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
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
randy oliver <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:53:56 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
It's difficult to interpret Rhodes and Somerville's findings due to lack of
details in the paper.  Queens caught at 7 days had poor acceptance, but
that that was most likely because they had not yet mated, as evidenced by
their lack of spermatozoa.
Queens caged at 14 days fared better, but the authors didn't specify how
long they'd been laying, it at all.  In my own operation, if poor mating
weather occurs, many queens don't begin laying until after 14 days.
In their 1999 study, some early queens were exposed to very low temp during
transport.
When temps were better in subsequent years, acceptance was better for
14-day queens.
So I don't know what to make of the study.

It would be an easy study to replicate.  Does anyone know of any such study?

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2