From: "klbees" <kytl@chevron.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:06:09 -0000
To: BiologicalBeekeeping@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: cell size measurement

Greetings Fellow Beekeepers,
To summarize what many of you have said recently, "Natural Cell Size"
data is suspect for a variety of reasons:

1. Present bee strains have been raised so long on enlarged cells.
2. Feral bees are often recently swarmed domestic bees.
3. Historical data is often ambiguous, esp. in regards to cells per
unit area.
4. The cells we are interested in measuring are only brood cells.
5. Larger cells not in the brood area are often measured and
reported or averaged in.

It seems to me that the largest population of A. mellifera raised
without foundation is the African bee, A.m. scutellata. Brood cells,
if I am not mistaken, typically measure 4.7 mm. I would be
interested in the range of measurements that exists for scutellata.
This is the most reliable "Natural Cell Size" data we can hope for.

It should be argued that scutellata, of tropical origin, is not
typical of bees of temperate climates. Are there any populations of
bees in the temperate climates that are absolutely wild? Are there
any bees that have been feral for a century? Are there any domestic
bees that have been raised for a century, without foundation? Or is
this whole temperate beekeeping industry hooked on the use of
foundation? What about in Primorski, Russia? How are bees raised in
the Middle East? The Cape bee of S. Africa? A.m. monticola? What
about the feral bees of Washington State's Olympic Wilderness? Are
any of these bees free of the effects of imprinted foundation? If
so, what is the size of their brood cells?

Sorry to ask more than one question per post.

Cheers for the new year to all of you. I appreciate the wealth of
information on this and other beekeeping sites. Thanks to all of you.

Kyle