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:
"Susan L. Nielsen" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 31 Aug 2000 20:45:19 -0700
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (30 lines)
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, James Kilty wrote:

> >... then feral hives should not
> >succumb to varroa pressure.

> So
> therefore many feral colonies should have survived if it were the *only*
> factor. Since they didn't, it cannot be the only factor. Enlighten me
> please.

Not me. I didn't think it required an explicit statement. The evidence
of the natural experiment suggests that feral hives, with smaller
cell sizes, did succumb to Varroa infestation. In the absence of a
controlled experiment, it is a strongly suggestive description of
the situation.

It would be wonderful of the solution were as simple as a new (old)
cell size, but casual observations are not convincing in light of the
disappearance of feral colonies of A. mellifera across Varroa blighted
continents.

It would take enlightening to demonstrate another reason for the
coincidence.

Susan
--
Susan Nielsen, Shambles Workshops      |"...Gently down the
Beavercreek, OR, USA                   |stream..."
[log in to unmask]                   |           -- Anon.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2