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:
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 25 Sep 2012 09:32:06 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
> If they are the studies I remember,  above 4.4 was harmful and below that
> was less or marginally effective. Sort of a sweet spot for oxalic.
>
> As I recall from a lecture at Apimondia in Dublin in 2005 the Italians had
> concluded that the concentration of sugar was as important as the
> concentration of Oxalic, with 3.6% being as good as or better than 4.2.
>

Your recall is better than my recall. I looked back on my notes and it was
3.5% as the sweet spot. Higher was worse (killed bees) and lower was not as
effective.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm

ATOM RSS1 RSS2