Dennis Murrell gave a description of his SMR results so far.
> SMR breeder: The bees didn't like the degree of inbreeding and continually
tried to supercede her.
> one round of f1's but haven't had them long enough to make any good
measurements.

First, the results with the breeder from Ca. is consistent with reports from
the folks doing the work.  They have stated up front, and it is very clear
on the breeder's web page that these bees have been inbred (perhaps
excessively) to isolate SMR traits.  The queens are recommended ONLY as
breeders, not production colonies, and it's stated up front that customers
should be prepared for the experience that Dennis described.  The breeder
queens are to be used to raise as many queens as on is able for as long as
the bees will allow the breeders to exist.  And the progeny may or may not
retain SMR traits, although claims are that it is highly likely that some
degree of SMR will carry over to the next generation(s).

> I have removed about 100 or so uncapped purple eyed pupa from several
> frames and found mature female adult varroa mites in all instances but
> two.
These details are sketchy.  Were those "100 or so" from multiple queens or a
single colony.  How soon after the colony(s) was/were given the open mated
SMR daughter queen(s) were the small sample size tests run?  It's not hard
to recognize holes in the evaluation.

All in all I'd say Dennis' SMR experiment is right on track and consistent
with what Baton Rouge has publicized to expect.  However, it also seems to
me that it's too soon and not complete enough to make valid conclusions.

Aaron Morris - thinking Bob's 2-yr test period is about spot on!