> In fact, we are being told now to recycle combs after 3 years or so due to
> the buildup of pathogens.These same combs are generally darkened -- by the
> painting of them with propolis by the bees. So, the question is: does
> propolis really help? If it does, we are pitching out propolized combs. If
> it doesn't...
I am glad you brought this up. I have been puzzled and a tiny bit annoyed
at the advice given so often -- to use as much new comb as possible and
throw away perfectly good combs. It is a pet peeve, in fact.
In my experience, bees do some things well on new comb, and at some times of
year, but for wintering in the north, nothing beats old comb. No matter
what some respected beekeepers and researchers say, in my experience, my
bees do best overall on middle-aged and older combs.
Bees are happy to raise brood in new comb, but prefer to store honey in
older, darker comb. That is the opposite to how we like do things, since we
want the nectar to be stored in unstained comb so that the honey is white,
and to use our older combs in the brood nest, since we have them on hand,
and too much foundation slows build-up and cuts into production.
We did a few tests years back. See
http://honeybeeworld.com/diary/articles/fdnvsdrawn.htm and
http://honeybeeworld.com/diary/2000/diary040100.htm#ResearchDetails
After trying wintering on new comb a few times, we gave in and follow Don
Peer's advice (in the above links) to me when I was just starting out. Even
if the bees have been summering on new comb, we make sure they winter on
dark comb.
Also, we find that it is harder to get a hive up to proper wintering weight
on light comb -- around here, at least, and if we do, the bees often just
die for no apparent reason, even when wintered on a beautiful perfect super
of brand new comb full of honey.
In my opinion, middle-aged darkened comb is a beekeepers best asset, and it
pains me to hear recommendations to destroy it. I can understand that there
is a need where coumaphos has been used, and to a lesser extent where
fluvalinate has been used, but isn't it the same people making that
recommendation who recommended using these chemicals in the first place, and
in a manner that was bound to contaminate comb?
Chemical buildup in comb is an obvious reason for cycling older combs out,
but as for the build-up of disease in combs, I am not so sure. For one
thing, good bees should have some resistance to the diseases, and below a
threshold, exposure is likely harmless, and, conceivably, even beneficial.
I see no need to destroy comb because of pathogen buildup. AFB, possibly is
an exception in some circumstances simply because the scale is so hard for
bees to remove. As you mention, though, irradiation is a good option where
practical.
We often see new comb of brood with lots of larvae missing, particularly
near the wires. An older comb beside it will be solid with brood. That
says something to me.
As a result, I really do not think the same advice applies in all
situations, and that the advice to destroy good combs is overly simplistic..
> What is the point of throwing out good combs, if the rest of the hive is
> covered with all the same stuff? ...One would have to study clean new
> hives, versus old sticky ones, to determine whether a clean environment is
> really better or not
That would be a difficult study to control, for reasons discussed above, but
I think I have done the uncontrolled version and, ceteris paribus, older is
better in my country.
I can see the argument to be made that the young are raised in the comb, and
are imprisoned next to whatever is in the comb, while the boxes and other
parts -- even outer combs -- are more distant and contact is more
transitory. However, I think that as with many things we assume about bees
and beekeeping, these ideas are deduced by logic performed on assumptions,
rather than empirical, carefully observed fact and, as such, very suspect
until tested.
***********************************************
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
|
