
How AI and robot hives are lowering the risk of bee colony collapse in California
The unit — dubbed a BeeHome — is an industrial upgrade from the standard wooden beehives, all clad in white metal and solar panels. Inside sits a high-tech scanner and robotic arm powered by artificial intelligence. Roughly 300,000 of these units are in use across the U.S., scattered across fields of almond, canola, pistachios and other crops that require pollination to grow.
It's not exactly the romantic vision of a beehive or beekeeper lodged in the cultural consciousness, but then that's not what matters; keeping bees alive does. And Beewise's units do that dramatically better than the standard hive, providing constant insights on colony health and the ability to provide treatment should it start to falter.
The U.S. has observed a startling uptick in the number of die-offs since the mid-2000s as beekeepers have struggled to keep pace with the rise of disease-carrying mites, climate extremes and other stressors that can wipe out colonies. That's endangering billions of dollars in crops from almonds to avocados that rely on the pollinators. This past year saw the worst colony losses on record. Beewise has raised nearly $170 million, including a $50 million Series D earlier this month, and it has a plan to change the industry.
AI and robotics are able to replace '90% of what a beekeeper would do in the field,' said Beewise Chief Executive and co-founder Saar Safra. The question is whether beekeepers are willing to switch out tried and true equipment.
Ultimately, the fate of humans is tied to that of bees. Roughly 75% of crops require pollinators, with nuts and fruits particularly dependent. While other species of bees and insects can play a role, they can't replace honeybees.
'There would essentially be no crop without the bees,' said Zac Ellis, the senior director of agronomy at OFI, a global food and ingredient seller.
The beehive hasn't seen much technological innovation in 170 years. The Langstroth hive, named after the American reverend who patented it in 1852, is a simple wooden box with frames that can house the queen and her worker bees, larvae and honey.
'Langstroth hives are easy to work with, break down, build up, manipulate frames, make splits' and move, said Priya Chakrabarti Basu, a Washington State University bee researcher.
These boxes are the backbone of the agriculture industry and the high-value crops that are heavily reliant on the 2.5 million commercial hives that crisscross the U.S. on semitrailers. Beekeepers with thousands of hives will travel from as far away as Florida to provide pollination services for California's $3.9 billion almond crop in spring before moving on to other states and crops.
'Almonds are one of the largest pollination events in the world,' said Ellis, who uses Beewise's hives on 30% of the acres he manages. 'Typically, a grower needs two hives per acre,' each with up to 40,000 bees.
Pollinating the 10,000 acres of almonds, walnuts and pistachios he oversees requires millions of bees doing the brunt of the pollination work.
The number of hives and demand have created a problem, though: Beekeepers are only able to check on their colonies' health every week or two. But a growing number of threats to bees means entire colonies can be wiped out or weakened past the point of no return in just a few days.
Toxic pesticides, a changing climate and a sharp uptick in the invasive, disease-transmitting varroa mite since the 1980s have contributed to the rise of what's known as colony collapse disorder. The exact role each of these issues plays in wiping out colonies is unclear, but they are also likely interacting with each other to take a toll.
'You are rarely going to find a bee who is only, for example, stressed by a mite or a bee who's stressed by a disease only or a bee who's only stressed by poor nutrition,' Chakrabarti Basu said. 'It is always a combination.'
The impacts, though, are clear. From the 12-month period starting last April, more than 56% of commercial colonies were wiped out, according to the Apiary Inspectors of America. Beekeepers have taken a major economic hit as a result: Between last June and March, colony losses cost beekeepers an estimated $600 million, according to the Honey Bee Health Coalition.
While a new hive design alone isn't enough to save bees, Beewise's robotic hives help cut down on losses by providing a near-constant stream of information on colony health in real time — and give beekeepers the ability to respond to issues. Equipped with a camera and a robotic arm, they're able to regularly snap images of the frames inside the BeeHome, which Safra likened to an MRI. The amount of data they capture is staggering.
Each frame contains up to 6,000 cells where bees can, among other things, gestate larvae or store honey and pollen. A hive contains up to 15 frames and a BeeHome can hold up to 10 hives, providing thousands of data points for Beewise's AI to analyze.
While a trained beekeeper can quickly look at a frame and assess its health, AI can do it even faster, as well as take in information on individual bees in the photos. Should AI spot a warning sign, such as a dearth of new larvae or the presence of mites, beekeepers will get an update on an app that a colony requires attention. The company's technology earned it a BloombergNEF Pioneers award earlier this year.
'There's other technologies that we've tried that can give us some of those metrics as well, but it's really a look in the rearview mirror,' Ellis said. 'What really attracted us to Beewise is their ability to not only understand what's happening in that hive, but to actually act on those different metrics.'
That includes administering medicine and food as well as opening and closing vents to regulate temperature or protect against pesticide spraying. Safra noted that after two hurricanes hit Florida last year, BeeHomes in the state were still operational while many wooden hives were destroyed.
That durability and responsiveness has Ellis convinced on expanding their use. Today, BeeHomes are on 30% of his acres, but he said within three years, they're aiming for 100% coverage. Whether other growers and beekeepers are as keen to make the switch remains to be seen, though, given nearly two centuries of loyalty to the Langstroth design.
The startup wants to more than triple the number of BeeHomes in use, reaching 1 million in three years.
'We're in a race against time,' Safra said. 'We might have the best product on planet Earth in 15 years, but it doesn't matter' if there aren't any bees left.
Ellis likened the hives to a Ritz-Carlton for pollinators. The five-star stay appears to suit bees well: Beewise says its units — which it leases to provide pollination services at what it says are market rates — have seen colony losses of around 8%. That's a major drop compared to the average annual loss rate of more than 40%, according to Apiary Inspectors of America, a group that tracks colony health.
'The asset is the bees, that's the revenue-generating asset,' said Safra, noting that losing more than 40% of those assets makes it hard for businesses to cover labor to maintain hives, trailers to transport them and other fixed costs.
Beewise expects to have $100 million in revenue this year, and Safra said it's a year away from profitability. The company declined to share the valuation for its Series D.
It has competition in the bee-saving technology realm. Some companies like Dalan Animal Health are developing vaccines to protect bees against disease. BeeHero and Beeflow (sensing a pattern?) are among those that provide sensors for monitoring health in hives and fields. Both can help improve outcomes at Langstroth hives, but they still require regular beekeeper maintenance.
Chakrabarti Basu from Washington State and her colleagues are also working on using AI to detect bees entering hives. 'The more data sets we can give, the better it'll be trained,' she said. 'Pattern recognition — it could be monitoring a brood frame, it could be looking at anything for estimating colony health or any aspect of colony health — I think AI will probably get better at it.'
Kahn writes for Bloomberg.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Scientists warn US will lose a generation of talent because of Trump cuts
A generation of scientific talent is at the brink of being lost to overseas competitors by the Trump administration's dismantling of the National Science Foundation (NSF), with unprecedented political interference at the agency jeopardizing the future of US industries and economic growth, according to a Guardian investigation. The gold standard peer-reviewed process used by the NSF to support cutting-edge, high-impact science is being undermined by the chaotic cuts to staff, programs and grants, and by meddling by the so-called department of government efficiency (Doge), according to multiple current and former NSF employees who spoke with the Guardian. The scientists warn that Trump's assault on diversity in science is already eroding the quality of fundamental research funded at the NSF, the premier federal investor in basic science and engineering, which threatens to derail advances in tackling existential threats to food, water and biodiversity in the US. Related: We are witnessing the destruction of science in America | Paul Darren Bieniasz 'Before Trump, the review process was based on merit and impact. Now, it's like rolling the dice, because a Doge person has the final say,' said one current program officer. 'There has never in the history of NSF been anything like this. It's disgusting what we're being instructed to do.' Another program officer said: 'The exact details of the extra step is opaque but I can say with high confidence that people from Doge or its proxies are scrutinizing applications with absolutely devastating consequences. The move amounts to the US willingly conceding global supremacy to competitors like China in biological, social and physical sciences. It is a mind-boggling own goal.' The NSF, founded in 1950, is the only federal agency that funds fundamental research across all fields of science and engineering, and which over the years has contributed to major breakthroughs in organ transplants, gene technology, AI, smartphones and the internet, extreme weather and other hazard warning systems, American sign language, cybersecurity and even the language app Duolingo. In normal times, much of the NSF budget ($9bn in 2024-25) is allocated to research institutions after projects undergo a rigorous three-step review process – beginning with the program officer, an expert in the field, who ensures the proposed study fits in with the agency's priorities. The program officer convenes an expert panel to evaluate the proposal on two statutory criteria – intellectual merit and broader impacts on the nation and people – which under the NSF's legal mandate includes broadening participation of individuals, institutions, and geographic regions in Stem (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields. The NSF's gold standard review process has 100% been compromised Current NSF program officer Applications from across the country which are greenlighted by the program officer are almost always funded, though may be subject to tweaks after revision by the division director before the grants directorate allocates the budget. That was before Trump. Now, Doge personnel can veto any study – without explanation, the Guardian has confirmed. 'We are under pressure to only fund proposals that fit the new narrow priorities even if they did not review as well as others,' said one current program officer. 'The NSF's gold standard review process has 100% been compromised.' Research aimed at addressing the unequal impact of the climate crisis and other environmental hazards is particularly vulnerable, according to several sources. New proposals are also being screened for any direct reference or indirect connection to diversity, equity or inclusion (DEI). 'NSF is being asked to make science racist again – which contradicts evidence that shows that diversity of ideas is good for science and good for innovation. We are missing things when only white males do science,' said one program officer. In addition to Doge interfering in new proposals, at least 1,653 active NSF research grants authorized on their merits have so far been abruptly cancelled – abandoned midway through the project, according to Grant Watch, a non-profit tracker of federal science and health research grants canceled under Trump. Multiple NSF scientists who oversee a diverse range of NSF programs described the grant cancellations as 'unprecedented', 'arbitrary' and a 'colossal waste of taxpayer money'. Almost 60% of the projects abandoned are in states which voted for Joe Biden in 2024, Guardian analysis found. Meanwhile more than one in nine cancelled grants – 12% of the total – were at Harvard University, which Trump has particularly targeted since coming to power in January. In addition, studies deemed to be violating Trump's executive orders on DEI and environmental justice – regardless of their scientific merit, potential impact or urgency – are being abruptly terminated at particularly high rates. It's not uncommon for the NSF and other federal research agencies to shift focus to reflect a new administration's priorities. Amid mounting evidence on the crucial role of diversity in innovation and science, Biden priorities included increased effort to tackle inequalities across the Stem workforce – and a commitment to target underserved communities most affected by the climate crisis and environmental harms. Trump's priorities are AI, quantum information science, nuclear, biotech and translational research. It has been soul-sucking to see projects that went through the review process being changed or terminated over and over again Current NSF staffer 'It's normal that a new administration will emphasize some areas, de-emphasize others, and we would gradually transition to new priorities. During the George W Bush administration there were shenanigans around climate change, but it was nothing like this kind of meddling in the scientific review process. You never just throw proposals in the garbage can,' said one current NSF staffer. 'Our mandate is to advance science and innovation. And we just can't do that if we're not thinking about diversifying the Stem workforce. We don't have enough people or diversity of thought without broadening participation – which is part of the NSF mission mandate,' said a former program officer from the Directorate for Computer and Information Science who recently accepted a buyout. 'It has been soul-sucking to see projects that went through the review process being changed or terminated over and over again,' they added. *** The Federal Reserve estimates that government-supported research from the NSF and other agencies has had a return on investment of 150% to 300% over the past 75 years, meaning US taxpayers have gotten back between $1.50 and $3 for every dollar invested. Trump's big, beautiful bill calls for a 56% cut to the current $9bn NSF budget, as well as a 73% reduction in staff and fellowships – with graduate students among the hardest hit. Last week, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud) announced that it will be moving into the NSF headquarters in Virginia over the course of the next two years. The shock announcement – which did not include any plans on relocating more than 1,800 NSF employees – has triggered speculation that the administration eventually plans to defund the agency entirely. For now, program officers are also being instructed to return research proposals to scientists and institutions 'without review' – regardless of merit and despite having been submitted in response to specific NSF solicitations to address gaps in scientific and engineering knowledge around some of the most pressing concerns in the US. This includes projects that have in fact undergone review, and others which can no longer be processed due to staff and program cuts, according to multiple NSF sources. In one case, a 256-page proposal by scientists at four public universities to use ancient DNA records to better forecast biodiversity loss as the planet warms was apparently archived without consideration. In an email seen by the Guardian, the NSF told Jacquelyn Gill, a paleoecologist and principal investigator (lead scientist) based at the University of Maine, that all proposals submitted to the Biology Integration Institute program were returned without review. A second email said their specific proposal had been 'administratively screened' and the area of proposed study was 'inappropriate for NSF funding'. An estimated 40% of animals and 34% of plants across the US are currently at risk. The proposed study would have used an emerging technology to extract ancient DNA from lake sediments, ice cores and cave deposits to better understand which species fared better or worse when the planet naturally warmed thousands of years ago – in order to help model and protect biodiversity in the face of human-made climate change. Gill told the Guardian the team took great care to avoid any reference to DEI or climate change. The grant would have created much-needed research capacity in the US, which is lagging behind Europe in this field. 'Ancient DNA records allow you to reconstruct entire ecosystems at a very high level. This is a very new and emerging science, and grants like this help catalyze the research and reinvest in US infrastructure and workforce in ways that have huge returns on investments for their local economies. It's an absolute slap in the face that the proposal was returned without review,' Gill said. Nothing's going to get funded because there's DEI in this program NSF employee In another example, two academic institutions chosen to receive prestigious $15m grants for translational research – a Trump priority – after a 30-month cross-agency review process led by the engineering directorate and involving hundreds of people will not be honored. The proposals selected for the award through merit review will be returned without review for being 'inappropriate for NSF funding', the Guardian understands. 'This is complex, very high-impact translation science to achieve sustainability across cities and regions and industries … we're being instructed to put the principal investigators off, but nothing's going to get funded because there's DEI in this program,' said an NSF employee with knowledge of the situation. Meanwhile scores of other proposals approved on merit by program officers are disappearing into a 'black box' – languishing for weeks or months without a decision or explanation, which was leading some to 'self-censor', according to NSF staff. 'It's either NSF staff self-censoring to make sure they don't get into trouble, or it is censorship by somebody inserted in the scientific review process from Doge. Either way it's a political step, and therefore problematic,' said Anne Marie Schmoltner, a program officer in the chemistry division who retired in February after 30 years in the agency. In addition to distributing funds to seasoned researchers, the NSF supports students and up-and-coming scientists and engineers through fellowships, research opportunities and grants. This next generation of talent is being hit particularly hard under Trump, who is attempting to impose sweeping restrictions on visas and travel bans on scores of countries. The proposed 2026 budget includes funding for only 21,400 under- and postgraduate students nationwide – a 75% fall on this year. Like many scientists across the country, Gill, the paleoecologist, is not accepting new graduate students this fall due to funding uncertainty. 'That's a whole generation of young scientists who see no pathway into the field for them. I cannot stress enough how deeply upsetting and demoralizing these cuts are to a community of people who only ever wanted to solve problems and be of use.' Yet the NSF student pipeline provides experts for the oil and gas, mining, chemical, big tech and other industries which support Trump, in addition to academic and government-funded agencies. 'Industry is working on optimizing what they're doing right now, whereas NSF is looking 10, 20 years down the road. The US wants a global, robust economy and for that you need innovation, and for innovation you need the fundamental research funded by the NSF,' said Schmoltner. The NSF declined to comment, referring instead to the agency website last updated in April which states: 'The principles of merit, competition, equal opportunity and excellence are the bedrock of the NSF mission. NSF continues to review all projects using Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts criteria.' *** The sweeping cuts to the NSF come on top of Trump's dismantling of other key scientific research departments within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Agriculture (USDA) and US Geological Service (USGS). The USGS is the research arm of the Department of Interior. Its scientists help solve real-life problems about hazards, natural resources, water, energy, ecosystems, and the impacts of climate and land-use change for tribal governments, the Bureau of Land Management, fish and wildlife services, and the National Parks Service among other interior agencies. Trump's big, beautiful bill cuts the USGS budget by 39%. This includes slashing the entire budget for the agency's ecosystems mission area (EMA), which leads federal research on species & ecosystems and houses the climate adaptation science centers. EMA scientists figure out how to better protect at-risk species such as bees and wolverines, minimize harmful overgrazing on BLM lands, and prevent invasive carp from reaching the Great Lakes – all vitally important to protect food security in the US as the climate changes. The EMA has already lost 25 to 30% of employees through Doge-approved layoffs and buyouts, and is now facing termination. 'We've already lost a lot of institutional memory and new, up-and-coming leaders. [If Trump's budget is approved], all science in support of managing our public lands and natural resources would be cut,' said one USGS program officer. This is now a political process USGS scientist 'Our economy is driven by natural resources including timber, minerals and food systems, and if we don't manage these in a sustainable way, we will be shooting ourselves in the foot.' Like at the NSF, the USGC's gold standard peer-review system for research approval and oversight is now at the mercy of Doge – in this case Tyler Hasson, the former oil executive given sweeping authority by the interior secretary. According to USGS staff, Hasson's office accepts or rejects proposals based on two paragraphs of information program officers are permitted to submit – without any dialogue or feedback. 'The gold standard scientific review is being interfered with. This is now a political process,' said one USGS scientist. A spokesperson for the interior department said: 'The claim that science is being 'politicized' is categorically false. We reject the narrative that responsible budget reform constitutes an 'assault on science'. On the contrary, we are empowering American innovation by cutting red tape, reducing bureaucracy and ensuring that the next generation of scientists and engineers can focus on real-world solutions – not endless paperwork or politically motivated research agendas.' The USGS, office of management and budget and White House did not respond to requests for comment. The Guardian is interested in hearing from US scientists and students impacted by the changes at National Science Foundation and other agencies, including on the impact on innovation in the US. Contact
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk and Sam Altman have something else in common: Dissatisfaction with politics
Archrivals Elon Musk and Sam Altman may have found something to bond over. The two tech billionaires are both disenchanted with US politics. Both posted about their political frustrations on X this Fourth of July. Forget fireworks and cookouts: Elon Musk and Sam Altman are spending their Fourth of July sharing their frustrations about US politics. The rival tech billionaires each celebrated Independence Day with social-media posts in which they vented about the state of the 50 states. Musk rekindled his idea of starting a new political party called the "America Party" in an X post. This comes after a falling out between the Tesla CEO and his former ally, President Donald Trump. "Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!" Musk wrote on X. Musk's musings may have been prompted by Trump's so-called "big, beautiful bill," which the billionaire slammed as being full of bloat. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman also expressed dissatisfaction with politics, specifically with the Democratic Party. Once a Democratic mega-donor, Altman wrote on X that he's now "politically homeless." Altman's missive started as a love letter to the US. "I'm not big on identities, but I am extremely proud to be American," he wrote. "This is true every day, but especially today — I firmly believe this is the greatest country ever on Earth." But don't expect Altman to host fundraisers for Democrats anytime soon. The tech mogul said he's a believer in "techno-capitalism," where wealth flows from innovation, entrepreneurship, and education. In his view, the Democratic Party is now out of step with that mission. "The Democratic party seemed reasonably aligned with it when I was 20, losing the plot when I was 30, and completely to have moved [sic] somewhere else at this point," Altman wrote. The billionaire added that "I care much, much more about being American than any political party." Altman's shift may come as anti-billionaire sentiment among Democrats, including New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, is on the rise. "I'd rather hear from candidates about how they are going to make everyone have the stuff billionaires have instead of how they are going to eliminate billionaires," Altman wrote. Musk is also a former self-identifying Democrat who became alienated from the party and eventually threw his support behind Republicans, culminating in his former leadership role in Trump's DOGE project. Despite his frustrations, Altman might not join Musk's America Party, given their squabbles. But if Altman and Musk do squash their beef, it could be because of this Fourth of July — and it won't be because they're grilling. Read the original article on Business Insider
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump signs order extending TikTok ban deadline
President Trump signed an executive order Thursday extending the deadline for TikTok's parent company to divest the popular video sharing app by 90 days. The order punts the deadline for China-based ByteDance to Sept. 17. The most recent deadline was Thursday. 'I've just signed the Executive Order extending the Deadline for the TikTok closing for 90 days (September 17, 2025). Thank you for your attention to this matter!' Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social, attaching a screenshot of the order. The order instructs the Department of Justice not to enforce the law or impose penalties related to it. 'We are grateful for President Trump's leadership and support in ensuring that TikTok continues to be available for more than 170 million American users and 7.5 million U.S. businesses that rely on the platform as we continue to work with Vice President Vance's Office,' TikTok said in a statement following Thursday's order. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed earlier this week Trump planned to sign another extension, telling reporters the president 'does not want TikTok to go dark.' 'This extension will last 90 days, which the Administration will spend working to ensure this deal is closed so that the American people can continue to use TikTok with the assurance that their data is safe and secure,' Leavitt said in a statement Tuesday. Trump himself hinted at the extension earlier this week. When asked Monday whether he would give the popular video-sharing platform another extension, the president told reporters aboard Air Force One, 'Probably, yeah.' 'Probably have to get China approval, but I think we'll get it,' Trump said as he traveled back from the Group of Seven summit in Canada. 'I think President Xi [Jinping] will ultimately approve it.' The order marks the third extension from Trump since he took office in January. The law requiring ByteDance to divest from the platform or face a ban on U.S. networks and app stores was signed by former President Biden last year. The Supreme Court upheld the divest-or-ban law in early January, prompting the law to take effect January 19, the day before Trump was sworn in for his second term. The platform was brought back online hours later after Trump vowed to sign an executive order once back in office to give the company an extension. Trump made good on that promise, and his first order gave ByteDance 75 days beyond the January deadline to divest from the platform amid national security concerns. A deal was finalized by the White House in early April, but was never completed amid Trump's tariff fight with China. The president then signed another executive order in April, extending the deadline by another 75 days, which was set to expire Thursday. Updated at 12:55 p.m. EDT Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.