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:
Dee Lusby <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 13 May 2007 17:58:30 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (110 lines)
Allen:
Please, then, *clearly* define "regression", describing
both the method and the mechanisms believed to be at work. 

Reply:
Passage back, return. To go back,move backward, return to
state in this instance of previous size. Method here being
to insert and use SC foundation, though each step in
regression down/back is only about .2mm to .3mm sizing each
jump down. (by the way HSC gets around this buying time)
Why, Allen then? Here please note page 433 under honeycomb
in ABC and XYZ of Bee Culture 1920 edition, right column,
bottom paragraph "Several times it has been suggested that
we enlarge the race of honeybees by giving them larger
cells; and some circumstances seem to indicate that
something may be done in this direction, altho there is
little hope of any permanent enlargement in size unless is
combined with it the idea of selecting the largest bees
from whcih to propagate."..."Worker bees reared in
drone-cells are sometimes extra large in size; but as to
whether they can be made permanently larger by such a
course is bery doubtful." 

Now Allen, course this was done with a series of upsizing
over the years, though some seem to not think so, my man!!
and today we are paying the consequences for this trend,
especially since the 1933/34 era. and first Paris
convention for beekeeping.

Regression here is to merely size back down the comb sizes
to the center of the natural size spectrum again,and away
from various foundations in usage today to the bigger made
in succession over the past several decades one might say.

This then sets the stage for massive change within our
honeybees again by changing their aerodynamics in flight
and therefore in mating; change in foraging and what can be
foraged patterns; therefore change in diet; change also in
propolis which then changes hive suceptability to
diseases/maladies, sterility of broodnest from bacteria,
fungal, and viruses; also changes by size physical
attraction for pests and parasites; also changes
longevitity of the bees to longer and less development time
in broodcells to emergence. Could go on I suppose but see
no reason to keep listing as you will probably question all
anyways. 

Now Allen, my reply to Bill was:
> Bill: How can you assume they are the same race of bees
you started with unless you use AI?
>
> Reply:
> Just now what has this got to do with regression,

So since you will probably want to know why I want to know
what this has to do with regression let me then now go into
for Bill and you here:

Many wrongly believe that hybaridization is progressive
breeding. It is not! In today's world, hybridization is for
the most part mongrel breeding that produces only a short
burst of hybrid vigor and then quickly falls apart with
each succeeding generation. The final result is nearly
always total mongrelization of local area bee stocks and an
uncontrolled mixture of overly aggressive bees which makes
beekeeping more and mroe impossible in todays urbanizing
world. Then add to this the huge variance in so many
treatments going on at same time, besides artificial diets
of sugars and pollen substitutes and one is asking for
disaster and I have not even mentioned that in a long term
program of stock improvement, artificial insemination and
various closed-population breeding methods should be
avoided, as they lead to severe inbreeding, resulting in
poor brood patterns, poor preouct averages, weak winter
cluster carryover (not that some now don;t see this!) and
colonoy collapse over a period of 20-30 years (another take
on CCD maybe?).

Nature breeds evolutionary chages that are progressive,
retrogressive, or clones when race/strain survivability is
at stake. But who talks about this Allen? for to go back to
progressive breeding or even retrogressive breeding one
must have acclimitized honeybees FWIW and this is what I
was eluding to in replying to Bill and the AI bit.

Will stop for now.

You want more specific regressing down in size of combs go
to:
http://www.beesource.com/pov/lusby/ and bring up the "Way
Back to Biological Beekeeping" and read.........

Regards,

Dee




 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a PS3 game guru.
Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.
http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************

ATOM RSS1 RSS2