Herve,

Pollen as a feed ingredient outside its natural supply route into bee colonies sure is interesting.

Addition of pollen to patties is more than suggested as a method of getting pollen substitute accepted by bees.

You enquire about the possibility of autoclaving pollen to reduce possible disease problems.

Pollen is used as a fatty acid and protein/amino acid source for colony nutrition.

By autoclaving, the protein (amino acid) components are going to be denatured - resulting in an altered / damaged
molecular configuration.
This will render the material less nutritious - if not nigh on useless.

Once in this state, is the pollen any better than available commercial/homemade pollen substitute?

The attractiveness of the pollen grain may still be present - resulting in an increased uptake of the material/patty.
This may lead the beekeeper into thinking that an advantage to the colony is being delivered.

As the material is now containing denatured molecules, is its nutritional value really much better than attractive fine
sawdust?

Sure, there are minerals, fatty acids that will help where limited supply of these components exists. I suggest that the
main reason for pollen supply in a substitute is for the protein fraction.

Conventional freezing?
Chaotic dehydration will lead to nutrient loss as cellular integrity is removed.

Pollen that has undergone irradiation presumably suffers from the above as well.

To supply pollen - would it not be best to only use fresh pollen mixed into a paste by the addition of honey - both
coming from sources that you know and trust. This then being made available to the bee colonies.

Peter

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