> There is no clear answer which of the two methods is more accurate because the true assignment of workers to subspecies remains unknown. > Not quite sure what the second part of this statement means. Well, those are Tofilski's words, published in 2015. The rest of the paragraph is: There is no clear answer which of the two methods is more accurate because the true assignment of workers to subspecies remains unknown; however, microsatellites have some advantages over morphometrics. First of all, as categorical traits, microsatellite alleles can be interpreted without error (although some issues could arise due to problems with amplification or electrophoresis conditions). On the other hand, morphological traits suffer from measurement errors. Second, unlike microsatellites, the morphological traits are affected by the environment which can obscure differences between subspecies. and The results presented here show that morphometrics can be used for detection of hybrids between A. m. mellifera and A. m. carnica (but see Guzman-Novoa et al. 1994). The wing measurements are relatively inexpensive and accessible to beekeepers; therefore, they can be an alternative to molecular methods in projects aiming at protection of endangered A. m. mellifera. reference: Guzman-Novoa, E., Page, R.E., Fondrk, M.K. (1994) Morphometric techniques do not detect intermediate and low levels of Africanization in honey bee (Hymenoptera, Apidae) colonies. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 87, 507–515 *********************************************** 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