> What I was saying that the 1-hr dusting drop equalled the natural drop that > I had counted for the previous 6 days. It was merely an observation of the > data, not theoretical. OK, That seems to suggest that if six days drop a number equal to 34% of the 33% that are phoretic, then one day's drop represents 2% of the total mite population in this instance. That is quite interesting. A little later in the season, when there is no brood, if the adult mite age profile has not changed a lot, then if one day still drops the same percentage of the phoretic mites, but no immatures, then we would expect to see 1% of the phoretic mites dropping daily, and if the attrition were linear, run out of mites in a little over three months. (So, it must not work like that.) > So 33 are phoretic. If dusting causes 34% of these to drop, then about 11 > would drop. <etc.> > So we are in the same ballpark. Does that help? Yes, your explanation is most interesting and helpful, especially since the natural drop used for reference was backward-looking in a developing population. Thanks. At this point, I am trying to guess mite populations from a natural drop. Using a 100 multiplier I get a population estimate for some colonies which should be virtually broodless. When I use that estimate in a mdel for oxalic drop, I see that our results locus is at about 50% of the model we are using so am pondering... Actually, I suppose, given the WAG figures we have used and the lack of rigour going in, coming within 100% is not too bad, but I'm wondering if I overestimated the mite pop or if we should have done a better job of oxalic fogging. Or something else altogether... *********************************************** The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to: http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at: http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm