Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 44
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    If you are not interested, please just skip this message. Thanks.

    Personally. I am interested because I used the drench method commercially at least ten or maybe twenty years ago, before it was respectable, and I know the guy who started it, AFAIK. The optimal concentration has been a big question mark as long as it has been in use. There are currently a number of studies going on and several conflicting recommendations out there. Moreover this could technically be construed as an off-label usage.

    I haven't seen Keith's numbers, beyond what he posted below, or any documentation, so I would be glad to be pointed to them.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but given the price of fumigillan, I should think most commercial beekeepers would be interested to know if they need to boost or lower the dose.

    Anyhow, here is some correspondance with Steve Pernal, (Beaverlodge Research Station) which he says I can share. Some of you might want to contact him if you have information.
    ---

    > I should have some data on the drench technique this spring as we used that as a treatment in fall trials (i.e. fall 2008). I have concerns about using a low volume syrup treatment in the fall as it may have less "staying power" in the hive over the winter.

    > Based on our spring 2008 experiment using packages, where we evaluated 0.5, 1 and 2 x label doses, we saw no evidence of increased efficacy with increased dose. We applied fumagillin as icing sugar dustings, in pollen patties and in syrup. Basically all worked, perhaps with the exception of some delayed effciacy on some of the patty treatments.

    > For N. ceranae, the Spanish recommend 4 applications of fumagillin, each application in 250 mL of syrup in a bag placed on the top bars. Each application contains 30 mg of active ingredient for a total of 120 mg of active ingredient applied per colony. They sugges this confers control for ceranae for six months.

    > I don't have the answers yet, but I would predict we may have to get into a paradigm by which we may have to control in the spring and fall. The spring treatments will have the additional concern of not contaminating honey, which is why we have been looking at different application methods.

    > I anticipate running fall and spring efficacy experiments for nosema for at least 2 to three more years. I would be very interested in knowing if there appears to be a treatment that is being informally adopted by beekeepers, so that I can include it as a comparative treatment in experiments.

    > Randy Oliver will be at Medhat's IPM symposium in Feb. He may have some insight from the U.S. as well.

    > Steve.
    >
    > Stephen F. Pernal, Ph.D.
    >
    > Research Scientist | Chercheur
    > Beaverlodge Research Farm | Ferme de recherche de Beaverlodge
    > Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada | Agriculture et Agroalimentaire Canada
    > P.O. Box 29 | C.P. 29, 1 Research Road
    > Beaverlodge, AB T0H 0C0
    > Steve.Pernal@AGR.GC.CA
    > Telephone | Téléphone 780-354-5135
    > Facsimile | Télécopieur 780-354-8171
    > Teletypewriter | Téléimprimeur 613-759-7470
    > Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada
    Last edited by Allen Dick; 01-28-2009 at 04:28 PM. Reason: Added Info

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    5,753

    Default

    >>Allend, I too am having troubles and for me you are way confusing this issue.. Have you ever heard of the KISS method (keep it simple stupid)


    I dont agree, we are treating our hives with an antibiotic, that potentially is very harmful to a certian demagrafic of people who might ingest it.( hearing so from fellow beekeepers on this fourm) We have to get this right if we are going to treat with it effectively. If there is any confussion out there, youd better get it sorted out,
    going right to the source of production to get recommended treatments, or to fellows who research the dosages and its effects on bees and residual levels, id probably the best route to clarify any confussion,
    Ian Steppler >> Canadian Beekeeper's Blog
    www.stepplerfarms.com

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amador County, Calif
    Posts
    3,159

    Default

    After reading this last page...... WOW...

    Gene is right, my load is a little hot at five gallons but I do three treatments ten days apart (for saving labor) also my hives are fairly strong with bees.

    P.S. Trevor, are you the guy that started this. lol

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Clear Lake, WI / Sebring, FL
    Posts
    618

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Jarrett View Post
    After reading this last page...... WOW...

    Gene is right, my load is a little hot at five gallons but I do three treatments ten days apart (for saving labor) also my hives are fairly strong with bees.

    P.S. Trevor, are you the guy that started this. lol
    Thanks ,I think.

    So do you do a cup each time?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Well, don't panic anyone. I don't think any harm is being done, although on BEE-L they are talking about fumigilan suppressing the immune system in mammals, the fact that fumigilan sets bees back, and the search for an alternate -- and the fact that there is no MRL for fumigilan in many countries, making it verboten there.

    Steve Pernal has taken the approach in his studies that the goal is to deliver the same total dose to a colony in several shots to be consumed in a short period, as we would deliver in two gallons of syrup to be consumed over winter. That is what it seems beekeepers are doing too.

    I'm debating that point, but he is a trained and experienced scientist and I am not, so if it turns out you are using more than necessary, at least you are in good company.

    I hope to have more. Stay tuned.
    Last edited by Allen Dick; 01-28-2009 at 07:37 PM.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amador County, Calif
    Posts
    3,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor Mansell View Post
    Thanks ,I think.

    So do you do a cup each time?
    Hey Trevor, yes, a cup every ten days.

    But watch out for barney five, he may disagree.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Well, this question got me looking around. In addition to talking to Steve, I got some input from Randy. In that regard he directed me to http://www.scientificbeekeeping.com/...ask=view&id=63

    I'm afraid his experiment did not prove what we all assume it should. Why? Nobody knows.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    LA Co, Calif, USA
    Posts
    86

    Default Keith - Method of drenching?

    Keith,

    What is your technique for drenching? Drizzle from top? I can't imagine commercial guy removing and applying (spray/splash) to each frame?
    Do you have a problem with syrup running out bottom of hives?

    At Reno convention, presenters seem to contradict the Spain findings - Conclusion seemed to be that fumaB is hard on bees. Stressed testing.

    I saw the pictures of your bees - and WOW! Doesn't seem like it's hurting yours.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    45,340

    Default

    >Well, don't panic anyone. I don't think any harm is being done, although on BEE-L they are talking about fumigilan suppressing the immune system in mammals

    That seems a mild side effect compared to the reasons it's illegal in most of the world, which is that it blocks blood vessel formation by binding to the enzyme methionine aminopeptidase. This targeted gene disruption of methionine aminopeptidase 2 results in an embryonic gastrulation defect and endothelial cell growth arrest. In other words it is a teratogen (causes birth defects). It is currently being tested as a treatment for cancer because it interferes with the tumor's ability to develop a good vascular system which inhibits its growth because it has no food supply.
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FRASER VALLEY, BRITISH COLUMBIA
    Posts
    1,303

    Default Kiss

    Kenny I can understand your frustration. So assuming the spaniards are correct then they are saying 1 bottle treats 80 hives (79.166 hives) They also say treat 4 times at one week apart. I'm pretty sure my math is correct.

    To do this 1 bottle fumagillin to 20 gallons of syrup. Feed 1 cup/week for 4 weeks.

    9.5 g = 9500 mg
    9500mg/120mg per hive= 79.166 hives (see post #21 for total dosage of 120 mg per hive)

    This means you want 30 mg per treatment (1 cup per week for 4 weeks) for a total of 120mg.

    So if you took 320 cups of syrup (5 gallons) and gave each hive 1 cup it would get: 9500mg of fumigillin per bottle/320 cup= 29.6875 mg of fumigillin per hive. That's close enough to 30 mg by my books. Works real well on the KISS principle.

    Do this 4 times at weekly intervals and apparently you're bees are good for 6 months, at least in Spain. I think my brain needs a siesta.


    Jean-Marc

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    The Spaniards did not use drench, did they? I understood they used bags. I assume the release rate coiuld be different.

    And I must say Michaels' comments are noteworthy.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FRASER VALLEY, BRITISH COLUMBIA
    Posts
    1,303

    Default

    The spaniards did use bags and that would necessitate an inner cover at least. Not everybody uses that piece of equipment. Now I'm not sure why they used baggies. They are easy to place over the cluster at the precise place. From what I hear bees will not syrup if heavily infected with Nosema Ceranae so beekeepers resort to drenching. I'm not sure if the Spaniards did this. I thought they did but again not sure. I would think that drenching would give a good distribution of the syrup, provided it did not end up on the bottom board.

    Jean-Marc

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    The spaniards did use bags and that would necessitate an inner cover at least. Not everybody uses that piece of equipment. Now I'm not sure why they used baggies. They are easy to place over the cluster at the precise place. From what I hear bees will not syrup if heavily infected with Nosema Ceranae so beekeepers resort to drenching. I'm not sure if the Spaniards did this. I thought they did but again not sure. I would think that drenching would give a good distribution of the syrup, provided it did not end up on the bottom board.
    Yes. We are all guessing, it seems. Too bad we have to use this drug. The sooner we find alternate solutions that do not involve sacrificing our bees and our livelihood, the better.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FRASER VALLEY, BRITISH COLUMBIA
    Posts
    1,303

    Default

    Well in my recent experience the only thing worse than using fumigillin is not using it. I'm sure we would all welcome an alternative.

    Jean-Marc

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Southern Oregon
    Posts
    1,162

    Default

    What about Nosevit? It seems like a viable alternative. I suspect there are going to be others since we now understand Nosema to be a fungus and not a protozoa. I suspect Tea tree oil known for its anti fungal properties may be worth exploring also.
    John B Jacob www.oldsolbees.com

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amador County, Calif
    Posts
    3,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBJ View Post
    I suspect Tea tree oil known for its anti fungal properties may be worth exploring also.
    John, been there and am doing that, I'll let you know if anything comes of it .

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Southern Oregon
    Posts
    1,162

    Default

    I know it works well on my toes. Thanks for sharing your good apicultural science!
    John B Jacob www.oldsolbees.com

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amador County, Calif
    Posts
    3,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JBJ View Post
    I know it works well on my toes. Thanks for sharing your good apicultural science!
    Got an can of tea tree and it reminds me of the old one gallon feeder tins. Also thymol, I haven't given up hope on that product either, just have to come up with the right method, dosage ect...

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Cleveland, Texas
    Posts
    1,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Jarrett View Post
    Got an can of tea tree and it reminds me of the old one gallon feeder tins. Also thymol, I haven't given up hope on that product either, just have to come up with the right method, dosage ect...
    I personally believe that thymol works better in combination with other treatments. It works by inactivating the fungal spores, but does nothing to halt the progression of the fungus in an active infection. Any infected bees are still cranking out spores like crazy and unless those spores happen to come in contact with the thymol, they still present a significant danger of allowing the infection to continue (albeit possibly at a slower but still significant rate). Fumigillin-b works exactly the opposite by interfering with the ability of an active infection to produce spores and does little to prevent re-infection by old spores that are still hanging around the hive or are re-introduced into the hive via drift of untreated, infected bees. If you are using both products, it could explain some of your pretty spectacular results.
    "The UNKNOWN, huh? That would be SNORBERT ZANGOX over in Waycross."

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    souris, manitoba, canada
    Posts
    749

    Default Gene, what would be the highest dosage of thymol

    that you have fed.
    I have fed 1gram/gallon syrup.......makes some colonies cluster on the outside... but seen no damage otherwise. Think recommended dosage in Spain was .44gm/gallon.Also fed fumidil -B seperately in syrup. I understand thymol also hinders varroa developement

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads