Hi Waldemar

> I did not realize AMM were larger than Italians, Carniolans, or
 > Caucasians.

Yes, the body is larger, the limbs are slightly shorter and thicker,
when seen in bulk they appear to be similar sizes to other races, but
when looked at individually the differences can be seen.

> If I recall right, Caucasians are the smallest with the longest
 > tongues allowing them to take interest in red clover...

I believe that this feature has been the cause of many of the bee
enlargement trials that have occurred over the last century or more.

 > Instead of focusing on the 'right' or 'natural' cell width, the cell
 > diameter should be described as a fraction of the average bee body
 > envolope for each race?

This would not work very well for AMM, as this race of bee has been
demonstrated as being very flexible in cell size and capable of using
cells over a much wider range of sizes than other races.

> Dennis Murrell has shown, there is no such thing as a single cell
 > size in any naturally drawn out nest.

As far as the whole nest is concerned the range of cell size and the
range centre, may well be a good way of describing the collection of
comb that forms the nest, whether foundation supplied to such a colony
should be centre of range size, smaller or larger is another thing.

> Do you have any feral AMM populations of in remote natural reserves etc.
 > perhaps?  It would be most interesting to measure their cell sizing.

Difficult to be certain about the feral nature of 'wild' colonies, but
all the fragments of comb that I have measured from wild sources have
been 5.5 or 5.6 mm in brood cells.


Regards & Best 73s, Dave Cushman, G8MZY
http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman or http://www.dave-cushman.net
Short FallBack M/c, Build 6.02/3.1 (stable)

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---