>
> What happens when you take bees that have been "regressed"
> to 4.9 small cell foundation and have been on it for some time, and
> then allow then free rein, like in a top bar hive, to make whatever
> they want. Do they stay at 4.9 or do they start building something
> bigger if they are not "forced" to stay at the small cell size? >
> Layne Westover, College Station, Texas
>
I built and started some TBH's this year, and had mixed results. The hives
accomodate 28 bars. I started with standard foundation/5-frame nucs, and
let them build on top bars from there. I did not use small cell foundation
to start, although I will try next year. I have compared them somewhat
anecdotally with identical nucs started in Langstroths. In all, I doubt
they would adapt well to any large scale commercial operation aimed at
production. I have yet to do a final harvest and inspection, but here are
several observations thus far:
1) MUCH higher drone population than equivalent Langstroth, with
(obviously) fairly large numbers of drone cells, which later become honey
cells. I have seen no observable difference in cell size compared to my
Langstroths. I will do some more accurate measurements after harvest.
Without the foundation to control cell size, there is a LOT more variance in
cell size across a given comb.
2) Considerably smaller final (peak) colony size, presumably due to slower
expansion of brood nest (difficult to manipulate/expand), and higher
proportion of drones.
3) Although comb building and honey storage seemed accelerated in Jun-July
compared to Langstroths, they were somewhat outpaced in the later parts of
the summer. Again, I suspect this is partly due to smaller brood nest.
4) Once the bees draw out about 15 "frames", they seem to idle somewhat.
They don't seem willing to work too far back from an entrance horizontally.
5) The comb building process is easily disturbed in a horizontal
arrangement. The bees seem "perturbed" by the introduction of comb "out of
sequence". This makes swapping combs/combining less advantageous.
6) They can sometimes be difficult to keep comb building parallel - cross
comb can be a real pain in the neck, since you have to cut it all apart just
to move top bars and gain access.
7) Definitely lower production, but that can probably be mitigated by
improved strategies.
8) Considerably more time consuming to work than a Langstroth.
9) They seem less prone to swarming. Once again, I think this is due to a
naturally smaller brood chamber.
10) They would make excellent drone hives for mating purposes.
11) Probably the best motive - VERY cheap to build. Mine cost around $15
each, complete.
12) Since the hive is entirely self contained, they're MUCH easier to move
than a Langstroth, as long as they're not full. It would be easy to build
provisions for handles for easy transport.
13) Disadvantage - they need supports. You can't just set them on the
ground or a pallet, unless you want to lay on your belly to work your hives.
That would be an interesting sight.
I will continue to experiment with TBH's next year, since they are quite
interesting. I'll take some photos soon and make available to the list soon.
If you don't care about occasional cross comb (just cut it out to harvest),
they would make an excellent choice for leave-alone hives for pollination,
or remote locations. You could build them smaller just for that purpose.
Once they're up and running, you don't have to keep checking them to see if
they need a super. Give 'em room, and let 'em go.
Regards,
Todd.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
|
