>Are you saying that a powdered sugar shake seems to be as accurate an
indicator as an alcohol wash?   I've heard various opinions.  I rather like
the idea of a sugar shake which leaves the bees alive as apposed to an
alcohol wash which disposes of around three hundred bees (I have a soft
heart).

Mike, I'm a softie, too.  But have gotten used to sacrificing a relatively
few bees in order to keep my operation alive.  Two days ago, as we were
taking bee samples into alcohol in 50F weather, my soon screened a brood
frame for the queen, and then handed it to me to shake.  When I dumped the
bees into alcohol, there was the queen, dry on top of the sinking bees.  I
grabbed her, but not quickly enough to keep her from getting wet.  First
time we've noticed getting a queen inadvertently.  Really shook up my son's
confidence at spotting queens (he is actually quite good at it).

What I was referring to was a whole-hive dusting accelerated mite drop.

However, to answer your question, the sugar shake works fine, but only gets
about 70% of the mites to drop, so in order to compare to alcohol wash,
multiply the mite count by 1.4 to 1.5.  Sugar shake requires that you roll
the bees in the jar in order to get them disturbed enough to heat up their
wing muscles, which then causes the mites to release their grip.  Be aware
that at least one respected researcher feels that you can recover more than
70% with a sugar shake, but neither Dr. Marion Ellis' nor my data support
that claim.

My problem with the sugar shake is that it takes much longer than an alcohol
wash, is messier, and harder to count the mites, as they can be covered by
sugar, blow away, or if you do it into water, may be hard to see as they
float.  So it is mainly a time thing.  It also makes your arm sore, since
you need to shake the bees for so danged long before the mites finally stop
dropping off.

I'm sure that Bob and Allen would agree that in any kind of monitoring, the
more samples, and the more often taken the better.  So to me, if the
sampling method is in any way difficult or time consuming, it simply doesn't
get done.  Medhat's double bottle is the best thing that I've found (note
its similarity to the photo of the bottle that I developed a few years ago--
http://www.scientificbeekeeping.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=58
).

It is quick, and more accurate than the ether roll, sticky board, or
anything else other than washing bees in a submerged sieve in a tub of
alcohol.

Randy Oliver

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