蜜蜂的研究论文

后来的她发展的越来越好，一直默默无闻的工作。

历史以来，所有人包括科学家、生物学家都以为蜜蜂发出的“嗡嗡声”是高频率扇动翅膀发出的，直到一11岁的湖北小女孩发现了真相：她发现许多蜜蜂翅膀不动的时候，依然有嗡嗡声。她，就是湖北省监利县黄歇口镇中心小学五年级学生聂利。

聂利决定自己弄个明白，她把蜜蜂的双翅用胶水粘在木板上，蜜蜂仍然发出声音。她用剪刀剪去它的翅膀，蜜蜂仍然嗡嗡直叫。用放大镜仔细查找，观察了一个月，终于在蜜蜂双翅的根部发现了两粒比油菜子还小的小黑点。蜜蜂发声时，小黑点上下鼓动。聂利认为蜜蜂的嗡嗡声来自它们的振动。

聂利找来一根缝衣针，在前面实验的基础上又将刺破小黑点的蜜蜂放在盒子里仔细观察，蜜蜂再也没有发出嗡嗡的声音。她想，也许是蜜蜂受了刺痛不发声了吧？也许是蜜蜂没有飞舞不发声了吧？于是她又把刺破小黑点的蜜蜂放在蚊帐里观察，一连几个小时，蜜蜂仍不发声。于是她得出结论：蜜蜂有自己的发声器官，蜜蜂靠这两个小黑点发声。

一年以后，聂利撰写了一 篇科学论文《蜜蜂不是靠翅膀振动发声》，并在2003年第十八届全国青少年科技创新大赛上荣获优秀科技项目银奖和高士其科普专项奖。聂利还名列2003年“武汉十大年度人物”。

她的实验，被叫做“聂利实验”，那时她不仅得大奖，还陆续接受许多记者采访，中央电视台特邀聂利赴京与著名科普作家叶永烈等同台做《小崔说事》专题节目的录制。虽然也曾辛苦过，但忽然一夜间成了名人，还是让她很幸福的。她大胆质疑、勇于探究的精神，也鼓励了很多同龄人。

在做实验的过程中，聂利吃了不少苦头，也积累了许多动手的经验。有一次，她在蔷薇花上用手捉一只正在采蜜的蜜蜂，不料这只蜜蜂狠狠地蜇了她一下，痛得她直流眼泪。在实验中，她的手指、耳朵、额头被蜜蜂蛰过好几次。

但一些昆虫专家否定了小黑点是蜜蜂发声器官的观点，所以初中时期的聂利依然研究蜜蜂，试图证明“小黑点”就是蜜蜂嗡嗡声的地方。但随着时间的过去，聂利已经没有什么关注量了，她曾说：“刚开始，我真的很不习惯，过去自己常见诸于各报端，而现在却默默无闻地在学校里，与其他同学没有两样。但后来我还是习惯了，毕竟有一股力量在支撑着我。”

随着实验取得不了什么新进展，聂利开始把时间放在学习上，她当年接受采访时说：“眼前不继续蜜蜂发声实验，是为了把文化成绩搞上去，争取考上重点高中、考上重点大学，在大学里继续蜜蜂发声的实验。”很多人也告诫聂利，要适应平淡。

聂利自从升入初中后，就没有任何发明或发现了，似乎与其他学生没有差别，由科学小新星到平平无奇。我们都知道一个故事叫“江郎才尽，泯然众人”，但聂利毕竟辉煌过，很多大科学家也不是每年都出成果。如今十多年过去了，聂利应该也近30岁了，一定在默默无闻地工作。

先不说内容，首先格式要正确，一篇完整的毕业论文，题目，摘要（中英文），目录，正文（引言，正文，结语），致谢，参考文献。学校规定的格式，字体，段落，页眉页脚，开始写之前，都得清楚的，你的论文算是写好了五分之一。然后，选题，你的题目时间宽裕，那就好好考虑，选一个你思考最成熟的，可以比较多的阅读相关的参考文献，从里面获得思路，确定一个模板性质的东西，照着来，写出自己的东西。如果时间紧急，那就随便找一个参考文献，然后用和这个参考文献相关的文献，拼出一篇，再改改。正文，语言必须是学术的语言。一定先列好提纲，这就是框定每一部分些什么，保证内容不乱，将内容放进去，写好了就。参考文献去中国知网搜索，校园网免费下载。

现在的她平平无奇过着普通人的生活。考上了重点高中。希望她的未来可以非常的成功。

NC508 Sustainable Solutions to Problems Affecting Honey Bee HealthWhite Paper: Honey bee genetics and breeding As the managed pollinator of choice for numerous crops, the honey bee is an animal of substantial importance to . agriculture. However, like many of the crops they pollinate, honey bees are not native to North America. Current honey bee populations within the United States reflect historical patterns of introduction from Old World source populations and the genetic consequences of founder events and subsequent queen propagation practices by beekeepers. With few exceptions, commercial queen propagation in the United States has relied on the production of a large number of saleable queens from a very limited number of queen mothers each generation. The ratio of daughter queens to queen mothers in these operations has averaged well over 1000:1 over the past decade (1, 2, 3). Following the establishment of parasitic honey bee mites in . beekeeping operations in the 1980's, substantial losses occurred at the national level to both managed honey bees and a formerly robust feral honey bee population (4). While queen production output was able to provide replacement queens for the beekeeping industry during this period, little effort was made to select for and incorporate genetic traits that enhanced the resistance of honey bees to parasitic mites and diseases. Unfortunately, substantial annual losses of honey bees due to parasitic mites have continued, as the mite Varroa destructor rapidly develops resistance to beekeeper applied chemical control measures. The inherent genetic capacity of some honey bees to tolerate or resist V. destructor, tracheal mites and contagious brood diseases is well known (5, 6, 7). However, there has not been a concerted effort within the queen breeding industry to develop selection protocols nor to manage even breeder queen populations without supplemental miticides and antibiotics. Exceptions include some private and public institution bee breeding programs that have adopted selection protocols based, in part, on specific assays, for traits of apicultural significance. While the impact of these programs has been limited, relative to overall queen production totals, collectively they represent a germplasm reserve of honey bee stocks that are comparatively productive, mite resistant and healthy in the face of known pathogens and stressors. Measurements that are used in selection protocols include the expression of hygienic behavior, short-term weight gain, mite and bee population growth, temperament, Varroa sensitive hygiene and reports of increased honey bee losses in the United States due to as yet undefined causes (8) makes it clear that high priority should be given to selecting and breeding honey bees that can remain healthy with minimal need for chemical inputs in the bee hive. There is preliminary evidence to suggest that selection and breeding would be an efficient and sustainable approach to deal with novel pathogens or group of pathogens, including those that may be involved in CCD (9, 10). The recent report that a virus associated with CCD is present within a population of honey bees that are currently being imported into the . in massive numbers(11) brings up another aspect that must be considered together with selection and breeding regimes, the issue of honey bee source populations and of the 26 recognized subspecies of honey bees, only 9 are known to have been sampled and introduced into the New World (12). Currently, commercial strains (Italian, Carniolan) based on two of these subspecies predominate in managed populations in the United States, although a third strain (Caucasian) was available until quite recently. Since 2004, due to perceived/projected shortfalls in managed honey bee colonies available to effect almond pollination, the . has permitted the importation of honey bees of presumptive European origin maintained in Australia. These honey bees underwent a genetic bottleneck associated with importation, similar to . populations (vis a vis sampling original sources from Europe) although, in contrast to . populations, the Australian honey bees have not been selected for any measure of resistance through exposure to parasitic mites over the past 20 years. The importation of additional honey bee germplasm for selection and breeding purposes could address several key needs. First, the importation of germplasm from Old World subspecies known to have been sampled and previously introduced to the . would provide additional genetic diversity for breeding purposes, a means to enhance and maintain sex allele diversity, to recover the commercial Caucasian strain and potentially bolster mite resistance. The latter contribution would depend on whether original Old World source populations (with their own history of mite exposure and survival) were utilized (13), rather than mite-free "introduced" populations from other New World sources. Secondly, the importation of novel honey bee germplasm from subspecies now known to be the original pollinator for crops of agricultural importance, such as A. m. pomonella in endemic forests of wild apples and pears, may provide improved pollination efficiency in crop-specific climatic conditions. Finally, as genetic markers associated with genetic resistance mechanisms or useful immunological or behavioral characteristics become available, Old World honey bee populations represent an available resource for marker-assisted identification of desirable germplasm. Currently, there is no explicit protocol . researchers and breeders to import live bees from many countries nor are there readily accessible quarantine facilities to assist in safe importation of summary, research is needed to:1) Screen available stocks of honey bees from . breeding programs for the expression of genetic characteristics associated with colony health. This could involve phenotypic measurements of heritable traits or identification of specific genes that influence these traits. In addition to known apicultural traits and measures of genetic diversity, these characteristics could include immunological resistance to pathogens and potential indicators of "CCD-resistance" detectable through novel screening protocols. 2) Develop a selection and breeding protocol for the queen breeding industry that can be implemented with existing honey bee stocks to maximize the preservation of genetic diversity (sex-allele diversity) , while still permitting measurable stock improvement in areas of disease resistance and parasitic mite tolerance. Stocks identified in the colony health screening protocol (1) as useful to breeders could be promoted within this ) Characterize additional populations of Old World honey bee stocks as potential sources to assure sustainable germplasm maintenance within the . bee breeding industry. This research will use molecular markers for the identification of specific subspecies and to label highly desirable breeding lines or lines expressing "CCD-resistance" (1). Develop a protocol to maintain these stocks within an association of involved university/private/government bee breeding facilities. Primary author: Steve Sheppard1Participants: Marla Spivak2, Greg J. Hunt31. Washington State University, shepp@. University of Minnesota, spiva001@. Purdue University, ) Schiff, . and . Sheppard. 1995. Genetic analysis of commercial honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) from the southern United States. J. Econ. Entomol. 88: ) Schiff, . and . Sheppard. 1996. Genetic differentiation in the queen breeding population of the western United States. Apidologie 27:) Delaney, Schiff and Sheppard. 2007. Unpublished data4) Sanford, M. T. 2001. Introduction, spread, and economic impact of Varroa mites in North America, in; Webster ., Delaplane . (Eds.), Mites of the honey bee, Dadant and Sons, Hamilton, Illinois, pp. ) Guerra Jr., J. C. V., L. S. Gonçalves and D. De Jong. 2000. Africanized honey bees (Apis mellifera L.) are more efficient at removing worker brood artificially infested with the parasitic mite Varroa jacobsonii Oudemans than are Italian bees or Italian/Africanized hybrids. Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 89-92. 6) Spivak, M. and G. S. Reuter. 2001. Resistance to American foulbrood diseases by honey bee colonies (Apis mellifera) bred for hygienic behavior. Apidologie 32: ) Danka, R. G. and J. D. Villa. 2000. A survey of tracheal mite resistance levels in . commercial queen breeder colonies. American Bee Journal 140: ) Oldroyd, B. P. 2007. What's killing American honey bees? PLOS Biology, 5: ) Evans, J. D. and D. L. Lopez. 2004. Bacterial probiotics induce an immune response in the honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 97: 752-756 10) ) Cox-Foster et al. 2007. A metagenomic survey of microbes in honey bee colony collapse disorder. Sciencexpress, 6 September 2007, ) Sheppard, . 1989. A history of the introduction of honey bee races into the United States, I and II. Amer. Bee J. 129: 617-619, 664-667. 13) De Guzman, ., . Rinderer, A. M. Frake. 2007. Growth of Varroa destructor (acari: varroidae) populations in Russian honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies. . Soc. Amer 100:187-195