BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date:
Tue, 11 Feb 2014 14:59:57 -0500
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Message-ID:
Sender:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
From:
Peter L Borst <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (12 lines)
The behaviors for bees returning with that which they "think" is propolis
are entirely different than those for which they "think" the material is pollen. 

Not sure about that. In both cases, they fail to evaluate the content and respond on cues that are only partly valid. Bees are unable to assess neither the nutritional content of pollen nor the bactericidal value of resins. The parameters that guide them are approximate and lead them to occasionally collect bogus products. Overall, the criteria are effective nonetheless. 

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2