Charles, you asked:

"A cpl of questions/ If the larva uptake from wax is real, am I mistaken in assuming that old comb would then be more "clean" than fresh comb??"

The most "X" that can possibly diffuse out of a substance (wax in this case) will equal the amount of "X" left behind in that substance (wax)...this is equilibrium between the source and the sink, and it is a fundamental law of physics. So, you can basically never reduce the amount in the "higher concentration" end (the wax) to zero, even supposing that you were 'drawing it off' by diluting it in larvae that hatch and are replaced (meaning you change the sink and replace it with fresh sink containing no substance X), and even supposing more "X" weren't continuously entering the hive.

In beeswax there is always more "X" coming in (except around here, in the winter, when nothing is coming in to the hives but cold).  So, it is not possible to reduce the concentration of "X" retained in the old comb to a level that is less than what would be found in new comb.  The "log P" coefficient (see Mark's post) is too large to allow for a substantial outward rate of diffusion from the wax to aqueous surroundings that exceeds the rate of uptake.  You'd have to send your bees to X-free "forage nirvana" for a year or ten.

What happens instead is that the amount of "X" in the wax keeps increasing, and that is bad for the larvae because it increases the concentration gradient between wax and larvae.  This is why rotation of old combs is recommended.

Christina

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