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:
Peter Borst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 27 Jan 2007 09:19:20 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (142 lines)
Allen Dick wrote:

> Banning non-movable comb hives was a turning point in beekeeping and turned
> us away from selection for resistance toward mechanical and chemical methods
> of disease management.

Comment:
The invention of the movable comb was the single most important change
in beekeeping. It made possible the complete management of the honey
bee colony and opened the way to the great understanding of honey bee
biology that we now take for granted. Before that it was basically a
black box.

The banning of non-movable combs was initiated by the need to be able
to inspect hives for disease. While many beekeepers attempted to
"treat" with various chemicals, most of these treatments failed and
burning was the recommended method. The idea of breeding resistant
bees appeared very early on. Antibiotics did not appear on the scene
until much later.

In my opinion, the reason that interest in bee breeding has had its
ups and downs is that it is very expensive to develop better strains
of bees and the characteristics of these bees rapidly disappear as the
bees interbreed with local stock.

In order for a breeding program to work, it would have to be
undertaken on a national scale, and steps would have to be taken to
eradicate the mongrelized local stock. While this has been done in
some countries, I doubt if it will happen in the US, where beekeepers
seldom agree on anything.

* * *

Some Historical Background:

Many people kept bees in all parts of the territory [Utah]. But, all
beekeepers had problems with a disease that would kill an entire hive
of bees and spread to other hives. Called foul brood, it killed the
young bees while they were still in the comb.

A beekeepers organization was needed to rid all the hives of the
disease. In March 1892 Professor A. J. Cook of Michigan Agricultural
College and beekeeper A. T. Root of Medina, Ohio, came to Salt Lake
City to help solve the disease problem. They organized for the
territory the Utah Bee-Keepers Association. Oliver B. Huntington was
named president and R. T. Rhees secretary. The association asked the
territorial legislature to pass a bee inspection law in 1892.

It allowed each county to hire inspectors to look at all the beehives
and destroy those with foul brood disease. After the law was passed
and before the 1893 season started, beekeepers were notified of an
April association meeting in Salt Lake City. The beekeepers met in the
Brick and Stone Masons Hall over the Western Union Telegraph Office on
Main Street. Huntington held several sessions of the beekeepers
association on April 10 and 11 to tell beekeepers about the new
inspection law, how to get rid of the disease, and how to sell their
honey.

http://history.utah.gov/

* * *

The [Pennsylvania] bee inspection program exists today because in the
early 1900's, beekeepers had an epidemic of American Foul Brood (AFB)
and they petitioned their state government for help. The first bee law
was passed in 1911 but was never effective. It was repealed with the
passage of the bee law in 1921 which continues to remain in effect
today.

http://www.agriculture.state.pa.us/

* * *

By 1922-1923 it was said that much of the bee stock in the state was
inferior with respect to productivity and resistance to foulbrood and
this led to studies at the Experiment Station. European foulbrood
disease had assumed such proportions that at the request of the [New
Jersey] State Beekeeper's Association, the legislature made a special
appropriation for research in methods of combating it. Studies were
begun by Ray Hutson and on his resignation in 1931, were continued
under the direction of Robert S. Filmer. The investigation was
conducted along three main lines: (1) the development of a strain of
bees resistant to European and American foulbrood, (2) the breeding of
a high-producing strain of bees, and (3) the use of bees in
pollination.

On special breeding grounds established in the south Jersey pine
barrens, Hutson succeeded in developing, by selection and inbreeding a
strain of bees which was not only apparently strongly resistant to
European foulbrood, but had also an exceptional honey-gathering
ability. Shortly after 1930, European foulbrood practically
disappeared from New Jersey.

Later an attempt was made to develop a strain resistant to American
foulbrood, and strains developed in other parts of the country were
tested in New Jersey. Chlorine gas was found successful as a
disinfectant in the control of American foulbrood

In developing a high-producing strain, forty to eighty colonies were
maintained in an apiary at Lebanon, New Jersey. Filmer succeeded in
developing a high producing strain for New Jersey by crossing inbred
lines that had high vigor and excellent honey-producing qualities. In
connection with this work extensive knowledge was accumulated on bees'
winter requirements for honey and pollen. Work on breeding programs
was discontinued at the start of World War II.

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/

* * *

Discovery in the mid-1940's that sulfa drugs could control European
foulbrood disease ushered in a new era. Some bee inspectors did not
initially accept sulfa treatment as valid, but eventually most
beekeepers and inspectors realized the economic value of protecting
colonies with this chemical treatment. It wasn't long before the
practice became widespread, making large-scale commercial beekeeping
viable and profitable. The use of sodium sulfathiazole was eventually
discontinued however because it didn't work against EFB, and when used
for AFB, it left persistent residues in extracted honey.

http://maarec.cas.psu.edu/

* * *

Many honey bees exhibit hygienic behaviour by cleaning out dead or diseased
larvae from their cells (Spivak & Gilliam, 1998). If the bees are
very hygienic the only trace of disease might be irregular patterns of
empty cells
on the brood combs. Hygienic behaviour is an inheritable trait and can easily be
tested by killing off brood and then measuring the time it takes the
bees to clean
out the larval cadavers (Spivak & Reuter, 1998). Consequent breeding of hygienic
lines have created bees that show increased resistance to AFB
infections. So far,
no totally AFB-resistant lines of bees have been bred (Hansen & Brødsgaard,
1999).

-- 
pb

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---

ATOM RSS1 RSS2