>The first question I have is: What was the chief aim of this? Are you trying to figure out what type of honey you have, or are you simply curious as to what's in your honey. I am with Dr. Matilla, the pollen content of honey may represent a different set of plants than the nectar sources.

Good question. The opportunity to do this testing kind of fell in my lap so there wasn't a clearly defined objective other than that we stood to learn *SOMETHING*.  In my naivete at the time, I assumed there would be a stronger correlation between the presence of pollen in the samples and clues to the foraging behavior of the bees.

I am indebted to Dr Matilla for pointing me in the right direction and I've seen ample evidence since our correspondence that windborne pollen in honey is not unusual, even in relatively high proportions.

Does it seem reasonable to say that the presence of pollen from NECTAR-PRODUCING plants in honey is evidence that the bees have been foraging on them? That seems to be a standard assumption in melissopalynolgy. It makes sense that windborne pollens could accidentally find their way into nectar/honey through a variety of methods; for plants that require insect pollination it seems far less likely. I would like to be able to draw even attenuated conclusions about the botanical origin of these samples, but the casual way the sampling was undertaken has me gun-shy to say too much with any sense of certainty.

I appreciate all your thoughtful responses.

Scott
Johnston RI

             ***********************************************
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