> I would be surprised not to see more "off the foundation" comb
> unwaxed plastic.  From here, this seems to be what you have
> demonstrated, but instead are ascribing the differences to other
> variables.

Looking over this thread, I think the writer missed the entire point of
my post and that was to say that three years later the _bees seem to
like PF100s after they are drawn out properly_, not to point out that
PF100s were difficult to introduce.  That is a separate matter.

I merely posted to say that bees do not seem to favour any particular
cell size when offered worker combs of 5.0, 5.25, and 5.35 mm. in the
same brood nest.  I am is a position to observe (casually) as I have a
hodge-podge of everything.

I have some on 100% 3-yr old Pierco, some with older comb drawn on
Duragilt, aluminum or wax foundation, some with Mann Lake plastic
foundation in new wood frames, and some with PF100s in various
proportions and positions.

And... at risk of stirring up more merde, as I was selecting colonies
for sale yesterday I noticed -- unscientifically, granted -- that the
most bodacious colonies were ones with nothing but older dark combs.

Some of these combs, judging by the brands, had to be thirty years old,
minimum, and some had patches of drone cells and distortions.
Nevertheless, these hives were thriving.

I should point out that I used only one strip of Apistan annually years
ago and never used Checkmite+) and that some of the combs may have spent
ten or more years in storage, so chemical contamination from treatments
is minimal.

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