From benches to beehives.
From benches to beehives.
Immunibee was not just about developing a vaccine, but developing a relationship between researchers
and beekeepers that can continue into the future. Through our shared love for bees, this cooperation
between the lab and the apiaries will allow issues facing bee populations to be solved in ways that
truly work.
Our design incorporated opinions from experts and the most important
stakeholders at every step of the way. From learning how bees are fed to bee immunology and beyond,
we have been learning how our project can integrate and expand on what is already used in the bee
world.
We also wanted learn the best way to communicate our project so every bee lover can
learn from it. Whether it was bonding over a shared love for bees or bringing awareness to deformed
virus, we wanted every person to find something to love about our project.
Immunibee set off
to change the world with three goals in mind:
With ImmuniBee, we wanted to make a product that not only worked in the lab but also worked for the people who mattered most. Having conversations with beekeepers, honey producers, and the general public is critical for understanding the impact DWV has on the agricultural sector and gaining valuable insights into potential solutions. We could also tailor the vaccine to the needs of the end users and directly address concerns and apprehensions about the vaccine.
Ensuring that our project and the interventions to combat DWV are safe for the bees and to prevent any spillover effects is one of our main goals. IHP can help the team assess the pros and cons of our methodologies by talking with bee experts and insect immunology experts to gain valuable feedback.
Through IHP, we engaged in conversations about the importance of bee conservation in the Okanagan ecosystem, and the roles bees play in the agricultural sector. Bringing awareness to the threats bees face opens up opportunities to talk about what people can do to help save the bees.
Immunibee provides not only the first solution for DWV, but incorporates a more holistic and responsible approach to bee treatment. Taking into account not only the scientific aspect of creating a vaccine, but also focusing on the stories and livelihoods of those closest to bees.
Meet the founder of Bee City Canada, Shelly Candel! She started Bee City Canada after being inspired by the success of Bee City USA, and the project has made amazing impacts across the country. She has so much love for pollinators, and is very passionate about teaching others the actions we can take to help them.
One of the first things we had to consider was how bees would bee exposed to our bacteria. We knew that you could inject them, but that can cause great stress on the bee and is honesty quite ineffective and time-consuming. We had to figure out a way to deliver our product to the bees, and make sure that it is feasible for beekeepers. Or, decide if the best way was to prime queens ourselves and distribute them (Dalial Freitak). The best place to start learning was with the beekeepers themselves!
We started by asking beekeepers how they fed their bees and learned that different methods are used depending on the time of year. Darren and Brad Ingram of Ingram farms and Emily Huxter from Wild Antho all feed their bees a mixture of sugar and water leading up to winter, and pollen patties in the springtime. Sugar water is a simple, high-energy source of food for bees that helps prepare them for the winter. Darren suggested that if ImmuniBee could be added to sugar water it could easily be dropped in the top of hive frames. Pollen patties are produced by an Albertan company, Global Patties. Each beekeeper mentioned that Global Patties can mix practically anything into pollen patties, and Brad and Darren added that they sometimes add vitamin C to make it easier for the bees to digest. They all suggested that having ImmuniBee mixed into pollen patties would make treatment easier and more accessible. When asking Emily about the idea of distributing “primed” queens, she told us that she breeds from her own true BC stock, so buying “primed” queens is not of interest to her. Darren mentioned that some people in the beekeeping community are very against feeding bees anything, so it may be difficult to accommodate the needs of every beekeeper with our project.
Ultimately, we decided the best form for ImmuniBee would be a deactivated bacteria powder. This would give beekeepers the flexibility to put it in sugar water or add it to their hives in any way that works best for them. We also reached out to Global Patties to gather their opinion on integrating our product with pollen patties, however we never received a response from them. In the future, we would like to continue exploring the possibility of collaborating with Global Patties. Our goal is to make our product as user-friendly and accessible as possible, so every bee has the opportunity to be treated.
When thinking about how ImmuniBee would be used, we had to consider the best time for beekeepers to administer our product. We wanted to consider the impacts on the bees immune system and how long it takes for immunity to come into effect. Is the best time right before overwintering, right after they come out, or sometime in between?
We decided to speak to PhD student Abbi Chapman from UBCV about timing vaccine delivery, because of Abbi’s understanding of bee immunology and immune response. She told us that there is typically a peak in DWV cases in the springtime when colonies start growing again. If we were to vaccinate before overwintering there would likely be virus present in the hive at this point. She told us about winter bees, which are the last bees that hatch in the fall, and are the bees present during overwintering. Her suggestion was to administer treatment right before these bees are laid, so the they would be able to acquire immunity before the winter. Another piece of information Abbi brought up was that Deformed Wing Virus can also be sexually transmitted between drones and the queen. This led to the suggestion that treatment be administered before queen bees go out to mate. Treated queens would then have a lower chance of contracting the virus and passing it on to their offspring. We were told that our treatment should work at any time of the year, and it may be beneficial for bees to be treated all year if beekeepers could afford to do so.
There is a lot of flexibility when it comes to delivery timing, and our product could be administered year-round if desired. Timing the delivery of the vaccine is ultimately up to the beekeeper, but we can encourage beekeepers to administer it right before winter bees are laid or before queens go out to mate. We decided that ImmuniBee should be manufactured as an easy-to-use product, which allows for flexibility in delivery between individual beekeepers.
From the start we knew about the decline in honey bee populations, which was what inspired this project. However after meeting with stakeholders we began to find out more about how beekeepers are losing bees, the way these losses are tracked, and why we aren’t hearing much about it.
Who would care about our project the most and be impacted by its success? ImmuniBee is made for beekeepers, but we wanted to learn if commercial beekeepers would have different opinions than hobby beekeepers.
Payton Henderson, a 4th year Zoology student and bee researcher informed us that commercial beekeepers would favour the use of bee vaccines and other similar bee treatments compared to their current mite control methods. Treatments for bee viruses are beneficial in keeping bees alive so that they can continue to produce honey and, in the same breath, continue being a source of income for honey companies. Additionally, she also let us know that beekeepers would be curious about any possible side effects of the treatments, and would want to see proof that they work before applying them to their hives. She mentioned that beekeepers have relatively niche ways of treating DWV and varroa mite in their hives, and may be apprehensive towards new, unproven treatments. Emily Huxter added to this by letting us know she doesn’t think hobby beekeepers should be a major stakeholder of ours. She mentioned that because hobby beekeepers keep less hives, they are more likely to shrug off large bee losses because they can afford to purchase new hives each year. This philosophy does not work for large-scale operations, which is why they often do more to keep their bees alive. She believes that bee hobbyists who have apprehensions towards vaccines and new technologies are more likely to let those views influence their beekeeping practices. This will sometimes lead to new technologies being disregarded. When we asked about fruit orchards as stakeholders, she told us that it is not common for orchards to keep their own bees. Orchards typically pay for pollinators to stay on-side for a short period of time, and likely will not pay much attention to bee health during the rest of the year.
At the time of our meetings with Emily and Payton, we had already spent time reaching out to as many local hobby beekeepers as possible. We received very few replies, and once we had learned about the benefits for commercial beekeepers we shifted our focus towards reaching out to commercial bee operations and organizations. We began designing our presentations to cater more towards commercial beekeepers, by highlighting the larger-scale benefits and sustainability of our project.
From the start we knew about the decline in honey bee populations, which was what inspired this project. However after meeting with stakeholders we began to find out more about how beekeepers are losing bees, the way these losses are tracked, and why we aren’t hearing much about it.
In the lab we can confirm our constructs, but how will we be able to find out if our project works inside bees? We spoke to experts in bee research to determine methods of confirming whether or not bees respond to our treatment.
After bees are treated with our vaccine, we wanted to be able to determine where the vaccine localizes in the bees. To do this we took tissue samples from untreated bees to analyze and compare to the same segments of treated bees. This idea was recommended by Gro Amdam from ASU, who connected us with one her students, Gyan Harwood, to learn how to perform tissue sampling on bees. Gyan walked us through how to dissect our bee tissues in detail, and told us which bee tissues were the most important to image when showing the potential of our vaccine in real-world applications. UBCO Biology Department Head and molecular etymologist Dr. Mark Rheault gave additional advice on tissue sampling and supplied us with materials for the tissue sampling of our bees.
The feedback we received from Gro Amdam and Dr. Mark Rheault led to us establishing tissue sample prep protocols and preparing tissues to be further cut. However, Dr. Rheault’s vibratome (used for cutting the samples really small) had broke when he tried to start it. As such, we weren’t able to cut our samples, but were able to do dissections on bees and acquire samples that can be used in the future. We plan on continuing research with ImmuniBee next year and will use these techniques and samples in future experiments.
Are there any ethical considerations? What legislation is passed to protect bees (both native and honeybees). Are there ways to practice sustainable beekeeping, and how are these practices implemented in industry? How can our vaccine contribute to more sustainable practices? In what ways are we able to practice sustainable beekeeping in our lab and with our project?
| What we learned We learned so much about ethics, it was awesome! | How it was integrated We also did a lotof cool things :) |
|---|
One of the first things we had to consider was how bees would bee exposed to our bacteria. We knew that you could inject them, but that can cause great stress on the bee and is honesty quite ineffective and time-consuming. We had to figure out a way to deliver our product to the bees, and make sure that it is feasible for beekeepers. Or, decide if the best way was to prime queens ourselves and distribute them (Dalial Freitak). The best place to start learning was with the beekeepers themselves!
We started by asking beekeepers how they fed their bees and learned that different methods are used depending on the time of year. Darren and Brad Ingram of Ingram farms and Emily Huxter from Wild Antho all feed their bees a mixture of sugar and water leading up to winter, and pollen patties in the springtime. Sugar water is a simple, high-energy source of food for bees that helps prepare them for the winter. Darren suggested that if ImmuniBee could be added to sugar water it could easily be dropped in the top of hive frames. Pollen patties are produced by an Albertan company, Global Patties. Each beekeeper mentioned that Global Patties can mix practically anything into pollen patties, and Brad and Darren added that they sometimes add vitamin C to make it easier for the bees to digest. They all suggested that having ImmuniBee mixed into pollen patties would make treatment easier and more accessible. When asking Emily about the idea of distributing “primed” queens, she told us that she breeds from her own true BC stock, so buying “primed” queens is not of interest to her. Darren mentioned that some people in the beekeeping community are very against feeding bees anything, so it may be difficult to accommodate the needs of every beekeeper with our project.
Ultimately, we decided the best form for ImmuniBee would be a deactivated bacteria powder. This would give beekeepers the flexibility to put it in sugar water or add it to their hives in any way that works best for them. We also reached out to Global Patties to gather their opinion on integrating our product with pollen patties, however we never received a response from them. In the future, we would like to continue exploring the possibility of collaborating with Global Patties. Our goal is to make our product as user-friendly and accessible as possible, so every bee has the opportunity to be treated.
Question Stigma and Myths have been building behind the idea of GMOs, which makes it difficult to introduce a new GMO product to the public. Since our bee vaccine is a bacterial cell modified to express virus proteins, it is now a GMO product. As we consider the potential impact of this project, we believe it is necessary to understand how to make opposing views feel heard.
Answer Jordan Phelps has a background in psychology and now works as a program coordinator at BeeCity Canada. In a conversation regarding the communication surrounding a GMO bee vaccine project, strategies were discussed to counter common anti-GMO myths. The most challenging myths include religious arguments and health concerns while addressing corporate influence on GMOs remains complex. It was suggested that emphasizing the GMO aspect may not always be necessary, and a focus on product promotion can alleviate concerns. Making people feel heard involves offering surveys and follow-up interviews while maintaining a positive interaction. Incorporating opposing views is key, and extensive conversations are recommended. It was noted that public perceptions often resist new technologies, but an educational approach emphasizing the benefits for bees can be effective. Scaling the benefits, confronting the consequences of rejecting GMOs and pesticides, and addressing distrust in science were highlighted. Overall, transparency is essential, and the importance of disclosing GMO status depends on individual beliefs. These insights provide a comprehensive guide for navigating anti-GMO sentiments and engaging with those who hold opposing views while working on the bee vaccine project.
Question
One of our goals was for everyone to find something to love about our project, regardless of how much they know about synthetic biology or beekeeping. We wanted to learn how we could communicate our project in an engaging and exciting way. This was to encourage people to think about their relationship with pollinators and feel called to protect them.
Answer
After being given the opportunity to host a booth at the Kelowna Farmers’ and Crafters’ Market, we spoke with Corrine Takada about how we could weave a story around our project, including everyone we speak to into it.
She gave us tips on how to make our booth attractive to various audiences and most importantly, how to collect useful feedback from our audience.
At the farmer’s market, we implemented her advice by showcasing a story board with pictures, starting from the benefits humans gain from pollinators, why pollinators are at risk, and the solution we are providing.
To increase public engagement, we had an Art’s Corner where people could draw a picture of a bee to add to the board. As adults and children were drawing, we asked them the following questions: “What do you know about bees?”, “Do you know what problems bees currently face?”, “Do you know that bees get sick?”
This way, we were able to weave a story arc that left a place for us to propose our solution and what we have been working on as a team.
Other questions we asked people were: “How would you feel about buying honey from a ‘treated’ bee?”. With this question, we gave more clarity on what “treated” means in respect to our project, and were able to delve more into the science with audiences that were interested in hearing more.
Through these interactions, we were able get children and adults thinking about the roles pollinators play in our lives, and reflect on their importance.
When dealing with a vector-transferred virus, it is not uncommon to wonder whether the virus should be primarily addressed, or the vector. We wanted to find out from our experts and stakeholders if they think by addressing DWV we are tackling a secondary issue. Would beekeepers would prefer a solution that protected bees from the Varroa Mite instead?
Our team quickly found out that there is no easy answer to this question. We received a variety of responses from the people we spoke to, and learned that while the mites cause severe damage, the presence of DWV may be escalating the losses we are seeing. Heather Higo from the BC Honey Producer’s Association mentioned that we have always had viruses like DWV, but the mites enhance the severity of them. As a queen breeder, she is more worried about viruses such as Black Queen Cell Virus than about varroa mite, and says that treating the virus is more important. Brad Ingram, a beekeeper from Ingram farms related the damage bees receive from Varroa Mite to having a crab biting you in the chest and leaving a half-inch hole in your body. The wound reduces your lifespan and well-being, but once a virus gets into the wound you would “be pretty much done for”. He brought up the fact that mites can also carry other diseases, but DWV is the main killer from them. Bees can get DWV from other places and he believes it’s important to let people know this, because simply eradicating the mite is not enough. Samantha Muirhead and Connie Phillips from Alberta agreed with the idea that the virus causes secondary issues, and think it would be best to tackle both. They both mentioned that viruses in Alberta are escalating, and we should be taking action against them to protect the beekeeping industry. Alternatively, Lisa St. Laurent from Arlo’s Honey Farm suggested that the damage mainly comes from the mites, as they reduce the ability of larvae to reach maturity. She said that hives experiencing low levels of Deformed Wing Virus are still losing many bees. Payton Henderson, a 4th year zoology student at UBCO also believes that we are tackling a secondary problem to a degree. Mites have their own role in the ecosystem and it is not possible to eradicate them. Her research focuses on breeding bees with high grooming abilities to protect hives from mite infestations in the first place.