BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bill Truesdell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 20 Aug 2003 16:11:02 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Aaron Morris wrote:

> Before this blows out of proportion (again), my recollection was there were
> some VERY good reasons (far beyond legalities) why Apis c. is a bad idea
> posted by some knowledgeable contributors (Blane?  Jim Bach?) when the
> discussion took place more than a few years back.

One thing that was discussed back then was that Varroa J was the mite
and even Apis M could deal with it. It was also noted that Apis M and
Apis C were close to each other in the Far East so they both were able
to deal with Varroa.

So why bring Apis C when we have Apis M which has the same tolerance?
Russian bees anyone?

If I recall we are also talking not just about different Varroa but also
about different variants of Apis C. One post from back then was about a
variant of Varroa J which could not survive on Apis M! So it is not as
clear cut as it seems.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2