In article <[log in to unmask]>, Dee Lusby <[log in to unmask]> writes >But in actuality the density of the inside of the bee's >muscle structure, etc does change. Too many assumptions being used by most in this. There seems to be little proof that bees of a single given type fly faster or slower just according to their size. All sorts of variables are at play and not many seem to have hit on the power/weight ratio. I don't have the answers nor would I pretend to, and it may seem supercilious and unnecessary to say this, but if smaller is truly better and faster, then why, after 50 million years or so of selection, are bees not now the size of gnats and fly at mach 2? The only time I have seen a seriously backed up correlation between smaller bees and faster flight was in a discussion a long time ago which involved Garth Cambray (whatever happened to him?) and others. In that, and subsequent discussions with yet other people involved in monticola breeding, it was stated that the mode of energy conversion in African bees, particularly scutellata, is such that they can fly faster and earlier, and hence outcompete European bees in areas climatically suited to them. (Dont ask me to explain it, as it had me well baffled to begin with at the time.) Unfortunately this did not take place solely on Bee-L so archive searches would prove incomplete. Perhaps thoracic density is also involved here and may be an indicator of a genetic type (or supersisters within a colony) rather than strictly being a size related criterion. Murray -- Murray McGregor