>Are these protocols the same now as they were in the 1970s?

>... it might be a valid indication that more bees in the cage = longer
lived. Another factor:

They did index for:

*... year of publication, dependent and independent variables, cage
population, the presence or absence of dietary variables (water, sucrose,
pollen, pollen substitute, and honey), the source or type of water, pollen,
or pollen substitute offered, sucrose type and concentration, the presence
of a buffer in any fluids offered, the use of commercial Queen Mandibular
Pheromone (QMP), incubator temperature and humidity, the age of the bees at
the beginning of the experiment, median lifespans of control groups,
duration of the experiment, the season the bees were harvested, and the
country and state/province/territory hosting the experiment.*

But did acknowledge:

*The near universal presence of DWV in US bee populations makes the option
of using disease free specimen in cage trails unworkable, and so we
recommend that all cage trials report the viral presence and load of their
source colonies. This then will allow for the consideration of viral
effects when interpretating results. Along these lines, we would also
recommend analyzing the wax and bee bread from bee source colonies for the
presence of pesticides, as exposure to such stressors at the larval stage
may affect adult lifespan.*

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