>
> >Why not?, I use it no doubt, it is probably better now after /lactic?/
> fermentation.
>

Juanse, a recent in-depth study by Dr. Kirk Anderson's lab (reviewed at
http://scientificbeekeeping.com/reevaluating-beebread-part-1-the-story/),
showed that  lactic fermentation was for preservation, not to increase the
nutritional value of pollen (although there could be some benefit from the
yeast fermentation that occurs prior to lactic fermentation).

And as far as lactic fermentation of pollen sub, it is an entirely
different animal than fermentation of pollen grains.  The pollen grains are
each enclosed in a protective exine, which is not penetrated during lactic
fermentation. Thus, the lactic fermentation is only of the nectar and
pollenkit surrounding the pollen grains, *not* of the nutritious innards of
the pollen grains.

 But the finely-ground plant proteins used in pollen sub have no such
protection, and are thus exposed to digestion and degradation to any number
of bacteria and fungi.  There is no reason to think that fermented sub is a
good food for bees.  As is happens, I asked Dr. Anderson to investigate
specifically this--supplying him with combs of fermented pollen sub.  The
study is now in review, and the results were surprising.

For a more practical answer to Brion's question, I taste any aged sub
before I feed it.  If it has developed an off flavor or odor, I put it into
the compost pile, similar to how I test food that I find in my kitchen
refrigerator.

-- 
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