 
| Sender: |
|
| Date: |
Wed, 8 Apr 2009 15:34:45 -0600 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original |
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| Organization: |
Deep Thought |
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>>If the chance of queen loss was 15% in a single queen colony, then the
>>chance of both queens being or going bad in a two queen one might be as
>>low as 15% of 15% or 2.25%. YMMV, though.
> This might be stretching--math vs field reality. Do you have actual field
> results, rather than mathematical theory?
Read it again. I said *might be* and YMMV i amending my original number,
which is prolly closer to real world since it yields a 5% to 7% loss.
In practice I do not have enough measurements to prove anything, but I do
know that wintering loss is very low when good hives are combined by a
knowledgeable crew or in two-queen colonies that are wintered with the
excluder pulled -- and in my area. I know nothing about generalities, only
the specific cases I observed.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|
