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:
Dave Cushman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 4 Jun 2003 09:41:03 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
Hi Zachary & all

> but it does not explain why exactly 1 out of 7 would be
> inhibiting others.

It is not one out of seven... the pattern is repeated, overall it is about
one in two

The pattern could originate due to the sunken cells coming under the
influence of two non sunken cells with a 'fall off' of effect being so steep
that it takes two cells (one either side of a sunken one) to create the
effect in the first place.

> Also, inhibited growth should not resulting in different
> capping, only later capping.

Are the moults governed by elapsed time or volumetric increase? I would have
thought that growth could be stunted, but occur in the same developmental
stages and same timing.



Regards & 73s... Dave Cushman, G8MZY
Beekeeping & Bee Breeding Website
http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2