Hi Bob and all,

> Although I believe the small cell theory needs looked at further I do not
> believe it is fair to say the theory has NOT been looked at or are talked
> about by researchers.

You are very right here.

> The above is the main reason why researchers around the world first looked
> at small cell. Varroa DOES reproduce in AHB small cells and in amounts to
> KILL brood nests but the constant swarming and abscounding limit varroa in
> my opinion.

This is opinion here. Partly true and partly wrong. Reproduction occurs in
small cell brood nests, BUT mainly in drone brood. Why is it that when Dr.
Erickson experimented with small cell foundation the bees were surviving.
These same bees placed back upon enlarged foundation began to crash(this is
in ABJ, not sure what issue but could look it up) . Why? Also in S. America
4.9mm foundation is used. As for absconding/ swarming with AHB in S.
America. Hmmm. They import alot of honey to good old USA don't they? You and
I know that bees that abscond and swarm don't make honey.  How could they
stay competetive with such bees?

> "There seems to ba a correlation between the height of the cell and the
> number of mites witin those cells; the cells with the greater distance
> between the larva and the RIM having fewer varroa mites."

This was a two year study on "8 colonies". Two years? It could take 5 for a
crash! The Lusby's are now in there 6th year with 100's. Also the cells
measured 5.4mm wide and 5.9mm wide. After 2 years only 50 cells were
examined on each frame side looking for the presence of of female mites
ONLY. This in my POV was a poor experiment. Also why isn't the industry
increasing this distance in colonies? Did these colonies survive? What
happened to them?

This experiment is comparing cell height to cell width. This isn't comparing
enlarged cells to small cell sizing. They are two different things.

Maybe the Lusbys work has not been looked at
> but small cell certainly has. We do not know why the Lusbys are being
> successful and maybe researchers should take a look . Again what works for
> her may not work for others.

The reverse is also true. Maybe what works for the Lusby's may work for
others. If 4.9mm was to be shown to be effective would you go this route
Bob?

regards,

Clay