On Sun, 2 Jul 1995, Jerry J Bromenshenk wrote: > I found out > years ago and Erik Erickson and others found that European bees vary more > in size than generally acknowledged. Erickson found that the foundation > supplied by various distributors of bee equipment has different cell > sizes. I found that bees vary so much that some colonies can squeeze > through a hole 1/16 of an inch smaller than others. Okay! Jerry you bring up the most fascinating subjects. Here's one I have always wondered about. I have a read over the years that it is a good idea to try to have larger bees by changing brood comb regularly so that the cell size is not reduced with old cocoons -- and even by obtaining stock that is purported to be bigger. I have always somehow doubted this, being aware that if we doubled the size of the bee, we would have a different critter. Because of simple geometric facts, doubling the bee size would increase the mass by a factor of 8. Volume varies as dimensions cubed (In this case 2 X 2 X 2) and the wing surface by 4 (2 X2). If we tripled the size, we would have 27 times the present mass, but only 8 times the wing surface. Such a bee would have trouble lifting itself off the ground empty, let alone laden, unless other factors of scale cut in. I think lift from wing is more or less linear with area. (Velocity of wing movement might be lower due to the fact that larger muscles tend to be slower, but then again, wingbeat might be faster due to lighter load caused by less area and the fact that the muscle mass would increase faster than the wing area as size of bee was increased). This can bee a complex engineering problem. Heat dissipation, circulation, skeletal strength and other many other factors would have to be considered too -- including the size of the flowers they visit. Of course these are extreme examples, but they illustrate a problem related to scale that is often neglected when discussing the degree of change that is possible by the above suggested methods. And nonetheless, they are operational even in small changes of bee size, I would expect. Of course someone will say that bumblebees manage to fly even though they vary in size quite drastically. But of course thay are engineered very differently and perhaps there is an optimal size for the bumblebee design. Maybe the smallest size is best and the queens are less effective foragers? Or maybe the queens are ideal and the early season foragers are sub optimal? Or maybe the design is detuned and the optimal range extends over all sizes encoutered in practice? Back to the honeybee: There have also been attempts to select for specific body parts being larger: a longer tongue without other size differences would appear to me to be a good improvement. But then, the tongue does have to fit into the head, so I guess nothing can be changed without affecting something else (balance, space in the head for other parts, etc.) At any rate, I'll get to the point here: The 'experts' all say that smaller bees are not good. One should change the combs regularly. I have a confession to make: I have changed only maybe 10% of my brood combs over the *entire* last 10 years and my crops are getting bigger and my wintering sucess and incidence of diseases is better every year. At present, the only brood combs that are culled are the ones that won't stay in the frame and the ones that are too warped to use next to as flat frame. We do add some good brood combs from supers and a bit of foundation each year. We use excluders on every hive and any comb that is no good for brood goes up there. Our supers have lots of dark comb and our honey always grades water white. (Except for an amber flow that came in last fall) When I changed brood combs regularly the bees did not do so well. Personally, I think that the bees do something to brood combs that are in the nest . That something disappears when they are rearranged or left unused for a long time. In order to do whatever it is, they require hot weather and a flow. That's why I never disturb the arrangements of brood chambers after August in any hive I wish to winter. If I do, they winter badly and fail to build up in the spring. * * * * * * * * * I heard this also from the chief inspector I worked for years ago - the late Roger Topping. He told of the time he went to work on his bees - he only kept 100 hives, just enough to keep his hand in. He went out in the fall - September - to ensure that the stores were correctly asrranged for winter and went through about half the hives, placing the feed whered the feed belongs, the pollen where the pollen belongs, the empty comb where the empty comb belongs, the cluster where the cluster belongs, etc. But then he was called a way and never finished. When he returned, it was cold out and he had to just wrap them and hope. In the spring, he was astounde to find that the half he had 'helped' suffered something like 50% loss and the ones he had not been able to get to had virtually all survived. * * * * * * * * * Lately I read that varroa require a certain space beside the larva to decide to move into a cell. I think I recall that people are even trying different cell sizes to deal with this. (Smaller cells?) I would like to hear some discussion on this from anyone who has any insights. Allen W. Allen Dick, Beekeeper VE6CFK Rural Route One Swalwell Alberta Canada T0M 1Y0 Email: [log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask] Futures, Art & Honey:http://www.cuug.ab.ca:8001/~dicka