Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 2 Jan 2011 10:04:19 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Sorry about the garbled text. Corrected, it should read:
> Remebee-I + IAPV treated hives still produced 30 - 300% more honey than the IAPV-only treated hives in PA and FL respectively
The second figure, 300%, is not supported in the text with actual weights. They give only a bar graph. The differences on the graph appears to be a couple of kg over 6 weeks in Florida (Florida- April to June 2008) , whereas the Pennsylvania figures are given in terms of actual weights and the trial runs for four months (Pennsylvania-May to October 2008).
The omission of the figures for the weight difference in Florida is rather odd, and the graph has the caption: "Honey production in control colonies and IAPV colonies were not significantly different", which seems to say that the artificial infection of colonies with IAPV *did not affect them* in an adverse way. Overall, the results seemed a bit over-hyped.
PLB
***********************************************
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
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
|
|