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:
Charles Linder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:22:27 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (52 lines)
This work did show the interesting discovery that AChE goes up in January in
winter bees, so although the rest of the paper is equivocal, I don't think
the experiment was worthless.

Agreed!,   My comment was just premature and   well   Frankly I can't think
of anything polite to use......


Had they simply noted that and dug a lot deeper it may be valuable,  but to
say  "look what we found"  is disingenuous at best.


I was reading a long paper on Varro fundicity (reproductive success rate)
this week. It was quite interesting to see how the rate varied  a lot based
on "envirmental" issues and be species.  The bottom line of the paper was
simply  "we don't know why"  but outside factors are  seriously in play.
Add that to ground truth experiences in that some years mites are terrible
and others not so bad,  and you these ACHe levels,  and you have something
worthy of a look.

For those who are observing  it seems the rate varies from  1.3  to 1.8 %
depending on some outside factors.  
I tried to apply that math to the data in this report,  but it doesn't work
The time cycle for the spikes in mites indicates the problem either A
started before the test began,  or B  was influenced by outside factors 

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/sick-bees-part-12-varroa-management-getting-
down-to-brass-tacks/




In this case to my totally untrained eye,  it looks as if Carbyl was a
bigger factor then anything,  and yet since that didn't fit the narrative,
it was ignored.     If the 1% was an issue    it should have been a simple
task to find out if there was more correlation, by finding some secondary
hives with even higher levels and see if the same trend is observed.

It disturbs me greatly when things are stopped short of real information in
the name of some other agenda.   Should neonics  actually play a role in
susceptibility to Varro,  we could then compare that information to other
pesticides such as synthetic pyrethroids  or Carbyl's  and have some good
information.


Charles

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2