>Thirdly... you seem to demean a lot of work and the obvious (at least to me) progress these have provided.  To suggest that II or genome mapping does not provide important information and promotes a lot of progress in terms of breeding is simply not comprehensible by myself.  



I would completely disagree ET,  Dicks right.   Having purchased many AI queens,  this far in we have butkiss,  nothing...  every AI queens traits wash out quickly,  and the fundicity of the AI queens  has all been lower in my experience.   Maybe at some point,  still have faith,  but   to quite Tom cruise,  "show me the money"


Having had many conversations with professor Robinson on genomes,  if you think they will be a boon to genetics in our lifetimes,  your completely mistaken.  Our knowledge of them, and how they function and what they tell us are very much in infancy.  We have little more than the first glance at the Rosetta stone in this area. Its cool,  and I support it,  and huge hopes.  But right now what we know and how it might be used in our field is literally nothing.  The respect I have for Professor Robinson and his work is huge,  the man and his ideas are brilliant.  But practicality is a ways out yet.

You might recall a report last year that we can see the bees taste the difference between HFCS and honey,  pretty cool!  But I can do a the same with a toddler by watching his face.  Doesn't tell me a thing yet about which is better or even IF they one is better,  only that they are different.

To conclude at this point that Genome mapping will help us breed better bees is such a leap of faith I can't even comprehend it.  Future possibility?  Yep,  a ways in the future?  Most assured.


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