> What I was saying that the 1-hr dusting drop equalled the natural drop that
> I had counted for the previous 6 days.  It was merely an observation of the
> data, not theoretical.

OK,  That seems to suggest that if six days drop a number equal to 34% of the
33% that are phoretic, then one day's drop represents 2% of the total mite
population in this instance.  That is quite interesting.

A little later in the season, when there is no brood, if the adult mite age profile
has not changed a lot, then if one day still drops the same percentage of the
phoretic mites, but no immatures, then we would expect to see 1% of the
phoretic mites dropping daily, and if the attrition were linear, run out of mites
in a little over three months.  (So, it must not work like that.) 

> So 33 are phoretic.  If dusting causes 34% of these to drop, then about 11
> would drop. <etc.>
> So we are in the same ballpark.  Does that help?

Yes, your explanation is most interesting and helpful, especially since the natural
drop used for reference was backward-looking in a developing population.

Thanks.

At this point, I am trying to guess mite populations from a natural drop.  Using a
100 multiplier I get a population estimate for some colonies which should be
virtually broodless.  When I use that estimate in a mdel for oxalic drop, I see that
our results locus is at about 50% of the model we are using so am pondering...

Actually, I suppose, given the WAG figures we have used and the lack of rigour
going in, coming within 100% is not too bad, but I'm wondering if I overestimated
the mite pop or if we should have done a better job of oxalic fogging.

Or something else altogether...

             ***********************************************
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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm