>The "live and let die" method was tried for a few years but was a total failure. Dr. Harbo then decided to discover why and did.

>This link from the ARS that I have provided below which states that the Russian bees evolved resistance because 'natural selection may have favored the most resistant bees'.  Isn't natural selection the perfect example of 'live and let die'?

Only if there are survivors, and that depends on the original stock, the size of the population(s) and also on what may have been introduced during the time elapsed -- and also the pressure from the pest and environment, among other things.  

Also, I am sure the Primorsky beekeepers attempted interventions of various sorts.  

>The fact that beekeepers and breeders in the USA needed to rely on 'natural selection' to provide us with a varroa tolerant stock, is proof that the "live and let die" worked in Russian bees from the Primorsky region.

Some people need more proof than others.  Merely quoting a dumbed-down press release is not proof, and does not provide a great deal of insight into the details necessary for deep understanding as to the mechanisms which resulted in those bees ot the immense cost in terms of time, failures, and effort -- bee and human -- in their eventual selection.

>In your quote you say <<< "live and let die" method >>.  The inclusion of the word 'method' is worth noting.  

Semantics.  Negotion for symbiosis as often as not results in the extinction of the host.

Please do not raise transparently specious and semantic arguments, and thus insult our intelligence.

Thank you.

             ***********************************************
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

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L