Review of the Wild Blueberry Producers’ Association of Nova Scotia Annual General Meeting

Last week the Atlantic Tech Transfer Team for Apiculture had the pleasure of attending and presenting at the Wild Blueberry Producers’ Association of Nova Scotia annual general meeting for 2025 in Truro, NS. Read this week’s blog for a summary of the event, and to learn more about the 2025 wild blueberry season in Nova Scotia.

Review of the Wild Blueberry Producers’ Association of Nova Scotia Annual General Meeting

The Wild Blueberry Producers’ Association of Nova Scotia (WBPANS) held their annual general meeting last week on November 20^th and 21^st. To start the event, Andrew Dobson (WBPANS president) and Janette McDonald (WBPANS executive director) welcomed everyone to the conference and gave an overview of the two-day agenda.

Executive director of the Wild Blueberry Producers’ Association, Janette McDonald, at the 2025 WBPANS AGM in Truro, NS (2025).

The first presenter of the conference was Gilbert Lavoie (Forest Lavoie Conseil) who provided a wild blueberry market update. Wild blueberry production was down across the Maritime region with New Brunswick producing 25 million lbs., Nova Scotia producing 20 million lbs., and Prince Edward Island producing 21 million lbs. (Maritimes = 66 million lbs., and North America = 213 million lbs.). This past year was the lowest production of wild blueberries seen in North America within 25 years. Low production can be attributed to drought conditions persisting throughout the growing season, which were extreme within the Maritime region. The market price of wild blueberries continues to increase due to low inventories and production this past season. The demand for wild blueberries remains high. Despite high market price and good demand, revenue will be a continued challenge in the Maritime region due to exceptionally low production and high input costs.

Next, the Atlantic Tech Transfer Team for Apiculture provided a research update. To learn about ATTTA’s 2025 research projects read the past blog post “Summary of ATTTA Summer Field Work 2025” published on September 18^th. Our team will also continue to provide research updates through reports and throughout the 2025 meeting season.

Members of the Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture discussed various business risk management programs offered by the federal and provincial governments. These programs consist of Agri Invest, Agri Insurance, Agri Stability and Agri Recovery. These programs can help growers protect their livelihood during a poor growing season as observed this past summer. To learn more about each program visit https://agriculture.canada.ca/en/programs.

To start the afternoon session, Hugh Lyu (Perennia) provided a wild blueberry extension report. Hugh highlighted the severity of this past season’s drought conditions which, depending on the region of Nova Scotia, caused high yield reduction (various regions reporting between 55 to 100% reduction). Hugh also discussed how drought impacts the wild blueberry plant, where primary indicators of plant stress include a reduced number of berries and buds, and changes in leaf colour. It is still unknown how this past season’s drought will impact next year’s crop fields.

The Minister of Agriculture, Honorable Greg Morrow, addressed members of Nova Scotia’s wild blueberry industry, and demonstrated that the department of agriculture recognizes the extreme impact the 2025 drought has had on growers, and that the department is working to support growers however they can.

To conclude day one of the event, WBPANS held their annual business meeting. The business meeting included a president’s report (Andrew Dobson) and executive director’s report (Janette McDonald). The executive director of the Nova Scotia Federation of Agriculture (Carolyn Van Den Heuvel) gave an update on the various activities of the NSFA and the agriculture programs that NSFA supports. The business meeting also consisted of a promotion committee report (Sam Haley) and research committee report (James Fullerton).

Day two of the event started with a presentation from Patrick O’Neil (Wild Blueberry Association of North America – WBANA). Patrick discussed the structure of WBANA, and the various partners of the association. Patrick highlighted the marketing priorities of WBANA, and discussed various promotional activities and events that have recently occurred to promote the wild blueberry industry.

Dr. Collen Craig (Chair of the WBANA Health Research Committee) gave a health research update highlighting current and upcoming projects being funded and/or supported by WBANA. Some of the areas of wild blueberry health research currently in works include the benefits of wild blueberries for protection against ultraviolet rays, prevention of inflammation in the body, stress management and improved brain function.

Next, Dr. Scott White (Dalhousie University) provided a weed management update discussing the efficacy of various herbicides to manage hair fescue and sheep sorrel. Dr. White discussed which products are best to be applied in sprout versus crop year fields, and the optimal timing of application within the season.

Members of Dr. Chris Cutler’s lab (Dalhousie University) provided research updates on the biology and management of two insect pests of wild blueberries – spotted winged drosophila (SWD) and blueberry maggot. Samantha Van Wart discussed monitoring techniques for SWD including lures and traps highlighting crucial times for growers to be monitoring. Janelle MacKeil provided a research update on blueberry maggot which provided insight to the biology of the pest, when growers should be monitoring in their fields and what treatments are currently available and effective to manage blueberry maggot.

Patrick Hennessy (Dalhousie University) gave an update on his research regarding new technology in pesticide applications. Patrick discussed the results of field trials for using smart sprayers and machine vision technology to treat various weeds, and to detect and treat various wild blueberry diseases.

Dr. David Percival (Dalhousie University) presented on the impacts drought stress has on the physiology of the wild blueberry plant. Overall, the wild blueberry plant is resilient to both water and heat related stress, but prolonged stress impacts the plant’s ability to photosynthesize and in turn produce fruit. Additionally, environmental stress creates competition for resources between the wild blueberry plant and various weeds (ex. hair fescue), further impacting the health of the plant.

To conclude the meeting, Dr. Harrison Wright (Agriculture and Agrifood Canada) gave a research update on wild blueberry hardiness. Dr. Wright explained three techniques that can be used to assess plant hardiness and provided preliminary results comparing the hardiness of wild lowbush blueberries to cultivated highbush blueberries. Dr. Wright also explained some of the impacts dramatic winter temperature fluctuations can have on plant hardiness as observed during the winter of 2023.

This past year the wild blueberry industry experienced one of their most challenging growing seasons as their industry was significantly impacted by drought conditions, and it remains a challenge for the industry to generate sufficient revenue with high production costs and low yield once again. Despite the many challenges the industry has, the wild blueberry industry is resilient, and it works to produce a quality product for which there is high demand. Thank you to all members of WBPANS who helped organize this great event, which provided an opportunity for growers to recap the 2025 season and to learn from ongoing research.

Connecting with ATTTA Specialists

If you’d like to connect with ATTTA specialists or learn more about our program, you can:

visit our website at https://www.perennia.ca/portfolio-items/honey-bees/

Email attta@perennia.ca

An issue you may have encountered as a beekeeper is the presence of laying worker bees. A worker bee can only lay drones, and therefore she cannot maintain a healthy and productive colony dynamic. Read this week’s blog to learn more about how the issue of laying workers results, how to identify the presence of laying workers and what management steps a beekeeper can take to correct the issue.

How to Identify and Manage the Issue of Laying Workers

After a colony loses its queen, and if it is unable to raise a new queen due to limited resources available (i.e. no eggs or larvae less than three days old), there is a possibility that worker bees will start to lay unfertilized eggs. Given that a laying worker bee can only lay unfertilized (male/drone) eggs the population dynamic of the colony will start to shift from worker bees to an abnormally high drone population, which is not sustainable long-term given that worker bees carry out essential colony tasks.

When a queen is present within a colony her pheromones suppress the development of ovaries in worker bees, which makes her the only reproductive female of the colony¹. Once a colony is queenless, the concentration of existing queen pheromones will gradually decrease and eventually the ovaries of worker bees have the potential to mature¹. In order for the eggs in the ovaries of workers to mature worker bees must be fed royal jelly¹. Although capable of laying eggs, workers lack the capability and anatomy to mate, which means they can only lay unfertilized eggs^1,2.

Over the past few decades there has been some research conducted on the physiology of laying workers, and how this group of bees differs from queens and non-laying workers. Researchers have found that there is greater variation in the size of eggs laid by worker bees compared to queens, with a coefficient of variance for egg length being 3.5 times higher in laying workers³. On average, it was found that eggs from queens were longer (1.620 mm), but narrower (0.368 mm) than eggs from laying workers (1.579 mm and 0.378 mm)³. In one study the development of the hypopharyngeal gland (HPG) and hemolymph vitellogenin titers was examined in laying workers to assess if their physiology was more similar to nurse bees or forger bees⁴. The researchers discovered that laying workers have physiology more similar to nurse bees compared to forger bees indicating that workers are more likely to have ovaries mature in a queenless colony earlier on in their lifespan⁴.

Generally, a colony will be queenless for approximately 21 days before a laying worker exists within the colony¹. There are a few key indicators of laying workers. To start, laying workers often lay multiple eggs per cell, and they are usually on the sides of the cell rather than the bottom of the cell². This is the result of workers having a shorter abdomen compared to a queen who can properly lay eggs at the base of the cell². Other key indicators of laying workers include a spotty brood pattern and an abnormally high percentage of drones and drone brood compared to workers².

Multiple eggs laid on sides of brood cells is a key sign of laying worker bees (© S. Camazine²).

It is difficult to locate and remove a laying worker as she is similar in appearance to other workers, and there can be many laying worker per colony, therefore, the management of this issue is not straightforward². The requeening of a colony that has laying workers is not usually successful². Frequently the colony will reject the introduced queen or queen cell if a laying worker is present^1,2.

Unfortunately, disassembling a colony is the best way to address the issue of a laying worker. If the colony shows no signs of disease, all the bees from the colony should be shaken onto the ground in the apiary, remove their hive, and the bees will drift to other colonies². There are some other suggested approaches to managing the issue, but they are not guaranteed to be successful.

The best way to prevent a laying worker is to recognize when a colony has become queenless as soon as possible, and either ensure the colony has the proper resources to raise their own queen or provide the colony with a new queen. Beekeepers should inspect colonies regularly which will help them to identify multiple queen problems early on.

References

1. Sammataro, D., and Avitabile, A. 2021. A beekeeper’s handbook: fifth edition. Cornell University Press.
2. Pernal, S. F., and Clay, H., 2013. Honey bee diseases and pests, 3rd Edition. Canadian Association Professional Apiarists, Beaverlodge, AB, Canada 68 pp.
3. Woyke, J., 1994. Comparison of the size of eggs from Apis mellifera L queens and laying workers. Apidologie, 25(2), pp.179-187.
4. Nakaoka, T., Takeuchi, H. and Kubo, T., 2008. Laying workers in queenless honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies have physiological states similar to that of nurse bees but opposite that of foragers. Journal of Insect Physiology, 54(5), pp.806-812.

Connecting with ATTTA Specialists

If you’d like to connect with ATTTA specialists or learn more about our program, you can:

visit our website at https://www.perennia.ca/portfolio-items/honey-bees/

Email attta@perennia.ca