In a message dated 30/10/04 15:26:46 GMT Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<From the post it, in this case, appears that cell size had no  effect on
Varroa tolerance but the bee is the defining factor, since the  1,000
colonies were requeened and that made the difference. One can infer  that
they were not small cells, but if they were, then they had Varroa  and
were also collapsing. If they were large cell, they also were  collapsing
but a new queen added resistance, in spite of the cell  size.

Cell size may still have an effect, but here it seems that it is  the bee.

What were what is/are the race/s of bees that the Weaver stock  was
derived from? It seems that more than one is involved.

Bill  Truesdell
Bath, Maine>>



I think its both, at least in the case of my bees.  I just did three-day
mitefall counts on three hives, two with sister queens and  one with an aunt. Hive
1, with the aunt, had a daily mitefall of 8, the same as  a month ago when I
checked them last. Hive 2 is dropping 3 a day, compared to 2  a moth ago; this
one seems to have some resistance. Both these hives are on an  eclectic mix
of comb sizes. Hive 3 was put on 4.9 in July; I had the combs  already drawn.
The daily mitefall last month was 6, now its 3. This is going to  need further
monitoring, but the only reason I can think of why the mitefall  would have
halved is the cell size. I have trays sitting permamently underneath  the hives,
and when I took it out to sipe it off prior to starting the count I  was
surprised by the small number of mites I saw, given the mitefall a month  ago, so
its not just a random variation.


       Regards,

    Robert Brenchley

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