This posting was acknowledged, appears in the archive, but does not appear to have been distributed. PE. In response to my posting about susceptibility of bees to viruses: Bob: > The key to the bees surviving varroa in my opinion is in cutting the number > of varroa in the hive. Period! Most researchers in the world stand with > me. Surely, cutting the number of varroa in the hive does not enable the bees to 'survive varroa' - it simply enables the bees to survive with the viruses present by reducing the number of bees/larvae infected by injection of the viruses into the haemolymph. Here,as we all know, lies the treadmill - since it is necessary to keep on attempting to eliminate varroa. My point was that we seem to be concentrating on the varroa, which is the vector, rather than looking at the real cause of the problem, the viruses. If we had bees that were not susceptible to these viruses (esp DWV and APV), then varroa would be much less of a problem. Of course, the stock answer is that we cannot control viruses, so must keep killing the varroa. But is this true? Sac brood is caused by a virus, but is easily cured by requeening from a resistant strain. Perhaps if more work was done on resistance to DWV and APV, rather than ways to kill varroa, then we might move ahead more quickly. > The U.S. with its huge pollination needs could not afford to simply let > hives die as the Russians did. I am not suggesting that anyone should simply let hives die! I am just questioning the approach to the problem. > Perhaps a hobby beekeeper in a small city will come up with a cure for > varroa or a bee which will tolerate varroa but I would bet my money on the > very small group of researchers & beekeepers doing serious varroa > research. Maybe so, but this does not preclude hobby, or side-line, beekeepers from doing useful work. For example, in order to get good tempered bees we could wait for 'scientists' to produce a strain of docile bee and then breed large numbers of queens from that stock. On the other hand, hobby beekeepers could select for docile stock, either by queen rearing from the best - or by culling the worst. I theorise that we can apply a similar approach to the virus problem associated with varroa and in this case the varroa themselves will do the culling - if we let them. By attempting to kill virtually all the varroa we remain on the treadmill; but if we use less effective treatments and tolerate a moderate (to be defined!) varroa population, then the most susceptible colonies will not survive. Of course, we do not want varroa levels to be so high that virtually all colonies die (because the US has huge pollination needs!), but should be able to cope with slightly higher losses if this leads to resistant bees. I know that much work has been done on killing varroa (because there is money to be made); I know that much work has been done to establish the how, when and why of colony collapse due to the viruses vectored by varroa. What I ask is whether any work has been done to establish variation in susceptibility to the viruses, especially when they are injected directly into the haemolymph. Peter Edwards [log in to unmask] www.stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk/ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info --- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::