Hi Guys,

At the time those studies were done, most of the speculation concerning the
success seen in small cell hives focused on mite reproduction. When I
removed worker pupa that had been uncapped at the purple eye stage, I found
very few immatures or males. Mostly just one mature female would be found.
What I saw seemed to collaborate with the speculation about cell size
directly affecting varroa reproduction rates.

But another, more plausable explanation, is possible. I think when the bees
uncap/remove infected brood, and destroy the mites, it's very disruptive to
mite reproduction. Uncapped pupa remain alive for extended periods before
the bees remove them. Maybe the mites hide out toward the bottom of an
uncapped cell rather than reproduce:>) I had planned to chronologically
compare mite reproductive biology and see what kind of damage would occur
when cells are uncapped at the purple eye stage, but haven't got around to it.

Cell size directly affects the bees behavior instead of directly affecting
mite reproduction. It appears the NZ test was designed to measure the direct
effects of cell size on mite reproduction. The government was in a hurry to
get some fast answers for their impending mite problems which explains the
short duration.

It's too bad the NZ government took the speculation as the only possible
explaination. It would have been better to not speculate in this case, as
the test might have been broader in scope and of a longer duration.

It's not a bad test for a direct correlation between cell size and varroa
reproduction. And the NZ test along with some of the other research should
end the cell size/varroa reproduction speculation as the reason for small
cell size mite tolerance.

Regards
Dennis

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::