> Simpson (1957a) showed that the proportion of colonies not producing any queen cells can vary with locality and year, and he concluded that the probability that a queen would be replaced increased with her age. A similar indication was given by the present work, for no colony with a queen of the current year produced queen cells, and colonies with queens 1 year old had a lower queen-replacement rate than those with queens 2 and 3 years old.

Allen, 1965, was quoted to show that colonies vary considerably but still that general trends are observed. It is a 20 page piece from JAR, and can't be boiled down to one or two ideas. My main point is that people tend to oversimplify what is in fact an extremely unpredictable system. 

More recent research supports the idea that the impulse to swarm or not is generated by the queen and her reproductive state:

> Our results demonstrate that queens could play a role in triggering the initial swarming event through the release of novel pheromones, and swarming and non-swarming workers represent distinct physiological and behavioral states that likely are differentially responsive to these pheromones.

> We identified five compounds, one of which is (E/Z)-beta-ocimene, a compound found in mated queens. There was considerable variation among the queens. This suggests that blends of chemicals, rather than a specific chemical, are associated with the swarming process.

Richards, J. Y. (2013). Chemical communication and genomics of swarming behavior in honey bees (apis mellifera L.) (Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University).

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