BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Bob & Liz <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 20 Jun 2001 13:27:57 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
Hello John & All,
> >  For the archives:
> >  Lloyd R. Watson in 1927 demonstrated that queen honey bees could be
> >  inseminated and gave us the term "instrumental insemination". After 74
> > years   we should expect bee books to use the correct terms.
John wrote:
> Sorry, but the phrase "AI" (Artificial Insemination) is in common use in
most
> other types of animal husbandry (cattle, horses, swine). Call it what you
> choose.
I used to say "A I" until I got tired of being corrected by those doing
instrumental Insemination. You can call the procedure whatever you want but
lets be CORRECT at least in the beekeeping books. Big difference between * A
arm and glove inserted* and a *sterile instrument*.  "AI" is as you say is
for (cattle,horses,swine) and as I and researchers  doing "II" say
*instrumental insemination* IS correct for A.mellifera. I have NEVER seen a
add in a bee magazine for a artificial inseminated breeder queen. They
ALWAYS say instrumentally inseminated.
Sincerely,
Bob Harrison
Odessa, Missouri
"Thinking old habits may be hard to change"

ATOM RSS1 RSS2