Re: Queen Rearing with Michael Palmer method
sure, 2017 I did a 7x expsastion, on a good year, in full sized gear, with very little drawn comb.... (it was a split to far and I had to condensate some nucs come late fall)
And msl, going from about 5 -20 colonies is easily done with standard equipment, esp if you time it right with your flows.
But that was a good year, last year was NOT a good year.
often repeated, almost never backed (and if your not caging and banking/shiping it won't mater.. as in my example of a BYBK saving swarms cells... Again my point is they are over looking a good tool, not that minis are right or wrong for a given sideliner)
Another down side (and I don't have the latest data on this) is that it appears queens that lay longer before being caged are more productive.
There is one lonely Australian study that suggests better sruival, but the reality seems the longer catch cycle alsos mean you can be more selective , pinching poor brood patterns/drone layers and leaving better queens.. not necessarily creating them. Tested vs untested queens
Its worth a read, but it dosent show a significant ovariole difrance as some claim
In fact it shows some odd things.... clipping the wings at 14 days gives larger sperm loads. being in the center position on the cell bar led to less ovaries and had a bigger impact than time spent in the mateing nuc, Banked queen performing better then fresh caught, etc that makes a lot of the data suspect, as does the very poor mating of the queens in general with a very low sperm count https://www.agrifutures.com.au/wp-co...ons/03-049.pdf
Laidlaw (1979) says "Young queens mated from nuclei are ready to use as soon as they begin to lay. They are now as good as they will ever be" Contemporary Queen Rearing, page 109
"oh well, let us stick to science. let them have their beliefs and intuitions!" -Medhat Nasr