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:
Karen Oland <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 7 Oct 2002 10:01:14 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
> From:Peter Borst
> In order to study supersedure, one would have to requeen all hives
> with marked queens, or at least mark every queen early in the season.
> Then these queens would have to be monitored during the season. This
> would establish a baseline supersedure rate. Next, the
> "anti-supersedure" study would be undertaken, -- say: change the
> frame orientation. This would be done on half the hives. Half would
> have to be managed in the regular way. Then, if the rate of
> supersedure departed from the previous year in the test hives but not
> in the control hives, you could say you were on to something.

Peter,

Would you not need two groups that were re-arranged? One into the perfect
Housel (since we can presume few of your control hives start that way;
unless you re-arranged them, the odds are greatly against it) and the second
group into some other configuration that is not the perfect housel, but is
re-arranged.  Otherwise, your study may only gauge the difference between
those rearranged and those not, rather than Housel versus non-Housel.

Karen

ATOM RSS1 RSS2