A run down of the "Methods"

[wayacoyote]

I get lost in all of the "Methods" of queen rearing. I'm not expecting the Long version, just a footnote that will help me understand whose is whose. Maybe just the main point(s) that each person contrived that sets their method apart. Michael Bush has some of the books on his website for the in depth read. http://www.bushfarms.com/bees.htm

So here are a couple to start with:

Gilbert Doolittle: graft day-old larvae into queen-cups

Isaac Hopkins: Suspend a prepared comb of day-old larvae horizontally above a queenless hive.

Jay Smith:

Henry Alley:

Miller Method:


Hey, further browsing the BushBee Site has yielded even more treasure. The answers were found here:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesqueenrearingmethods.htm

[JohnBeeMan]

I plan to start the season using Nicot system. However, I also plan to experiment with the Doolittle method.
For mting I have some 4 way deeps, but am also thinking of ordering a few of the syrofoam mini-nucs from MannLake.

[Michael Bush]

Jay Smith:
Use a swarm box for a starter and the Doolittle method after that.

Henry Alley:
Use a swarm box to get them ready to be a starter and put them back in the hive for the starter.
Cut a strip of old comb with the larvae in it and destroy every other one.

Miller Method:
Cut a comb jagged on the bottom so that some of the larvae have no bottom on the cell.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beesqueenrearingmethods.htm

[tecumseh]

I discriminate between those methods that rely on grafting and those that don't. Since grafting requires some experience (doing)...non grafting methods seems much more likely to result in a quality product for the novice.

another excellent approach is to discriminate between those methods that are usable for the commercial production of queens and those that are not.

If memory serves Jay Smith played around with both grafting and non grafting methods in producing queens and in the end determined that a superior product could be better achieve via a non grafting method.

[Dubhe]

Out of the non graft systems, do y'all have a preference, ie. Nicot, Jenter, or Betterbee's Cupularve? Are all these kits equivalent?

[deknow]

fwiw, i bought an 'ez-queen' system. it is similar to the other graftless systems you mention, but the lay cage has far more cells, so more queens per cage-confinement. in retrospect, i expect this is overkill for my needs...but on the other hand, if one has a market for queen cells, or the resources to raise lots of queens at a time, this would be a real timesaver.

i haven't used the others.

deknow

[Michael Bush]

>Out of the non graft systems, do y'all have a preference, ie. Nicot, Jenter, or Betterbee's Cupularve? Are all these kits equivalent?

They are all similar. But not identical. The Nicot has a few less moving parts (two pieces for each cell as opposed to three for the Jenter). The one Dadant sells has rows of cell plugs which are quicker to put in, but you have to break them apart to use them and then they aren't so easy to reuse. The Jenter is very easy to reuse the parts.

[sc-bee]

Don't have a Dadant book----is it a Nicot MB. Please comment on re-use of Nicot parts please, since I have heard people complain about the bars in the Jenter and having to trim the cells to get them out? Is this common?

[Michael Bush]

>Don't have a Dadant book----is it a Nicot

No.

http://www.eziqueen.co.nz/
https://www.dadant.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30_54&products_id=604
https://www.dadant.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=30_54&products_id=605


> MB. Please comment on re-use of Nicot parts please

I have not tried it, but I don't see any reason you can't reuse the Nicot parts.

> since I have heard people complain about the bars in the Jenter and having to trim the cells to get them out? Is this common?

No. It's not very common.

[BWrangler]

Hi Guys,

Trying to understand all the different methods isn't very easy. Each method often uses it's on lingo. And the similar terms are often used quite differently. I stumbled for some time until I realized a couple of points.

First, it's the bees who raise the queens and not the beekeeper or his method. This may sound redundant. It's a concept that's often lost in the methodology. But once understood, it's the foundation for comparing methods and separating the wheat from the chaff.

Second, healthy, well-fed bees only rear queens under two circumstances, swarming and emergency with most queen rearers working with the later. This is accomplished by reducing, isolating, or removing bees from the queen's pheromones in healthy, well fed hives. Once that's done, the bees take care of the rest. Everything else has to do with available equipment, beekeeper's schedules, bee resources, production rates/duration and the season.

So, when comparing methods, divide the activities into two parts: those that are bee prep related, and those that are beekeeper focused. Compare bee prep stuff with bee prep stuff, and beekeeper stuff with beekeeper stuff helps simplify the process.

Regards
Dennis