Next Article in Journal
Validation and Ecological Niche Investigation of a New Fungal Intraspecific Competitor as a Biocontrol Agent for the Sustainable Containment of Aflatoxins on Maize Fields
Next Article in Special Issue
Prevalence and Risk Factors of Zoonotic Dermatophyte Infection in Pet Rabbits in Northern Taiwan
Previous Article in Journal
Distinction of Alternaria Sect. Pseudoalternaria Strains among Other Alternaria Fungi from Cereals
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JoF
Volume 8
Issue 5
10.3390/jof8050424
jof-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Recent Advances in the Biocontrol of Nosemosis in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.)

by
Massimo Iorizzo
1,
Francesco Letizia
1,
Sonia Ganassi
1,*,
Bruno Testa
1,
Sonia Petrarca
1,2,
Gianluca Albanese
1,*,
Dalila Di Criscio
1 and
Antonio De Cristofaro
1
1
Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Sciences (DiAAA), University of Molise, Via De Sanctis snc, 86100 Campobasso, Italy
2
Conaproa, Consorzio Nazionale Produttori Apistici, 86100 Campobasso, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Fungi 2022, 8(5), 424; https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8050424
Submission received: 15 March 2022 / Revised: 8 April 2022 / Accepted: 19 April 2022 / Published: 20 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fungal Diseases in Animals)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Nosemosis is a disease triggered by the single-celled spore-forming fungi Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae, which can cause extensive colony losses in honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Fumagillin is an effective antibiotic treatment to control nosemosis, but due to its toxicity, it is currently banned in many countries. Accordingly, in the beekeeping sector, there is a strong demand for alternative ecological methods that can be used for the prevention and therapeutic control of nosemosis in honey bee colonies. Numerous studies have shown that plant extracts, RNA interference (RNAi) and beneficial microbes could provide viable non-antibiotic alternatives. In this article, recent scientific advances in the biocontrol of nosemosis are summarized.

1. Introduction

The microsporidia Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae are among the main pathogens of honey bees; they are spore-forming, obligate, intracellular parasites and are acknowledged as belonging to the kingdom of Fungi [1,2].
Most recently, Tokarev et al. [3] placed the Nosema species, which infects bees (Anthophila, Hymenoptera), under the new genus Vairimorpha. N. apis. This new genus was first isolated from the European honey bee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera, Apidae), whereas N. ceranae was first reported from the Asian honey bee Apis cerana (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Currently, these two parasites have a worldwide distribution [4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16].
Both N. apis and N. ceranae are the etiological agents of nosemosis, one of the adult honey bee’s most widespread and serious diseases, causing significant economic losses to beekeepers [5,17,18,19]. N. apis is responsible for nosemosis type A, a disease that increases bee mortality in winter and causes a slow build-up in spring, making bees weak and reducing honey yield [20]. Field experiments demonstrated that N. apis infection is also responsible for the onset of foraging at a younger age than in healthy worker bees. [21,22]. Dosselli et al. [23] demonstrated that N. apis infected worker bees quickly altered their flight behavior, reducing the foraging trip duration and increasing the number of flights. In addition, the disease causes diarrhea and fecal spots inside and outside the hive [9]. Nosemosis type C, caused by N. ceranae [24], includes a wide range of effects on honey bee physiology and behavioral changes, weakness and colony mortality increase, decreased brood-rearing capacity and honey production, all of which may contribute to colony collapse [25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. Moreover, N. ceranae infection may lead to the impairment of hormone production and lipid synthesis [32,33], the induction of nutritional and energetic stress [32,34,35,36] and the degeneration of the host’s midgut tissues [37,38]. N. ceranae infection can also induce immune system suppression in the host [39,40]. Recently, different authors demonstrated that both N. apis and N. ceranae inhibit apoptosis in the host cells [41,42,43].
N. ceranae infection also affects the neurobiology of honey bees by impairing olfactory learning and memory [44] and, on a behavioral level, premature foraging in worker bees [29,34,45], decreased homing ability [46] and weaker flight ability [47].
The acquisition of Nosema occurs via the fecal-oral route through the ingestion of spores. In the midgut lumen, the spores extrude a polar filament through which the sporoplasm is transferred into the epithelial cells and merogony begins. Shortly, meronts can either turn into primary spores or mature spores; primary spores transmit the disease to adjacent cells, whereas mature spores are released into the midgut lumen, from which they can pass through the rectum into the feces or remain in the midgut to infect other cells [5,48,49,50,51]. The spores excreted by the host through the feces may then contaminate the nesting environment, comb, floral resources, collected pollen and water [20,26,52]. Beyond horizontal transmission (e.g., via trophallaxis) [53,54], both N. apis and N. ceranae may be airborne [55] and sexually transmitted [56,57]. Because of the disastrous consequences of Nosema infections, there is a strong demand for the management of these pathogens.
The antibiotic fumagillin is a historically accepted treatment for Nosema infections [58]. Unfortunately, Nosema spp. strains exhibit variable levels of antibiotic resistance [59]. Furthermore, dysbiosis of the gut microbiota caused by antibiotics might increase the susceptibility of honey bees to N. ceranae infections [60]. Although the fumagillin degrades quickly in the hive, residues can persist, and their degradation products pose a potential risk to human health [61,62,63]. Consequently, fumagillin is currently banned in many countries, including the European Union [64], due to its genotoxic and tumorigenic properties towards humans and toxicity to bees [65,66]. The inhibition of the enzyme methionine aminopeptidase type 2 (MetAP2) is fumagillin’s proposed mechanism of action against Nosema [67]. Therefore, Van den Heever et al. [66] recently screened other MetAP2 (methionine aminopeptidase type 2) antagonist compounds in cage experiments and observed a significant decrease in load of N. ceranae [58]. However, given the tight regulation on the use of antibiotics in animal food, precautions should be taken in the development and approval of novel MetAP2 inhibitors for honey bee diseases.
Currently, several chemical compounds are used for the management of Nosema infections. Formic acid and oxalic acid, both used for Varroa control, have the ability to control Nosema [68,69]. The mode of action of these organic acids against N. ceranae is still unknown. Strachecka et al. [70] reported that oxalic acid interfered with the activity of the cuticle proteolytic defense system in A. mellifera workers. Indeed, a notable component of resistance is the layer of active cuticle surface proteins that protect the honey bee from pathogen invasion [71,72]. In a study conducted by Genath et al. [73], formic acid treatment was shown to induce an alteration in the proteostasis of the ectoparasite Varroa destructor, with significant dysregulation of proteins involved in mitochondrial cellular respiration. Two other molecules, nitroimidazole compounds (metronidazole, tinidazole), completely inhibit the proliferation of N. ceranae and constitute promising candidates for the establishment of a new strategy to control Nosema [74].
In recent years, several studies have claimed that residues of veterinary treatments have been reported in hive products, which is a public health concern as their ingestion can pose a risk to human health [75,76,77,78]. In particular, it is relevant to note that the commercial formulation of fumagillin consists of the dicyclohexylamine (DCH) salt of fumagillin in a 1:1 stoichiometric ratio with fumagillin. The stability of DCH, along with its genotoxicity and tumorigenicity, renders it a major potential contaminant in hive products for human consumption [63,65]. Therefore, to prevent and treat nosemosis over the years, developing sustainable alternative methods to fumagillin and finding new natural agents active against Nosema spp. has increased [79]. In this review, recent scientific advances on some alternative approaches to control nosemosis are discussed.

2. Plant Extracts

In recent years, several studies have evaluated plant extracts and organic compounds, reporting their effectiveness for the biocontrol of nosemosis [80]. In Table 1, we list the plant extracts tested and their main effects on nosemosis.
Some scientific investigations have used products already available on the market. In the trial by Cilia et al. [81], the efficacy of two commercial products, ApiHerb® and Api-Bioxal®(Chemicals Laif SpA, Padua, Italy), was compared. ApiHerb® is composed of Allium sativum and Cinnamomum zeylanicum extracts. Instead, Api-Bioxal® is a registered veterinary drug against Varroa destructor containing oxalic acid dihydrate. While both treatments lowered the abundance of N. ceranae, ApiHerb® also diminished the prevalence of infected bees.
In a study by Shumkova et al. [82], the findings from the application of two plant extracts, NOZEMAT HERB® and NOZEMAT HERB PLUS® (Extract Pharma, Sofia, Bulgaria), are discussed. The accurate quantitative composition of these two herbal supplements is protected from patent law. Specifically, the authors demonstrated that both supplements significantly improved honey bee colony strength and diminished the number of N. ceranae spores by 68% in the group treated with NOZEMAT HERB®, while in the group treated with NOZEMAT HERB PLUS®, a reduction of 60% was found. Charistos et al. [83] showed that using HiveAliveTM (Advance Science Ltd., Galway, Ireland), a mixture of algae extracts, increased colony worker bee population size by 89% and decreased N. ceranae spores by 57%; the effect of this treatment is most likely due to the strengthening of the intestinal epithelium, although the authors do not refer to the survival of the honey bee and use colony mortality as one of the parameters to evaluate the strength of the colony [67]. In an investigation using Nozevit® (a natural product based on plant polyphenols), it was observed that this commercial phytopharmacological supplement could improve the health of honey bees by decreasing Nosema spores [84,85]. The same product was used by van den Heever et al. [66] in cage trials with negative results, which is why further investigations are required.
The phytotherapeutic product Protofil®, rich in flavonoids (rutin and quercetin) and volatile compounds such as eucalyptol (1.8-cineol) and chavicol-methyl-ether, prevents the growth cycle of N. apis [86,87], but in the description of this hydroalcoholic extract, the mechanism of action is not specified. Other studies have evaluated the integration of the honey bee diet with vitamins and nitrogen compounds. Dietary supplementation with an amino acid and vitamin complex called “BEEWELL AminoPlus” (Provet, Ankara, Turkey) decreases N. ceranae spores and prevents bees from immune suppression by increasing the expression of genes for immune peptides (abaecin, apidaecin, hymenoptaecin, defensin and vitellogenin) [88] However, not always the products advertised as anti-nosemosis supplements have beneficial effects on honey bees infected with N. ceranae [67].
According to the study conducted by Botías et al. [89], three therapeutic agents (Nosestat®, Phenyl salicylate and Vitafeed Gold®) were screened to control N. ceranae infection in bee colonies and compared with the use of fumagillin. Nosestat® is a combination of iodine and formic acid and is commercialized for the treatment and prevention of nosemosis in bees. Vitafeed Gold® is a natural extract based on beet extract and molasses. None of the investigated products were effective against Nosema under the used experimental conditions. Among the natural products explored hitherto against nosemosis, there is propolis extract: a mixture of resinous substances collected by bees from various plant sources. Of the emerging effective treatments against N. ceranae, propolis extract is effective in three of the four bee species (A. cerana, A. mellifera and A. florea) [90,91,92,93,94,95].
As for the use of extracts obtained from different plant sources, many studies have been carried out with highly promising results, which are sometimes comparable to those obtained with fumagillin. Chaimanee et al. [96] demonstrated that plant extracts made from Annona squamosa, Ocimum basilicum, Psidium guajava and Syzygium jambos possess a strong anti-microsporidian activity and inhibit the development of N. ceranae spores, with similar efficacy to fumagillin. In another recent study conducted by Özkırım et al. [97], the results showed that a mix of herbal extract mixture containing Rumex acetosella, Achillea millefolium, Plantago lanceolata, Salvia officinalis, Thymus vulgaris, Rosmarinus officinalis and Laurus nobilis was more effective than fumagillin.
Table
Table 1. List of plant species whose extracts, and relative bioactive compounds, are effective against nosemosis.
Table 1. List of plant species whose extracts, and relative bioactive compounds, are effective against nosemosis.
Plant SpeciesExtractBioactive CompoundsRelevant Reported EffectsRef.
Achillea millefoliumAqueousterpenes and terpenoids (artemisia ketone, camphor, linalyl acetate and 1,8-cineole)Antimicrobial activity, reduction of Nosema spores, improvement of honey bee survival.[97]
Agastache foeniculumEthanolicphenolic acids and flavonoids (chlorogenic acid, isoquercitrin, quercetin, vanillin, acacetin, gallic acid, caffeic acid, p-OH cinnamic acid, resveratrol)Reduction of Nosema spores.[98]
Allium sativumEthanolicessential oilsReduction of Nosema spores.[99]
Andrographis paniculataAqueousterpenoids (andrographolide, dehydrographolide)Reduction of Nosema spores; mitigation of gut epithelium degeneration caused by N. ceranae.[100]
Annona squamosaEthanolicsteroids, terpenes, alkaloids, flavonoids, saponins, phenolic acidsReduction of Nosema spores.[96]
Aristotelia chilensisMethanolicphenolic acids, flavonoids (caffeic acid, apigenin and pinocembrin)Reduction of N. ceranae
spore loads, improvement of honey bee survival.		[95]
Artemisia absinthiumEthanolicflavonoids (isoquercitrin, quercetin, rutin)Antimicrobial and antioxidant activity, reduction of Nosema spore loads.[98,101]
Artemisia dubiaAqueousbenzopyrones, phenolic compounds and quinic acids derivatives (coumarin, chlorogenic acid, 4,5-dicaffaeoylquinic acid)In vitro and in vivo anti-nosemosis activity.[102,103]
Aster scaberAqueousbenzopyrones, phenolic compounds and quinic acids derivatives (coumarin, chlorogenic acid, 4,5-dicaffaeoylquinic acid)In vitro and in vivo anti-nosemosis activity.[102,103]
Brassica nigraOrganicglucosinolates (glucoerucin, glucoraphanin, sinigrin) and isothiocyanatesIn vivo and in vitro reduction of N. ceranae infections, improvement of honey bee survival.[104]
Cryptocarya albaAqueousterpenes and terpenoids (β-phellandrene, α-terpineol, eucalyptol)Antimicrobial activity and reduction of Nosema spores.[105]
Cucurbita pepoEthanolicEssential OilsReduction of Nosema spores.[99]
Eleutherococcus senticosusEthanolicsaponins and flavonoids (eleutheroside B, eleutheroside E and naringenin)Prophylactic effect in vivo against Nosema infections does not affect Nosema spores’ viability, improvement of honey bee survival.[106]
Eruca sativaHexanglucosinolates (glucoerucin, glucoraphanin, sinigrin)In vivo and in vitro reduction of N. ceranae infections, improvement of honey bee survival.[104]
Eucalyptus globulusEthanolicessential oilsReduction of Nosema spores.[99]
Evernia prunastriEthanolicphenolic acids and flavonoids (chlorogenic acid, vanilic acid, vanillin, rosmarinic acid, crisin, o-Cumaric acid and acacetin)Reduction of Nosema spores.[98]
Humulus lupulusEthanolicflavonoids (isoquercitrin, rutin, epicatechin)Reduction of Nosema spores.[98]
Laurus nobilisEthanolicphenolic acids and flavonoids (syringic acid, isoquercitrin, quercetin, kaempferol, rutin, epicatechin, resveratrol and monoterpenes (1,8-cineole, sabinene and linalool)Reduction of Nosema spores.[97,98,107,108]
Ocimum basilicumEthanolicphenylpropanoid and phenylpropene (methyl eugenol, methyl chavicol)Reduction of Nosema spores.[96]
Origanum vulgareEthanolicphenolic acids, flavonoids (isoquercitrin, rosmarinic acid, apigenin, vitexin 2-o-ramnoside, sinapic acid, resveratrol) and essential OilsReduction of Nosema spores.[98,109]
Plantago lanceolataAqueousflavonoids, alkaloids, terpenoids, phenolic compounds (caffeic acid derivatives), fatty acids, polysaccharidesAntimicrobial, antioxidant and cytotoxic activity; reduction of Nosema spores; improvement of honey bee survival.[97]
Psidium guajavaEthanolicterpenes (limonene, β-Pinene, α-Pinene, caryophyllene)Reduction of Nosema spores.[96]
Rosmarinus officinalisAqueousphenolic acid, terpenes and terpeinods (rosmarinic acid, caffeic acid, ursolic acid, betulinic acid, carnosic acid and carnosol, camphor, 1,8-cineole, α-pinene, borneol, camphene, β-pinene and limonene)Antimicrobial and antioxidant activity, reduction of Nosema spores; improvement of honey bee survival.[97]
Rosmarinus officinalisHydroalcoholicessential oilsReduction of Nosema spores.[109]
Rumex acetosellaAqueousphenolic compounds and inorganic salt derivates (tannic acid, binoxalate of potassium, and nitrogenous matter)Reduction of Nosema spores and improvement of honey bee survival.[97]
Salvia officinalisAqueousterpenes and terpenoids (cis-thujone, camphor, cineole, humulene, trans-thujone, camphene, pinene, limonene, bornyl acetate and linalool)Antimicrobial and antioxidant activity, reduction of Nosema spores, improvement of honey bee survival.[97]
Syzygium jambosEthanolicphenolic compounds, anthraquinones, and steroidsReduction of Nosema spores.[96]
Thymus vulgarisEthanolicessential oilsReduction of Nosema spores.[99]
Thymus vulgarisAqueousterpenes and terpenoids (geraniol, linalool, gamma-terpineol, carvacrol, thymol and trans-thujan-4-ol/terpinen-4-ol, p-cymene, γ-terpinene and thymol)Antimicrobial and antioxidant activity, reduction of Nosema spores, improvement of honey bee survival.[97]
Ugni molinaeMethanolicphenolic acids (caffeic acid)Reduction of N. ceranae spores and improvement of honey bee survival.[95]
Urtica dioicaEthanolicessential oilsReduction of Nosema spores.[99]
Vaccinium myrtillusEthanolicphenolic acids and flavonoids (chlorogenic acid, syringic acid, ferulic acid, isoquercitrin, quercetin, myricetin, naringenin, kaempferol)Reduction of Nosema spores.[98]
Pașca et al. [98] reported that integrating the honey bee diet with different plant extracts (Agastache foeniculum, Artemisia absinthium, Evernia prunastri, Humulus lupulus, Laurus nobilis, Origanum vulgare, and Vaccinium myrtillus) decreased the number of Nosema spores in a similar way to the commercial product Proitofil. The authors hypothesize that the mechanism of action is attributable to the bioactive compounds, such as phenolic acids and flavonoids contained in these extracts.
Nanetti et al. [104] found that the administration of Brassica nigra defatted seed meal in the diet of honey bees reduced the mortality of bees affected by N. ceranae spores and increased insect lifespan. Laurus nobilis extract (essential oil, hydrolate and its main component) did not cause lethal effects on adult honey bees and significantly inhibited N. ceranae development [107,108]. Other studies reported that extracts of Andrographis paniculata, Origanum vulgare, Rosmarinus officinalis, and Artemisia absinthium were significantly effective in reducing the number of spores and controlling Nosema [100,101,109].
In some studies, the anti-microsporidian activity is related to specific compounds (e.g., phenolic compounds, terpenes, aromatic organic chemical compounds, polysaccharides) contained in the vegetal extracts used [91,96,110,111].
In particular, Mura et al. [91] showed that propolis extracts, containing mainly phenolic acids and flavonoids (caffeic acid, ferulic acid, ellagic acid and quercetin), increase the longevity of bees infected with N. ceranae and significantly lower the spore load. Promising results were also observed with chitosan, peptidoglycan and algal polysaccharides. These natural products promote antimicrobial activity and have been shown to stimulate the immune system, thus reducing N. apis infection in A. mellifera [95,112,113,114,115].
Klassen et al. [116] assessed the effect of the prebiotics eugenol, chitosan and naringenin and the probiotic Protexin® (Enterococcus faecium) on N. ceranae infection, colony population, honey production and winter survival using field colonies. In spring, treatments with eugenol, Protexin® and naringenin significantly decreased N. ceranae infections, increased adult bee populations and increased honey production, whilst chitosan was ineffective.
Ptaszyńska et al. [117] demonstrated the efficacy of porphyrins and biological nitrogen pigments (biochromes). Supplementing the diet with sugar syrup containing these substances showed significant efficacy, preventing the development of microsporidia and decreasing the mortality of infected bees.
Another recent study has shown that the use of acetic and p-coumaric acids in the honey bee diet was effective in the control of nosemosis [111]. The efficacy of p-coumaric acid confirms the results obtained by Bernklau et al. [110], who showed that this substance, together with other phytochemical compounds (caffeine, gallic acid and kaempferol), administered individually, reduces spore load and bee mortality.
The extracts of Artemisia dubia and Aster scaber, belonging to the Asteraceae family, rich in chlorogenic acid and coumarin, exhibited high potential anti-Nosema [102,103]. Instead, Arismendi et al. [95] attribute the significant anti-Nosema activity to extracts from leaves of Aristotelia chilensis (Elaeocarpaceae) and Ugni molinae (Myrtaceae) for their high content of flavonol compounds (rutin and myricetin).
Monoterpenes found in Cryptocarya alba (Lauraceae) leaves have reported inhibition activity on N. ceranae [105]. Similarly, feeding bees curcumin, a phenolic compound from turmeric (Curcuma longa, Zingiberaceae), reduced Nosema spp. spore loads and increased the survival of infected bees [118]. Resveratrol (a natural phytoalexin: trans-3,5,4′-trihydroxystilbene) and thymol (terpene; 2-iso propyl-5-methylphenol) appear to be capable of diminishing the level of infection, and thus the mortality of experimentally infected bees [119,120].
In a study conducted by Borges et al. [121], sulforaphane (organosulfur compound) from cruciferous vegetables, carvacrol from Origanum vulgare (Lamiaceae) oil and naringenin from citrus have been shown to cause a high reduction in Nosema spores.
Tlak Gajger et al. [122] reported in their study that diet supplementation with the pentadecapeptide BPC 157, a well-studied gastrointestinal protective compound, has significant therapeutic effects. Their results showed that this specific oral therapy increased the strength of honey bee colonies, reduced the number of Nosema spores and limited midgut lesions of infected honey bees. Based on this scientific evidence, the efficacy of many plant extracts and organic compounds against nosemosis appears to be consolidated. However, the exact mechanism of inhibition by all these compounds is still unclear, and in some cases, the antimicrobial activity of plant extracts is not likely due to a single compound but rather to all of the constituents [102].
Several studies suggested that some phenolic compounds, typical secondary metabolites of many plants, can permeate the cell wall and plasma membrane of spores, destroy the plasma membrane and prevent germination of the spore [91,117]. Another recent study reports that the anti-nosemosis activity of several phenolic and monoterpene compounds is related to the inhibition of the expression of the N. ceranae virulence factor encoding the polar tube protein 3 (ptp3) mRNA of the ptp3 gene [123]. Furthermore, some compounds, such as polysaccharides, could have the potential to prevent spore adherence to host cells by producing a thin coating on bees’ ventricular walls [115]. The phytoderivative Nozevit, a preparation that includes polyphenols, vitamins, minerals and amino acids, induces the production of mucous from the epithelial layer of treated bees and additionally coats the peritrophic membrane to form a firm and resilient envelope [85]. Other studies have shown that plant extracts support immunity and improve bees’ resistance to nosemosis. In this regard, Ptaszyńska et al. [106] used Eleutherococcus senticosus, belonging to the Araliaceae family and commonly known as Siberian ginseng. The extract of this plant, containing eleutheroside B, eleutheroside E and naringenin, proved effective both as a cure and in the prophylaxis of nosemosis. These adaptogenic compounds were important for supporting immunity and improving the resistance of honey bees.
Although they are not obtained from plants, we report the results obtained upon the application of some extracts from basidiomycetes fungi (Kingdom Fungi) and insects (Kingdom Animalia). Anti-Nosema and immune-protective effects of Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus blazei (Agaricaceae) were observed without any side effects but with immunostimulatory activity in the preventive application.
In two studies conducted by Glavinic et al. [124], the extract of these mushrooms stimulated the expression of abaecin, hymenoptaecin, apidaecin and vitellogenin genes reducing the oxidative stress caused by N. ceranae and consequently reducing N. ceranae infection [124,125].
Recently, a particular survey was performed by Kunat et al. [126] using aqueous extracts of the carton nest produced by the jet-black ant (Lasius fuliginosus) in the management of bees infected with Nosema. This study showed that the administration of this extract in the honey bee diet greatly influenced the incidence of the disease, inhibiting the germination of Nosema spores. Lasius fuliginosus is a species of ant belonging to the subfamily Formicinae [127,128].
Based on the scientific evidence mentioned above, supplementing the honey bee diet with natural extracts would offer an alternative therapy for the control of nosemosis and help reduce the overuse of antibiotics in beekeeping.

3. RNA Interference

RNA interference (RNAi) is a post-transcriptional process triggered by the introduction of double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) as a tool that limits the transcript level by either suppressing transcription (transcriptional gene silencing [TGS]) or activating a sequence-specific RNA degradation process (post-transcriptional gene silencing [PTGS]/RNA interference [RNAi]) [129,130]. RNA interference (RNAi) is currently being explored for pesticide activity in agriculture and as a potent and specific strategy for controlling infections of parasites and pathogens in insects, including honey bees [131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138]. Several studies evidence that RNAi might be exploited to regulate Nosema gene expression within bee hosts [139,140,141].
Kim et al. [142] examined the control of nosemosis caused by N. ceranae using RNAi technology. Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) for RNAi application targeted the mitosome-related genes of N. ceranae. Two dsRNAs, specific to NCER_101456 and NCER_100157, showed high inhibitory effects on spore production. NCER_101456 and NCER_100157, as predicted with FNR1 and FNR2, are ferredoxin NADPH+ reductases, which are flavin enzymes that reduce NADP+ by ferredoxin and are involved in electron transport and biodegradation [143,144]. In addition, these dsRNA treatments significantly increased the survival rate of honey bees [142].
Another recent study used RNAi to lower the expression of polar tube protein 3 (ptp3), a protein essential for sporoplasm injection and microsporidian cellular invasion [145]. He et al. [141] explored the therapeutic potential of silencing the sequences of two N. ceranae encoded spore wall protein (SWP) genes employing the RNAi-based methodology. This study revealed that the oral ingestion of dsRNAs corresponding to SWP8 and SWP12, used separately or in combination, could lead to a significant reduction in spore load, improved immunity and extended lifespan of N. ceranae infected bees.
Previous studies reported that N. ceranae infection could comprehensively and persistently suppress the immune system of the honey bee, causing a higher susceptibility to other bee diseases and senescence [39,96].
An interesting aspect of the RNAi response is that dsRNA treatment might not only result in a knockdown of specific gene expression post-transcriptionally, but it may also regulate a signal transduction cascade, useful for reducing the expression of negative regulators of the honey bee immune response [134].
Li et al. [146] reported that nkd (Naked Cuticle Gene) mRNA levels in adult bees were upregulated by N. ceranae infection (and thus, the parasite may use this mechanism to suppress host immune function) and that ingestion of double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) specific to nkd, efficiently silenced the expression of this gene.
Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that RNAi-mediated knockdown of nkd transcripts in Nosema-infected bees resulted in upregulation of the expression of several immune genes (Abaecin, Apidaecin, Defensin-1, and PGRP-S2), reduction of Nosema spore loads and extension of honey bee life span.
RNAi-mediated knockdown of the genes important for N. ceranae viability or honey bee immunoregulation may have the potential to control nosemosis.
Nevertheless, several obstacles should be considered when evaluating the feasibility of RNAi-based bee medications; in fact, oral delivery of dsRNA to honey bees may lower RNAi efficiency and stability, as digestive enzymes and gut pH can rapidly metabolize and alter the drug sequence before delivery to target mRNA [67].
Although many applications of RNAi have been thoroughly researched, no RNAi-based drugs or pesticides have been approved for agricultural use. Off-target and non-specific effects of RNAi are a major concern in agriculture that will likely slow the approval of RNAi-based treatments for apiarian medicine.
The efficiency of RNAi delivery can be influenced by several factors, which can act alone or in combination. Some of the influencing factors include the life stage of the target insect, stability of the target gene, target tissue site and double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) quantity [147]. Therefore, although the results from the use of RNAi-based therapies are very promising for controlling nosemosis infection in honey bees, more research is needed to implement these biomolecular techniques in beekeeping practice.

4. Beneficial Microbes

The gut microbiota plays a key role in the maintenance of honey bee health, contributing to growth and development, immune function and protection against pathogens [148,149,150]. However, the honey bee microbiota is destabilized (dysbiosis) by natural events such as immunosenescence or by various exogenous factors such as climate, diet, nutritional deficiencies, pathogens, pesticides and environmental pollution [151,152,153,154,155,156,157,158]. The functional outcomes of dysbiosis include poor host development, early mortality and increased susceptibility of bees to pathogens [149,152,159,160,161]. Recent studies provide experimental evidence for a link between nosemosis and dysbiosis in the honey bees’ gut [60,162,163,164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171]. Other studies suggested that management strategies based on re-establishing the microbiota are a promising path to restoring or improving the health of honey bees and that probiotics and several bacterial metabolites may participate in the control of nosemosis, other than increase the survival of infected honey bees [172,173,174,175,176]. Table 2 provides a detailed list of the main effects obtained in the biocontrol of Nosema spp. through the use of different microbial cultures.
As shown in Table 2, the most commonly used bacteria belong to the group of lactic acid bacteria and specifically to the species related to Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus and Pediococcus. The action of these bacteria is expressed essentially through an antimicrobial action directed against Nosema [175,177] or through the stimulation of the immune system of the honey bee [178].
Maggi et al. [179] investigated the impacts of oral administration of organic acids produced by Lactobacillus johnsonii CRL1647 (lactic acid, phenyl-lactic acid and acetic acid) and reported a strong spore load reduction in bees. Similarly, De Piano et al. [180] highlighted a relationship between bacterial metabolites and the presence of N. ceranae spores, showing a significant decrease after dietary supplementation with Lactobacillus johnsonii AJ5.
Table
Table 2. Overview of the main effects obtained in the biocontrol of Nosema using different microbial cultures.
Table 2. Overview of the main effects obtained in the biocontrol of Nosema using different microbial cultures.
SourceMicrobial CulturesRelevant Reported EffectsRef.
Honey bee
gastrointestinal tract		Lactobacillus johnsonii AJ5
L. johnsonii CRL1647		Oral administration of the metabolites produced by L. johnsonii (mainly organic acids) supplemented in syrup reduced the intensity of the disease.[179,180]
L. johnsonii CRL1647Reduction of Nosema spores.[181]
Lactobacillus kunkeei *[182]
Lactobacillus salivarius * A3iob[183]
Lactobacillus plantarum *The dysbiosis induced by Nosema spp. was lessened by the probiotic L. plantarum.[170]
Bacillus subtilis subsp. Subtilis Mori2Reduction of Nosema incidence.[184]
Honey
samples		B. subtilisSurfactin S2, a cyclic lipopeptide produced by B. subtilis C4 exhibited statistically significant anti-Nosema activity.[185]
Bacillus sp. (PC2)Improvement of honey bee survival.[175]
Honey bee
larvae		ParasaccharibacterapiumImprovement of honey bee survival.[175,186]
Honey bee
hive		Multiple strains:
Bifidobacterium asteroides DSM 20431
Bifidobacterium coryneforme C155
Bifidobacterium indicum C449
L. kunkeei * Dan39
L. plantarum * Dan91
L. johnsonii Dan92		Reduction of Nosema spores.[187]
Commercial
probiotic		Protexin® (Enterococcus faecium) Reduction of N. ceranae incidence increased the population of adult bees and increased honey production.[116,176]
Bactocell® (Pediococcus acidilactici)
Levucell SB® (Saccharomyces boulardii)		Improvement of honey bee survival.[175]
EM® probiotic for bees:
Multiple species of LAB and photosynthetic bacteria.		Reduction of Nosema spores increased strength of colonies.[177]
APIFLORA (Biowet, Poland) lyophilized selected L actobacillus strains (Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin and University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Poland)Antagonistic effect toward N. ceranae and increased bee survival.Available at: https://biowet.pl/en/produkty/apiflora-2/ accessed on 9 March 2022
VETAFARM:
Lactobacillus acidophilus
Lactobacillus delbruekii sub.bulgaricus
L. plantarum *
L. rhamnosus
B. bifidum
Enterococcus faecium		Reduction of N. ceranae incidence increased the population of adult bees and increased honey production.[176]
P. acidilactici (Lallemand SAS Blagnac, FranceRegulate genes involved in honey bee development (vitellogenin), immunity (serine protease 40, defensin) and possibly prevent infection by the parasite N. ceranae.[178]
* Taxonomic correspondence: Lactobacillus kunkeei (currently Apilactobacillus kunkeei); Lactobacillus plantarum (currently Lactiplanbacillus plantarum); Lactobacillus salivarius (currently Ligilactobacillus salivarius).
Baffoni et al. [187] reported that probiotic treatment with Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains successfully lowered the presence of Nosema spores in infected honey bees, thus demonstrating the effectiveness of a microorganism-based preventive strategy.
Other studies reported below have shown that other non-LAB bacteria and yeasts may have antagonistic activity against Nosema. For example, Sabaté et al. [184] reported that the endogenous intestinal bacterium Bacillus subtilis subsp. subtilis Mori2 enhanced queen egg-laying, resulting in more bees and reducing the occurrence of nosemosis; furthermore, they demonstrated that a surfactin, a cyclic lipopeptide synthesized by this bacterium, was also shown to reduce the development of N. ceranae, acting either by direct exposure to the purified spores or incorporated into the bee’s digestive tract.
Moreover, Corby-Harris et al. [186] have shown that Parasaccharibacter apium improves honey bee resistance to Nosema. L. kunkeei (currently Apilactobacillus kunkeei) and L. salivarius A3iob (currently Ligilactobacillus salivarius) administered to honey bee colonies reduced Nosema disease. Feeding caged bees, the honey bee gut bacterium L. kunkeei reduced N. ceranae spore loads compared to the control with untreated bees [182].
Regarding the antimicrobial activity of the yeasts, Braglia et al. [111] proved that dietary supplementation with Saccharomyces sp. strain KIA1 was effective in the control of nosemosis.
Different commercial probiotic strains have also been tested as an alternative therapy against N. ceranae infections in honey bees. El Khoury et al. [175] demonstrated that administration of sugar syrup containing P. apium (PC1 sp.), Bacillus sp.(PC2 sp.) and two commercial probiotics, Bactocell® (Pediococcus acidilactici) and Levucell SB® (Saccharomyces boulardii) in the diet of honey bees, significant increases the probability of survival after two weeks in both curative and prophylactic treatments. The results reported in this work support that bacteria within the genus Bacillus and the species P. apium have antagonistic activity against Nosema, in accordance with Sabaté et al. [184] and Corby-Harris et al. [186]. The commercial probiotic VETAFARM (L. acidophilus, L. delbruekii sub. bulgaricus, L. plantarum, L. rhamnosus, Bifidobacterium bifidum, Enterococcus faecium), besides reducing N. ceranae proliferation, increased the survivorship of infected honey bees.
Tlack Gajger et al. [177] found that the commercial probiotic EM® PROBIOTIC FOR BEES administration was followed by a significant reduction in the spore count of Nosema spp. in the colonies, and the strength of the colonies increased. The achievements from these aforementioned investigations have shown that some endogenous gut bacteria and commercial probiotics can sometimes have a biologically relevant antagonistic effect on the development of N. ceranae. However, some studies have indicated that arbitrary probiotic treatments may not have beneficial effects on the host [188]. Complementing the diet of honey bees with inadequate probiotics does not prevent the emergence of nosemosis, may de-regulate the insects’ immune system and could significantly increase bee mortality [189]. Andrearczyk et al. [190] noted an increase in Nosema spp. infections in young bees fed with commercial probiotic strains of Lactobacillus sp. and Saccharomyces cerevisiae. As a whole, this suggests that some generic and inappropriate probiotics are not suitable for feeding honey bees.
In a study conducted by Ptaszyńska et al. [189], a significant increase in Nosema spore counts, compared to the A. mellifera infected control, was caused by two probiotic supplements. The former consisted of Lactobacillus casei, L. plantarum, Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Rhodopseudomonas palustris, while the second consisted of L. acidophilus, L. delbrueckii and Bifidobacterium bifidum. Furthermore, probiotic supplementation accelerated the nosemosis incidence. Probably, increased acidity of the honey bees’ gut, which is a consequence of the uncontrolled growth of inadequate LABs, created conditions favorable to faster nosemosis development. In our opinion, based on all the aforementioned studies, it is clear that only the supplementation of the honey bee diet with appropriate probiotics can have a positive impact on nosemosis control by providing a long-lasting strategy to improve overall honey bee health.

5. Conclusions

We believe that the use in beekeeping practice of beneficial microbes, plant extracts and RNAi has enormous potential for biocontrol of nosemosis. However, for systematic application, further studies are needed for these techniques to become reliable and effective tools. The antimicrobial activity of plant extract is mainly due to the presence of phenolic compounds and terpenoids, which possess well-known antimicrobial activity. The effect that these substances may have on bee gut microflora and symbiotic LAB, however, is not fully known. Regarding the RNAi-based antiviral effect, the molecular mechanisms have not been thoroughly characterized, and little is known about the optimal RNAi delivery method for treating honey bees at different developmental stages. The use of appropriate probiotics, unlike synthetic or natural chemical compounds, does not adversely affect the balance of the gut microbiota and is also a technique that can help prevent and treat nosemosis as well as positively impact honey bee welfare.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.I. and A.D.C.; software, F.L., B.T. and G.A.; writing—original draft preparation, M.I., S.G., D.D.C. and S.P.; writing—review and editing, M.I., F.L. and G.A.; visualization, B.T.; supervision, M.I. and A.D.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lee, S.C.; Corradi, N.; Byrnes, E.J., III; Torres-Martinez, S.; Dietrich, F.S.; Keeling, P.J.; Heitman, J. Microsporidia Evolved from Ancestral Sexual Fungi. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18, 1675–1679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Corradi, N.; Keeling, P.J. Microsporidia: A Journey through Radical Taxonomical Revisions. Fungal Biol. Rev. 2009, 23, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Tokarev, Y.S.; Huang, W.-F.; Solter, L.F.; Malysh, J.M.; Becnel, J.J.; Vossbrinck, C.R. A Formal Redefinition of the Genera Nosema and Vairimorpha (Microsporidia: Nosematidae) and Reassignment of Species Based on Molecular Phylogenetics. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2020, 169, 107279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Invernizzi, C.; Abud, C.; Tomasco, I.H.; Harriet, J.; Ramallo, G.; Campá, J.; Katz, H.; Gardiol, G.; Mendoza, Y. Presence of Nosema Ceranae in Honeybees (Apis Mellifera) in Uruguay. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2009, 101, 150–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Goblirsch, M. Nosema Ceranae Disease of the Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera). Apidologie 2018, 49, 131–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Klee, J.; Besana, A.M.; Genersch, E.; Gisder, S.; Nanetti, A.; Tam, D.Q.; Chinh, T.X.; Puerta, F.; Ruz, J.M.; Kryger, P. Widespread Dispersal of the Microsporidian Nosema Ceranae, an Emergent Pathogen of the Western Honey Bee, Apis Mellifera. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2007, 96, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Emsen, B.; Guzman-Novoa, E.; Hamiduzzaman, M.M.; Eccles, L.; Lacey, B.; Ruiz-Pérez, R.A.; Nasr, M. Higher Prevalence and Levels of Nosema Ceranae than Nosema Apis Infections in Canadian Honey Bee Colonies. Parasitol. Res. 2016, 115, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Martín-Hernández, R.; Botías, C.; Bailón, E.G.; Martínez-Salvador, A.; Prieto, L.; Meana, A.; Higes, M. Microsporidia Infecting Apis Mellifera: Coexistence or Competition. Is Nosema Ceranae Replacing Nosema Apis? Environ. Microbiol. 2012, 14, 2127–2138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Martín-Hernández, R.; Bartolomé, C.; Chejanovsky, N.; Le Conte, Y.; Dalmon, A.; Dussaubat, C.; García-Palencia, P.; Meana, A.; Pinto, M.A.; Soroker, V. Nosema Ceranae in Apis Mellifera: A 12 Years Postdetection Perspective. Environ. Microbiol. 2018, 20, 1302–1329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Suwannapong, G.; Yemor, T.; Boonpakdee, C.; Benbow, M.E. Nosema Ceranae, a New Parasite in Thai Honeybees. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2011, 106, 236–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Tapaszti, Z.; Forgách, P.; Kővágó, C.; Békési, L.; Bakonyi, T.; Rusvai, M. First Detection and Dominance of Nosema Ceranae in Hungarian Honeybee Colonies. Acta Vet. Hung. 2009, 57, 383–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Ansari, M.J.; Al-Ghamdi, A.; Nuru, A.; Khan, K.A.; Alattal, Y. Geographical Distribution and Molecular Detection of Nosema Ceranae from Indigenous Honey Bees of Saudi Arabia. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2017, 24, 983–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Chupia, V.; Pikulkaew, S.; Krutmuang, P.; Mekchay, S.; Patchanee, P. Molecular Epidemiology and Geographical Distribution of Nosema Ceranae in Honeybees, Northern Thailand. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Dis. 2016, 6, 27–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chen, Y.; Evans, J.D.; Smith, I.B.; Pettis, J.S. Nosema Ceranae Is a Long-Present and Wide-Spread Microsporidian Infection of the European Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera) in the United States. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2008, 97, 186–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Jack, C.J.; Lucas, H.M.; Webster, T.C.; Sagili, R.R. Colony Level Prevalence and Intensity of Nosema Ceranae in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera L.). PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0163522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Fries, I.; Feng, F.; da Silva, A.; Slemenda, S.B.; Pieniazek, N.J. Nosema Ceranae n. Sp.(Microspora, Nosematidae), Morphological and Molecular Characterization of a Microsporidian Parasite of the Asian Honey Bee Apis Cerana (Hymenoptera, Apidae). Eur. J. Protistol. 1996, 32, 356–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Manual, O.T. Manual for Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals, Chapter 2.2. 4; Office International des Epizooties: Paris, France, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  18. Fries, I. Nosema Ceranae in European Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2010, 103, S73–S79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Paris, L.; El Alaoui, H.; Delbac, F.; Diogon, M. Effects of the Gut Parasite Nosema Ceranae on Honey Bee Physiology and Behavior. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2018, 26, 149–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Fries, I. Nosema Apis—a Parasite in the Honey Bee Colony. Bee World 1993, 74, 5–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, D.-I.; Mofller, F. The Division of Labor and Queen Attendance Behavior of Nosema-Infected Worker Honey Bees. J. Econ. Entomol. 1970, 63, 1539–1541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Woyciechowski, M.; Moroń, D. Life Expectancy and Onset of Foraging in the Honeybee (Apis Mellifera). Insectes Soc. 2009, 56, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Dosselli, R.; Grassl, J.; Carson, A.; Simmons, L.W.; Baer, B. Flight Behaviour of Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera) Workers Is Altered by Initial Infections of the Fungal Parasite Nosema Apis. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 36649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Higes, M.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Meana, A. Nosema Ceranae in Europe: An Emergent Type C Nosemosis. Apidologie 2010, 41, 375–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Higes, M.; Martín, R.; Meana, A. Nosema Ceranae, a New Microsporidian Parasite in Honeybees in Europe. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2006, 92, 93–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Higes, M.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Botías, C.; Bailón, E.G.; González-Porto, A.V.; Barrios, L.; Del Nozal, M.J.; Bernal, J.L.; Jiménez, J.J.; Palencia, P.G. How Natural Infection by Nosema Ceranae Causes Honeybee Colony Collapse. Environ. Microbiol. 2008, 10, 2659–2669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Paxton, R.J. Does Infection by Nosema Ceranae Cause “Colony Collapse Disorder” in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera)? J. Apic. Res. 2010, 49, 80–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Botías, C.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Barrios, L.; Meana, A.; Higes, M. Nosema Spp. Infection and Its Negative Effects on Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera Iberiensis) at the Colony Level. Vet. Res. 2013, 44, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Goblirsch, M.; Huang, Z.Y.; Spivak, M. Physiological and Behavioral Changes in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera) Induced by Nosema Ceranae Infection. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e58165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Aufauvre, J.; Misme-Aucouturier, B.; Viguès, B.; Texier, C.; Delbac, F.; Blot, N. Transcriptome Analyses of the Honeybee Response to Nosema Ceranae and Insecticides. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e91686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Basualdo, M.; Barragán, S.; Antúnez, K. Bee Bread Increases Honeybee Haemolymph Protein and Promote Better Survival despite of Causing Higher N Osema Ceranae Abundance in Honeybees. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 2014, 6, 396–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Li, W.; Chen, Y.; Cook, S.C. Chronic Nosema Ceranae Infection Inflicts Comprehensive and Persistent Immunosuppression and Accelerated Lipid Loss in Host Apis Mellifera Honey Bees. Int. J. Parasitol. 2018, 48, 433–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Mayack, C.; Natsopoulou, M.; McMahon, D.P. Nosema Ceranae Alters a Highly Conserved Hormonal Stress Pathway in Honeybees. Insect Mol. Biol. 2015, 24, 662–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Mayack, C.; Naug, D. Energetic Stress in the Honeybee Apis Mellifera from Nosema Ceranae Infection. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2009, 100, 185–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Aliferis, K.A.; Copley, T.; Jabaji, S. Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry Metabolite Profiling of Worker Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera L.) Hemolymph for the Study of Nosema Ceranae Infection. J. Insect Physiol. 2012, 58, 1349–1359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Vidau, C.; Panek, J.; Texier, C.; Biron, D.G.; Belzunces, L.P.; Le Gall, M.; Broussard, C.; Delbac, F.; El Alaoui, H. Differential Proteomic Analysis of Midguts from Nosema Ceranae-Infected Honeybees Reveals Manipulation of Key Host Functions. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2014, 121, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Dussaubat, C.; Brunet, J.-L.; Higes, M.; Colbourne, J.K.; Lopez, J.; Choi, J.-H.; Martin-Hernandez, R.; Botias, C.; Cousin, M.; McDonnell, C. Gut Pathology and Responses to the Microsporidium Nosema Ceranae in the Honey Bee Apis Mellifera. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e37017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Panek, J.; Paris, L.; Roriz, D.; Mone, A.; Dubuffet, A.; Delbac, F.; Diogon, M.; El Alaoui, H. Impact of the Microsporidian Nosema Ceranae on the Gut Epithelium Renewal of the Honeybee, Apis Mellifera. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2018, 159, 121–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Antúnez, K.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Prieto, L.; Meana, A.; Zunino, P.; Higes, M. Immune Suppression in the Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera) Following Infection by Nosema Ceranae (Microsporidia). Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 11, 2284–2290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Roberts, K.E.; Hughes, W.O. Immunosenescence and Resistance to Parasite Infection in the Honey Bee, Apis Mellifera. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2014, 121, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Higes, M.; Meana, A.; Bartolomé, C.; Botías, C.; Martín-Hernández, R. Nosema Ceranae (Microsporidia), a Controversial 21st Century Honey Bee Pathogen. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 2013, 5, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Kurze, C.; Le Conte, Y.; Dussaubat, C.; Erler, S.; Kryger, P.; Lewkowski, O.; Müller, T.; Widder, M.; Moritz, R.F. Nosema Tolerant Honeybees (Apis Mellifera) Escape Parasitic Manipulation of Apoptosis. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0140174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Martín-Hernández, R.; Higes, M.; Sagastume, S.; Juarranz, Á.; Dias-Almeida, J.; Budge, G.E.; Meana, A.; Boonham, N. Microsporidia Infection Impacts the Host Cell’s Cycle and Reduces Host Cell Apoptosis. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0170183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Gage, S.L.; Kramer, C.; Calle, S.; Carroll, M.; Heien, M.; DeGrandi-Hoffman, G. Nosema Ceranae Parasitism Impacts Olfactory Learning and Memory and Neurochemistry in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera). J. Exp. Biol. 2018, 221, jeb161489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Li, Z.; He, J.; Yu, T.; Chen, Y.; Huang, W.-F.; Huang, J.; Zhao, Y.; Nie, H.; Su, S. Transcriptional and Physiological Responses of Hypopharyngeal Glands in Honeybees (Apis Mellifera L.) Infected by Nosema Ceranae. Apidologie 2019, 50, 51–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Wolf, S.; McMahon, D.P.; Lim, K.S.; Pull, C.D.; Clark, S.J.; Paxton, R.J.; Osborne, J.L. So near and yet so Far: Harmonic Radar Reveals Reduced Homing Ability of Nosema Infected Honeybees. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e103989. [Google Scholar]
  47. Dussaubat, C.; Maisonnasse, A.; Crauser, D.; Beslay, D.; Costagliola, G.; Soubeyrand, S.; Kretzchmar, A.; Le Conte, Y. Flight Behavior and Pheromone Changes Associated to Nosema Ceranae Infection of Honey Bee Workers (Apis Mellifera) in Field Conditions. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2013, 113, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fries, I. Infectivity and Multiplication of Nosema Apis Z. in the Ventriculus of the Honey Bee. Apidologie 1988, 19, 319–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. De Graaf, D.; Raes, H.; Sabbe, G.; De Rycke, P.; Jacobs, F. Early Development of Nosema Apis (Microspora: Nosematidae) in the Midgut Epithelium of the Honeybee (Apis Mellifera). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 1994, 63, 74–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Becnel, J.J.; Andreadis, T.G. Microsporidia in Insects. In The Microsporidia and Microsporidiosis; American Society for Microbiology: Washington, DC, USA, 1999; pp. 447–501. [Google Scholar]
  51. Higes, M.; García-Palencia, P.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Meana, A. Experimental Infection of Apis Mellifera Honeybees with Nosema Ceranae (Microsporidia). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2007, 94, 211–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Graystock, P.; Goulson, D.; Hughes, W.O. Parasites in Bloom: Flowers Aid Dispersal and Transmission of Pollinator Parasites within and between Bee Species. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2015, 282, 20151371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Smith, M.L. The Honey Bee Parasite Nosema Ceranae: Transmissible via Food Exchange? PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e43319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Huang, W.-F.; Solter, L.F. Comparative Development and Tissue Tropism of Nosema Apis and Nosema Ceranae. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2013, 113, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Sulborska, A.; Horecka, B.; Cebrat, M.; Kowalczyk, M.; Skrzypek, T.H.; Kazimierczak, W.; Trytek, M.; Borsuk, G. Microsporidia Nosema Spp.–Obligate Bee Parasites Are Transmitted by Air. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 14376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Peng, Y.; Baer-Imhoof, B.; Harvey Millar, A.; Baer, B. Consequences of Nosema Apis Infection for Male Honey Bees and Their Fertility. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 10565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  57. Roberts, K.; Evison, S.; Baer, B.; Hughes, W. The Cost of Promiscuity: Sexual Transmission of Nosema Microsporidian Parasites in Polyandrous Honey Bees. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 10982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Van den Heever, J.P.; Thompson, T.S.; Otto, S.J.; Curtis, J.M.; Ibrahim, A.; Pernal, S.F. The Effect of Dicyclohexylamine and Fumagillin on Nosema Ceranae-Infected Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera) Mortality in Cage Trial Assays. Apidologie 2016, 47, 663–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Huang, W.-F.; Solter, L.F.; Yau, P.M.; Imai, B.S. Nosema Ceranae Escapes Fumagillin Control in Honey Bees. PLoS Pathog. 2013, 9, e1003185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Li, J.H.; Evans, J.D.; Li, W.F.; Zhao, Y.Z.; DeGrandi-Hoffman, G.; Huang, S.K.; Li, Z.G.; Hamilton, M.; Chen, Y.P. New Evidence Showing That the Destruction of Gut Bacteria by Antibiotic Treatment Could Increase the Honey Bee’s Vulnerability to Nosema Infection. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0187505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Higes, M.; Nozal, M.J.; Alvaro, A.; Barrios, L.; Meana, A.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Bernal, J.L.; Bernal, J. The Stability and Effectiveness of Fumagillin in Controlling Nosema Ceranae (Microsporidia) Infection in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera) under Laboratory and Field Conditions. Apidologie 2011, 42, 364–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Lopez, M.I.; Pettis, J.S.; Smith, I.B.; Chu, P.-S. Multiclass Determination and Confirmation of Antibiotic Residues in Honey Using LC-MS/MS. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008, 56, 1553–1559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Van den Heever, J.P.; Thompson, T.S.; Curtis, J.M.; Pernal, S.F. Stability of Dicyclohexylamine and Fumagillin in Honey. Food Chem. 2015, 179, 152–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Commission Regulation (EU), No.37/2010 of 22 December 2009 on Pharmacologically Active Substances and Their Classification Regarding Maximum Residue Limits in Foodstuffs of Animal Origin. J. Eur. Union 2010, 15, 1–72.
  65. Van den Heever, J.P.; Thompson, T.S.; Curtis, J.M.; Ibrahim, A.; Pernal, S.F. Fumagillin: An Overview of Recent Scientific Advances and Their Significance for Apiculture. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 2728–2737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Van den Heever, J.P.; Thompson, T.S.; Otto, S.J.; Curtis, J.M.; Ibrahim, A.; Pernal, S.F. Evaluation of Fumagilin-B® and Other Potential Alternative Chemotherapies against Nosema Ceranae-Infected Honeybees (Apis Mellifera) in Cage Trial Assays. Apidologie 2016, 47, 617–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Burnham, A.J. Scientific Advances in Controlling Nosema Ceranae (Microsporidia) Infections in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera). Front. Vet. Sci. 2019, 6, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Underwood, R.M.; Currie, R.W. Indoor Winter Fumigation with Formic Acid for Control of Acarapis Woodi (Acari: Tarsonemidae) and Nosema Disease, Nosema Sp. J. Econ. Entomol. 2009, 102, 1729–1736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Nanetti, A.; Rodriguez-García, C.; Meana, A.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Higes, M. Effect of Oxalic Acid on Nosema Ceranae Infection. Res. Vet. Sci. 2015, 102, 167–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Strachecka, A.; Paleolog, J.; Olszewski, K.; Borsuk, G. Influence of Amitraz and Oxalic Acid on the Cuticle Proteolytic System of Apis Mellifera L. Workers. Insects 2012, 3, 821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Grzywnowicz, K.; Ciołek, A.; Tabor, A.; Jaszek, M. Profiles of the Body-Surface Proteolytic System of Honey Bee Queens, Workers and Drones: Ontogenetic and Seasonal Changes in Proteases and Their Natural Inhibitors. Apidologie 2009, 40, 4–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Strachecka, A.; Paleolog, J.; Grzywnowicz, K. The Surface Proteolytic Activity in Apis Mellifera. J. Apic. Sci. 2008, 52, 57–66. [Google Scholar]
  73. Genath, A.; Petruschke, H.; von Bergen, M.; Einspanier, R. Influence of Formic Acid Treatment on the Proteome of the Ectoparasite Varroa Destructor. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0258845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Gisder, S.; Genersch, E. Identification of Candidate Agents Active against N. Ceranae Infection in Honey Bees: Establishment of a Medium Throughput Screening Assay Based on N. Ceranae Infected Cultured Cells. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0117200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Boukraâ, L.; Sulaiman, S.A. Rediscovering the Antibiotics of the Hive. Recent Patents Anti-Infect. Drug Disc. 2009, 4, 206–213. [Google Scholar]
  76. Lozano, A.; Hernando, M.; Uclés, S.; Hakme, E.; Fernández-Alba, A. Identification and Measurement of Veterinary Drug Residues in Beehive Products. Food Chem. 2019, 274, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Al-Waili, N.; Salom, K.; Al-Ghamdi, A.; Ansari, M.J. Antibiotic, Pesticide, and Microbial Contaminants of Honey: Human Health Hazards. Sci. World J. 2012, 2012, 930849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Lima, C.M.G.; Dalla Nora, F.M.; Seraglio, S.K.T.; da Silva, J.M.; Marzoque, H.J.; Santana, R.F.; Verruck, S.; Scussel, V.M. Antibiotic Residues in Honey: A Public Health Issue. Res. Soc. Dev. 2020, 9, e1739119604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Formato, G.; Rivera-Gomis, J.; Bubnic, J.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Milito, M.; Croppi, S.; Higes, M. Nosemosis Prevention and Control. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Tauber, J.P.; Collins, W.R.; Schwarz, R.S.; Chen, Y.; Grubbs, K.; Huang, Q.; Lopez, D.; Peterson, R.; Evans, J.D. Natural Product Medicines for Honey Bees: Perspective and Protocols. Insects 2019, 10, 356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Cilia, G.; Garrido, C.; Bonetto, M.; Tesoriero, D.; Nanetti, A. Effect of Api-Bioxal® and ApiHerb® Treatments against Nosema Ceranae Infection in Apis Mellifera Investigated by Two QPCR Methods. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Shumkova, R.; Balkanska, R.; Hristov, P. The Herbal Supplements NOZEMAT HERB® and NOZEMAT HERB PLUS®: An Alternative Therapy for N. Ceranae Infection and Its Effects on Honey Bee Strength and Production Traits. Pathogens 2021, 10, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Charistos, L.; Parashos, N.; Hatjina, F. Long Term Effects of a Food Supplement HiveAliveTM on Honey Bee Colony Strength and Nosema Ceranae Spore Counts. J. Apic. Res. 2015, 54, 420–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Higes, M.; Gómez-Moracho, T.; Rodriguez-García, C.; Botias, C.; Martín-Hernández, R. Preliminary Effect of an Experimental Treatment with “Nozevit®”,(a Phyto-Pharmacological Preparation) for Nosema Ceranae Control. J. Apic. Res. 2014, 53, 472–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Gajger, I.; Kozaric, Z.; Berta, D.; Nejedli, S.; Petrinec, Z. Effect of the Herbal Preparation Nozevict on the Mid-Gut Structure of Honeybees (Apis Melífera) Infected with Nosema Sp. Spores. Vet. Med. 2011, 56, 344–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Chioveanu, G.; Ionescu, D.; Mardare, A. Control of Nosemosis-Treatment with Protofil. Apiacta 2004, 39, 31–38. [Google Scholar]
  87. Cristina, R.T.; Kovačević, Z.; Cincović, M.; Dumitrescu, E.; Muselin, F.; Imre, K.; Militaru, D.; Mederle, N.; Radulov, I.; Hădărugă, N. Composition and Efficacy of a Natural Phytotherapeutic Blend against Nosemosis in Honey Bees. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Glavinic, U.; Stankovic, B.; Draskovic, V.; Stevanovic, J.; Petrovic, T.; Lakic, N.; Stanimirovic, Z. Dietary Amino Acid and Vitamin Complex Protects Honey Bee from Immunosuppression Caused by Nosema Ceranae. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0187726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Botías, C.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Meana, A.; Higes, M. Screening Alternative Therapies to Control Nosemosis Type C in Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera Iberiensis) Colonies. Res. Vet. Sci. 2013, 95, 1041–1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Suwannapong, G.; Maksong, S.; Phainchajoen, M.; Benbow, M.; Mayack, C. Survival and Health Improvement of Nosema Infected Apis Florea (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Bees after Treatment with Propolis Extract. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2018, 21, 437–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Mura, A.; Pusceddu, M.; Theodorou, P.; Angioni, A.; Floris, I.; Paxton, R.J.; Satta, A. Propolis Consumption Reduces Nosema Ceranae Infection of European Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera). Insects 2020, 11, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Naree, S.; Ponkit, R.; Chotiaroonrat, E.; Mayack, C.L.; Suwannapong, G. Propolis Extract and Chitosan Improve Health of Nosema Ceranae Infected Giant Honey Bees, Apis Dorsata Fabricius, 1793. Pathogens 2021, 10, 785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Naree, S.; Ellis, J.D.; Benbow, M.E.; Suwannapong, G. The Use of Propolis for Preventing and Treating Nosema Ceranae Infection in Western Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera Linnaeus, 1787) Workers. J. Apic. Res. 2021, 60, 686–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Yemor, T.; Phiancharoen, M.; Eric Benbow, M.; Suwannapong, G. Effects of Stingless Bee Propolis on Nosema Ceranae Infected Asian Honey Bees, Apis Cerana. J. Apic. Res. 2015, 54, 468–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Arismendi, N.; Vargas, M.; López, M.D.; Barría, Y.; Zapata, N. Promising Antimicrobial Activity against the Honey Bee Parasite Nosema Ceranae by Methanolic Extracts from Chilean Native Plants and Propolis. J. Apic. Res. 2018, 57, 522–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Chaimanee, V.; Kasem, A.; Nuanjohn, T.; Boonmee, T.; Siangsuepchart, A.; Malaithong, W.; Sinpoo, C.; Disayathanoowat, T.; Pettis, J.S. Natural Extracts as Potential Control Agents for Nosema Ceranae Infection in Honeybees, Apis Mellifera. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2021, 186, 107688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Özkırım, A.; Küçüközmen, B. Application of Herbal Essential Oil Extract Mixture for Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera L.) Against Nosema Ceranae and Nosema Apis. J. Apic. Sci. 2021, 65, 163–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Pașca, C.; Matei, I.A.; Diaconeasa, Z.; Rotaru, A.; Erler, S.; Dezmirean, D.S. Biologically Active Extracts from Different Medicinal Plants Tested as Potential Additives against Bee Pathogens. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Yilmaz, F.; Kuvanci, A.; Konak, F.; Öztürk, S.; Şahiïn, A. The Effects of Some Essential Oils Against Nosemosis. Bee Stud. 2020, 12, 37–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Chen, X.; Wang, S.; Xu, Y.; Gong, H.; Wu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Hu, F.; Zheng, H. Protective Potential of Chinese Herbal Extracts against Microsporidian Nosema Ceranae, an Emergent Pathogen of Western Honey Bees, Apis Mellifera L. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2021, 24, 502–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Pohorecka, K. Laboratory Studies on the Effect of Standardized Artemisia Absinthium L. Extract on Nosema Apis Infection in the Worker Apis Mellifera. J. Apic. Sci. 2004, 48, 131–136. [Google Scholar]
  102. Lee, J.K.; Kim, J.H.; Jo, M.; Rangachari, B.; Park, J.K. Anti-Nosemosis Activity of and Aqueous Extracts. J. Apic. Sci. 2018, 62, 27–38. [Google Scholar]
  103. Balamurugan, R.; Park, J.K.; Lee, J.K. Anti-Nosemosis Activity of Phenolic Compounds Derived from Artemisia Dubia and Aster Scaber. J. Apic. Res. 2020, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Nanetti, A.; Ugolini, L.; Cilia, G.; Pagnotta, E.; Malaguti, L.; Cardaio, I.; Matteo, R.; Lazzeri, L. Seed Meals from Brassica Nigra and Eruca Sativa Control Artificial Nosema Ceranae Infections in Apis Mellifera. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Bravo, J.; Carbonell, V.; Sepúlveda, B.; Delporte, C.; Valdovinos, C.E.; Martín-Hernández, R.; Higes, M. Antifungal Activity of the Essential Oil Obtained from Cryptocarya Alba against Infection in Honey Bees by Nosema Ceranae. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2017, 149, 141–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Ptaszyńska, A.A.; Załuski, D. Extracts from Eleutherococcus Senticosus (Rupr. et Maxim.) Maxim. Roots: A New Hope against Honeybee Death Caused by Nosemosis. Molecules 2020, 25, 4452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Damiani, N.; Fernández, N.J.; Porrini, M.P.; Gende, L.B.; Álvarez, E.; Buffa, F.; Brasesco, C.; Maggi, M.D.; Marcangeli, J.A.; Eguaras, M.J. Laurel Leaf Extracts for Honeybee Pest and Disease Management: Antimicrobial, Microsporicidal, and Acaricidal Activity. Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 701–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Porrini, M.P.; Fernández, N.J.; Garrido, P.M.; Gende, L.B.; Medici, S.K.; Eguaras, M.J. In Vivo Evaluation of Antiparasitic Activity of Plant Extracts on Nosema Ceranae (Microsporidia). Apidologie 2011, 42, 700–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Radoi, I.; Sapcaliu, A.; Mateescu, C.; Pop, A.; Savu, V. In Vitro Screening of Hydroalcoholic Plant Extracts to Control Nosema Apis Infection. J. Biotechnol. 2014, 185, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Bernklau, E.; Bjostad, L.; Hogeboom, A.; Carlisle, A.; HS, A. Dietary Phytochemicals, Honey Bee Longevity and Pathogen Tolerance. Insects 2019, 10, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. Braglia, C.; Alberoni, D.; Porrini, M.P.; Garrido, P.M.; Baffoni, L.; Di Gioia, D. Screening of Dietary Ingredients against the Honey Bee Parasite Nosema Ceranae. Pathogens 2021, 10, 1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Saltykova, E.; Karimova, A.; Gataullin, A.; Gaifullina, L.; Matniyazov, R.; Frolova, M.; Albulov, A.; Nikolenko, A. The Effect of High-Molecular Weight Chitosans on the Antioxidant and Immune Systems of the Honeybee. Appl. Biochem. Microbiol. 2016, 52, 553–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Saltykova, E.; Gaifullina, L.; Kaskinova, M.; Gataullin, A.; Matniyazov, R.; Poskryakov, A.; Nikolenko, A. Effect of Chitosan on Development of Nosema Apis Microsporidia in Honey Bees. Microbiology 2018, 87, 738–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Valizadeh, P.; Guzman-Novoa, E.; Goodwin, P.H. Effect of Immune Inducers on Nosema Ceranae Multiplication and Their Impact on Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera L.) Survivorship and Behaviors. Insects 2020, 11, 572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Roussel, M.; Villay, A.; Delbac, F.; Michaud, P.; Laroche, C.; Roriz, D.; El Alaoui, H.; Diogon, M. Antimicrosporidian Activity of Sulphated Polysaccharides from Algae and Their Potential to Control Honeybee Nosemosis. Carbohydr. Polym. 2015, 133, 213–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Klassen, S.S.; VanBlyderveen, W.; Eccles, L.; Kelly, P.G.; Borges, D.; Goodwin, P.H.; Petukhova, T.; Wang, Q.; Guzman-Novoa, E. Nosema Ceranae Infections in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera) Treated with Pre/Probiotics and Impacts on Colonies in the Field. Vet. Sci. 2021, 8, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Ptaszyńska, A.A.; Trytek, M.; Borsuk, G.; Buczek, K.; Rybicka-Jasińska, K.; Gryko, D. Porphyrins Inactivate Nosema Spp. Microsporidia. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 5523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Strachecka, A.J.; Olszewski, K.; Paleolog, J. Curcumin Stimulates Biochemical Mechanisms of Apis Mellifera Resistance and Extends the Apian Life-Span. J. Apic. Sci. 2015, 59, 129–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  119. Maistrello, L.; Lodesani, M.; Costa, C.; Leonardi, F.; Marani, G.; Caldon, M.; Mutinelli, F.; Granato, A. Screening of Natural Compounds for the Control of Nosema Disease in Honeybees (Apis Mellifera). Apidologie 2008, 39, 436–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. Costa, C.; Lodesani, M.; Maistrello, L. Effect of Thymol and Resveratrol Administered with Candy or Syrup on the Development of Nosema Ceranae and on the Longevity of Honeybees (Apis Mellifera L.) in Laboratory Conditions. Apidologie 2010, 41, 141–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  121. Borges, D.; Guzman-Novoa, E.; Goodwin, P.H. Control of the Microsporidian Parasite Nosema Ceranae in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera) Using Nutraceutical and Immuno-Stimulatory Compounds. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0227484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Tlak Gajger, I.; Ribarić, J.; Smodiš Škerl, M.; Vlainić, J.; Sikirić, P. Stable Gastric Pentadecapeptide BPC 157 in Honeybee (Apis Mellifera) Therapy, to Control Nosema Ceranae Invasions in Apiary Conditions. J. Vet. Pharmacol. Ther. 2018, 41, 614–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Go, E.B.; Kim, J.-G.; Park, H.-G.; Kang, E.-J.; Kim, H.-K.; Choi, Y.-S.; Moon, J.-H. Screening of Anti-Nosemosis Active Compounds Based on the Structure-Activity Correlation. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2021, 24, 606–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Glavinic, U.; Rajkovic, M.; Vunduk, J.; Vejnovic, B.; Stevanovic, J.; Milenkovic, I.; Stanimirovic, Z. Effects of Agaricus Bisporus Mushroom Extract on Honey Bees Infected with Nosema Ceranae. Insects 2021, 12, 915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Glavinic, U.; Stevanovic, J.; Ristanic, M.; Rajkovic, M.; Davitkov, D.; Lakic, N.; Stanimirovic, Z. Potential of Fumagillin and Agaricus Blazei Mushroom Extract to Reduce Nosema Ceranae in Honey Bees. Insects 2021, 12, 282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Kunat, M.; Wagner, G.; Staniec, B.; Jaszek, M.; Matuszewska, A.; Stefaniuk, D.; Ptaszyńska, A. Aqueous Extracts of Jet-Black Ant Lasius Fuliginosus Nests for Controlling Nosemosis, a Disease of Honeybees Caused by Fungi of the Genus Nosema. Eur. Zool. J. 2020, 87, 770–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Tragust, S. External Immune Defence in Ant Societies (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): The Role of Antimicrobial Venom and Metapleural Gland Secretion. Myrmecol. News 2016, 23, 119–128. [Google Scholar]
  128. Bos, N.; Kankaanpää-Kukkonen, V.; Freitak, D.; Stucki, D.; Sundström, L. Comparison of Twelve Ant Species and Their Susceptibility to Fungal Infection. Insects 2019, 10, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  129. Agrawal, N.; Dasaradhi, P.; Mohmmed, A.; Malhotra, P.; Bhatnagar, R.K.; Mukherjee, S.K. RNA Interference: Biology, Mechanism, and Applications. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2003, 67, 657–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  130. Hannon, G.J. RNA Interference. Nature 2002, 418, 244–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Mamta, B.; Rajam, M. RNAi Technology: A New Platform for Crop Pest Control. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants 2017, 23, 487–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Vogel, E.; Santos, D.; Mingels, L.; Verdonckt, T.-W.; Broeck, J.V. RNA Interference in Insects: Protecting Beneficials and Controlling Pests. Front. Physiol. 2019, 9, 1912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  133. Zhang, J.; Khan, S.A.; Heckel, D.G.; Bock, R. Next-Generation Insect-Resistant Plants: RNAi-Mediated Crop Protection. Trends Biotechnol. 2017, 35, 871–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Brutscher, L.M.; Flenniken, M.L. RNAi and Antiviral Defense in the Honey Bee. J. Immunol. Res. 2015, 2015, 941897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  135. Grozinger, C.M.; Robinson, G.E. The Power and Promise of Applying Genomics to Honey Bee Health. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2015, 10, 124–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  136. Yu, N.; Christiaens, O.; Liu, J.; Niu, J.; Cappelle, K.; Caccia, S.; Huvenne, H.; Smagghe, G. Delivery of DsRNA for RNAi in Insects: An Overview and Future Directions. Insect Sci. 2013, 20, 4–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Christiaens, O.; Whyard, S.; Vélez, A.M.; Smagghe, G. Double-Stranded RNA Technology to Control Insect Pests: Current Status and Challenges. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Joga, M.R.; Zotti, M.J.; Smagghe, G.; Christiaens, O. RNAi Efficiency, Systemic Properties, and Novel Delivery Methods for Pest Insect Control: What We Know so Far. Front. Physiol. 2016, 7, 553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  139. Paldi, N.; Glick, E.; Oliva, M.; Zilberberg, Y.; Aubin, L.; Pettis, J.; Chen, Y.; Evans, J.D. Effective Gene Silencing in a Microsporidian Parasite Associated with Honeybee (Apis Mellifera) Colony Declines. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2010, 76, 5960–5964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  140. Evans, J.D.; Huang, Q. Interactions Among Host–Parasite MicroRNAs During Nosema Ceranae Proliferation in Apis Mellifera. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  141. He, N.; Zhang, Y.; Duan, X.L.; Li, J.H.; Huang, W.-F.; Evans, J.D.; DeGrandi-Hoffman, G.; Chen, Y.P.; Huang, S.K. RNA Interference-Mediated Knockdown of Genes Encoding Spore Wall Proteins Confers Protection against Nosema Ceranae Infection in the European Honey Bee, Apis Mellifera. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Kim, I.; Kim, D.; Gwak, W.; Woo, S. Increased Survival of the Honey Bee Apis Mellifera Infected with the Microsporidian Nosema Ceranae by Effective Gene Silencing. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2020, 105, e21734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Balconi, E.; Pennati, A.; Crobu, D.; Pandini, V.; Cerutti, R.; Zanetti, G.; Aliverti, A. The Ferredoxin-NADP+ Reductase/Ferredoxin Electron Transfer System of Plasmodium Falciparum. FEBS J. 2009, 276, 3825–3836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Carrillo, N.; Ceccarelli, E.A. Open Questions in Ferredoxin-NADP+ Reductase Catalytic Mechanism. Eur. J. Biochem. 2003, 270, 1900–1915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Rodríguez-García, C.; Evans, J.D.; Li, W.; Branchiccela, B.; Li, J.H.; Heerman, M.C.; Banmeke, O.; Zhao, Y.; Hamilton, M.; Higes, M. Nosemosis Control in European Honey Bees, Apis Mellifera, by Silencing the Gene Encoding Nosema Ceranae Polar Tube Protein 3. J. Exp. Biol. 2018, 221, jeb184606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  146. Li, W.; Evans, J.D.; Huang, Q.; Rodríguez-García, C.; Liu, J.; Hamilton, M.; Grozinger, C.M.; Webster, T.C.; Su, S.; Chen, Y.P. Silencing the Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera) Naked Cuticle Gene (Nkd) Improves Host Immune Function and Reduces Nosema Ceranae Infections. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2016, 82, 6779–6787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  147. Yang, D.; Xu, X.; Zhao, H.; Yang, S.; Wang, X.; Zhao, D.; Diao, Q.; Hou, C. Diverse Factors Affecting Efficiency of RNAi in Honey Bee Viruses. Front. Genet. 2018, 9, 384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Raymann, K.; Moran, N.A. The Role of the Gut Microbiome in Health and Disease of Adult Honey Bee Workers. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2018, 26, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Hamdi, C.; Balloi, A.; Essanaa, J.; Crotti, E.; Gonella, E.; Raddadi, N.; Ricci, I.; Boudabous, A.; Borin, S.; Manino, A. Gut Microbiome Dysbiosis and Honeybee Health. J. Appl. Entomol. 2011, 135, 524–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  150. Zheng, H.; Powell, J.E.; Steele, M.I.; Dietrich, C.; Moran, N.A. Honeybee Gut Microbiota Promotes Host Weight Gain via Bacterial Metabolism and Hormonal Signaling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 4775–4780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  151. Dolezal, A.G.; Toth, A.L. Feedbacks between Nutrition and Disease in Honey Bee Health. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2018, 26, 114–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Anderson, K.E.; Ricigliano, V.A. Honey Bee Gut Dysbiosis: A Novel Context of Disease Ecology. Vectors Med. Vet. Entomol. Soc. Insects 2017, 22, 125–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Maes, P.W.; Floyd, A.S.; Mott, B.M.; Anderson, K.E. Overwintering Honey Bee Colonies: Effect of Worker Age and Climate on the Hindgut Microbiota. Insects 2021, 12, 224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Raymann, K.; Shaffer, Z.; Moran, N.A. Antibiotic Exposure Perturbs the Gut Microbiota and Elevates Mortality in Honeybees. PLoS Biol. 2017, 15, e2001861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Kešnerová, L.; Emery, O.; Troilo, M.; Liberti, J.; Erkosar, B.; Engel, P. Gut Microbiota Structure Differs between Honeybees in Winter and Summer. ISME J. 2020, 14, 801–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  156. Kakumanu, M.L.; Reeves, A.M.; Anderson, T.D.; Rodrigues, R.R.; Williams, M.A. Honey Bee Gut Microbiome Is Altered by In-Hive Pesticide Exposures. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  157. Hubert, J.; Bicianova, M.; Ledvinka, O.; Kamler, M.; Lester, P.J.; Nesvorna, M.; Kopecky, J.; Erban, T. Changes in the Bacteriome of Honey Bees Associated with the Parasite Varroa Destructor, and Pathogens Nosema and Lotmaria Passim. Microb. Ecol. 2017, 73, 685–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  158. Ricigliano, V.A.; Williams, S.T.; Oliver, R. Effects of Different Artificial Diets on Commercial Honey Bee Colony Performance, Health Biomarkers, and Gut Microbiota. BMC Vet. Res. 2022, 18, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  159. Daisley, B.A.; Chmiel, J.A.; Pitek, A.P.; Thompson, G.J.; Reid, G. Missing Microbes in Bees: How Systematic Depletion of Key Symbionts Erodes Immunity. Trends Microbiol. 2020, 28, 1010–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Cariveau, D.P.; Elijah Powell, J.; Koch, H.; Winfree, R.; Moran, N.A. Variation in Gut Microbial Communities and Its Association with Pathogen Infection in Wild Bumble Bees (Bombus). ISME J. 2014, 8, 2369–2379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Dosch, C.; Manigk, A.; Streicher, T.; Tehel, A.; Paxton, R.J.; Tragust, S. The Gut Microbiota Can Provide Viral Tolerance in the Honey Bee. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Rouzé, R.; Moné, A.; Delbac, F.; Belzunces, L.; Blot, N. The Honeybee Gut Microbiota Is Altered after Chronic Exposure to Different Families of Insecticides and Infection by Nosema Ceranae. Microbes Environ. 2019, 34, 226–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  163. Maes, P.W.; Rodrigues, P.A.; Oliver, R.; Mott, B.M.; Anderson, K.E. Diet-related Gut Bacterial Dysbiosis Correlates with Impaired Development, Increased Mortality and Nosema Disease in the Honeybee (Apis Mellifera). Mol. Ecol. 2016, 25, 5439–5450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Rubanov, A.; Russell, K.A.; Rothman, J.A.; Nieh, J.C.; McFrederick, Q.S. Intensity of Nosema Ceranae Infection Is Associated with Specific Honey Bee Gut Bacteria and Weakly Associated with Gut Microbiome Structure. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 3820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Schwarz, R.S.; Moran, N.A.; Evans, J.D. Early Gut Colonizers Shape Parasite Susceptibility and Microbiota Composition in Honey Bee Workers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 9345–9350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  166. Paris, L.; Peghaire, E.; Mone, A.; Diogon, M.; Debroas, D.; Delbac, F.; El Alaoui, H. Honeybee Gut Microbiota Dysbiosis in Pesticide/Parasite Co-Exposures Is Mainly Induced by Nosema Ceranae. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2020, 172, 107348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Castelli, L.; Branchiccela, B.; Garrido, M.; Invernizzi, C.; Porrini, M.; Romero, H.; Santos, E.; Zunino, P.; Antúnez, K. Impact of Nutritional Stress on Honeybee Gut Microbiota, Immunity, and Nosema Ceranae Infection. Microb. Ecol. 2020, 80, 908–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Tauber, J.P.; Nguyen, V.; Lopez, D.; Evans, J.D. Effects of a Resident Yeast from the Honeybee Gut on Immunity, Microbiota, and Nosema Disease. Insects 2019, 10, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  169. Ptaszyńska, A.A.; Borsuk, G.; Mułenko, W.; Wilk, J. Impact of Vertebrate Probiotics on Honeybee Yeast Microbiota and on the Course of Nosemosis. Med. Weter. 2016, 72, 430–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Diaz, T.; del-Val, E.; Ayala, R.; Larsen, J. Alterations in Honey Bee Gut Microorganisms Caused by Nosema Spp. and Pest Control Methods. Pest Manag. Sci. 2019, 75, 835–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Panjad, P.; Yongsawas, R.; Sinpoo, C.; Pakwan, C.; Subta, P.; Krongdang, S.; In-On, A.; Chomdej, S.; Chantawannakul, P.; Disayathanoowat, T. Impact of Nosema Disease and American Foulbrood on Gut Bacterial Communities of Honeybees Apis Mellifera. Insects 2021, 12, 525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Crotti, E.; Balloi, A.; Hamdi, C.; Sansonno, L.; Marzorati, M.; Gonella, E.; Favia, G.; Cherif, A.; Bandi, C.; Alma, A. Microbial Symbionts: A Resource for the Management of Insect-related Problems. Microb. Biotechnol. 2012, 5, 307–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  173. Crotti, E.; Sansonno, L.; Prosdocimi, E.M.; Vacchini, V.; Hamdi, C.; Cherif, A.; Gonella, E.; Marzorati, M.; Balloi, A. Microbial Symbionts of Honeybees: A Promising Tool to Improve Honeybee Health. New Biotechnol. 2013, 30, 716–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Alberoni, D.; Baffoni, L.; Gaggìa, F.; Ryan, P.; Murphy, K.; Ross, P.; Stanton, C.; Di Gioia, D. Impact of Beneficial Bacteria Supplementation on the Gut Microbiota, Colony Development and Productivity of Apis Mellifera L. Benef. Microbes 2018, 9, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. El Khoury, S.; Rousseau, A.; Lecoeur, A.; Cheaib, B.; Bouslama, S.; Mercier, P.-L.; Demey, V.; Castex, M.; Giovenazzo, P.; Derome, N. Deleterious Interaction Between Honeybees (Apis Mellifera) and Its Microsporidian Intracellular Parasite Nosema Ceranae Was Mitigated by Administrating Either Endogenous or Allochthonous Gut Microbiota Strains. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 6, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  176. Borges, D.; Guzman-Novoa, E.; Goodwin, P.H. Effects of Prebiotics and Probiotics on Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera) Infected with the Microsporidian Parasite Nosema Ceranae. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Tlak Gajger, I.; Vlainić, J.; Šoštarić, P.; Prešern, J.; Bubnič, J.; Smodiš Škerl, M.I. Effects on Some Therapeutical, Biochemical, and Immunological Parameters of Honey Bee (Apis Mellifera) Exposed to Probiotic Treatments, in Field and Laboratory Conditions. Insects 2020, 11, 638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Peghaire, E.; Mone, A.; Delbac, F.; Debroas, D.; Chaucheyras-Durand, F.; El Alaoui, H. A Pediococcus Strain to Rescue Honeybees by Decreasing Nosema Ceranae-and Pesticide-Induced Adverse Effects. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2020, 163, 138–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Maggi, M.; Negri, P.; Plischuk, S.; Szawarski, N.; De Piano, F.; De Feudis, L.; Eguaras, M.; Audisio, C. Effects of the Organic Acids Produced by a Lactic Acid Bacterium in Apis Mellifera Colony Development, Nosema Ceranae Control and Fumagillin Efficiency. Vet. Microbiol. 2013, 167, 474–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  180. De Piano, F.G.; Maggi, M.; Pellegrini, M.C.; Cugnata, N.M.; Szawarski, N.; Buffa, F.; Negri, P.; Fuselli, S.R.; Audisio, C.M.; Ruffinengo, S.R. Effects of Lactobacillus Johnsonii AJ5 Metabolites on Nutrition, Nosema Ceranae Development and Performance of Apis Mellifera L. J. Apic. Sci. 2017, 61, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  181. Audisio, M.C.; Sabate, D.C.; Benítez-Ahrendts, M.R. Effect of Lactobacillus Johnsonii CRL1647 on Different Parameters of Honeybee Colonies and Bacterial Populations of the Bee Gut. Benef. Microbes 2015, 6, 687–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Arredondo, D.; Castelli, L.; Porrini, M.P.; Garrido, P.M.; Eguaras, M.J.; Zunino, P.; Antunez, K. Lactobacillus Kunkeei Strains Decreased the Infection by Honey Bee Pathogens Paenibacillus Larvae and Nosema Ceranae. Benef. Microbes 2018, 9, 279–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Tejerina, M.R.; Benítez-Ahrendts, M.R.; Audisio, M.C. Lactobacillus Salivarius A3iob Reduces the Incidence of Varroa Destructor and Nosema Spp. in Commercial Apiaries Located in the Northwest of Argentina. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 2020, 12, 1360–1369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Sabaté, D.C.; Cruz, M.S.; Benítez-Ahrendts, M.R.; Audisio, M.C. Beneficial Effects of Bacillus Subtilis Subsp. Subtilis Mori2, a Honey-Associated Strain, on Honeybee Colony Performance. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 2012, 4, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Porrini, M.P.; Audisio, M.C.; Sabaté, D.C.; Ibarguren, C.; Medici, S.K.; Sarlo, E.G.; Garrido, P.M.; Eguaras, M.J. Effect of Bacterial Metabolites on Microsporidian Nosema Ceranae and on Its Host Apis Mellifera. Parasitol. Res. 2010, 107, 381–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  186. Corby-Harris, V.; Snyder, L.; Meador, C.; Naldo, R.; Mott, B.; Anderson, K. Parasaccharibacter Apium, Gen. Nov., Sp. Nov., Improves Honey Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Resistance to Nosema. J. Econ. Entomol. 2016, 109, 537–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  187. Baffoni, L.; Gaggìa, F.; Alberoni, D.; Cabbri, R.; Nanetti, A.; Biavati, B.; Di Gioia, D. Effect of Dietary Supplementation of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus Strains in Apis Mellifera L. against Nosema Ceranae. Benef. Microbes 2016, 7, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  188. Schmidt, K.; Engel, P. Probiotic Treatment with a Gut Symbiont Leads to Parasite Susceptibility in Honey Bees. Trends Parasitol. 2016, 32, 914–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Ptaszyńska, A.A.; Borsuk, G.; Zdybicka-Barabas, A.; Cytryńska, M.; Małek, W. Are Commercial Probiotics and Prebiotics Effective in the Treatment and Prevention of Honeybee Nosemosis C? Parasitol. Res. 2016, 115, 397–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  190. Andrearczyk, S.; Kadhim, M.J.; Knaga, S. Influence of a Probiotic on the Mortality, Sugar Syrup Ingestion and Infection of Honeybees with Nosema Spp. under Laboratory Assessment. Med. Weter. 2014, 70, 762. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Iorizzo, M.; Letizia, F.; Ganassi, S.; Testa, B.; Petrarca, S.; Albanese, G.; Di Criscio, D.; De Cristofaro, A. Recent Advances in the Biocontrol of Nosemosis in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.). J. Fungi 2022, 8, 424. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8050424

AMA Style

Iorizzo M, Letizia F, Ganassi S, Testa B, Petrarca S, Albanese G, Di Criscio D, De Cristofaro A. Recent Advances in the Biocontrol of Nosemosis in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.). Journal of Fungi. 2022; 8(5):424. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8050424

Chicago/Turabian Style

Iorizzo, Massimo, Francesco Letizia, Sonia Ganassi, Bruno Testa, Sonia Petrarca, Gianluca Albanese, Dalila Di Criscio, and Antonio De Cristofaro. 2022. "Recent Advances in the Biocontrol of Nosemosis in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.)" Journal of Fungi 8, no. 5: 424. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8050424

APA Style

Iorizzo, M., Letizia, F., Ganassi, S., Testa, B., Petrarca, S., Albanese, G., Di Criscio, D., & De Cristofaro, A. (2022). Recent Advances in the Biocontrol of Nosemosis in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.). Journal of Fungi, 8(5), 424. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8050424

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop