Anecdotal reports of "mite" cures can be useful, if they provide some
evidence of the claims.  We can use all the good leads that we can get
for solving these problems.
.
But, unsupported claims lead to the promulgation of unsubstantiated and
sometimes erroneous information.
 
Sometimes the conversations on this list seem to pit beekeepers against
researchers.  Yet, every beekeeper is a researcher, and every researcher
keeps bees.  Together, we all want to come up with answers to difficult
questions.
 
There are two articles in the last two issues of Bee Culture describing
how to conduct a research project.  Anyone can do it, but you need to
design the study, no matter how small; use appropriate methods; keep good
records, and report your results.
 
Throwing something in a hive, than telling everyone that it got rid of
the mites, without providing some evidence that this really happened or
which mites were controlled doesn't help.  Did you include some untreated
colonies?  If so, did they still have mites? which mites? at what levels?
 
Our own studies show that strong colonies outpace both mites in
mid-summer.  So, if I throw agent X on a colony at that time, I won't
have many mites, because the population dynamics of mites and bees are
such that the mite levels will automatically decline.
 
As far as I can see, no one is precluded from testing hives, even with
substances that have not been approved for use in hives.  The big
difference is that those of us who conduct research as our prime
occupation NEVER use or market the honey from hives treated with
chemicals that have not been approved for use in bee hives.
 
If you as a beekeeper want to do the same, I don't see any problem.  But,
if you as a beekeeper decide to throw a foreign substance into your
producing hives, that is a very different issue.  I have seen entire
commercial operations running thousands of colonies treating using
veterinary chemicals at very high concentrations squirted on  cotton
balls, paper towels, or cardboard.
 
Ok, so some of you will say that it is the same chemical as in one of the
approved strips; so what's the big deal?  But, the concentrations are
different, the means of dispersing the chemical is different, and the
efficacy of using cotton balls has not been demonstrated.
 
Our studies would suggest that a saturated cotton ball almost quarantees
a high probability of contamination of the honey and wax.
 
Should beekeepers use unapproved substances on producing colonies - no!
Should beekeepers conduct tests - yes!  There are a lot more beekeepers
than researchers.  If everyone got engaged in investigating and solving
the problems, odds are that a beekeeper might find answers.
 
Do you need lots of colonies?  No!  But you need more than 1.  You have
to replicate your study.  Any response in a single colony could be from
the luck of the draw.  So, minimally you should have two untreated
controls and two treated colonies.  The treated colonies need to be
treated exactly the same (same dose, method of application, etc.).
 
Three replicates is better than two.  With two, what do you do if each
responds differently?  With three, you have a tie breaker.
 
So, ideally, you start with a minumum of 6 hives.  Do ewerything the same
with these six except for the "treatment".  So if you want to soak a
coffee filter in peppermint oil and test its effectiveness, you would get
six filters and something to measure the weight or volume of the oil.
 
Let's say you use a kitchen teaspoon.  Take three coffee filters, put one
teaspoon of oil in the center of each of three of the filters (this is
probably way too much, but I am just pulling a number out of the air).
Don't put any oil on the other three filters (in fact, don't even keep
them in the same room as the one in which you pour the oil.
 
Now, go out to your six hives.  Give each a number or I.D.  Write the six
numbers on a scrap of paper, throw the papers in a hat.  Draw out the
papers and record the numbers in order of being drawn.  For example,
maybe you got 4, 6, 3, 1, 2, 5.  Ok, use hives 4, 6, and 3 for the
untreated colonies.  Use 1, 2, and 5 for your treated hives.  This
ranomization step is critical.  If you just pick the hives by eyeball,
you may unwittingly pick hives that share some trait that could alter the
test.  For example, maybe you picked strong hives.  If so, maybe they are
strong because they don't have mites or may be somewhat resistant.
 
If you have more than six hives, number them all, repeat the above, and
draw out six numbers for the test.
 
Now, it is obvious that you are going to put your coffee filters soaked
in oil in three colonies.  But, you have to put unsoaked coffee filters
in the other three colonies (your controls).  Now, I doubt that coffee
filters have any affect on mites, but who would have guessed that oil or
grease does?  So, you can never assume anything.
 
You also have to conduct some type of test to determine the mite levels
before the test (numbers of mites and/or percent of bees infested).  You
also have to conduct a follow up test.
 
Why is this necessary.  Well, when I moved into my home on the mountain
above Missoula, we found that the deer liked to sleep in our back yard.
An organic gardening expert said deer hated the smell of Irish Spring
soap.  So, I hung bars of soap from all of our trees.  That night, it
rained.  Next day I found a deer imprint in the grass right under the bar
of soap.  Not only did the deer not object to the soap, it took a shower!
 
So, I decided the soap trick didn't work.  A couple of days later, one of
the neighbors asked why the soap in the trees.  I told her, including my
evidence that it didn't work.  But, because someone said it worked,
despite evidence to the contrary, she hung soap in her trees.  Four years
later, we don't have any soap in our trees, but all the neighbors do!
And the deer are still coming into the yards and browsing the trees and
shrubs.
 
Cheers,
 
Jerry Bromenshenk
[log in to unmask]
http://grizzly.umt.edu/biology/bees