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:
Mon, 4 Jun 2001 11:47:24 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Seppo Korpela wrote:

> You remember the third case quite well, but not exactly. The small experiment was
> made by me in Finland using the original method of applying FGMO on frame top
> lists.

Thanks, Seppo.
After I posted the message I retrieved your message, both the one you
posted to the list plus the one that you sent me which had the data.

Just to refresh the memories of those who may not remember the exchange,
I requested independent verification of FGMO tests. Seppo had run them
and they showed about the same mite drop from FGMO that would have been
expected from mite drop without FGMO. The mites were not affected by
FGMO. The results were counter to that published by proponents of FGMO
at the time.

The application method has changed several times since then. Since the
proponent's data was not supported by independent research then, I am
only asking for independent data for whatever the newest application
methods might be, just as I did before.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, ME

ATOM RSS1 RSS2