Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 28 Jun 1996 14:22:10 -0600 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> >A probable 99% test for queenlesness would be to put a frame of
> >brood containing eggs or 24hrs old larvae into the suspect hive.
> While I agree with the overall method the last sentence forces me to
> respond.
> The only reason it will produce runty Qs is the failure of
> the
> keeper to remove the emergency cells!! On the 4th day after adding
> the frame, check and cut out all "Sealed" cells. This removes cells
> which would produce runty Qs, and leaves cells which will go full
> term ie 9 days to sealed, 16 days to emerge.
The other day I was adding a frame of eggs to a queenless hive in an
outyard (Too far to drive to get only one queen!)
And I realised that we always add a frame of *eggs* -- not larvae -- where
possible in such a case.
Of course this is a habit and I hadn't thought much about it lately,
but I realised that if the bees were actually queenless and were
given eggs, then they would likely start queens as soon as the first
eggs hatched -- or sooner.
In this case, the larvae would be treated as queens from the start
and the runty or half caste problem should not occur.
Am I wrong?
Regards
Allen
W. Allen Dick, Beekeeper VE6CFK
RR#1, Swalwell, Alberta Canada T0M 1Y0
Internet:[log in to unmask] & [log in to unmask]
Honey. Bees, & Art <http://www.internode.net/~allend/>
|
|
|