[A Novice]

We all have a tendency toward magical thinking.

Armchair science.

 

[Litsinger]

So resistance, to the extent it exists, will follow a Gaussian ("normal") distribution.

Except in honey bees we have the highest rate of recombination of any animal - when subjected to Natural Selection, heterozygosity and recombination work to increase the frequency of the alleles suitable to survival - thus an 'additive' accumulation of the appropriate genes.

This is why Tom noted that the resurgence of feral bees would be our 'tell' that Natural Selection is bringing the appropriate alleles forward.

 

[GregB]

Your broad statement seems to support that every bee contains all the adaptations of previous milliions of years;

Clearly, the Italian bees can not have adaptation for the survival in Northern forests.
Should go without repeated saying.


Historically the bee adapted to the local conditions and have done so for the notorious millions of years.

 

[GregB]

So I have tentatively concluded that localization is irrelevant.

As soon as you attempt low-maintenance approaches - the localization becomes very much relevant.

But sure - did you know they have a hyppo in the Madison Zoo?.
He is doing very well.
For him the localization is irrelevant.

See it?

 

[Litsinger]

This simple, stupid test needs to be done.
Until then - there is nothing to argue about and nothing to preach about.

That's the nut, isn't it?

Part of the challenge is being willing to start with stock that has already gotten a bit down the road or to utilize soft bond to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff.

 

[GregB]

I guess I need to keep re-posting this document published on 1916 - map of distribution of the bees around the Great Caucasian mountain range.
This is great documented demo what the localization is about.
There are just enough English subs on this picture to understand the context.

 

[GregB]

That's the nut, isn't it?

Part of the challenge is being willing to start with stock that has already gotten a bit down the road or to utilize soft bond to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff.

Yes, it is best to avoid the mite-naive bees from the start.
Which I have done for my own BOND feasibility study.

 

[A Novice]

BOND with consistent survival near zero is waste of time - one can never create anything from dead bees.
BOND with consistent survival about 20% is a workable case however (but must be done on scale, not 5 hives).

Like I have been ranting for about 5 years now - first, do your own feasibility study and see what is your own BOND survival rate?
Establish that # - then go from there.

This simple, stupid test needs to be done.
Until then - there is nothing to argue about and nothing to preach about.

The problem with BOND from an effectiveness standpoint is the assumption that the survivors are somehow different from the ones who died in terms of intrinsic resistance to or tolerance of Varroa and its associated viruses.

A well timed supercedure or a weak queen or a swarm at the right time could lead to survival. Even a brood disease could reduce varroa populations.

So if you start with 20 identical colonies and 5 survive, you have no idea if those 5 are better or worse than the ones that perished.

You could test that, but 5 is too small a number to demonstrate statistical significance, your control group is all dead, and you can't split the 5 without introducing different genetics.

So there is no science in it. It is wishful thinking the ones that survived are better. They may be.

To do Bond in what looks like a scientific way,

Start with enough colonies so that you will have 10 to 20 survivors.
Select those colonies from a stable pool from which you can select again the next year.
If you start with nucleus or package bees, you would select maybe 20 identical colonies and treat them for mites, overwintering them similarly to your Bond colonies but sufficiently distant to avoid the mite bombs. These will be your controls.
Run your bond.

You now have your 10 or twenty colonies of Bond bees and about the same number of colonies of treated bees.
Run Bond on both the second year.

If Bond was effective at selecting better bees, there should be a difference in survival between the controls and your sample.

If the results are not statistically significant then Bond has failed to select for better genetics, as far as can be determined.

At that point there would be no reason to continue.

If your results are statistically significant - say 1 of 12 survive n the controls and 10 of 12 in the sample, your process of selecting better bees is a success.

If I see that someone is doing BOND that way, I would be interested in the results. Otherwise it does not appear to me to make any sense.

 

[crofter]

So would the bees that you strive for in Wis. despite the overwhelming influence of the background drones, be very much like the bees that AN describes in post #78 and Russ describes in post #85. Already basically a stock item. I am not questioning the Northern disfunctionality of bees bred for pollination gigs.

 

[Litsinger]

To do Bond in what looks like a scientific way,

Soft Bond has been promoted by Dr. Kefuss and is currently being utilized by Randy Oliver to good effect - but requires establishing appropriate treatment thresholds rather than treating prophylactically:

A shift in message? The case for IPM instead of bond as...

This post is triggered by a highly respected TF advocate recently posting advice to a new BYBK (backyard Beekeeper) Planing on getting 2 hives and had a question of what to do if his hive started having mite problems “ let them fail and start over the next year” this is compounding on all the...

www.beesource.com

 

[GregB]

Yes, it is best to avoid the mite-naive bees from the start.
Which I have done for my own BOND feasibility study.

This sounds ambiguous.
I have done my BOND feasibility study using TF bees from Arkansas.
In AR they were maintained in TF setting with good results.
In my setting they all died out after 3 years.
In spring of the year 4 of my BOND I had zero survivors.

 

[Litsinger]

In AR they were maintained in TF setting with good results.
In my setting they all died out after 3 years.

A possibility - especially given the three year timeline:

If you haven't already, the talk below by Dr. Stephen Martin is well worth the investment. Near the end he outlines discussions he had with Dr. Spivak and their combined observations that VSH colonies in a high mite load environment can fail due to an external mite pressure that causes them to uncap too much brood and fail to effectively turn-over...

 

[GregB]

A possibility - especially given the three year timeline:

Yes.
Without supplemental treatment this what happens - unsustainable pattern.

 

[Litsinger]

... unsustainable pattern.

Have you tried a 100% robbing screen group to minimize the amount of non-natal bee incursions?

 

[GregB]

Have you tried a 100% robbing screen group to minimize the amount of non-natal bee incursions?

No.

I have no plans for robbing screens either looking forward.
I own zero robbing screens.
Any of these gimmicks quickly turn into a nuisance on any appreciable scale.
Someone has time and research motivation - they can play.

Same time - strategic 1/2" round mid-way entrances work really well.
Again, the research people never think outside of their preset Walmart equipment.

 

[Litsinger]

Any of these gimmicks quickly turn into a nuisance on any appreciable scale.

Might prove to be the only option for those in high bee density areas, even w/ resistant stock:

https://www.beesource.com/threads/robbing-screens-as-an-ipm-tool-lower-mite-loads.367299/#replies

 

[Kellyb]

However...

If for some reason I need new bees, I will try and trap swarms. Most likely not more than one generation away from imported bees.

If that isn't likely to be sufficient I will buy package bees from California. I have had good success with those. The last time I did that was 2023. That queen is still going strong, and so are her daughters. 2 years is pretty good for a queen here. Most are superceded or swarm at about 1 year old.

I hear the localization idea, but I am very skeptical. When I first heard about "meat bees" it made sense to me. But having watched it for a couple of years I am mostly convinced that "meat bees" is an indication of sick bees trying to stay alive by making new bees. The bees are no different.

Reading Seeley's experiment with small hives pretty much convinced me. Of 24 colonies of California Italians with locally adapted mites and viruses in an isolated setting, not more than 2 were 'meat bees".

And colonies of "meat bees" appear to dwindle while continuing to brood. Colonies of honey bees shrink less without adding bees.

So I have tentatively concluded that localization is irrelevant. It might make sense in Europe where bees are native and have had a long time to adapt to the local climate and forage.

My California "carniolans" have shown more visible VSH behavior than any of the other bees I have had. Bees are getting better. Selection is happening.

My current thinking is that localization is only effective in random non-native areas if it results in less agessive mites and less virulent viruses.

But you are running carniolan package bees correct? Seems to me that would be a step towards a bee more suited to the north, compared to a southern package bee.

I took that study by Seely on small hive size as a data point in my thinking that all a hive really needs to do to survive in my location is brood appropriately based on the season. The climate & flows here naturally offer 2 brood breaks for a responsive bee - winter & summer. If they swarm thats 3. Given the impact swarming & brood breaks have on mite levels & mite reproduction I think that would go a long way in this location. But the southern italians brood incessantly all year. They can do well here if one feeds them & can put up with the robbing in the summer dearth.

 

[GregB]

Might prove to be the only option for those in high bee density areas, even w/ resistant stock:

https://www.beesource.com/threads/robbing-screens-as-an-ipm-tool-lower-mite-loads.367299/#replies

These pictured entrances work well I feel - these secure the bees really well.
No - I did not do any sorta scientific study.
No one has, actually that I aware of.

Compare this to my mentee's hives.

He is very sloppy about and no matter how many times I correct his hives - he never really pays attention and repeats the same.
Just some sloppy bottom entrances; often it is a fully open bottom slot regardless of the colony size.
I ranted enough - people invent multitude of gizmos to the silly "leaky" entrance problem (trivially solved).

 

[Phyrric]

If for some reason I need new bees, I will try and trap swarms. Most likely not more than one generation away from imported bees.

If that isn't likely to be sufficient I will buy package bees from California.

Because I could import VSH bees from this ad:

I have done my BOND feasibility study using TF bees from Arkansas.

Is there a reason why you guys arent looking at Wisconsin VSH bees? There are producers that sing the same tune of localisation and have stock that mates and overwinters there.

 

[A Novice]

But you are running carniolan package bees correct? Seems to me that would be a step towards a bee more suited to the north, compared to a southern package bee.

I took that study by Seely on small hive size as a data point in my thinking that all a hive really needs to do to survive in my location is brood appropriately based on the season. The climate & flows here naturally offer 2 brood breaks for a responsive bee - winter & summer. If they swarm thats 3. Given the impact swarming & brood breaks have on mite levels & mite reproduction I think that would go a long way in this location. But the southern italians brood incessantly all year. They can do well here if one feeds them & can put up with the robbing in the summer dearth.

Every location is different.
And every colony is different.

If there is much difference between "carniolan" and "italian" package bees I'm not observant enough to really see it. It might be a thing but I don't have a lot of confidence in it.

After a couple of generations the bees are mutts anyway.

My location is suburban with other beekeepers nearby.

I am within a mile of a golf course, the city sprays for mosquitoes, and there are several "lawn care" operations hanging advertising on my doorknob or in my mailbox offering their services. So chemical exposure is significant, but not as bad as if I lived next to a cornfield or apple orchard.

If Seeley had tried his experiment here I suspect most of the colonies would have collapsed by early September. The rest by end of November.

The one time I bought a VSH queen - a POL LINE queen - to requeen a hive gone queenless in early June, that colony crashed in September even though it received the same treatment regimen as my other hives.

I don't know if it is due to background chemical exposure, aggressive mites, virulent viruses, or some other cause. But keeping bees alive here is a bit tougher. I see significant VSH behavior in my bees. But I don't think it makes much difference.

But if you can control mites with brood breaks that would be a good way to do it.

What I do is

Treat with oav in November on a warm day when there is no brood. Maybe twice.

In spring, around the middle of May, split the colonies. Put the sealed brood in the queenless half. Treat the half with the queen and open brood with OAV. Twice. Let the other half alone for two weeks then treat them. Twice.

That is a cut down split.

Let them run to the middle of July. Then pull the supers and extract. Nice honey.

Put the queen and most of the sealed brood in the bottom 6 frame box under a queen excluder.

That should mostly shut down brood production.
Emerging brood will provide space for the queen to lay so they won't be tempted to swarm late in the year. Put the empty supers back on so the bees have space to put up late honey if there is any. This works about as well as a brood break.

In 2 or 3 weeks you can do another extraction of everything above the queen excluder.

Last year I did a round of Formic Pro at that time. The previous year I removed any frames with more than a dollar bill worth of sealed brood (both sides total) from all hives, put them together in a remote location with a queen and treated that one with Formic Pro. If not doing a round of formic pro do 2 rounds of oav with no brood and no supers.

Put the supers back and you are good to end of August.
End of August remove any honey you want to extract, consolidate to 2 deeps if possible and begin regular OAV until end of October.

So far that works. The only problem is it results in a steady increase in the number of colonies.

The cut down split results in significant honey production.

I have observed that if I am not diligent in the fall OAV my bees get in trouble.