Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:49:21 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
allen dick wrote:
>
> The bees on HFCS died slightly faster, and, as I recall, the
> difference in longevity was about 10%, with sucrose being better.
>
>
That correlates with the studies done in England many years ago. The
difference between sucrose (white sugar) and HFCS was not substantial
but measurable and in the 10-15% range. One problem with such a small
difference is that it is not noticed in the spring. Which is why most
arguments between beekeepers about winter feed are useless without a lab
study.
> I think that the Joker in then deck is that, while sucrose syrup
> deliveries are always very nearly identical, HFCS batches have the
> potential to vary over a range of (acceptable for human food)
> compositions.
Which I agree with. I would say that the pecking order would be as far
as what was delivered to your door:: granulated sugar (then converted to
sugar syrup without boiling), not-boiled sugar syrup, HFCS/boiled sugar
syrup, and honey. Even sugar additives which were once approved
(tartaric acid) in books like The Hive and the Honey Bee are harmful to
bees.
The other issue is just what the bees are actually overwintering on. The
bees do need field honey for the additional minerals it provides. But
all honey is not equal, so some will cause more harm than good. But they
will not do well on just sucrose or HFCS.
Winter feed is a bit more complex than just HFCS or sucrose.
Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info ---
|
|
|