>
> >There are a number of studies on small cell, and I think we should
> discuss them all.


Dean, it may help you to understand that those of us  who focus on actual
data and results, rather than unsupported hypotheses, need to see some
actual supportive data for your hypothesis.   All of us started out with
very open minds to small cell--it suggested a simple, natural, and
inexpensive way to control varroa.

Some of us even tested it (me in a controlled trial, with suggestive
beneficial results, but was with fully drawn plastic), and a number of
commercial beekeepers tested it on large scale.  It simply didn't appear to
make much difference.

A number of pretty good controlled trials have now been done around the
world (granted that none were "perfect").  The Ellis, Hayes, Ellis trial
that Pete cited was durn near perfect, but would have been better had they
gone through the Sept/Oct "mite cleansing" period in the second season.

Dean, it is a rather weak argument to keep promoting small cell without
benefit of some very simple data to back it up!  This is not a difficult
sort of controlled trial to run, and most of us would be happy to accept
conclusions drawn from a trial of only 24 hives, half on small cell, half
on regular, with mite measurements taken on a monthly basis, with non
Africanized bees.

If indeed the experimenter was able to measure an appreciable depression in
mite levels in the SC group over an extended period of time, that would
definitely get our attention!

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

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