>> Could someone let me know what the identifying trait is 
>> between swarms from managed colonies and those from 
>> feral sources?

> Didn't Seeley do a study of ferals in the Arnot forest? 
> How did he know they were feral?  ;)

Seeley's work in the Arnot forest is widely misunderstood
by those who have neglected to read his papers.  It just
doesn't matter "where the bees came from", and Seeley
himself has stated multiple times that he knows of 
beekeepers near enough to the Arnot Forest to be possible 
sources of bees to at least (re)populate the forest with 
initial swarms.

Here's the basic point that he made about the colonies 
in the Arnot Forest area:

The survival of the "feral colonies" was not due to any unique
trait of the bees, but instead, due to traits in the local 
population of the >>>VARROA mites<<<.

So, It just doesn't matter!
http://unclebubby.com/wav/wav/MOVIES/Meatballs/doesntmatter-speech.wav

It just doesn't matter one little bit if the Arnot Forest 
was populated with:

a) a mythical population of "true feral" bees,

b) initial swarms from beekeepers, that further swarmed

c) 100% swarms from beekeeper hives, with only a tiny
   fraction of the swarms surviving as colonies for 
   more than a single season.

And breeding from that bee population will not result in 
bees with any sort of "resistance" to varroa or the many 
viruses spread by varroa.  There never were any magic
beans, and there don't appear to be any magic bees,
either.

Because the difference in the Aront Forest is in the 
VARROA, not in the bees.

This is from Seeley's abstract:

"The Arnot Forest colonies proved to be infested with 
V. destructor, but their mite populations did not surge 
to high levels in late summer. To see if Arnot Forest 
bees can suppress the reproduction rate of mites, 
colonies of Arnot Forest bees and New World Carniolan 
bees were inoculated with mites from an apiary and the 
growth patterns of their mite populations were compared. 
No difference was found between the two colony types. 
Evidently, the stable bee-mite relationship in the Arnot 
Forest reflects adaptations for parasite (mite) avirulence, 
not host (bee) resistance."
http://research.cals.cornell.edu/entity?home=6&id=31234

So, the clear need here is to start a "Feral VARROA Project"
where beekeepers use their colonies to produce more and
more of these varroa that somehow manage to NOT kill
their host colonies.  These varroa, by not killing their
host colonies off, would out-compete the varroa that do
kill off their colonies, and become the dominant form
of varroa in North America.

But just try and convince anyone that this approach 
would work for varroa the way it worked in completely
irradiating the Screwworm fly, and in controlling 
multiple species of fruit pests, including the infamous
Medfly.  Our task would be much easier, as we need not
create a "sterile" varroa mite, or redistribute them
over and over in the same areas each season, as was
done to control these other pest insects.

I've tried to get someone, anyone interested in this
approach, but the usual reaction is "You want beekeepers
to raise varroa-infested hives so that those varroa 
will infest all their hives?  What are you, nuts?"

We've had two decades of mostly fumbling and impotent 
efforts in regard to varroa, and we have as a result 
become accustomed to putting pesticides DIRECTLY INTO 
BROOD CHAMBERS.  

So I feel that "Thinking Outside The (brood) Box"
is in order.  But then, I always do.

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************