BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"David L. Green" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:34:15 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
In a message dated 9/9/00 1:27:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

> bob harrison wrote:.
>
>  A USDA rep told me they could put a honey smear under a microscope and tell
>  exactly the source of most U.S. honeys as each pollen grain is different
as
> is
>  each snowflake.

   Bob Post is right.  The presence of pollen in a honey is only a
documentation that the bees worked that particular species, but the
pollen/nectar ratio is quite different for each plant, and a good knowledge
of this would be necessary for any attempt to quantify the relationship.  In
my area wild mustard yields tremendous quantities of pollen throughout the
winter and spring, but very little nectar, so all my early honeys would
probably show a high percentage of mustard pollen, yet the honey is not
really made from mustard.  I could give many other examples.

   Of course there is also the case of the "sourwood" honey being full of
"star thistle" pollen....

Dave Green      SC   USA
The Pollination Home Page:   http://pollinator.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2