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
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Charles Linder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 25 Jun 2015 08:51:52 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
As long as one uses a consistent method, the counts that result will be
consistent, (some might say consistently low by x %) and we will still be
able to plot the slope of the curve, and it is the slope of the curve that
matters, not the values of the points on the curve.  



  
I disagree a bit.  Understanding your point.  With many hives,  I know for a
fact all of them are trending upward.  Some obviously faster than others.
But I care not.  I am not going to monitor hundreds of hives to see where
they are any given day/week/month.   What I do is have a plan.  In my case
july splits and Cot treatments has been working well,  but whatever the
plan, at the given time,  I want to know which hives need treatment, and
which can be considered good at the point I am going to treat.   Nothing
else matters to me.

I am also careful not to delude myself into believing that the ones that
test good are "mite restiant" (last season almost 30%)  as I am merely
speculating at the reason for low levels.


With many hives and limited time, plotting that curve is futile.  Knowing
its rising and at what rate is also a bit futile.   Knowing which hives are
good/fair/ poor  are what matters to me.


AS to your point of "being low by x"  I agree with the concept  but the math
fails when levels are really low.  If your at a 10% mite level with a 30
error in your reading your probably okay.  But if you have a 30% error and
your at say a 5% confidence level is effectually  zero.   Since I tend to
believe in and follow the threashold level concept, the zeros scare the heck
out of me.  Especialy since in this case your reading is always low.  In the
above case you could easily measure 5% and actually have 8%.   

When I worked at GM I had a great boss.  I was always plotting CPK, and
confidence levels in test equipment.  I was showing him a bell curve on a
test stand one day and how great it was.  He put his pen in a spot on my
chart and said very simply  "your job is to find that ONE bad part."
Different way of thinking.    


Charles

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