Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner

fumigillin: how vital?

28K views 122 replies 21 participants last post by  dickm 
#1 ·
The temperatures are now dipping into the thirties at night and the forties to low fifties during the day. On sunny days my bees are still active. I'm still giving them syrup and although their appetite for it has lessened, they're still taking it. My question is, is it too late to mix in some fumigillin, and how dire is it if I skip it until the spring when I begin feeding them again?
 
#35 ·
[QUOTE=Jim Fischer;273332
>I think Randy Oliver said that he is doing an article on the
process of testing for Nosema for either ABJ or Bee Culture
soon, so he may have some step-by-step, with photos.
He's good at that sort of thing.

Yes, Blender then scope. Will let Randy O take it from there.
 
#37 ·
>Your new statements indicate that either:

What new statements? I quoted my previous statement. I made no new statements. Again you are rewriting what I said. Perhaps my "new statments" are the once quoting an esteemed Dr. of entomology saying that it's not a problem in this part of the country? But you will continue to ignore that.

>a) You have seen symptoms of nosema, but ignored it.

I did not say anything about it, but no, I have NOT seen symptoms of Nosema. Ever. And, no I have not examined them or kept records. But apparently I'm not entitled to my opinion unless I have a careful scientific records to back it up. Am I claiming they have never had Nosema? No. I'm claiming nothing of the sort. I'm made two, count them, TWO statements. I will not bother to restate them for the third time as you couldn't read them on the first two installments, so there seems no point in repeating them.

>b) You have seen nosema, but have tried something
other than fumagillin.

I did not say anything about what I've tried, or not tried, but I have never used anything for Nosema.

>The first would be cruel, and the second would be
either "interesting" or "puzzling".

You apparently didn't read what I said that Dr. Ellis said. Since he has hardly ever seen it around here either it doesn't seem that unlikely that I wouldn't either.

>Or you tried something else? How'd that go?

I've tried nothing. I think I've stated my "treatment" program often enough before that you'd have to be pretty dense not to know what it is.

>And how did you test/examine your bees to assure
yourself that your approach worked?

I did not say that I examined them and I have not examined them.

>I know you dislike addressing "the details"

Actually I often address the details which you promptly ignore or rewrite to fit your view of what you THINK I've just said so it does seem like a total waste of effort.

>So, "vital"? You decide.

I did.
 
#38 ·
*Sigh* Looks like I need to drag this out again:
http://www.bee-quick.com/FordGuys_dilemma.jpg

Regardless, Mike - so you were trying to say was:

1) You've never tested for Nosema.

2) You have it on what you think as good authority
that there isn't much Nosema in Nebraska.

So for that reason, you don't think it is "vital", and
you not only intone it as if it were universal fact
to a person from Bow NH, but you just don't take
the hint
when I offer a gentle hint.

Well, here's a less subtle clue - NH and VT have problems
with Nosema. Always have. I lived in NH from 6th grade
through the start of college, and Dad lived there for a
total of 30 years. We both keep bees. Connect the dots.

Sometimes, the "discussion" ends up containing false, misleading,
and mistaken opinions that appear to present actual hazard to the
health of bees belonging of the trusting souls who ask simple and
direct questions. This is one of those cases. Making it out
to be any sort of "personal thing" is a problem that is unique
to specific egos.
 
#39 ·
well I guess I am clueless (most time's I prefer it that way) about your link mr fischer. and what ever happened to fordguy (I kind of liked the guy and was quite certain that god would forgive him for being a lawyer).

so what's that about?

and I can't say I would much disagree with keith jarret horse back gestimate of the problem, although I would likely add iapv to the list.... plus genetics.

although I cannot document the incident I witnessed at least one (possible two) cases of iapv here this past summer. I took samples but did not KNOW what to tell the lab to test for... actually at that point iapv wasn't even on the short list of possible causes that I had considered. I add genetics to the list in that I also know that certain lines of bees (associated with II queens for rearing queens) has been shown to not so robust in their tolerance to some virus(s).

I think I need to price out some fumidil and go lookin' today at my local flea market for a microscope.
 
#40 ·
So, when considering those dead-out hives that seemed to re-infect with CCD when bees were added back to the hive, it would be interesting to see what would happen if those repopulated hives were treated for nosema. Would they still re-infect? It would be interesting to see.
 
#41 ·
well hillside my instinct (for certainly I was operating on NO information) at the time was to melt 'er down in a big hot water tub. until I can determine a better strategy it will likely continue to be my preferred option. for some reason restocking sounds like a slightly worse bet than throwing dice in vegas.
 
#43 ·
Well, for someone who lives in NH, the experience of someone
who keeps bees in Nebraska is somewhat less than "universal truth".

To a guy in NH, where Nosema is common, the "advice",
offered posed a clear and tangible threat to the survival
of his hives, by suggesting complacency in the face of
what may turn out to be the year that everyone learns
just how much nosema we have.

I've tried several times to put the most charitable interpretation
I could on your suggestion, but you use each opportunity to
rethink/restate your position to merely insult.
 
#44 ·
Jim, I offered no advice in this thread so I really don't understand how you can disagree with it. I have not stated any disagreement with any position you have made in regards to treating Nosema. Other than my, quite simple, original statements, I have merely pointed out that you keep saying I said things I did not or that I meant things that I did not. Please share what you think of Nosema and treating it. I am always happy to hear what you have to say on beekeeping matters.
 
#45 ·
beyond the he said, she said banter mr fischer and mr bush I think it is undeniable that:
1)nosema is pretty widespread over the us of a,
2) often time the impact of nosema may be significant (bioliogically and economically) and never be evident or obvious,
3) only in those places where nosema is evident to the point of being catastrophic do beekeeper recognize the disease and interact with it in some form or fashion, and
4)some cultural practice may actually help disguise or blurr the total effect of nosema which translate into a low prioritization by the beekeeper in regards to attending to this problem.

and finally since we are on a board where the largest audiences are beginner and new bees with little to no experience it would be relevant to suggest that there are some things in regards to managing bees that you cannot recognize directly. ignoring the problem (denial is easy but ineffective) will not make it disappear (although this strategy will quite likely make your bees disappear).

my two centavos...
 
#46 ·
restocking sounds like a slightly worse bet than throwing dice in vegas.
I don't necessarily disagree with you on that, but I was approaching the idea as a test. IF nosema is a significant part of the cause of the disease (which sounds plausible), and if nosema is reliably treatable, then restocking along with treatment could be somewhat of a test. Maybe not a definitive test, but interesting and worthwhile.
 
#48 ·
Nosema opinion.

There is much info on Nosema as far as the details. I recommend MAARC or other sites for details of what the symptoms are, what it looks like under a microscope etc. I will not repeat all of that here as that information is commonly available.

But since there has been so much speculation and inference on what I advise as far as using Fumidil (or Fumagillan) for Nosema. I will clarify my view:

The first issue you need to decide, is what your philosophy of life is as well as your philosophy of beekeeping.

A lot of decisions on equipment or methods or treatments, depend on your personal philosophy of life and your personal philosophy of beekeeping. Some people have more faith in Nature or the Creator to work things out. Some are more interested in keeping their bees healthy with chemicals and treatments. You'll have to decide where you stand on these kinds of things.


Organic

If you're the type to take an herbal remedy before you run to the doctor, you probably fall into this category. True organic would be no treatments whatsoever. Some will say this can't be done, but there are many people including me doing it. Many are online and help each other through it. After that there are "soft" treatments like essential oils and FGMO, and then slightly "harder" treatments like Formic Acid and Oxalic acid for Varroa.


Chemical

If you're the type who runs to the doctor for antibiotics the second you get a sniffle this is probably more your style. Some in this group treat for prevention. IMO the wiser ones treat only when necessary. Most of the recent research shows that treating for prevention has caused resistance to the chemicals on the part of the pests and has done little to help the hive and often hurt them. Chemical buildup in the wax from Cumaphos (Check Mite) and Fluvalinate (Apistan) used for Varroa mites, is suspected to be the cause of high supersedure rates, and known to be the cause of infertility in drones and queens. Fortunately as far as Nosema, it has not built up resistance to Fumidil.

Science vs Art

If you see beekeeping as an art or you see it as a science it will change your perspective a lot. I think it's a bit of both, but since bees are quite capable of surviving on their own and since we really can't coerce them into doing anything, I see it as more of an art where you work with the bees natural tendencies to help them and yourself. Some won't believe anything until it's been proven in a scientific study. Some will go with their own observations.

Scale

This is another thing that changes your philosophy on many things. When you have time to spend with the hives and the hives are in your backyard, then methods that require you to do something every week are not a big problem. For instance, when I requeen in my own yard, I don't mind if it takes three trips to the hive to get it done if that improves acceptance. But if it's at an outyard 60 miles away, I want to do something one time and be done. The same is true of the number of hives. If you have only two hives to deal with on a certain issue, you may not mind how complicated it is. When you have hundreds of hives to deal with, you have to have a streamlined system.

Reasons for beekeeping

A lot of your decisions will be guided by this. If you have bees as pets you have a different agenda than if you have them solely to make a living. Some are somewhere in between.

================================

Assuming you have decided where you fit in the realm of beekeeping
philosophy we can proceed to some branches in your decision on what to
do about Nosema. If you are of the Chemical/Scientific philosophy you
should see instructions on how to use Fumidil or Fumagillin. Advice on
this is available on the bottle as well as most beekeeping web sites
such as MAARC etc. At this point you've made up your mind and should
skip the rest of what I have to say as it will be addressed to those of
a different mindset and will only offend your view of the world.
 
#49 ·
If you are still reading I assume you have at least a small interest in the organic side of beekeeping or at least trying to avoid the use of chemicals and antibiotics in your hives. That or you just want to find something to disagree with. If you want to get a grasp of how necessary it is to give preventative treatments for Nosema, I will point out a few things that may help clarify this for you. First, realize that many beekeepers have never treated for it, including me. Not only are there many beekeepers who don't want to put antibiotics in their hives, but in fact many beekeepers in the world are prohibited from using Fumidil by law. I am certainly not the only person who thinks it's a bad idea to put Fumidil in your hive. The European Union has banned it's use in beekeeping. So we know they aren't using it legally anyway.

http://www.apimondia.org/apiacta/articles/2003/multinelli_1.pdf

So why would you want to avoid Fumidil?

Just how dangerous is Fumidil to your hive? It's hard to say exactly, but of all the chemicals people put in hives, it's probably one of the least dangerous. It does break down quickly. It doesn't appear to have a lot of downsides on the surface anyway. But if you're of the Organic kind of philosophy you're still thinking, why do I want to add antibiotics to my hive? I certainly don't want it in my honey and, in my view, anything that goes in the hive can end up in the honey. Bees move things all the time. Every book I've seen on comb honey talks about the bees moving honey from the brood chamber up to the comb honey supers during a cut-down split. Having an area of the hive that is the only part there when chemicals are applied is a nice idea, but it's a lot like a no-peeing section in a swimming pool.

What do antibiotics do to the natural balance of a natural system? Experience with antibiotics would say that they upset the natural flora of any system. They kill off a lot of things that perhaps should be there along with what shouldn't leaving a vacuum to be filled by whatever can flourish. Probiotics have become a big thing in people and horses and other animals now, mostly because we use antibiotics all the time and upset the normal flora of our digestive system. Are there beneficial microorganisms living in bees and beehives? Are they affected by Fumidil? Yes, it's unscientific of me to assume there are without some study to support it, but my experience says all natural systems are very complex all the way down to the microscopic level. I don't want to risk upsetting that balance.

Propping up weak bees.

Yes, those with the Scientific philosophy will find that statement offensive. But I know of no better way to say it. Creating a system of keeping bees that is held together by antibiotics and pesticides that perpetuate bees that cannot live without constant intervention, is, in my organic view of beekeeping, counterproductive. We just continue to breed bees who can't live without us. Perhaps some people get some satisfaction of being needed by their bees. I don't know. But I would prefer to have bees who can and do take care of themselves.

What other non-organic practices may contribute to Nosema?

While the non-organic group tends to want to believe that feeding sugar instead of leaving honey will prevent Nosema, I have seen no evidence of this. Honey may have more solids and may cause more dysentery, but while dysentery is a symptom of Nosema, it is neither the cause nor is it evidence of Nosema. In other words, just because they have dysentery does not mean they have Nosema. Many of the Honey Bee's enemies, such as Nosema, Chalkbrood, EFB, and Varroa all thrive and reproduce better at the pH of sugar syrup and don't reproduce well at the pH of honey. This, however, seems to be universally ignored in the beekeeping world. The prevailing theory on how Oxalic acid trickling works is that the bee's hemolymph becomes too acidic for the Varroa and they die, while the bees do not. So how is it helpful to feed the bees something that has a pH in the range that most of their enemies, including Nosema, thrive, rather than leave them honey that is in the pH range where most of their enemies fail?

The bottom line is this. You have to make up your mind what your risks are. What you are willing to put in your hives and therefore into your honey. How you want to keep bees. How much you trust a natural system or how much you want to strive for "better living through chemistry"

I made up my mind in 1974 not to use any chemicals for Nosema. I have not regretted the decision.
 
#50 ·
Well that speaks for itself.

Here's my philosophy.

I don't like to watch things in my care die. I've had enough bees and other animals die due in part to management practices. Yes death is nature, but so is nurturing. But I'm also into organic and sustainable agriculture, so I take the IPM approach. Go with the least impact on the environment while remaining "economically" viable, which is really about nurturing something to the point it can grow and thrive as its own living thing. Watching one hive succumbing to Nosema this spring, since I didn't treat either, while at the same time hearing about big, big losses in our area due to Nosema didn't set well with me.

But, I say to the readers of this thread, do what you want. The genetics will be better if you raise your own queens from survivors after a nosema outbreak or the best performers with low level infections, but I don't have the scale to do that, nor the control over my drone pool. If you buy queens somewhere else, or don't have much control of your drone pool, your wasting your time and bees letting them die or simply not thrive from nosema.
 
#51 · (Edited)
I'll limit myself to addressing only the items that
are clearly not factually correct.

> Just how dangerous is Fumidil to your hive?
> It's hard to say exactly

No, it is very easy to say.
It is not even a little bit dangerous.
The only danger it poses is to the Nosema.
It is a very specific item, and not at all similar to a broad-sprectrum
antibiotics of the sort that Mike apparently thinks it is.

> Experience with antibiotics would say that they upset the natural flora
> of any system. They kill off a lot of things that perhaps should be there
> along with what shouldn't leaving a vacuum to be filled by whatever
> can flourish.

This might be a valid concern for a wide-spectrum antibiotic being used
in a creature like a human, which uses "Beneficial Microorganisms" to
aid in things like digestion, but bees are different. They use enzymes.
There are no "Beneficial Microorganisms" helping bees. This is basic
bee biology, so this sort of misleading comparison can be said to be
not just "misinformed", but "completely wrong".

So if there is a microorganism in a bee, that's a problem for the bee.

> Propping up weak bees.

If Mike's approach to beekeeping is let every hive that gets Nosema
(or perhaps shows any other sign of weakness) die, perhaps there's
someone who lives near Mike and has a less "laissez-faire" approach
to beekeeping who would like to adopt those bees rather than have
them die. (With love and a little care [some might call it "beekeeping"],
these bees can be given the chance to live full and productive,
perhaps even happy, lives that God intended them to live...
...send your dollars now to "Save The Bees"..
.)

As there is no Nosema-resistant stock out there, any illusion that one
might cling to about about somehow having "nosema resistant stock"
as a result of letting hives die would be self-delusion. In fact, one
must kill the nosema spores that would remain on the comb (Acetic
acid seems to be the current favorite) if one wants to re-use combs
from a hive that died from Nosema, so letting Nosema get out of hand
can wipe out not just a hive, but multiple hives in the same yard
as a result of robbing, and multiple colonies put on the infected
woodenware.

> Having an area of the hive that is the only part there when chemicals
> are applied is a nice idea, but it's a lot like a no-peeing section in a
> swimming pool.

Mike made a funny!

The suggested time to feed Fumadill is in early spring, when the
bees are eating up a storm to raise brood, draw comb, and
otherwise ramp up the hive for spring. As fast as bees take feed
during this period, it is (ahem) highly unlikely that any feed would
remain unconsumed, or any feed would even be stored for more
than a few hours. Of course, Mike says he does not feed his bees
either, so he may not be aware of the rapid rate of consumption
of "artificial nectar" in early spring by a colony that is being fed
well in advance of any blooms.

> What other non-organic practices may contribute to Nosema?

Nosema is a bee disease that was here long before we started
keeping bees, and will still be here long after we are safely and
cozily dead. Back when all beekeeping could have been described
as "organic" it was a problem, so while it may make some
beekeepers feel smugly justified in adopting a holier-than-thou
stance thinking that "non-organic practices" are the root of all evil,
this is wishful thinking. To suggest that one set of practices or
another (other than neglecting to sample and test for it) might
somehow contribute to Nosema is misleading in the extreme.

> "While the non-organic group tends to want to believe that feeding
> sugar instead of leaving honey will prevent Nosema,

No one informed thinks this, it is dysentery that is avoided by
feeding pure feed, free of indigestible components, like sugar syrup.
The "non-organic" group would be more likely to not make this error,
and they would tend to know a bit more about diseases, as they
tend to do more than simply let hives die from them.

And while we are on the subject, calling one's honey "organic"
without following the USDA "National Organic Program" rules
is a violation of federal law, and carries steep fines. Ditto
for calling one's "growing methods" organic.

> Many of the Honey Bee's enemies, such as Nosema, Chalkbrood, EFB,
> and Varroa all thrive and reproduce better at the pH of sugar syrup
> and don't reproduce well at the pH of honey.

But if this made any difference, the beekeepers who fed honey would
have less incidence of these specific problems. They don't, so it
doesn't.

> This, however, seems to be universally ignored in the beekeeping world.

And with good reason, if one thinks it through slowly enough.
Let's walk though it together, shall we?

For the brood diseases, the difference appears to be a moot point, given
that bees convert the feed or the honey to a consistent brood food
product with a consistent pH before feeding it to brood, thus eliminating
the problem as it applies to the brood diseases. Bees process both
honey and sugar into brood food, and several powerful enzymes
assure a consistent result regardless of the mix of glucose and
fructose in the nectar, sugar, or honey. If the enzymes did not do this,
bees might have a difficult time raising brood on citrus honey, which
has more glucose, versus clover honey, which has less.

For Nosema (in the bee) the bee's digestive system breaks both honey
and sucrose down into the simple sugars long before is gets anywhere
where Nosema might form, so the bee's digestive tract sees no difference.
(Your digestive system can likewise see no difference between sugar,
honey, and a potato, as all are complex carbs.)

Varroa? They don't really hang out in cells where honey or sugar
syrup would be stored, do they? No, they hang out in cells full
of the above-mentioned brood food with that consistent pH.

That just about sums it up for why the difference in pH is
"universally ignored in the beekeeping world". It is ignored because
the difference really just doesn't matter, except in the case of
overwintering, when sugar syrup wins hands down for being 100%
digestible.

> The prevailing theory on how Oxalic acid trickling works is that the
> bee's hemolymph becomes too acidic for the Varroa and they die,
> while the bees do not. So how is it helpful to feed the bees something
> that has a pH in the range that most of their enemies...

No, that's an inference that is absolutely wrong.
The bee will digest the carbohydrates. The pH of the bee's hemolymph
will not change as a result of consuming one type of feed or another,
any more than your blood will change in pH as a result of eating sugar
one hour, and honey the next. You also digest carbohydrates.

Reminds me of this summer, when wasps were going into and out of
a can of soda on a picnic table. I laughed my head off. You see,
it was DIET soda. No sugar at all. Stupid wasps.
 
#52 ·
Jim Fischer> Of course, Mike says he does not feed his bees
either, so he may not be aware of the rapid rate of consumption
of "artificial nectar" in early spring by a colony that is being fed
well in advance of any blooms.

Actually I have read on his website and his recent posts that he has been feeding his bees this year as well as last year due to their inability to produce a surplus for him or much less enough for themselves for winter. He already has sugar on some of them, mostly nucs.
http://208.69.121.208/forums/showthread.php?t=214401
"Personally I don't feed if there is a nectar flow. Gathering nectar is what bees do. They should be encouraged to do it. I will feed in the spring if they are light, as they will not rear brood without sufficient stores to do it with. I will feed in the fall if they are light, but I always try to make sure I don't take too much honey and leave them light. Some years, though, the fall flow fails and they are on the verge of starvation if I don't feed. When queen rearing, during a dearth, I sometimes have to feed to get them to make cells and to get the queens to fly out and mate."
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesfeeding.htm#when

In some of his posts he has attributed the lack of stores to drought or a poor fall flow, but could it be possible that his bees don't live to full life expectancy due to not having a diagnosis for nosema by not having his bees tested and not properly eliminating the problem by medicating? We all know or should know you can have nosema without any obvious symptoms and if you do have it your bees can die without gathering the amount of nectar they could otherwise when they are healthy and you may not get the surplus you were banking on.

By MB's own admission on this very thread; "I did not say anything about it, but no, I have NOT seen symptoms of Nosema. Ever. And, no I have not examined them or kept records."
MB, I highly respect you as a beekeeper but with all your knowledge I can't understand why you've never had your bees tested for nosema. Maybe it's time to have them examined and treat them if you need to. You might get some of that honey you've been missing out on the last two years. I don't like to treat either but I will treat for nosema should I ever have a positive test for it.

MB>I certainly don't want it (fumagillin) in my honey and, in my view, anything that goes in the hive can end up in the honey.

If you treat in the fall when you have no honey supers above your brood chamber how can the antibodies get into those supers next year? Will the bees move the honey up into the supers when you put them on in the spring? Do they do this to make room for brood in the brood chamber? It is doubtful seeing how it takes approximately one frame of honey and one frame of pollen to raise one frame of brood and I've never had it happen. You can see how a colony will quickly go through stores when they are in full swing during the spring build up. As Jim pointed out, any syrup with medication fed in the fall or early spring will be used for brood rearing and has hardly no chance of ending up in your honey. I've always seen nectar collected and put in the supers then cured to honey to be moved down as needed, not up. Maybe the reason you don't want to treat for nosema is because you're harvesting honey from the brood chambers, though I doubt it, which could be another reason you've needed to feed your bees the last two years. I know it's hard to change your techniques when you're set in your ways and have had relevant success, but sometimes change can be a good thing and I'm always up for suggestions on how to improve the quality of my bees and their performance and keep an open mind.
 
#53 ·
thank ya' mr fischer for the clarification in regards to any number of dangling questions...

as for myself (and in partial reference to the two michael prior post about beekeeper philisophy) my approach is somewhere down the middle. which mean I would rather (and it is definitely less expensive) to just let the bees do their thing, but when I recognize a problem I will make every effort to assist (nurture) the bees in the best way possible.

if I determine that there is a partial genetic link to the problem then I simply don't utilize those individual hives for replication (ie I treat and use these for busting up and making nucs in the spring and early summer months)... as I have suggested elsewhere culling is a CRITICAL component of the selection process that is oftentime paritally to totally ignored. which mean that we use the word selection but the other side of the question (ie culling) is quite likely more important part of the process.
 
#54 ·
Wow, what a rancor. Has anybody out there tried to buy Fumagillan lately? I looked into it a few weeks ago and supplies were sold out everywhere well into November in any appreciable quantities.

With all this HUB BUB I think some may have missed Kieth Jarret's gem about thymol in syrup. There are some encouraging results being achieved in eliminating Nosema with this material. There are also some anecdotal reports from some reliable resources that HoneyBHealthy also helps control Nosema.

"They use enzymes. There are no "Beneficial Microorganisms" helping bees. This is basic bee biology, so this sort of misleading comparison can be said to be not just "misinformed", but "completely wrong".
So if there is a microorganism in a bee, that's a problem for the bee." Jim Fischer

Jim I would have to strongly disagree with that statement. There are many known bacteria that inhabit bee bread and the bee gut that are not associated with disease and generally considered harmless or beneficial. Many of the enzymes found in bee bread are the result of the actions of these bacteria.

I will make a prediction that with Nosema reclassified as a microsporidian we will begin to see new materials and practices developed or "re-discovered" (thymol) for its control.
 
#58 ·
With all this HUB BUB I think some may have missed Kieth Jarret's gem about thymol in syrup. There are some encouraging results being achieved in eliminating Nosema with this material. There are also some anecdotal reports from some reliable resources that HoneyBHealthy also helps control Nosema.

STOP...

We have a winner!

Way to go John.... Sorry Jim no prizes for second place. :)
 
#55 ·
> There are many known bacteria that inhabit bee bread and the bee gut
> that are not associated with disease and generally considered harmless

OK, name 'em.
If they are commonly found, which I question, they certainly are not acting
in the same manner as the beneficial bacteria found in humans, and their
loss will not harm the bee. (Mike was telling a story of antibiotics that
was true for humans, untrue for bees.)

> or beneficial.

OK, you REALLY gotta name them if you wanna call them "beneficial".

> Many of the enzymes found in bee bread are the result of the actions
> of these bacteria.

That's interesting because bee's don't DIGEST anything and then
regurgitate it to make bee bread, so those enzymes would be
where, exactly? Not in the "gut" of the bee.
 
#56 ·
> Has anybody out there tried to buy Fumagillan lately?
> I looked into it a few weeks ago and supplies were sold out
> everywhere well into November in any appreciable quantities.

Gee, could it be that other beekeepers heeded the warnings
of their state apiarists and the researchers?

Well, if nothing else, it is a pretty strong endorsement for the
advisability of paying attention to Nosema.
 
#57 ·
Response for Jim

It has been found that honeybees live longer on pollen removed from combs than on trap collected. This could be due to the three genera of bacterial flora found so far in stored beebread: Pseudamonas, Lactobacillus, and Saccharomyces. This study was done in 1966. This is From the hive and the Honeybee, granted a very old citation.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6978848.stm

"The scientists' trawl revealed a diverse cargo even in healthy colonies. Eight types of bacteria appeared to be present in all bees, suggesting they perform some function useful to their hosts."

I would have to dig a little deeper, somewhere I filed the actual names of these bacteria. The impression I am left with is that there is definitely a microbial ecology going in the hive and in the bees themselves.

Lactic acid fermentation caused by bacteria and yeasts are thought to be responsible for the conversion of pollen to bee bread---Dr Clarence Collison, Nov Bee Culture

If bees did not have any relationships with beneficial microorganisms would make them the exception to most living things in my humble opinion.

How about supporting your statement that there are no beneficial microorganisms helping bees?

Just trying to learn here, not wanting to get anybodies hackles up.
 
#59 ·
Questions for Jim & MB

Here is a link on Nosema that I found that seems to indicate that fumigillin may not be as effective as some would think.

http://www.algonet.se/~beeman/research/nosema.htm

A statement from the source:
"The antibiotic Fumagillin kills the active stages of Nosema, but not the spores, and it's effect diminish over time. Experiments show that even when fumagillin is administered both in the autumn and spring, infection levels might still be harmful. Wintering bees on clean or disinfected combs are therefor advisable with or without medication."

They seem to advocate that the wintering of bees on clean, disinfected comb is of more importance (comb can be easily disinfected by fumigating with acetic acid, a process that should be fairly acceptable even to those who advocate natural/organic methods since acetic acid is generally accepted as an "organic" substance).

I would be interested in both your comments regarding this approach. Jim, since you seem to have done a lot of study regarding Nosema, can you provide any evidence that fumigating with acetic acid is as effective on the spores of Nosema ceranae as it is for Nosema apis?
 
#61 ·
Why fumigate with acetic acid? Why not do what research has shown to be healthy for bees, and just replace some comb every so often?

I sat through many reports this past weekend at the Pa. State Bee Association fall meeting. One talk focused on the HIGH levels of MANY chemicals found in CCD samples sent for testing. One result was 22,000 part per billion of fluvalinate, among the other chemicals found. This was ironic to hear since this came after a round table discussion of SUPPOSED professional beekeepers, who went off into right field, discussing the use and application of Tactic and Mavrik, until they were abruptly cut off for obvious reasons from a Penn State researcher who had heard enough.

The best part, was a slide show of a rather outspoken beekeeper who lost ALOT of hives to CCD. In the slide show was a picture of a pile of comb that was being replaced. The comment was that "with all the dead outs, it was an opportune time to change out some comb." How old was the comb he mentioned. "About 30 years or more" was commented.

I think more people should try clean comb.... :)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top