Quoting the paper cited

:  "Only colony infestation with *Varroa* was associated with 
: significantly enhanced drifting. More specifically, colonies with 
: high *Varroa* infestation had a significantly enhanced acceptance 
: of drifters, although they did not send out more drifting workers."

But read on...

: "Since Varroa-infested colonies show an enhanced attraction of 
: drifting workers, and ***NOT ONLY***those infected with Varroa and its 
: associated pathogens, infestation by Varroa may also facilitate 
: the uptake of ***OTHER*** pests and parasites.
[asterisks added for emphasis]

So, yes the paper DOES say that.
I'm not sure what issue of pure semantics remains to be resolved, but the
context of the complete abstract is required here.

Would it simplify matters to assume that varroa infestation makes for less
guard bees (or something), and, thereby, more unrestrained drifting into the
infested colony?

> I had hypothesized that DWV infection would increase bee drift,

I would have figured that deformed wings would result in lower rates of
return for sortie, not drift.
Was that data (marked bees in collapsing colonies) made available anywhere?

Perhaps it can address "reduced rates of return".

	

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