There are many who don't want their names dropped, to get dragged in 
controversy, or be even remotely associated with misinformation.

Nonetheless, many are watching, and some venture an observation or two in 
the background.  Here is a comment I received recently.  Name withheld.  I 
left off one comment of a personal nature at the end.

                    --- begin quote ---

Subject: thelytoky


Not to be a nit picker but;

(1) Parthenogenic reproduction and reproduction by thelytoky are not the 
same.  Parthenogenic reproduction is asexual, i.e. "cloning", barring the 
very rare event of an autosomal mutation.  Thelytoky on the other hand is 
sexual, albeit the same individual provides the "sperm" and the "egg" which 
is a product of reduction division, hence reassortment occurs.

(2) Thelytoky has been around a long time in the US.  My photocopy of an 
article lacks a readable citation but I believe it is Journal of Economic 
Entomology, vol 36 pges 465-467 June 1943 in which Otto Mackensen has an 
article entitled "The Occurrence of Parthenogentic Females in Some Strains 
of Honeybees". Well before Kerr in Brazil you might want to note.

(3) Taber has a column in Gleanings (8/89) in which he mentions Arizona 
thelytoky.  I talked to him about this at a later date but he never 
mentioned the beekeepers name (Lusby?)  It had come about before he retired 
from Tucson

(4) Ruttner worked out the mechanism of thelytoky in Apis mellifera capensis 
and reported his results in Apidologie 1983 vol 14 (1) pges 41-57 among 
other places.

                    --- end quote ---

FWIW, I know that the Tucson lab was working on thelytoky a few years back 
when I visited, but do not know if it was ever completed, or whether the 
pheremone work eclipsed it.

And, also, many of us think that thelyoky is a useful property in bees, and 
in no way threatening.

allen

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---