Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 10 Feb 2021 13:33:14 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> The criteria were very clear for sampling:
> 1) Little to no build-up of dead bees in the hive or at the hive entrance.
> 2) Rapid loss of adult honey bee population despite the presence of the queen and capped brood
> 3) Absence or delayed robbing of the food reserves
> 4) Loss not attributable to varroa or nosema loads.
1.) Not uncommon. Multiple potential causes.
2.) Not uncommon. Multiple potential causes.
3.) Very curious, but observed at other times in other situations with no apparent diseases
4.) Not uncommon. Multiple potential causes.
> To this day, no one has adequately explained why these "near dead-outs" were not promptly robbed by healthy hives,
I've seen that more than once with no CCD in sight. No explanation. Maybe Winnie the Pooh explains it best.
> invariably still had a queen and a small number of workers, and often had far more capped brood than could have been fed/tended when open by the number of worker bees remaining in the hive.
I've seen that when packages were shaken from queenless or shut down hives down under and sent to Canada. The adults were healthy and started brood, but too old to live until brood emergence.
Of course that is not what happened here but is similar in appearance.
That third one is the one that brings the entire matter into question in my mind. AFAIK, no on has explained that.
Has anyone studied that one thing because without understanding that one condition IMO the whole thing gets very sketchy.
***********************************************
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
|
|
|