> There is no clear answer which of the two methods is more accurate because the true assignment of workers to subspecies remains unknown.

> Not quite sure what the second part of this statement means.

Well, those are Tofilski's words, published in 2015. The rest of the paragraph is:

There is no clear answer
which of the two methods is more accurate
because the true assignment of workers to
subspecies remains unknown; however,
microsatellites have some advantages over
morphometrics. First of all, as categorical
traits, microsatellite alleles can be interpreted
without error (although some issues could
arise due to problems with amplification or
electrophoresis conditions). On the other hand,
morphological traits suffer from measurement errors.
Second, unlike microsatellites, the morphological
traits are affected by the environment which can
obscure differences between subspecies.

and

The results presented here show that morphometrics
can be used for detection of hybrids
between A. m. mellifera and A. m. carnica (but
see Guzman-Novoa et al. 1994). The wing
measurements are relatively inexpensive and
accessible to beekeepers; therefore, they can be an
alternative to molecular methods in projects aiming
at protection of endangered A. m. mellifera.

reference:

Guzman-Novoa, E., Page, R.E., Fondrk, M.K. (1994)
Morphometric techniques do not detect intermediate
and low levels of Africanization in honey bee
(Hymenoptera, Apidae) colonies. Ann. Entomol.
Soc. Am. 87, 507–515

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