Hi Dave:
You are confusing this with the stiffness of the hairs. The
opening itself is rigid and part of the carapace.
Reply:
But Dave, I wasn't specifying either the actual spherical
or the hairs, just saying it is still somewhat elastic and
mites can therefor push things around to get in. But this
is very good you are pointing this out. And like I said
earlier this is all sounding very good to me what you have
written here letting us know about this research coming
out.
I just want to ask questions of you, since you seem in the
loop to see how wide things were looked at in consideration
of the results you mentioned. You know we have talked
deeply in the past of size ratio with honeybees and this
10% to 1% size change in the opening sure means a whole lot
to me in view of our past talks over the years.
We used to talk about the 2% size difference in the size of
the honeybee per each degree of latitude variation if I
remember correctly, which you correlated to a change in a
person to be about the size/width of a person's wrist. So
having you inform us here of a 10% size variation of the
bee to a 1% size variation of the first thoraxic spherical,
I think to myself. Well the size of a honeybee changing
upwards then much more then 10% and maybe even to 40%-50%
or more, in mass nowadays, with the larger enlarged
foundations on today's market, now making their entry into
broodnests as todays beekeepers just do it not thinking, I
am saying to self, even a 20% or 30% enlargement would mean
a big size enlargement in the first thoraxic spherical of
1% to 3% then and if there is a range and not a hardcore 1%
change then there is much larger going on. And A honeybee
then compared to a small trachael mite, most beekeepers
need a lenses to see and not just eyes, means even
naturally a big size difference between the honeybees and
trachael mites, and now with enlargement, WOW.....for the
smaller trachael mite can now get into the spherical
pushing the hairs aside until hardened.
But it would be nice to know if the project was done with
fully regressed honeybees or naturally occurring ones,
similar in size to 1904 when first seen. Also, it would be
nice to know,bear with me, if factored in to the project is
the selection going on by our honeybees here on the bigger
sizes for the past 100 years of artificial enlargement, due
to the selection pressure, due to the problem, for needing
a smaller thoraxic spherical to live and not die in then.
Just so much what you wrote here makes me think. Yes, shall
be interesting to see the final paper and see what aspects
where looked at, as whether from one isolated angle of
reasoning, or a whole-bee concept relative to the
environment. As Nature comes at you from all points.
Yes, 10% to 1% ratio is good I think...
Anymore just in case you want to talk more????
Regards,
Dee A. Lusby
Small Cell Commercial Beekeeper
Moyza, Arizona
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OrganicBeekeepers/
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info ---
|
