Questions on small cell and what type of bees i seem to have

[TheCrazyBeeMan]

Well I am trying to raise some queens from my feral bees and have begun to wonder if they may be my savior for the mites. They are on the second year and have yet been damaged by the mites. Last year they had a mite fall of five or less on most days at the same time being surrounded by two large colonies both crashing with mite loads in the thousands. I have been wondering about them for a while and do not want to make the mistake of putting to much faith in them but they seem to be doing very well and seem to exhibit some form of (SMR) traits such as uncapping pupae. I do not have any idea what they are though they seem to have white stripes with black turning a leathery yellow farther up the body. The queen was not marked and I believe was an after swarm of another colony I caught but lost (I never will forgive my self for that one). I have planned to see if I can raise a number of queens open mated and do a trial to see if this is just a one shoot deal. At this time they are the healthy beyond belief filling two deeps full with bees as to the point it makes me fell like I am swimming in bees. I have also looked into ways to keep the bees clean of mites if my thoughts are unfounded by using small cell but have heard some interesting things. 1) Small bees are less physically able to do work so less honey due to size of flight muscle in the thorax? 2) The bees raised on small cell are less able to feed themselves do to their small size/ tongue length? 3) The idea of post capping and precapping times are the same so no benefit? I am not so sure about what this beekeeper says and still want to try it out and see. I am waiting for Honey Super Cells drawn at 4.9mm frames to be available so I can try this and see for my self one way or another. I am just wondering if anyone either knows maybe what kind of bees I have or as to the validity of the claims made by the beekeeper. Maybe if I am lucky the queen will work out am I will not have to worry anymore (can always dream).

[D. Murrell]

Greetings,

There haven't been any studies, I've seen, concerning the size of the bee vs just about everything, although there are lots of statements made concerning it.

I have small cell hives, large cell hives, and all natural cell hives. And I've reached some conclusions that are quite different than the either or debate about cell size. Bees don't build one size worker cells. They build a range of cell sizes which fit into an overall broodnest structure. That structure is very important to colony function. And those functions change and vary in importance with the change in season.

Check out:

http://wind.prohosing.com/tbhguy/bee/musin.htm

http://wind.prohosting.com/tbhguy/bee/size.htm

And if still interesting go to beekeeping page and look at my comb and broodnest observations.

Concerning the feral bee type, any bee that's adapted to your area will be a better bee than one shipped in from somewhere else. If you have selected it, you can name it!

Regards
Dennis

[Darrel Wright]

"Bees don't build one size worker cells."

I think I want to start a bee-club where no one gets in the door without writing this statement on the blackboard 100 times. Everyone who has seen natural comb knows it, no one can dispute it, and yet most of the SC-LC conversations proceed in total abstraction from it.

[naturebee]

Â…. but they seem to be doing very well and seem to exhibit some form of (SMR) traits such as uncapping pupae.

Hello, the Word is, there is growing a discussion towards abandoning the term SMR, and listing the trait under hygienic, which is want SMR is anyways. Right now, to me it seems just another fancy strategy for selling hygienic queens. Bees will also exhibit this trait when regressed. Also, you have to watch that wax worm in capped brood can look like uncapping of cells.

Â…. I have also looked into ways to keep the bees clean of mites if my thoughts are unfounded by using small cell but have heard some interesting things. 1) Small bees are less physically able to do work so less honey due to size of flight muscle in the thorax?

As far as the pay load issue goes, this is true and has been proven years back. But this applies to NO other area such as division of labor ect. Only in the case of pay load to my knowledge has this been proven. My answer is here that keeping colonies is all about strength and numbers, strong colonies are the main thing beekeepers strive for pollination and surplus. Small cell would allow the colony greater fecundity in the broodnest and in foraging areas with the increased numbers. Same as the smaller AHB out performs the larger European variety of bees, it is likely that small cell European bees may out perform the larger. Same as the human race building the great wall of china. It was not a Â’payload issueÂ’ but a Â’work force issueÂ’ that is was ever built.

2) The bees raised on small cell are less able to feed themselves do to their small size/ tongue length?

I can’t see how feeding themselves would be a problem, or my small bees would have surely starved by now. But if you are referring to foraging here. There are many studies that show corolla width as limiting factor in determining which pollinators get the reward. The smaller bee may be more able to reach the reward. There is a study of the smaller AHB foraging closer in a test field and larger domestics going further. “They” interpret the study as larger bees are more efficient pollinators. I interpret the study as the larger bees may not be getting all the reward, or less efficient foragers, not reaching nectar at the very bottom of the flower and having to go further for the same?


3) The idea of post capping and precapping times are the same so no benefit? I am not so sure about what this beekeeper says and still want to try it out and see. I am waiting for Honey Super Cells drawn at 4.9mm frames to be available so I can try this and see for my self one way or another. I am just wondering if anyone either knows maybe what kind of bees I have or as to the validity of the claims made by the beekeeper. Maybe if I am lucky the queen will work out am I will not have to worry anymore (can always dream).

Wait and see approach is good. Also, the smaller Caucasians have a shorter hatching time and so do the AHB, so it dose seem logical. Also this shorter capping time can be selected for.

[naturebee]

Â…Well I am trying to raise some queens from my feral bees and have begun to wonder if they may be my savior for the mites. They are on the second year and have yet been damaged by the mites.

Forgot something,,,,
It is common for colonies to survive about two years without succumbing to varroa.

1) A colony exposed to mites and surviving 2 years while maintaining a fall surplus in the second year gets my attention as possible future genetic material.

2) A full size colony exposed to mites and surviving without any treatments for 3 years while producing a surplus, gets serious consideration as a candidate of genetic material for itÂ’s mite suppression qualities, and maybe just a limited amount of breeding from the colony.

3) Only if surviving 4 years without treatments or other mite suppression hive or frame manipulation tactics, while at the same time producing a surplus, is a colony claimed mite resistant.

Maintaining a fall surplus and surviving for 3 or 4 years is the key here, colonies occasionally can go on for a few or many years with mites.

[TwT]

could a hive survive 8 years be considered mite resistant or could it be a isolated location that has something to do with the hive surviving without medication or any hive manipulation. reason being, is that this hive belongs to my father and he isn't a up to date keeper. im going this year and still a few frames from that hive.

[TheCrazyBeeMan]

My thought is that I could do screened bottom boards and those colonies that have the least mite fall/best production I would use to requeen. I am not sure about 4 years to wait because with my luck they would either swarm abscond or just die from some other reason. Just because they can survive mites does not mean they can not be killed or lost through other means. My new queens should be ready soon so I should see if itÂ’s just a one time thing or not. I am also interested in Caucasians for the shorter pre and post capping. Could people just not breed for that? Maybe some observation hives set up as experiments??? Super fast bees in the time for capping and uncapping times would probably be a god send at this time with the mites.

[naturebee]

TwT, any hive surviving 8 years would likely have some degree of mite resistance. An isolated location does not necessarily mean there arenÂ’t any feral bees to transmit the parasite. If it were me, I would be making a few colonies from this hive to see how they do.

[naturebee]

...I am not sure about 4 years to wait because with my luck they would either swarm abscond or just die from some other reason. Just because they can survive mites does not mean they can not be killed or lost through other means.

Agree, but colonies often survive 2 to 3 years with mites. Mite drops, hygienic selection and simply breeding from your best performers would be methods that can be used to select resistant much sooner.

My new queens should be ready soon so I should see if itÂ’s just a one time thing or not. I am also interested in Caucasians for the shorter pre and post capping. Could people just not breed for that?

The LusbyÂ’s queens I believe hatch a day earlier due to selective pressure towards queens that mature and hatch sooner, so it can be done.

[Michael Bush]

>The LusbyÂ’s queens I believe hatch a day earlier due to selective pressure towards queens that mature and hatch sooner, so it can be done.

Perhaps. But I have put simple Carnis or Italians from commercial breeders on 4.95mm cells and seen them capped a day early and emerge two days early with no selective pressure at all. Since Lusby's are on 4.85mm to 4.9mm I would expect that is the major factor in early capping and emergence.

I suppose I should repeat the timing for the (recently) feral bees now.

According to Huber (who would have been on natural cell size since foundation wasn't invented yet) the worker emerges on the twentieth day from the day the egg was laid. That's one day earlier than we currently say it takes on "normal" enlarged foundation (assuming Huber is not counting the day the egg was layed as day one, in which case it's two days earlier).