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
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
randy oliver <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 25 Nov 2018 15:00:48 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
Roughly half the cost of creating a good pollen sub is in the grinding of
the meal fine enough for the bees to digest.

Juanse created a very nice calculator for balancing the ingredients.

In my current field trial, the commercial pollen sub for which I'm testing
additional nutrient additions is running slightly behind the positive
control patties of mixed natural pollens of equivalent protein content, and
far ahead of the negative controls of equivalent sugar alone.

Bottom line: for at least a couple of rounds of brood, the best subs are
not far behind mixed natural pollens.
-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2