At 06:30 PM 12/10/98 +0000, you wrote:
 
>>How much energy does the inversion proccess cost the bees?
 
Hi Garth and Bee Friends,
The Best of the Season to You All!
 
Feeding sugar that has not been inverted causes a condition know by
beekeepers here as bee "burn" out or "burning" them out. Not very
scientific but common use experience that started in the old days with
package bees that were kept for days on syrup made from dry cane or beet
sugars. In those days it was well know again from experience the shorter
time the bees were kept in the package the better they would do.
 
Inverted sugars from beets or cane and blends of invert and sucrose in time
replaced sucrose because the package bees did better on them; bees and feed
may last longer in the package and the bees developed faster after
installation. Still the faster they are introduced the better they do, but
they can be kept longer on invert sugar then normal sucrose sugar.
 
>Well the process requires enzymes - which are proteins. Proteins
>requite a source of amino acids to build - if that source is lacking
>the bees cannot do anything with the sugar syrup I believe and
>actually take it and dump it in the sky some distance from the hive
>(I have watched this happen clearly last year when I fed bees during
>a complete dearth. Within 20 minutes of feeding the was full of bee
>trails - and highlighted against the sun one could see cute little
>squirts or something ebing dropped -that made sticky marks on the
>trees). Hence I suspect that energy wise - if there is no source of
>protein coming in the bees are going to be hammered as they have to
>dispose of a potentially dangerous substance (can cause all sorts of
>problems they are programmed to avoid) - using resrouces they don't
>have.
 
Well in the US this is not a reported problem with invert sugars
recommended to bee feeders and without seeing the specs of the sugar you
are using I would guess that it could be different from that which is
provided here. All sugar is sold by analysis and no sugar company is so
interested in selling beekeepers sugar that they would provide any kind of
additional sugars or other ingredients that would make bees sick as this
would invite law suites and bad press for both. Most problems occur when
beekeepers buy sugars outside of the normal channels, such as fast buck
sugar brokers who have on repeated occasions sold beekeepers sugars that
were found to be contaminated or off grade in other ways that proved to be
detrimental to their bees. If the deal is too good to be true, its true.<G>
 
>If they are healthy and have a good source of protein I would hazard
>a geuss that they inversion is most probably not one that the bees
>have to invest energy in - there is latent energy in a disaccharide
>that can drive the reaction. Heat would be enough.
 
>>Which is better - glucose or fructose or invertsugar?
 
Feeding tests and millions of gallons fed each year has shown Invert sugar
and blends to be the best and most economical sugar to use in feeding bees
at least in California. We do not have real cold winters but we do have
long periods of time when bees can not fly, 30 to 90 days or more, which
can be just as bad if bees do not have good food sources.
 
>The mix would therefore be better - it is after all very similar to
>honey, and won't use much proccessing.
 
My own experience with feeding pure honey is that there is no benefit at
all compared to feeding invert sugar syrups. It normally is more costly
then any other sugars and out of reach of the bud jets of most beekeepers.
No scientific literature that I know of has demonstrated any real benefits
to feeding bees honey, and many pitfalls.
 
>THe US is the largest producer in the world of invert sugar - by a
>very long way.
 
We are that indeed and the reason for this is we have a large market and NO
controls other then those found in everyday business economics. Corn syrups
are not considered sugars for political reasons.
 
US corn sugar technology is for sale and new plants are being built in
other countries. It must be remembered that some areas that can grow corn
also grow sugar cane or beet sugar and are not interested in expanding corn
uses at the expense of cane production.
 
>The US companies use corn starch as a starting point, whereas the
>Japanese and Italians use mainly Rice. I suspect there are probably
>large scale rice inverters in the US as well as Budweiser uses this
>(rice invert sugar) as an ingredient. It is lower in protein than
>corn product and as a result produces a less milky beer.
 
The type of rice grown in the US is different from rice grown elsewhere
such as the sweet rice of Japan and is milled into all kinds of rice
products but I know of no large scale use of rice to make inverted sugar.
One reason for this is that our rice growers may have a inflated idea of
the farm value of rice compared to other areas of the world. It could be
they want to get a price for the "food" rice they grow that includes a
little profit and can not compete with "feed" grains grown on non irrigated
lands. There are one or more Japanese alcohol beverage outfits starting up
in the US, but I believe the economic conditions in Asia will keep these
small for years to come.
 
ttul, the OLd Drone
http://beenet.com
Los Banos, Ca USa