>
> More bees from low mite colonies (n = 37) were detected in receiver
> apiaries than bees from high mite colonies (n = 10, *p* < *0.001*).
> Receiver colony *Varroa* population growth was associated with visitation
> by non-natal bees (*p* = *0.03*), but not high mite bees alone (*p* =
> *0.19*). Finally, colonies lacking robbing screens experienced faster
> *Varroa* population growth than screened neighbors (*p* = *0.01*).
> Results indicate visiting non-natal bees may vector mites to receiver
> colonies. These results do not support the current two leading theories
> regarding mite immigration – the “mite bomb” theory (bees from high mite
> colonies emigrating to collapsing colonies), or the “robbing” theory (natal
> robbing bees return home with mites from collapsing colonies).


This does not appear to address collapsed colonies and migration from them
to other apiaries, only weak compared to strong colonies that are still
flying. In essence, what it says is strong hives rob more than weak hives.
Plus, it is not the number of bee visitations but the number of Varroa left
after they leave. So does a high mite colony leave more Varroa, even with
fewer visits than a low mite colony?

But my issue with Varroa is from collapsing hives near me and a Varroa
explosion in late September and early October. There were several
beekeepers in my immediate area who did not treat and lost hives
yearly.This does not seem to address that issue.

Otherwise there is nothing controversial in the study.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

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