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:
randy oliver <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 6 Jul 2011 08:33:31 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
Hi All,

I received replies to my rant from some of the researchers.

I am in total agreement with Jerry about the editors not allowing time for
rebuttal prior to publication, as that allows clear errors to be published,
such as the assertion that the Army team did not subtract bee proteins from
the analysis.  This was one of the first questions that I asked prior to
Bromenshenk publishing the paper, and I received a direct reply from the
Army that they indeed had.

Another researcher pointed out the statistical problems of identifying so
many pathogens out of the peptide soup.  However, the Army cites another
paper in which they tested their method with samples spiked with multiple
bacteria, and the results were quite impressive!

I would like to issue one retraction.  In the most recent paper, Cox-Foster
did indeed run positive controls for iridovirus.  I commend her team for
that, and consider that approach to be excellent science.  Since they did
not find iridovirus in samples that ostensibly were also analyzed by the
Army, this would be the first critique that IMHO has real meat to it.

I am still hoping to hear from the DeRisi team, as I am thoroughly impressed
by their techniques and recent findings.

The obvious shortcoming of the Bromenshenk findings is that they have yet to
publish evidence that they have isolated the iridovirus from sick bees and
then fulfilled Koch's Postulate by infecting healthy bees with it.  Until
that time, I expect great scientific skepticism as to their findings, and
encourage questioning, provided it be done in a positive manner.

My fervent hope is that the results of the different methodologies can
eventually be reconciled, and that we will eventually have better windows
through which we can view the actual pathogen load in our colonies.

Randy Oliver

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm

ATOM RSS1 RSS2