Hello Bob, Aaron and Everyone,

Bob asked:

>Has your bee population dropped accordingly to provide these lower mite
counts?  If you suspect reinfestation how do >you explain the low mite
counts?  How do you explain the drop from 150 mites a day to 25?.........
> Did your Russian bees produce honey? What about the hives you
introduced the SMR into? What about the >Carniolan hives with the average
untreated mite counts? How long have your bees been on small cell?

The bee population drop was normal and brood rearing also tapered off
normally. The hives appear healthy, prosperous. None appear like most of
the hives I have seen ready to collapse.

I think the reinfestation problem was significant during good flying
weather, but as the weather becomes colder the reinfestation problem
decreases due to IMPO less exposure by robbing or hive collapse, etc.
With the decrease in reinfestation and the decreasing brood rearing, the
bees were able to detect and groom off many of the free roaming mites. I
also have observed that the bees targeted varroa infested pupa just as
other's on small cell comb have described.

My Russian bees did produce a good honey crop comparable with the other
hives. But these hives were inspected more often. Problems such as a
higher rate of queen supercedure with the Russians was detected earlier
than would have happen in a normal production hive. Some of the Russians
tried to replace their queens about 3 times.

My best producer was an open mated SMR(Harbo) queen from Weavers in
Texas. SMR Hives with my own SMR reared queens really didn't have time to
develop and test for production as most were still a healthy mix of
Russian, Spivak, etc. by seasons end. The Carniolan hive was my second
best producer.

These hives had Russian queens installed a year ago, last spring. No
chemical treatments have been applied since then. I have used several
hives for non chemical type tests for varroa drop such as grapefruit leaf
smoke and powder sugar treatment in combination with sugar rolls, natural
mite fall and sampling for mites, etc. to get a feel for what the amount
of mite fall means.

These hives were installed on small cell foundation early this spring.
The Russians, with just a couple of exceptions, drew out the small cell
foundation. The Russians, except for the expensive breeder,  were then
replaced with a variety of queens from various suppliers including those
mentioned above.

This experience with small cell and SMR has been very interesting. I have
seen symptoms that I would have treated instantly with chemicals to save
the hive.

Aaron wrote:
>The way I interpret what Dennis describes is that his SMR bees aren't
SMRing, but they are exhibiting the behavior >attributed by the 49ers to
4.9 cell size.

I do not know what the mite count would have been without SMR trait. I
think mite reinfestation is a great problem, but mite reproduction was
occurring. I think some of my non SMR hives were loosing mites and my SMR
hives were gaining mites:>). They are all in the same yard.

I had used low natural mite drop as one of my primary selection criteria
for bee stock, but with the Russians I wondered in more mite drop might
indicate fewer mites in the hive. My testing showed that lower mite drop
reflected fewer mites in the hive.

With small cells it appears that at certain times of the year higher mite
drop reflects a process that ultimately could result in fewer mites in
the hive. Maybe.

The SMR bees definitely had the highest percentage of damaged mites.

Strange? Yes!  Interesting? Very!

Best Wishes
Dennis Murrell