Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 31 Aug 2000 20:45:19 -0700 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Organization: |
Oregon VOS |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, James Kilty wrote:
> >... then feral hives should not
> >succumb to varroa pressure.
> So
> therefore many feral colonies should have survived if it were the *only*
> factor. Since they didn't, it cannot be the only factor. Enlighten me
> please.
Not me. I didn't think it required an explicit statement. The evidence
of the natural experiment suggests that feral hives, with smaller
cell sizes, did succumb to Varroa infestation. In the absence of a
controlled experiment, it is a strongly suggestive description of
the situation.
It would be wonderful of the solution were as simple as a new (old)
cell size, but casual observations are not convincing in light of the
disappearance of feral colonies of A. mellifera across Varroa blighted
continents.
It would take enlightening to demonstrate another reason for the
coincidence.
Susan
--
Susan Nielsen, Shambles Workshops |"...Gently down the
Beavercreek, OR, USA |stream..."
[log in to unmask] | -- Anon.
|
|
|