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:
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 22 Oct 2001 12:01:17 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Greetings

quote:
>Using both formic acid and screen did have lowest mite
>population, no treatment had highest mites but still low.
>Are we talking Tmites or Vmites?There is an article in the Oct.01
>American Bee Journal detailing a study of tracheal mite levels in
>Russian stock versus a domestic strain,also with formic acid and screen
>bottoms.


Treatments were tested against both mites separately. But the section I quoted was for varroa.
Read it here:

>www.hoosierbuzz.com
>Domestic stock results were, 9% for both, 21% with formic acid, 69%
>with screen, and 70% with no treatment. It was also found that the
>Russians are more hygienic then domestic stock. -- ISBA JOURNAL.



quote:
>You will find most of the published figures on various German websites, the
>referances I do not have to hand, but I know there was some published by
>Helmut Horne about 15 or 20 years ago.


Well, I haven't found *anything current* that indicates that screened bottoms alone *significantly* reduce colony infestation levels. I have heard people say, on this list, that they would use them even if they didn't work against mites.  In my opinion, order for a procedure to be cost effective and worthwhile, it should have an *effect*.

PB

ATOM RSS1 RSS2