On Tue, 17 Feb 1998 16:20:15 -0600 "Excerpts from BEE-L"
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
>From:          Vince Coppola <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:       Re: smaller comb
>
>Maybee I'm missing something here but I see no data at all. I do see
>unfounded opinions and conclusions and some name dropping. I wonder
>what
>conclusions Dr. Ericson came to? I wonder why feral colonies that
>surely
>build "natural" comb die from infections of AFB, T-mite, and
>especially
>varroa mite? I wonder what proof Ms. Lusby has that tracheal mites
>existed on
>North America before 1983? I wonder on what data the 1/3, 1/3, 1/3
>estimate
>is based on? I wonder who those numbers down at the bottom are suposed
>to
>impress? Newbees beware.
>
>
        I asked this very same question to a well known researcher at
during a speaking engagement. The answer was very short and in my
estimation not convincing. In essence, the larger cell has been used so
long that it has became a trait for bees to build it that way because, I
guess the size of the bee was bigger? I didn't per sue the matter any
further at the time, I felt that I might be putting the speaker on the
spot and I feel the place to do that is somewhere other than in front of
an audience. Isn't it odd that the cell size has changed in a hundred
years or so with very little effort and when it comes to trying to make
other genetic changes cooperation with nature is arduous.
Well, I'm extremely skeptical.
 
Alden Marshall
B-Line Apiaries
Hudson, NH 03051
[log in to unmask]
tel. 603-883-6764
 
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]