Peter Borst wrote:
> I have read the so-called supporting literature and I failed to see any
> proof that bees were permanently altered in any way. You can get slightly
> bigger bees using larger celled foundation, but the effect is superficial
> and not lasting. People have measured the cells from bees in frameless hives
> around the world and have established the natural cell sizes. These numbers
> simply don't support the whole "upsizing" theory. 
>   
Dennis Murrell ran some exceptional trial of bees on small cells and 
found that bee size was not uniform but varied by season. Also, cell 
size varied.
So big bees exist in a small cell colony.

Truth is, in this discussion, we are continually going over the same 
paths. No big deal since there are always new people coming on the list, 
but for those that are new here, be careful. I would talk to local, 
successful beekeepers and listen to them before following some of what I 
read here.

Dennis ended up with Top bar hives and let the bees build their own comb 
and seemed successful in controlling Varroa.. Generally, the center of 
the frame was small cell, some cells much smaller that 4.9, but as you 
moved either way, the size grew to beyond 4.9. So, it seems that natural 
cell size is really an average and is not uniform. The size may also be 
latitude dependent, or winter temperature dependent.

So, if his trials reflect reality, any uniform comb, no matter what the 
size, is not natural., Maybe what is natural is what Dennis and others 
do with top bar hives, let the bees make their own (something I am going 
to trial next year). As you cull comb over several years, they will 
stabilize at the point which is "natural" for the local conditions. The 
problem with this is that the approach may be just fine in one location 
but may not work in others to control Varroa.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---