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:
Bill Truesdell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 11 Sep 2002 08:13:22 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
Peter Borst wrote:

> Right, but there would have to be a standard test. I mentioned the ether
> roll and George made a comment about "that damn ether roll" which he
> neglected to explain. Is there a feeling against doing the ether roll? I
> think it is the most reliable quick test.

It seems to be the preferred test to determine mite load. Generally,
after all the other treatments are done, the ether roll will give a good
determination of the effectiveness of treatment. Maybe there is
something new about ether rolls, but I share Peter's comment that it is
"the most reliable quick test".

But happy to be enlightened if it is not the best, since sugar, apistan
and cumophose are certainly not.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

ATOM RSS1 RSS2