--- Dick Allen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>
> I realize much of this "verbal fencing" is being
> done in fun, but still
> can't we try to strive for a bit more accuracy in
> our statements?  Is
> it that important to "win" the debate?

Agree, that's why if at all possible, I will back up
my statements more evidence from ARS publication or
other supporting documents or experts.  This way, all
on the list can judge for themselves if accuracy is
sufficient.

Someone here said something about a 'turf war' with
the Norland study.  Well my personal opinion is that
the fight to keep the SMR name alive is an attempt to
protect the 'turf' (turf = $$$$) and save time and
money spent in this area.  The evidence found by
Ibrahim and Spivak explains SMR as hygienic behavior
in the ARS link I provide.

That the mites must adjust their survival strategy
does not mean that the honeybees are SMR (having this
magical ability to suppress mite reproduction).  This
is simply an effect on the mites from colonies that
have a highly developed hygienic trait.

If I am wrong here, I would enjoy seeing supporting
evidence produced that would prove otherwise.  Until
then, NEW evidence shows that there is no such thing
as SMR honeybees.

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/Publications.htm?seq_no_115=178712


Joe Waggle ~ Derry, PA
Small Cell Beekeeping
‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries'
http://www.biologicalbeekeeping.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Organicbeekeepers/



__________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---