1. Introduction
The work of honeybee workers for humans and the ecosystem is invaluable. EFSA reports that the annual pollination by bees has been valued at around 22 billion Euros, and in Poland alone, this value exceeds 964 million Euros [
1,
2]. Worldwide, the economic value of pollination with honeybee workers has been estimated at 265 billion Euros per year [
3,
4]. Other sources report that the global value of pollination involving honeybee workers is estimated to be between US
$ 235-577 billion and up to half a trillion dollars [
5,
6,
7,
8]. Researchers have been searching for many years for factors that reduce losses in apiary management and increase the security of the honeybee as the main pollinator in the food production chain [
9,
10,
11]. Bee colonies are constantly threatened by brood and adult bee diseases, susceptibility to xenobiotics (including pesticides), an impoverished forage base, lack of diverse protein food resulting in massive worker malnutrition (nutritional stress), environmental stress, and newer and newer pests arriving from different parts of the world (populations of the small hive beetle or Asian hornet) [
12,
13]. The honey bee is also accompanied by a microflora whose biodiversity is modified by many environmental factors, including stress factors such as pesticides, forage shortages, pressure from the pathogenic microbiome, and immune impairment [
14,
15,
16]. According to various literature sources, there are between 6,000 and 8,000 different microbial strains in the microbiome of bee colonies [
17].
One microbial threat to the balance of the colony microbiome is
Paenibacillus larvae—a Gram-positive, peridomestic, mobile, virulent, spore-forming larvae that cause a brood disease called American foulbrood [
18]. The bacteria
Paenibacillus larvae, which produces approximately one billion spores per infected larva, is the main vector of this disease [
19]. Only spores can cause infection. Spores can survive for up to 50 years under favorable conditions and exhibit infectious properties for 35 years. A temperature of 100°C destroys spores after 5 days, while at 140-170°C they die after only 2 hours. Spores are also killed in 5-10% formalin within 6 hours, while soda lye kills spores at a concentration of 2% within 4 minutes. 5% sodium hypochlorite is also effective. Vegetative forms die at 60°C [
20,
21,
22]. An infected and disease-dead larva can contain up to 2.5 billion endospores, but only 10 to 35 spores are needed to infect another larva, indicating high virulence and a high rate of disease spread [
23,
24]. Spores can reside in honey, wax, royal jelly, propolis, pollen, and bee feathers. Once in the digestive tract of the larvae, they germinate after 24 hours, leading to bacterial superinfection manifested by rapid growth of vegetative forms. The vegetative cells damage the epithelium and intestinal walls and later attack all internal organs leading to cytolysis and histolysis [
25,
26,
27]. Nine days after infection, spores begin to form. The maggots die after 2-3 days after the cell is sealed [
28]. The dead larvae become flaccid, changing color first to yellow, then to a brown, sticky, and malleable mass. Five serotypes of American foulbrood are currently recognized worldwide: Eric I, Eric II, Eric III, Eric IV, and Eric V [
29,
30].
The epizootiological agent for all varieties remains the same bacterial species:
Paenibacillus larvae. Sick bee colonies are physically eradicated on the recommendation of veterinarians, legislation in the EU does not allow the use of any form of pharmacotherapy, and in Poland, American foulbrood is eradicated ex officio. In the past, antibiotics and sulphonamides were used. Currently, only administrative procedures are available for American foulbrood control [
31]. Once American foulbrood is confirmed, the district veterinarian may decide to eradicate the colonies or, in justified cases, order a double relocation procedure to a new or decontaminated hive on frames with hoses [
32]. Most cases with confirmed cases of foulbrood are classified as a high-risk group and end up with the burning of infected colonies. Prevention consists primarily of maintaining appropriate sanitary standards involving, for example, frequent changes of combs, and disinfection of hives and tools (e.g., with Virkon S). Other prevention methods include descriptions of the use of essential oils: cinnamon, rosemary, thyme, lemon or aniseed. The effect of extracts of various herbal species on
P. larvae cells is also known from in vitro laboratory studies [
33,
34]. Solutions described as effective in reducing
P. larvae abundance include products to be applied as food additives (syrup or cake) and products to be applied as sprays or sprinkled on the inter-frame streets [
35].
The Institute of Veterinary Medicine in Poland reports that
P. larvae spores are present in between 23 and 45% of the cases analyzed. Infected colonies weaken very quickly, the number of spring decreases dramatically leading to so-called colony unsealing, the number of bees decreases, which leads to a reduction in the economy of the farm or the total liquidation of the apiary. Statistical data from the Veterinary Inspectorate in Poland indicates several hundred cases of detected outbreaks, but these data are unreliable and underestimated and differ from the actual state. In previous years, i.e., 2009-2011, screening for the occurrence of
Paenibacillus larvae in bee colonies was carried out in 162 districts belonging to 9 voivodships. 6 510 honey samples were taken from 32 550 bee colonies from 2 294 apiaries. The disease was diagnosed in 45% of all apiaries examined, and the greatest intensity occurred in the Małopolskie voivodeship. In the Warmińsko-Mazurskie voivodeship, the presence of the bacteria was confirmed in 58% of the apiaries examined. Between 26% and 47% of apiaries were contaminated with
P. larvae spores [
36]. An even earlier history of the occurrence of American foulbrood in Poland is described in research studies conducted in 2005 and 2007. In 2005, out of 142 samples, 34 tested positive for
P. larvae, meaning that the bacteria were present in 23% of all samples. Similar statistics were found in 2007, where 23 out of 100 tests were positive. The number of Aedospores in 1 gram of honey ranged from 10 to more than 1,000. Such a huge scale of infections, still increasing from year to year, shows that the Polish beekeeping environment requires and needs the immediate implementation of a solution to reduce the uncontrolled growing number of infections in apiaries by supporting the bees’ natural protective barriers and stimulating increased nest hygiene [
37]. The data obtained from the above-mentioned monitoring indicates a growing problem with
P. larvae in bee colonies, which promotes the increasing incidence of American foulbrood. A high microbial burden on bee colonies is also observed in other countries, with a high number of infections also recorded in Austria [
38].
Currently, the number of bee colonies in Poland is 2.35 million, so this is a threefold increase since 2005 (827.4 thousand bee families). Bee families are looked after by around 97,000 beekeepers. The average bee colony per km
2 is 7.50. Unfortunately, the ever-increasing degree of apiculture in Poland favors the circulation of diseases between bee colonies [
39]. As of today, there are only 61 Veterinarians in Poland with a specialization in diseases of commercial insects [
40]. In Poland, there are no specific legal restrictions on the movement of migratory apiaries, which exacerbates the epidemiological situation.
The phenomenon of competition between microorganisms is well-known. Bacterial metabolites, also known as metabiotics, have become an object of scientific interest in recent years. Micro-organisms isolated from the digestive tracts of bees with in vitro antimicrobial activity against
P. larvae have been described in the literature [
41,
42]. Such activity may be called bioassurance. The definition given by Zygmunt Pejsak includes specific indications to be implemented to reduce or eliminate the risk of pathogen transmission into the flock. The aim of bioassurance is, among other things, to reduce the risk of introducing an infectious agent into the herd [
43]. In the definition of another researcher Thomas Gillespie, bioassurance must reduce the risk of pathogen intrusion and must consist of bioexclusion, which will control the transmission of pathogens. This element of bioassurance has been referred to as biocontainment [
44]. Bioassurance is the so-called biological protection consisting of protecting the animals through preventive and sanitary measures using biocontainment on the farm as well as in the immediate surroundings [
45,
46]. Adherence to bio-assurance aims, among other things, to reduce the incidence of pathogens and to improve animal health. Bioassurance is a set of measures aimed at maintaining or improving the health status of a herd through the use of specific organizational methods [
47,
48]. In other words, it is the biological protection of the farm. Effective bioassurance gives protection to the herd against the transmission of infectious agents [
49,
50,
51,
52]. Also, the Cambridge English Corpus states that these are the methods that are used to stop a disease or infection from spreading from one person, animal, or place to others or actions that are taken to prevent damage from biological threats using biological methods [
53]. Biotisation as a tool for the introduction of bioassurance may be a new biotechnological approach to animal husbandry. It consists of inoculating the animal environment with beneficial micro-organisms such as fungi or bacteria to increase their dominance in the environmental microbiome by increasing the tolerance of animals to biotic and abiotic stresses (in practice this is spraying or fogging). Biotisation is the process of inoculating with symbiotic native bacteria (bacterization) or involves the introduction of beneficial fungi-yeasts (microzation) [
54,
55]. Beneficial micro-organisms also known as beneficial or effective microorganisms (EM) have an important function in restoring the microbial balance in the native microbiome of animals and also supply animals with valuable metabolites and protect them from pathogens. Biosanitisation is a process that seeks to eliminate as many pathogenic microorganisms as possible, most commonly on flat surfaces and in the animal environment. Sanitization is carried out using common cleaning agents or biopreparations. This process does not guarantee the sterility of the cleaned object but allows the degraded and sterilized animal microbiome to be inoculated and rebuilt [
56,
57]. In the case of bee colonies, this can include inoculation of nests and hives with probiotics as a permanent integral part of good beekeeping practice. Bacteriophage therapies appear to be some kind of innovation in reducing
P. larvae infections, but phages are not officially authorized for use in Europe [
58].
The lack of effective product solutions on the market to prevent the development of superinfection, the unstable administrative and legal status of American foulbrood, the risky practices of beekeepers and growers exacerbating the American foulbrood problem, the increased interest on the market in natural products like targeted microbial biopreparations with increased metabolite content, the untapped potential of biotechnology and microbiology in the control and prevention of livestock diseases and animal welfare are just some elements of why this topic of work was undertaken.