Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 4 May 2017 08:42:16 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
<019501d2c4dc$3e8d69f0$bba83dd0$@com> |
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="UTF-8" |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
But be assured that his one will get traction while the honeybee study will not. It is the impala- nice metaphor BTW.
The nice thing about the honeybee study was there were a variety of locations and tests of pollen for all pesticides. That, to me, is key as the neonics are only one class of pesticides that the bees encounter.
Again, I am leaning toward BBs having more problems than honeybees in the field, but so far there is nothing definitive.
Bill Have you read "bumble bee economics" ? it’s a real good read actually. One of the takeaways from that was the number of bumbles is a highly variably issue. While honeybees being managed are fairly stable. In a bad year we feed our honeybees. In a bad weather year bumble reproduction is suppressed. Much like some years we get swarms like crazy, other years hardly any.
That makes any/all solitary bees hard to use as the monitor. Simple weather variations have more impact than most of us can imagine, nor de we have a good way to evaluate it.
Charles
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|