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
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
Sender:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Zachary Huang <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 16 Feb 2002 13:21:19 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
Peter,

£Ôrue that acquired characters cannot be inherited.  however I can see that it is possible that
if  previous generations of bees were reared in larger cells (with larger celled foundation),
these individuals can be larger, and therefore might make larger cells even if not given
foundation.  not really through genetics but maybe larger bees make larger cells?

Of course the point is moot is Marla has shown that bees prior to foundation use had
cell size similar to now.

Zachary Huang
http://www.cyberbee.net

On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 11:25:42 -0500, Peter Borst <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Greetings
>
>There have been many discussions in this forum on the worker cell
>size of naturally built comb. Despite the fact that many researchers
>have concurred that European bees make comb with worker cells that
>average around 53 mm (Taber & Owens, Michener), some people contend
>that this size reflects an artificial enlargement *caused* by the use
>of foundation based on larger than natural dimensions. This idea
>itself is based on a faulty understanding of biology (externally
>induced characteristics are not passed on to offspring).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2