Peter Dillon wrote:

> But then I ask myself - why all the comment?
> If it is related to V.j. control, if so and then presuming that it is
> possible to regress the corporal size of the A.m.m. over a few
> generations - why stop at cell size 4.7mm?
> Why not continue below, gradually reducing the cell size, 4.6, 4.5mm and
> observe the effects on V.j. reproduction.

Peter -

The first size tested in the field was 5.0 - 5.1mm cell size with near 900
colonies. Hives lived with varroa, but production dropped to practically
zero on all hive products. In 1997, the remaining hives (400) were all put
on 4.9mm foundation. Initially the hive count dropped to 250 and then later
to 104 in 1998. The Lusby's now have 700+ colonies and have just extracted
their 35th barrel with all expectations to get at least another 35 by fall.

I would assume if the bees can deal with the varroa mite by themselves being
on 4.9, then the question is why go even smaller? If you go too small you
will start having trouble extracting the honey from the cells.

I should point out that these are (will be) 70 barrels of honey from hives
that have seen no chemicals or drugs of any kind in them.

Regards,
Barry