Peter.
Noone disputes that wing venation can distinguish between pure mellifera subspecies.
This is how Ruttner envisaged it and in some cases there is a striking difference between values - such as the difference in the cubital index value of Apis mellifera carnica and Apis mellifera mellifera
The problem is that the technique has no value in distinguishing hybridised samples one from the other and that is how many people appear to be using it.
Some folk are taking a sample of 50 wings and if 70% of the wings conform to historic values for Amm wing pattern they are claiming that the bee is 70% Amm. There is no reason at all to suppose that a wing sample showing say 80% or 90% of the wings conforming to Amm historic values actually has more Amm genetics than the former. It just happens to have wings which have the classic Amm vein pattern. Once wing pattern starts to get used as a selection critera you get the selection artifact in subsequent generations described by Robin Moritz in his 'Limitations of Morphometry' paper.
Moritz found that the 'carnica' in Germany had perfect carnica wing venation pattern but other morphometric variables in his samples showed clear evidence of historic hybridisation from Amm. Not really surprising as Amm was the native bee of Germany before it was systematically replaced by carnica. Moritz claimed that this was a selection artifact due to over use of wing venation pattern as the main criteria for separating Am mellifera from Am carnica. Ie, you get the wing patterns you select for without necessarily any linkage with the rest of the underlying genetics. He recommended dropping it altogether as a selection criteria or else switching to other morphometric variables every couple of years to avoid the selection artifact.
Catherine Thompson also pointed this out and she covered it in her presentation at the recent Bibba conference in Wales last September. I asked her to clarify the point at the end of her presentation and she categorically stated that there is no link between an Amm wing pattern in hybridised samples and the microsatellite markers associated with Amm. This went down like a lead balloon as many UK based groups breeding Amm are still using it as an important selection criteria.

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