Hi Mike,  you wrote:

> In message <[log in to unmask]>, Joe Hemmens
> <[log in to unmask]> writes > >The research undertaken by Dr.
> Martin is interesting and no >doubt adds to the knowledge base.  As a
> paid-up member of >the cynics-club I suspect that the Varroa
> Calculator was a >way of justifying the cost of the research (paid for
> by beekeepers in >the UK). > >I also believe that the Varroa
> Calculator has no practical >use for the beekeeper whatsoever.
>
> >Either of these two factors alone would suggest that the
> >Varroa Calculator is well nigh useless.
> >Joe Hemmens
>
>
> These are strong condemnations of one of the very few pieces of
> research work carried out recently  by MAFF in the UK intended to be
> of practical use to small scale beekeepers.  In view of the strength
> of the views expressed it would be valuable to the beekeeping
> community for all the relevant data to be in the public domain, and
> for the accuracy of the technique to be discussed on the basis of
> these data.
>
> The data that are published on the Internet on the DARG trial are
> headed "Apilife VAR trial Results-Autumn 1996", obtained from
>
> http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/2352/
>
> I just checked and they are still there.  Are there any other results
> available to add to these?  I know that there was an article in the
> Devon Beekeepers Magazine after the trial.  Did it contain any
> additional information.

No,  I don't think so.

> These results of the DARG trial refer to 36 colonies using no less
> than 6 different designs/arrangements of hive; it seems a bit hard on
> Dr Martin to criticise him for using " no more than 30-40 colonies".

I wasn't suggesting that the DARG trial was 'better' than that
carried out by Dr. Martin,  merely that the sample seems small.
Also,  I assume that the trial colonies would have been in close
geographical proximity to each other.  Given that conditions in the
UK vary so widely - Spring is perhaps 5 weeks advanced - in
horticultural terms - in South Cornwall compared to the North of
England,  I find it hard to trust a calculation which shows quite
different relationships between natural mite mortality and infestation
level - according to the month in which the measurement is taken.

In fact the DARG trial was carried out over two years but the
results for the first year were unpublished because the trial was at
variance with the instructions for the application of Apilife Var (they
were written in Italian).  Nonetheless,  for the purposes of this
discussion there are results for 78 colonies.

<snip>

> For colonies in the DARG trial with natural drop rates of 3  or more
> per day ( and this includes 23 of the 36 trial colonies) the ratios of
> measured total to estimated lie in the range 0.4 to 3.3.
> Approximately half the ratio results in this case lie in the range 0.5
> to 2; this looks like quite a reasonable guide.
>
> In any case, one of the benefits of the natural drop count and the use
> of the varroa calculator is the ability to estimate the build up of
> varroa mites in a colony through the summer season so that treatment
> can be given if a dangerous build up occurs, as can sometimes happen
> quickly if local, untreated, colonies start to collapse and their bees
> fly to other local colonies.

Yes,  I understand that that is what it is supposed to do,  I
question whether it does this with sufficient accuracy to have any
use.

> The DARG results do not appear to be
> relevant to the accuracy of the Varroa Calculator during the summer
> period.

You could be right but we do at least have good figures for natural
mortality and I think fairly useful figures for 'total infestation' levels
some months later.

> "the Varroa Calculator has no practical
> use for the beekeeper whatsoever" and "the Varroa Calculator is well
> nigh useless"- Of such strong statements are myths and legends made!!

In this case I rather doubt it!  When I have mentioned my concerns
to other beekeepers they have either tended to agree with me or
regarded me as a heretic for criticising the work. At least you have
asked to see the figures...

> The varroa calculator is less than perfect, but this warning is made
> clear on the device.  If we are going to condemn it, let us at least
> do so on the basis of all the data, and with a full analysis of them.

Sure,  since you ask,  I will post the figures on a web page.  You
may have to wait a while though.

Joe