BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jerry J Bromenshenk <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 2 Mar 1994 09:32:22 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
On Tue, 1 Mar 1994, Jim G. Shoemaker wrote:
 
> Jerry:
>
> Do you mean that none of the equipment can be used as any part of a honey
> producing hive?
>
> Jim Shoemaker
> [log in to unmask]
>
Jim:  No, I mean that our research hives will never be used as any part
of a honey producing hive.  Irradiation, ETO, and heat have been used to
sterilize hive equipment for honey producers.
 
Some of the other chemicals that I mentioned may be good sterilants, but
are not approved for use in hives used to produce honey, wax, pollen, etc.
 
Considering the difficulty of registering Menthol for use in hives
against tracheal mites, one would only embark on this path if the
sterilant was super effective, non-harmful to bees, and not likely to
present a hazard to human health.
 
For our needs, we don't care about the food to human health transfer, it
is not an issue.  Our protocol will require us to destroy or sterilize
all equipment at the end of the experiment.  All of the equipment is in
the form of mini-nucs.  (Nucleus colonies in small hives)
 
My students have often joked that we are the biggest "little" beekeepers
around --- we run as many as 200 nucs (and mini-nucs) for our research
purposes.
 
Jerry
 
[log in to unmask]
The University of Montana

ATOM RSS1 RSS2