On Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:20:15 -0600 "Excerpts from BEE-L" <[log in to unmask]> writes: >From: Vince Coppola <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: Re: smaller comb > >Maybee I'm missing something here but I see no data at all. I do see >unfounded opinions and conclusions and some name dropping. I wonder >what >conclusions Dr. Ericson came to? I wonder why feral colonies that >surely >build "natural" comb die from infections of AFB, T-mite, and >especially >varroa mite? I wonder what proof Ms. Lusby has that tracheal mites >existed on >North America before 1983? I wonder on what data the 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 >estimate >is based on? I wonder who those numbers down at the bottom are suposed >to >impress? Newbees beware. > > I asked this very same question to a well known researcher at during a speaking engagement. The answer was very short and in my estimation not convincing. In essence, the larger cell has been used so long that it has became a trait for bees to build it that way because, I guess the size of the bee was bigger? I didn't per sue the matter any further at the time, I felt that I might be putting the speaker on the spot and I feel the place to do that is somewhere other than in front of an audience. Isn't it odd that the cell size has changed in a hundred years or so with very little effort and when it comes to trying to make other genetic changes cooperation with nature is arduous. Well, I'm extremely skeptical. Alden Marshall B-Line Apiaries Hudson, NH 03051 [log in to unmask] tel. 603-883-6764 _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]