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:
Charles Linder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 17 Mar 2015 12:03:10 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (44 lines)
Second, when it comes to screening and sample collection practices, one
should check out the current consensus on best practices in research, as
found in the Coloss Bee Book.  These recommendations are far superior to the
suggestions of other beekeepers, as they are evidence-based.  I dimly
remember the issue of "ether wash" vs "natural drop" being addressed in an
early 2000s study by Nancy Ostiguy and Maryann Frazier, only because I
remember their EAS talk where she talked about the "Great Lakes IPM" varroa
card with the crossword puzzle-like pattern.  


In the issues of mite monitoring I much prefer not to rely on 8 year old
data.  Or consensus.  While I am sure the Coloss book is a great guide,  I
prefer to get out and do the work.     Sticky boards do a great job of
catching dead and dying mites.   
Problerm is healthy mites do not drop much,  Despite insane theories to the
contrary,  they don't routinely drop off and climb on the next bee.   Some
hive groom more than others,  which means maybe more mites on the board,
less healthy bees don't groom as much so the numbers are skewed.

Sticky boards do not even come close to passing a range and repeatability
test (used in QA a lot)  Ether roll or alcohol wash comes closer,  but is
still marginal on repeatability.  I had to practice for a day before I was
happy with the results, even using Randys prior information,  it requires
some practice to get skilled.

If you do a lot of testing and math,  you will see.  Been there done that.
I promise despite some who have done statistical extrapolation on sticky
boards,  the real confidence levels are horrible.   Do you really want your
hive to be the one that didn't fit the bell curve??  
If you're an average beekeeper with a cpl hives,  and you lose them to mites
because the board said you were fine,  who do you call for a refund????

80% confidence is fine for a researcher or statistician,  but if its your
hive are you happy with that number???

I am not,  nor would I ever suggest to someone else,  that its close enough.

Charles

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2