COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SOFTWARE-BASED MORPHOMETRIC METHODS FOR DETERMINING THE BREED AFFILIATION OF HONEY BEES

2026

Полный текст Открытый доступ: Hybrid Метаданные (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.52578/3134-8572-2026-1-261-272
Достоверность данных 70 средняя
Как считается эта оценка

Складывается из проверяемых признаков самой записи: есть ли у статьи DOI, сколько независимых источников подтвердили её данные, заполнены ли обязательные поля и насколько свежо последнее подтверждение. Снижают оценку расхождения между источниками и отсутствие идентификатора. Значение от 80 означает, что запись опубликована без дополнительной проверки; от 60 до 79 — что она опубликована с пониженной достоверностью и ручная проверка желательна. Запись, выверенную редактором вручную, пересчёт не опускает ниже 90. Это оценка наших данных о статье, а не оценка самой статьи.

Аннотация

The identification of breed affiliation and evolutionary lineage of the honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) is essential for conservation, breeding programs, and the maintenance of genetic diversity. Morphometric analysis of wing venation remains one of the most accessible and informative tools for subspecies discrimination. The purpose of this study was a comparative study of software methods of morphometric analysis to assess their effectiveness in determining the breed of honey bees. This study presents a comparative evaluation of two software-based morphometric approaches-WingsDig and IdentiFly-for determining the breed affiliation of honey bee colonies. Worker bee samples (30–50 individuals per colony) were collected from multiple apiaries. Forewings were prepared, digitized, and analyzed using geometric morphometric techniques. Canonical variate analysis (CVA) and discriminant classification were performed to assess morphometric similarity with reference subspecies and evolutionary lineages (A, M, C, and O). Results obtained with WingsDig provided detailed subspecies-level differentiation, revealing clustering patterns primarily associated with the Eastern European lineage (C), including morphotypes related to A. m. carnica, A. m. ligustica, and Buckfast. Partial overlap among these subspecies suggests possible hybridization. IdentiFly analysis, based on lineage-level classification, confirmed the predominance of the C lineage, with limited contribution from the O lineage and minimal representation of the M lineage. No affiliation with the African lineage (A) was detected. The comparison demonstrates that WingsDig offers higher resolution for subspecies discrimination, whereas IdentiFly provides robust classification at the evolutionary lineage level. The combined application of both programs enhances the reliability of morphometric identification and can be effectively used in breeding control and genetic monitoring of honey bee populations.