"the issues of varroa and other
diseases the the larger "new improved" bees of today are experiencing
derive from modern beekeeping? "

The idea that man has artificially made today's honey bees larger than the natural size persists widely, particularly in the back yard sector of bee keepers.  Both Lusby and Bush have pushed this idea as a source of all kinds of evils created by man including why varroa mites are a problem.  The idea that man created the problem so the solution is dirt simple is near addictive in some quarters.  All you have to do is take the easy step of returning to natural size by the easy process of "regressing" your bees to their natural size.

Well, the problem is there is no evidence that today's bees are substantially bigger than bees of 100 and 200 years ago.  Because people like Lusby and Bush are unable to do high school math properly and thus get the wrong answers to the calculations they do on historical data they continue to preach this mantra.  Here is a ref to how to do the calculation properly:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263659467_On_the_natural_cell_size_of_European_honey_bees_A_fatal_error_or_distortion_of_historical_data

If you actually dig into the details of how we came to have today's cell sizes for the vast majority of foundation produced the story is interesting.  Root tried a number of things to make artificial foundation.  He found having the cell bottom angles proper was a great help in encouraging the bees to draw wax foundation.  He experimented with various cell sizes and determined what cell size the bees most readily accepted.  He also did measurements on natural comb and showed that such comb had cell sizes very close to those the bees preferred on foundation.

As I recall, during the 19 teens and twenties there was a significant effort to breed a larger bee by using foundation that had cells larger than normal worker cells but smaller than drone cells.  The objective of this effort was to get a larger bee with a longer tongue that could access nectar in flowers which were too deep for a normal sized bee to access.  The bees did not like this larger cell size and often remodeled the foundation to a cell size more to their liking just like they often do today with the unnatural 4.8 mm cell size.  The effort did not produce the desired results and the whole idea was dropped.  But, it is about due time for some snake oil salesman to revitalize that idea with the claim that  such bees are varroa proof.  It seems like a logical next step in the ever lasting stream of cult like religions that periodically invade bee keeping thinking.  Maybe I should push that idea?  Anyone have suggestions on how to make money from such a nutty idea?  While I am at it I could also make a syrup additive that supplements the bees vitamin D.  After all, where I live my bees get very little sunlight in the winter so must be vitamin D deficient.

Just to make sure that I do not mislead anyone yes there is some minor variation in both the cell size bees draw naturally and the size of the bee produced in such cells.  As you move from a cold climate to a warmer climate the native honey bees do change size to a small but measurable extent.  I know of no evidence that any such native population is so small that 4.8 mm is their normal cell size.  But, even if such a population does exist it is irrelevant.  The honey bees kept in the US and Canada are from Europe and there are no European bees that are anyplace close to that small naturally.

Dick

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