> Towards Peters post,  he stated it was not genetic. 

Have I been that unclear? I did not say it was not genetic. Obviously the varroa nesting preferences are inherited. They have clear preferences, they don't live in other species than Apis, though perhaps they could. 

Look at it like this: you have a population of people living in a city. They live that way because they like it, they prefer it. Then the city is bombed and people move to a refugee camp. The don't prefer that, they go there because they have to. 

Maybe they live in the camp for a decade. Will their children grow up preferring a nasty muddy camp to living in a nice apartment in the city? I doubt it. But even if they did, that wouldn't change their genes. 

The original varroa nesting preferences will not change because they are forced to live in a second-class way. They will not pass a preference for living in worker cells to their offspring, if they don't prefer it.

Varroa preferences evolved over thousands or millions of years. A couple of decades of exposure will not affect their preferences. Miticide resistance is different. 

If a mite can resist chemicals better than its neighbors, -- and it's based on a genetic difference -- that lineage can come to dominate. This is natural selection. 

There has to be a genetic basis for selection to act on, it has to confer a survival advantage. And, if say the chemical pressure is removed, the original genotype can resurface. You have seen this: things that people have selected for a particular trait, like squash, quickly revert to the original type, absent selection.

PLB

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