>>George wrote:
>>Try this example to test your thinking:  Consider two bees, both exactly 5
>>weeks old.  One became 5 weeks old on June 1st, and how much additional
life
>>can be expected of her compared a bee that became 5 weeks old on December
>>1st?

>With respect George, the longevity of these two bees cannot be compared,
>since one is a 'summer' bee and the other is a 'winter' bee. The longevity
>of these two bees is vastly different since most winter bees survive until
>the spring to feed the early brood.

>>Two bees, both emerging from their cells on June 1st.  However, it rained
>>almost every day from June 20th to July 10th and bees could rarely forage.
>>In the adjoining county, it was warm and sunny rain-free during the same
>>period and bees were very busy foraging.  Can you suggest a death date for
>>either?  I can't.

>Neither can I, and I doubt if anybody else can, and I fail to see how this
>adds to the debate either way.


I think what George is getting at is how do you develop a metric on
longevity when there are many factors that will skew the results. If you are
going to try and breed a bee with an average lifespan that is, say, one week
longer than our current stock what are you going to sacrifice? Your choices
may be something like:

Spends more time as a house bee.
Does not forage as much.
Carries less per foraging trip.
etc.

I understand what you are getting at. For example the reason to treat for
Nosema is to increase the productive life of the worker bee.

Maybe we need to think of bee longevity in the number of brood cycles the
adult lives? Since many bees adjust brood production based on the expected
need of adult workers. Living all of winter would only give the worker a 1.
An adult that lives 2.1 brood cycles (on average) would be better than a
2.0.