






 |
The late Monsieur Ursmar Baudoux
of Belgium was the first to
conceive of the use of an artificial foundation having an enlarged
cell base to increase the size of the emerging bee. In the year
1893 he was amazed on discovering bees from an old skep which
were very much smaller than normal. He then conceived the idea
of raising bees in larger cells. He accomplished this by means
of stretching regular foundation to the size he desired and had
by 1896 sufficiently proved his point in Belgium that a manufacturing
company began to place upon the market artificial bee comb foundation
having enlarged cell bases. It was Baudoux's belief that the
nurse bees following a natural instinct filled the bottom of
the enlarged cell more copiously with larval food, and that this
caused an increase in the size of the worker bees He also intimated
that the larger bee would generate more body heat which would
result in a greater quantity of brood.
By means of stretching foundation, he experimented with various
sizes of foundation having 750 cells to the square decimeter,
740, 730, 710, 700 and even 675 cells per square decimeter. (This
is in contrast to the U. S. standard size which is 857 cells
per square decimeter.) By means of an ingenious glossometer of
his own make, he determined the tongue reach of his colonies
and by means of an equally ingenious thoraxometer of his own
make, the diameter of the thorax. He found that with an increase
of 50 cells per square decimeter in the size of the foundation,
there was a corresponding decrease of one half millimeter in
the tongue reach. His thoraxometer gave thorax diameters of 3.7
mm., 3.9 mm., 4.1 mm. and 4.3 mm. for worker bees reared in brood
cells built from foundation having respectively 850, 800, 750,
and 700 cells per square decimeter. He arrived at the conclusion
that artificial foundation having 700 cells per square decimeter
gave a bee which was superior in all its measurements to those
reared in combs constructed from the smaller sizes of artificial
foundation.
Independent of the work done by Baudoux, a Frenchman by name
of Pincot arrived at the idea from a slightly different angle.
Pincot noticing the difference in size of worker bees from a
swarm placed on foundtion and the worker bees of the parent stock
reared in natural combs, came to the conclusion that this was
due to the fact that the natural brood cells were larger than
those drawn from the foundation and actual measurements confirmed
his theory. He then started experimenting with foundation having
736 cells per square decimeter and reports that during a two
year period thirty colonies using this size of foundation gathered
approximately one - third more honey than did thirty colonies
on normal foundation. Unfortunately, in 1910 his apiaries were
destroyed by a flood and Pincot was forced to abandon his experiments.
While the experiments of these two cannot be considered of a
very scientific nature, each claimed larger bees resulting in
a greater yield of honey. Their activities, particularly those
of Baudoux, were convincing to the extent that a firm in Belgium
has offered enlarged cell foundation for sale since 1896. Other
manufacturers have followed in this course. France was next and
more recently Italy and England have manufacturing concerns offering
for sale enlarged cell foundation and claiming better results
through its use. Consequently, interest in this country has been
focused upon this matter.
A Russian worker by name of Lovchinovskaya reporting on experiments
started in 1925 using enlarged cell foundation showed that bees
reared from enlarged cells weighed more, had a greater load capacity
and that from the results of one season produced more honey.
During the period 1930 to 1932, the first scientific study was
made to determine the effect of rearing in enlarged brood cells
upon various parts of the worker bee. These experiments were
carried on at Iowa State College under the direction of Dr. 0.
W. Park.
Three different sizes of foundation were used having respectively
857, 763 and 706 cells per square decimeter. The foundation having
857 cells per square decimeter is the commercial size manufactured
in the United States. The foundation having 763 cells per square
decimeter closely approximates that having 750 cells per square
decimeter which has been manufactured since 1896, by Jos. Mees
Sons of Herenthals, Belgium, and the latter size closely approximates
that having 700 cells per square decimeter which the same firm
has manufactured since 1927. Care was taken to eliminate all
warp and sag in the finished comb and no control of size of brood
cell other than size of foundation was used.
To facilitate recognition and handling of the combs, and for
convenience in presenting date, the frames containing the standard
size foundation, that having 857 cells per square decimeter,
Were marked "A" and the cell size was referred to as
size of cell "A". Similarly, frames containing foundation
having 763 cells per square decimeter were marked "B"
and the cell size was referred to as size of cell "B".
Likewise, the frames containing foundation having 706 cells per
square decimeter were marked "C", and the size of cell
was referred to as size of cell "C".
In general, two frames of each size of foundation were placed
in the same colony. Individual colony records were kept and the
queens were marked by clipping the right wing of those reared
in an even numbered year and the left wing when reared in an
odd numbered year.
It is of interest to mention that difficulties were experienced
in getting the queens to oviposit worker eggs in the enlarged
cells when all three sizes were placed in the same hive at the
same time. This was particularly true in case of size of cell
"C". While the worker bees apparently recognized no
difference in accepting the three sizes of cells, the queen bees
showed a preference for the smaller cells for ovipositing. This
result was confirmed by similar experiments carried out by Lovchinovskaya.
An effort was made to collect the bees upon emergence from all
three sizes of cells in a single colony at approximately the
same time and under the same conditions. To determine the date
of emergence, a chart was used whereby the daily emergence of
bees from twenty-three colonies was recorded. Prior to emergence,
each frame was caged in a Root introducing cage and a selected
area of brood containing no nectar or honey was caged with an
additional screen cage.
Each sample of bees contained at least fifty specimens. Following
the method outlined by Alpatov of Russia the bees were slightly
anaesthetized and then killed by dropping into boiling water.
They were then preserved in a 70 percent alcohol solution to
await further treatment. The measurements taken on each individual
bee were dry weight. length of right fore wing, width of right
fore wing, the sum of the widths of the third and fourth tergites
and the length of proboscis.
In Plate 1 are shown the measurements
taken on the right fore wing, the third tergite and the fourth
tergite. (In explanation the two latter parts are
the two largest plates on the top of the abdomen.) Plate
2 shows the measurements taken on the tongue or proboscis.
In the series of graphs which are illustrated, each character,
namely, dry weight, length of proboscis, length of right fore
wing, width of right fore wing, left fore wing and the sum of
the widths of the third and fourth tergites is plotted for each
size of cell. In all cases there is a distinct trend towards
a larger character of the worker bee as the size of the brood
cell increases.
In table 1 are given the averages of
the five measurements for the bees from each size of cell and
the percent increase of these measurements. It is of interest
to note that the length of proboscis increased 2.07 percent as
the size of foundation was increased from 857 cells per square
decimeter to 706 cells per square decimeter.
We, therefore, find that the size of the brood cell is definitely
a factor in determining the size of the adult worker bee. It
is also apparent that larger bees are obtained through the use
of artificial bee comb foundation having enlarged cell bases.
It is reasonable to state when we compare a 2.07 per cent increase
in the length of the tongue, that size of brood cell alone is
not sufficient to produce a much larger bee. It is much more
reasonable to state that selection and breeding of bees plus
the application of such factors as size of brood cell should
accomplish marked results in producing larger bees.
From the results we have obtained we cannot agree with Baudoux
either in the results he obtained or the consistency of his results.
While he records increases of 11.9 per cent to 25 per cent in
length of proboscis as the size of the brood cell increases from
850 cells per square decimeter to 700 cells per square decimeter
we are only able to find an increase of 2.07 per cent as a maximum.
However, we believe that our results compare favorably with results
obtained by Michailov of Russia who, on measuring the tongues
of worker bees reared in worker cells as compared with those
of worker bees reared in drone cells, found an increase of 4.82
per cent. While this is a greater increase than ours, it must
be considered that the size of cell was increased slightly more
than twice as much as in this experiment which in all probability
would account for the difference. Our results also compare favorably
with those obtained by the same worker on worker bees reared
in new combs as compared with worker bees reared in old combs. Here Michailov records an increase of
1.05 per cent in the length of the tongue.
Since we have made the statement that size of brood cell alone
is not sufficient to produce a much larger worker bee,
we must consider the fact that the crucial test for the commercial
use of enlarged foundation is greater honey production. While
this experiment should be a strong indication toward that end,
the exact relation of this increase in the size of adult worker
bees to a greater yield of honey has yet to be proved. During
the past four years, we have been conducting an experiment in
a commercial yard with from fifteen to twenty colonies containing
brood combs constructed from each size of foundation,
making an apiary of sixty colonies maximum. To date we have
not been able to find any significant increase in the honey production
due to the use of enlarged cell foundation. This experiment is
still being continued in a location more favorable for honeyflows
and we expect to have some definite results in the near
future.
*Rewritten from Journal Paper of the
Iowa Agricultural Experiment Station. Ames. Iowa. Project No.
129.
**Formerly. Research Assistant in Apiculture,
Iowa Agricuitural Experiment Station, Ames, Iowa. |
|