I said:

>> In studies, it is quite common to do a "24 hour" Apistan test as a
>> "standard" way of estimating mite populations... As a result, there
>> should be a good data set to prove that these "24 hour tests" were
>> never effective in themselves at controlling varroa.  If they were
>> effective, the act of counting mites in control (untreated) colonies
>> would eliminate so many mites that one's control colonies would no
>> longer be "controls".

and Karen Oland said:

> Do you have any references we could look at for that?

I don't think anyone has done a specific study to prove
that the measurement methods intended to merely count
mites have a negligible impact on the mite population,
but just think about it:

   If the "24-hour Apistan test" was a good way to
   control varroa, studies using such measurement
   methods would have an unusual (high) rate of
   colony survival among "control colonies".

In fact, the exact opposite appears to be the case.
Control colonies consistently enjoy the dubious honor
of "dying for science".  A "control" that survives a
varroa study is uncommon.

> Perhaps they were effective as a control (but who would
> want to do this every week?) and were a good measure of
> reinfestation, rather than continuing infestation.

Uh oh - you are using "control" as in "controlling varroa",
and I was using "control" as in "a control colony", one
that is given no treatment at all, in contrast to ones that
are subjected to "Methodology A" or "Methodology B".


Reinfestation is an interesting subject.  Wyatt Mangum is
working on a long-term study that looks at just that.

I dunno how to stop bees from "drifting" when hives are
clustered in groups, but it seems clear that if we could
somehow reduce drifting, we could reduce reinfestation.

                        jim

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::