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:
Jerry Bromenshenk <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:54:18 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (12 lines)
We didn't study this issue per se, but we did a study years ago where we measured honey yields, bee population size, etc. and calculated the stats, using relative standard deviation (also called coefficient of variation) to assess colony to colony variability.  Not surprisingly, the most variable component was honey yield, the rest like brood area, overall population  size, etc. were less variable.  That's one of the flaws in EPAs move to use honey yield as an indicator of colony health - it doesn't necessarily track the population.
 
What was not clear from our paper, but what we subsequently learned, the RSD's or CV's for colony variability for a wide array of parameters, were no better for mixed races, for same race, for same queen lines, and surprisingly, even for sister queens inseminated from the same drones.  This was EPA pollution sentinel work, and we thought that matching the queen/drone genetics should damp down variability - nope, didn't, in fact in some cases was even more variable.  We suspect that the additional handling, instrumental insemination, may have added stress or cause subtle damage.  Nothing obvious, but the extra expense and effort yielded nothing useful.
 


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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2