No one else has attempted to address this, so I will make a stab.

 

A regular schedule brood comb replacement to eliminate comb contamination,
possible sub-infection levels of foulbrood spores, and excessive drone cells
is never a bad thing, but I have no idea why Keith would say that replacing
50% of brood comb would have such a negative impact on colony survival,
unless the comb was replaced and drawn ON the flow, which would be a Big
Mistake(TM) if that one flow was the sole source of significant nectar.

 

Rather than on the flow, before or after the flow, the colony could be fed a
to supply the comb-building energy.  As usual, the beekeeper who manages
intelligently fares better.  

 

I replace two brood frames per box per year, and I manage this with a simple
scheme using flat metal thumbtacks with colors that match the queen-marking
colors, but the Swiss, Swedes, and Germans would consider a 5-year
replacement cycle to be  far too slow.

 

The UK National Bee Unit states flatly "no brood comb should be used for
more than three years".

http://www.bbka.org.uk/local/ludlow/bm~doc/fera-faq5-replacingoldbroodcomb.p
df

http://tinyurl.com/cwepaqo

 

So, they seem to want at least 3 brood frames per 10-frame box replaced each
year.

 

I remembered we talked about this issue recently - here's what a post that
cites work by Seeley on the specific issue of "drone comb" and its
significant impact on overall yield per hive:

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A2=ind1309
<http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A2=ind1309&L=BEE-L
&F=&S=&P=114671> &L=BEE-L&F=&S=&P=114671

http://tinyurl.com/lr5skvo

 


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