> Perhaps you could be so kind as to update the list members on the results of
> the fumidil experiment and the "nosema discussion group" that is on your
> webpages.  There has been no activity on this discussion group for over a
> year I believe.

That's true.  Eric, who inspired the whole thing, retired from beekeeping and
since I found very little nosema the year we did the tests and set up the page,
I lost interest.   We did some discussion about various alternate application
methods for fumigillan, nothing conclusive was established.

As it happened this past spring turned out to be the kind of spring that we
should have been looking for nosema, but we did not.  I had planned to do a bit
of a survey this fall and did not, so that is where it rests for now.

> I thought the discussion was quite promising and it would
> be timely to report to the list given the current thread about prophylactic
> drug use in North American bees.  Unlike foulbrood and chalkbrood, nosema is
> difficult to see without testing (and even *WITH* testing according to the
> discussion group and the thread on false positives).

True.  I suppose if we had found higher levels, I would have more interest, but
we have been distracted by the mites.

> FWIW, I am somewhat sceptical that comb fumigation with acetic acid, and
> comb renewal programs are sufficient to solve the problem (although I do not
> disbelieve the European experience).

I have doubted the usefulness of this approach, rather believing that taking
good care of the bees and using good bees would keep nosema at bay.  Any time I
have tested, I have found little evidence of the disease.

> I started over 200 packages this past
> spring from New Zealand, and they were shaken from two different beekeepers.
> I also picked up another batch of over 200 for other beekeepers.  In both
> cases the majority of the load came in excellent condition and some were
> very very poor.  It was determined that one of the beekeepers had high
> levels of nosema and this was the likely cause.

I don't know.  I've received a number of loads off planes and I think it may
have to do with the position of the packages in the load.  Also, dry ice is used
for cooling and it drugs the bees.  Some packages are closer to the chunks and I
wonder if they are damaged by it.  I have some real doubts about the practice.
I know they are pretty stupid for about a day or so after the experience and
would never again install bees fresh off the plane without a day minimum to
recover.  I have also mentioned before that one NZ shipper uses cardboard cages
with insufficient screen area.  The screen area is about 1/2 of that which
others consider necessary.

> I believe that bees can probably tolerate some nosema later in the season
> and still produce reasonable (but probably lower) honey crops, or at least
> that is what experiments that Endel Karmo years ago seemed to show.  But
> without fumidil I would worry that nosema would hit the bees hardest in the
> early spring, just when we here need to push for a fast build-up for the very
> early blueberry pollination.

Nosema shortens the lives of bees and affects their behaviour, but as with most
other bee problems, it is often when a number of factors combine that we notice
the impact most.

I guess I'll have to make sure I do some nosema checks this coming spring and I
will report if I do.  Maybe some others will do the same?

allen