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:
randy oliver <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 27 Nov 2018 17:26:59 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
Good questions Bill.  Let's use Occam's Razor.  The simplest explanation
for caste determination is that workers are simply starved queens.  What
they are starved for is total jelly, as well as supplemental sugar.

I find the three recent studies that suggested that caste differentiation
was a result of one of the above to all be questionable:

   1. Quercitin in pollen,
   2. Royalactin
   3. Micr RNAs

In the first place, I find little evidence that either queen or worker
larvae need to be fed any pollen whatsoever.  The royalactin hypothesis has
been disputed by another study.  The microRNAs in beebread may have nothing
to do with the jelly actually fed to queen larvae.

I would like to see a simple study performed by feeding larva nothing more
that different amounts of jelly, with the group receiving more jelly also
fed more sugar.  There may also be an effect of the proportion of HP gland
and mandibular gland secretions.  If these simple factors differentiate
caste, then we likely need to look no further.

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2