Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 6 Mar 1996 00:22:50 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In a message dated 96-03-05 12:40:22 EST, [log in to unmask] (David Eyre)
writes:
>To continue this one step further, if I may. If your statement is correct,
>and no doubt you're right "Why do we cull the Queen?" That's a bit like
>killing the messenger if you don't like the news! This practice has gone on
>for years, if you find chalkbrood, then requeen whereas ventilation will fix
>the problem! Does anyone want to comment?
I am firmly convinced that some bees are more susceptible to chalkbrood
than others. Certainly genetic hygenic behaviour has a very positive
influence. There may also be just a general increase in vigor with a young
queen, as opposed to an old one.
I have been rigidly excluding chalkbrood from all my breeding stock; even
just the slightest trace disqualifies a queen. I see a lot less of it now
than in previous years, and when I do, it is usually from a boughten queen,
which is a good arguement for trying to breed a higher percentage of my own.
I used to see quite a few hives in late summer, that were light as a
feather, and heavily infested with chalkbrood. I got so that I could predict
chalkbrood, just by the weight of the hive as it was loaded out of a
pollination crop.
[log in to unmask] Dave Green, PO Box 1200, Hemingway, SC 29554
Visit the pollination web page at
>http://users.aol.com/pollinator/polpage1.html<
|
|
|