> I know that several people have advocated an approach where
> powdered sugar is dumped onto the top bars in large quantities
> like a half a cup per hive or more, and then brushed down
> between the top bars.  This approach clearly will not create
> the fine particles that work, and will clearly never reach
> all the bees in the hive.

A picture is worth a thousand words (perhaps it is not so clear--I'll
leave it up to the viewers).
See http://www.scientificbeekeeping.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=40&limit=1&limitstart=9


> If someone wants to do a controlled study to prove the efficacy
> of the "dump and brush" approach,

Done, just haven't published data yet.  Have been too busy working in
the field, and replying to  silly criticism.


> this alternative methodology should not be assumed to have
> any value at all in varroa control, as it may not dislodge
> any more mites than opening the hive and saying "boo!"

We didn't use "boo" as a control, but did open the lid and smoke as control.
There was substantial difference in mite drop at 10 and 30 minutes. As
well as at 1, 2, 4,8,12, and 24 hrs.  Multiple colonies, singles and
doubles.  72 hr natural drops as well as 300-bee wash samples from
every colony.

In short, our findings were that sugar dusting is more accurate as a
determination of mite level in a colony, than either natural mite fall
or 300-bee alcohol wash.

However, sugar dusting is not effective at reducing mite levels.
To us, it is highly useful for quickly screening all colonies in yards
for mite levels (2 men can test 400 colonies easily in an afternoon,
plus drop a substantial portion of the phoretic mites).

However, for hobbyists, sugar dusting along with drone removal appears
to be quite effective.  The drone removal is likely the major
component, with sugar dusting as the drone frame is returned an easy
add.  I do not yet have data on the combination.

>In my view, those
> who promote these "easier approaches" are doing a great
> disservice by misrepresenting these methods as "proven"
> in the absense of any hard data at all.

That would certainly be the case.  But IMHO doesn't apply in this case.
Sorry about not saying "boo" in the controls.

Randy Oliver
Currently Down Under

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************