I am not trying to start WWIII regarding this debate

That war has been fought on Beesource numerous times. Debate about the UGA, UFL and Cornell studies have been done and redone. I think....if it starts again....it'll actually be WWX.

 

Here is a scientific study you may find interesting:

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

 

"There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false"

If we are to buy into this research finding, then it, by its own determination would then be false. Perhaps the DeLaplane study is not "most"?

 

I don't about anything else, but what I do know is that small cells mean more bees per comb. Less distance needs to be travelled by queen. That should make for a larger workforce.

 

Assuming everything else stays the same. What about any effect on lifespan. Just asking and pointing out an issue. I'm actually thinking of going Michael Bush's route. Not trying to dis' you.

 

. The PF-100 and PF120's are problematic in my operation because of the ladder comb issue. .

What is ladder comb?

 

Some call it ''burr''.
It's the comb the bees make that connects
one box to the next from the top of one frame to the bottom of the top box frame
Without excluder the Quenn uses it often to go back and forth

 

>If we are to buy into this research finding, then it, by its own determination would then be false. Perhaps the DeLaplane study is not "most"?

Yes, it is a bit of a dilemma to have a peer reviewed scientific study that shows that peer reviewed scientific studies are usually wrong... The study shows the causes and how to predict the likelihood. Some of those things like the length of the study and the scope of the study are very applicable to bee research. I would say anything involving bees that is less 100 hives for less than five years is probably not very accurate.

>The PF-100 and PF120's are problematic in my operation because of the ladder comb issue. .

This problem is the same with all plastic frames, Pierco etc. have the same problem. I don't find it to be a problem if you expect it... you just pry all the frames below, down before lifting the box.

 

>Yes, it is a bit of a dilemma to have a peer reviewed scientific study that shows that peer reviewed scientific studies are usually wrong... The study shows the causes and how to predict the likelihood. Some of those things like the length of the study and the scope of the study are very applicable to bee research. I would say anything involving bees that is less 100 hives for less than five years is probably not very accurate.

Though this is a peer reviewed paper it is also an "essay" and thus somewhat of an opinion piece rather than an actual experiment. If you read some of the comments not everyone in the field agrees with his conclusions.

 

Just so we're clear there were several separate peer reviewed studies that all came to the same conclusion. The presumption is that all three are wrong?

 

reproducibility is one important metric for data quality

 

This is why scientists repeat studies over and over and over. If one research paper at one location in one year had come to this conclusion then certainly it has lower credibility than one that has been repeated multiple times with the same or similar results. Once you start seeing multiple studies by multiple authors using rigourous methodology, you start taking notice.

You have to judge each study on its own merit, how it was conducted, were controls used, were as many variables as possible controlled, etc. Science isn't perfect and we must be careful to scrutinize the information that comes out but we must also be careful that we do not outright dismiss findings because the disagre with our own personal biases and beliefs.

 

hmmm. sounds like they can't prove small cell helps...but they can't prove it hurts either. So it seems to me that it leaves the door wide open for beeks to use whichever method seems to work in their operation. But of course if you take that conclusion from it, then what is left to fight over?

Sometimes it does seem like the only reason the topic keeps showing up on here is just because folks enjoy fighting over it.

JMO

Rusty

 

Bah, if you're worried about cell size, just go foundationless and let the bees build whatever size they want.

 

Exactly my position. Natural cell has worked out better for me than trying to force the bees into what I may think is the best size cell. But each to his own.

 

A decent review:
http://www.dheaf.plus.com/warrebeekeeping/do_small_cells_help_bees_cope_with_varroa.pdf

 

A good and balanced read Bernhard.

 

>Just so we're clear there were several separate peer reviewed studies that all came to the same conclusion. The presumption is that all three are wrong?

All short term. All small scale. There are quite a few positive studies on small cell, but you will simply discount them as you have every time they have been brought up before.

 

I took a look at Keith Delaplane's ABJ article. He says 'I am unaware of any publicly-accessible peer-reviewed papers that support it.'....referring to small cell for varroa control.

All short term. All small scale..........but you will simply discount them as you have every time they have been brought up before.

If you had a single, long term, large scale, peer reviewed study that supported your contention....my opinion wouldn't get in the way of your posting it....

 

Studies,studies,studies???? Smells like someone's making $$$$$$ I like the "Lauri method" 128 hives alive out of
133. Small cell? Large cell? Don't know. Dang she's a good beek.

 

MB > "I don't find it to be a problem if you expect it... "

Having kept bees for almost 30 years I pretty much know how to pry boxes...and your right I do expect to see lots of comb built between the plastic frames. Make no mistake its an issue and a problem at least in my bee management. Its a huge mess and involves lots of extra work cleaning it up unless you want to just set everything back together and squish 100's of bees in the process. I have some pictures I'd be glad to share in case others are not aware of what will happen placing plastic frames on a strong hive. As I understand it you purchased thousands of them so I do understand position.

 

I run plastic, there is bridge comb like with wood frames I run. I only scrape either wood or plastic infrequently, I own a smoker and know how to make volumes of cool smoke. I don't crush hundreds putting hive back together. Dozens almost certainly are killed every inspection. It is unavoidable. It is not a big deal. I do not feel that plastic is intrinsically evil. All my milk comes in it and I feel fine.

 

Interesting article by Keith DeLaplane in the April issue of ABJ regarding the use of small cell foundation and its effects on varroa mites.

I would think that DeLaplane's time could be better spent solving a problem...

 

The original study was intended to see if indeed small cell solved a problem. The issue addressed by repeating those results is advise new beekeepers that small cell is not a panacea for everyone. That seems like potential problem solving to me.

 

If anyone out there has been keeping a significant number of hives with no treatments for more than a decade on large cell, I'd love to discuss their experiences and why they think cell size doesn't matter. I tried not treating on large cell and not treating on small cell. The differences were quite significant.

 

Well it surly doesn't take a decade for mites to kill a colony. I been having about 40 colonies , some with small cell, some with natural cell and some with large cell all treatment free. Last year I went into winter with 40 and came out with 39. Checked them last week and all are strong.
All are doing good with all three types of comb.
So that's making me neutral on the subject. Use whatever you believe in and have fun doing it.

 

You can have 100 beekeepers do the same study and you'd get 100 different results.
Since local conditions, genetics and management methods are complicated and all critical for any kind of results, I don't think there is any real way to have conclusive results in simple studies. If one small thing is overlooked or changed, the results may be considered a failure, where as someone else may experience success. Who is to say ether one is right or wrong?Throw the human factor in the mix with limited or exceptional powers of observation/experience and the results of some of these studies are bound to be 'food for thought' at best. I think it is always wise to keep an open mind.


I've been asked for the scientific 'proof' my sugar blocks work too. LOL, It's just a recipe that works for me. And apparently it works well for others. Along with feeding my protein mix in fall, It's something I believe in for over wintering success. Try it or not. It's up to you

I think I'd put small cell beekeeping in that category. Try it ...or not. It's apparently worked well for some. Why fight over it?

 

That's some smart thinking Lauri.

I think that the smaller, resistant, feral bees come first. Then they settle into smaller cells.

I also recall reading a study where higher mite mortality was attributed to mites being smothered in tighter fitting brood cells, but, I can't recall the source.

 

>I also recall reading a study where higher mite mortality was attributed to mites being smothered in tighter fitting brood cells, but, I can't recall the source.

http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/pdf/2002/01/Martin.pdf

The conclusions:

"For ectoparasities which reproduce in enclosed cavities the amount of space can be an important constraint on their ability to reproduce successfully. Therefore, species like Dichrocheles phalaenodectes which breeds within the tympanic organ of moths (Treat, 1975) and Varroa sp., display traits such as lack of cannibalism, nest sanitation and space partitioning (Donzé and Guerin, 1997).One consequence of space partitioning in Varroa sp. is that the first (male) egg is laid near the cell cap. This increases the survival probability of themalemite since it is the only place in the cell not affected by the bee’s molt (Fig. 2). However, the male mite must now pass the constriction caused by the bee’s appendages to reach the feeding site which is established by the mother mite on the bee’s abdomen (Fig. 2). Since only one male is produced per batch of eggs, its death will result in all the female offspring being unmated and so unable to produce offspring (Akimov andYastrebtsov, 1984; Donzé et al., 1996; Martin et al., 1997; Harris and Harbo, 1999).

"A survey of the literature revealed a close correlation (r2 = 0.97) between fore wing length and brood cell diameter across 14 races of A. mellifera (Fig. 1), also fore wing length is closely correlated to bee head width (r2 = 0.97 worker & drone) in Apis (calculated from data inRuttner, 1988). Therefore, since the pseudo-clone which is among one of the larger A. mellifera races, is being reared in some of the smallest cells found in A. mellifera. (Fig. 1), there will be significantly less space between the bee pupae and cell wall in cells occupied by pseudo-clones than A. m. scutellata workers which may impede the movement of the mites. This may explain our frequent observations that dead male protonymphs and some dead mother mites appeared to be trapped in the upper part of cells containing the pseudo-clone. This is illustrated by the high level of male protonymph mortality found in cells occupied by the pseudoclone (48 × 0.90 = 43%) compared to those occupied by A. m. scutellata workers (28 × 0.59 = 16.5%). While in A. cerana drone cells, ancestral host of Varroidae, only 1–2% of the male offspring die (Tab. II). Interestedly this species builds the widest drone cells (7.1–7.2mm)of any Apis sp. but rears the smallest Apis drones based on head width.” --Reproduction of Varroa destructor in South African honey bees: does cell space influence Varroa male survivorship? Martin, S.J."

Followed by this paragraph which is only assumptions not based on anything observed in the study other that the fact that they WERE affected by the space:

"Although reproduction of Varroa sp. is affected by the space between the developing bee and cell wall, reducing cell sizes as a mite control method will probably fail to be effective since the bees are likely to respond by rearing correspondingly smaller bees which explains the close correlation between cell and bee size (Fig. 1)." --Reproduction of Varroa destructor in South African honey bees: does cell space influence Varroa male survivorship? Martin, S.J."

 

Post#23 Lauri, - that is a wonderful way to do a cell comparison and save tons of $$ on foundation.
I might have to try 10 or 20boxes with those 1/2 fr of plastic fd. They will surely fill out the sides.

 

I am looking forward to seeing how they work it. It will not only save me 1/3 to 1/2 on foundation costs, I'll get some natural comb too. A great compromise and the best of both worlds. I have quite a few overwintered hives on 3 and 4 deeps. As soon as they are packed with young bees, I'll make a simulated swarm with the foragers and established queen and install them at the old location on these frames. I expect perfection. That is one of my methods of mite control...no studies to back it up tho, so don't shoot me.inch:

 

Michael Bush, do you believe that the study you just linked establishes any credibility for small cell?

 

If you are of the opinion that bees should be able to deal with mites on their own then let them determine cell size.

John poor valley bee farm

 

add this to WWX . thats why i am foundationless. no guides and no starter strip. i let the bees decide what size cell they want. i dont measure the cell size. some colonies clearly breed smaller bees. i figure they know whats best INSIDE the hive.

 

I'm neutral too. Get mites regardless of cell size LOL.

 

Same here, in theory it makes sense, but I need data proof and data to make the switch. Whos to say the mite doesn't evolve to propogate under conditions presented with smaller cell size. Genetics is the key, if asian bees can live with them so can eventually other bees. Those bees who groom and who are not brood crazy ie Italians.