>
> Alden said: Perhaps Randy would like to put this to test?

Thanks for the suggestion, Alden.  Randy would like to put lots of things to
the test, but Randy is currently buried in current tests plus data
processing (months behind on processing hard-earned sugar dusting data).

Good tests are time consuming, fraught with likely failure due to the
learning curve and Murphy's Law, often require taking a lot of colonies out
of normal use, may take hundreds or thousands of mind-numbing
mite/spore/weight, etc counts, and then the hours to enter and process the
statistics.  Even after all that the results may be ambivalent, or don't
meet a P<.05 level), or the highest hurdle of all, the James Fischer
analysis  : )  One does not take on a "test" frivolously, but must carefully
choose where one spends their limited time and resources.

The data to date on screened bottoms is mixed and inconclusive (see
biotechnical control article on my website).  One can easily make a case
for, and possibly against.  I personally find them to be positive, and would
recommend for the hobbyist.  Commercial beeks would need to take a hard look
at cost/benefit.

In any case, I am glad to see beekeepers asking for hard data, rather than
touting various treatments and management practices based upon folklore and
say so.

Randy Oliver

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************