> we already know they make deliberate choices about which worker eggs to raise as queens
> But we don't know whether that choice is a good one for the colony that will be founded by that queen, or only good for that queen's bloodline. When we have extra cells, we routinely double them up in our nucs.  Pete now has every right to ask me whether I have data to back up whether this increases mating success or colony performance.  


Hmm. Generally I am reluctant to cast aspersions on the practices of seasoned professional. Despite what I may have said about commercial beekeepers wasting money on chemicals and protein substitutes. But I am skeptical that bees can select optimal eggs from which to raise superior queens. 

Most seasoned beekeepers have seen weird queen cells that are produced around drone eggs. If they are so good at evaluating, why would they do that? Also, queen breeders can make queen cells by the thousands from larvae plucked off brood combs in rapid succession, and they are pretty much treated equally by the nurses (which aren't even related to the larvae).

So, I am not so sure that "we already know they make deliberate choices about which worker eggs to raise as queens." 

> Hypotheses about nepotism in honeybees center on selection of eggs or young larvae for queen rearing. Of the hundreds or thousands of female eggs or larvae in a honeybee colony at any given point in time during the spring and summer, only a few are selected for rearing into queens. Studies on this type of nepotism in honeybees conducted between 1970 and 1990 showed that workers did not preferentially direct their behavior to their most highly related eggs and larvae and found no support for the hypothesis that workers rear queens that are more closely related to them as a result of selecting genetically matching larvae for queen rearing (Breed et al. 1984; Visscher 1986, see also review by Breed et al. 1994). Rangel et al. (2009) used more contemporary genetic techniques to test the hypothesis of within colony nepotism and obtained negative results, as did Koyama et al. (2009).  -- Breed, Michael D., et al. "Nestmate Recognition in Eusocial Insects: The Honeybee as a Model System." 

[note: I realize this paragraph is about kin preference and we are talking about selection for "quality." It would seem to me to be even less plausible that nurses can pick potential winners from thousands of virtually identical larvae.]

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