ArticleHereditas2024
The number of drones to inseminate a queen with has little potential for optimization of honeybee breeding programs.
Article in Hereditas, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMating control is a crucial aspect of honeybee breeding. Instrumental insemination of queens gives the breeder maximum control over the genetic origin of the involved drones. However, in addition to the drones' descent, the breeder's control also extends over the number of drones to use for inseminations. Thus far, this aspect has largely been ignored in attempts to optimize honeybee breeding schemes. The literature provides some comparisons between single drone inseminations (SDI) and multi drone inseminations (MDI) but it is unclear whether the number of drones used in MDI is a relevant parameter for the optimization of honeybee breeding programs.
methodsBy computer simulations, we investigated the effect of the number of drones per inseminated queen in breeding programs that relied on best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) breeding values. We covered a range of 1 to 50 drones per queen and observed the developments of genetic gain and inbreeding over a period of 20 years. Hereby, we focused on insemination schemes that take the drones for one queen from a single colony.
resultsSDI strategies led to 5.46% to 14.19% higher genetic gain than MDI at the cost of 6.1% to 30.2% higher inbreeding rates. The number of drones used in MDI settings had only a negligible impact on the results. There was a slight tendency that more drones lead to lower genetic gain and lower inbreeding rates but whenever more than five drones were used for inseminations, no significant differences could be observed.
conclusionThe opportunities to optimize breeding schemes via the number of drones used in inseminations are very limited. SDI can be a viable strategy in situations where breeders are interested in genetically homogeneous offspring or precise pedigree information. However, such strategies have to account for the fact that the semen from a single drone is insufficient to fill a queen's spermatheca, whence SDI queens will not build full-strength colonies. When deciding for MDI, breeders should focus on collecting enough semen for a succesful insemination, regardless of how many drones they need for this purpose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.