BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
allen dick <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 18 Oct 2005 14:01:56 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
>>> Is there a concise definition of "regressed bees"?
>
> Sorry, Allen.  I guess I am guilty again of using terms that show up on
> Bee-L but are not in frequent use here or elsewhere

Well, the term has been bandied about a lot, but, AFAIK, it has no clear
definition or well -understood meaning.  Many of us tolerate its use for
sake of discussion, hoping to get a handle on it, but find it rather vague
and magical.  It's sorta a "You know what I mean", kinda thing. You know?
You take some bees and shake them onto small cell foundation, and, if they
draw it out, they are regressed?  Or Not? Dunno?

Where does the process begin?  Where does it end?  Is it permanent?  If so,
what is the mechanism?  Genetic selection?  Nutrition? Learning?  An unknown
effect?  Magic?  Are there any controlled studies on the topic?

We've attempted in the past (years ago?) tried to get an understanding of it
here on BEE-L, but never did, so we let it go by, but not without an
occasional questioning to remind everyone that the term has no real status,
here, at least -- and among the scientific community AFAIK, but we are
listening...

allen

People who have no weaknesses are terrible; there is no way of taking
advantage of them.
            -- Anatole France, The Crime of Sylvestre Bonnard

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2