Sorry to awaken a 4 month old thread, but I was reading in the archives and this piqued my curiosity .

From: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>

>in order to be of any value, research has to be open to critique.  in the case of the several "small cell studies" (which i think you are alluding to), not a single one that i'm aware of has attempted to recreate anything close to the "protocols" that are being used in the field by beekeepers claiming success.  i understand the desire to boil things down to a single variable and into a study that can be completed in a few months, but such studies do not test what many of us see working in the field.

There was a Berry/Delaplane study written up not long ago in Bee Culture, and I assume there are others.  Is anyone aware of or does anyone have any suggestions to refine experimental design to address the issues noted above? Other than saying it's too complicated to work in a controlled study but it works in real life.  I remain a sceptic here but wouldn't it be great if there were something to it?
     Pete

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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm