assessed. The research was conducted on hives from the same apiary, equalised regarding the number of bees, brood area and food storage. Based on Varroa infestation the hives were allotted to two groups: non-infested (N) and infested (I). Both groups were either treated (T) – NT and IT, or untreated (U) – NU and IU. The treatment of infested bees was controlled with a follow-up treatment with amitraz. The efficiency of coumaphos was 96-97%. This organophosphate had a negligible effect on bee survival, but it significantly affected their oxidative status: superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and glutathione S-transferase (GST) activities, and the concentrations of malonyl dialdehyde (MDA). Coumaphos significantly (p˂0.0001) decreased SOD activity in non-infested bees, but increased it in those infested. By contrast, both CAT and GST activities, as well as MDA concentrations significantly increased (from p˂0.05 to p˂0.0001) after treatment in all groups, with the exception of IT, where it declined. Coumaphos in non-infested hives caused oxidative stress per se, not unlike varroa in infested colonies. However, in infested colonies it decreased oxidative stress, owing to its efficacy against Varroa mites and contributed to the recovery of bee colonies. In spite of its certain downsides, coumaphos remains an effective anti-varroa substance, but should be used with precaution, not to add to the effects of environmental factors which may cause red-ox misbalance.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Biology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
2 Department of Biology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia; Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
3 Department of Economics and Statistics, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia