Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner
81 - 101 of 121 Posts

·
Premium Member
Overwintering 6-frame Nucs
Joined
·
711 Posts
What if bees use their sence of smell to locate mites and groom each other? Most functions in a hive are controlled by smell. Anyone seeing queen supersedes when they are not needed? Maybe they just can't smell their queen like they should.

So if we assume for a minute, that in the gene poll we have hives that are mite resistant and die because the smell function is disabled, and hives that are not mite resistant, but are able to smell(due to less exposure to a man made chemical) the mites and remove some and live. Over time, you will loose your good genes because the loss of smell from a human chemical is masking the mite issue.
Bees do not smell - they have chemical receptors for specific compounds. They don't have noses as we do, so it's unlikely that other smells can mask the important ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,678 Posts
I am confident we can find a way to kill ourselves off.
We can have wars
we can invest in Gain of function research.
We can stir up violence against each other.
We can elect depopulation proponents to Political office.
We are quite resource full, give it some time....

GG
We are experiencing environmental push back but it is slow enough in most cases it is not a wake up call. The frog in the pot of water on the burner!
Yes we are starting to experience social decay as a result of numbers and environmental push back. Surely there would be better ways to restore balance than waiting for the Four Horsemen of the apocalypse!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Honey bees (Apis mellifera) have 170 olfactory or ‘smell’ receptors, but only have 10 gustatory or ‘taste’ receptors (Kleopel, 2006). They use their extraordinary sense of smell to detect chemical signals, including pheromones from their surrounding
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Is it even possible to eliminate a virus?
Does the smallpox virus still exist?
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf...tg-AKHdghCFoQ9QF6BAgeEAE#imgrc=asiPgDJQVOyC9M
Currently, there is no evidence of naturally occurring smallpox transmission anywhere in the world. Although a worldwide immunization program eradicated smallpox disease decades ago, small quantities of smallpox virus officially still exist in two research laboratories in Atlanta, Georgia, and in Russia.


I think the last case was in the 80's. Also the USSR fall around that time frame put their lab resources in jeopardy. Knew a smarter guy then me that had to go over to help protect the samples, I'm sure that got classified pretty quickly. They say they are keeping the samples for research on vaccinations, but I question lab accident waiting to happen.

So there is hope that we can get a mite eradicated with enough resources. Just remember small pox was much worse that covid, it destroyed the Native Americans.

There is still a lot that we don't know about the little bug. Some of the most recent research taught us what it ate (Thanks Sammy), but we are just learning the basics of the mite. Now the little bug is blind, but what is it using to navigate? Can we use that against them without effecting the colony? Does a larva emit a pheromone when it is time to be capped?: Drone brood vs worker brood how does the mite know, does it run around the rim, different smell, or are they just getting lucky? That was one of the theories of small cell foundation, but why did it not work - were the mite more successful in drone brood (sorry I was not there for the experimenting)? The mites are very fast and I was surprised by that. If only one mite goes in a cell the daughter are inbreed with her brother, how does that work? If there are more foundress mites there can be some gene swapping, but a some point the larva will be killed with to many mites or does it?

I also have alot of questions for your guys that used/tried small cell foundation for a TF option. Do you still run small cell? Is small cell a myth, was that just the smallest cell anyone ever measured? I have many more question about small cell that deserves its own thread. Don't answer these hear I have to start or find another thread.

Todd
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,541 Posts
I also have alot of questions for your guys that used/tried small cell foundation for a TF option. Do you still run small cell? Is small cell a myth, was that just the smallest cell anyone ever measured? I have many more question about small cell that deserves its own thread. Don't answer these hear I have to start or find another thread.

Todd
Todd,
This is for you:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Thanks Greg,

I tried small cell for the fact that I could get more cells/frame and also an extra frame/box (1.25 frame width). I do that now with ML PF-100 and foundationless. My bees are fanning out the comb and skipping about 3 columns per frame putting them in the 5.1-5.2 range (PF-100 are 4.995 closer to 5.0). Also put in about 50% foundationless, depends on if I want less drones. Not sure if I am not reqressed, but as it looking like <5.0 is smaller then they want to draw. All foundationless makes a mess if they start at the bottom. That's what you get for reading old threads, at least I knew it was not effective for mites. Just thought the other benefits would matter. I am looking for a good plastic foundation that is 5.2 and was hoping Premier was smaller, but they lied in the sales lit and are actually slightly large then acorn at 5.4. Their foundation is good but they just pissed me off by lying to me with brain dead measurements and not returning my email.

T
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,143 Posts
Not sure if I am not reqressed, but as it looking like <5.0 is smaller then they want to draw.
Same here, Thorting.

I have some bee types in my yard that are notably smaller than average. When I still had some, they would draw out 4.9 foundation beautifully and use it for rearing brood, even on narrow (i.e. 1-1/4" frame spacing).

Then I inherited some homemade Warre colonies that were top-bar only. They were also occupied with 'small-cell' bees but they had the freedom to define comb spacing and cell size as they saw fit.

What I learned is that the worker cells could be as small as 4.7 mm and as large as 5.3 mm, even on the same comb face. They also tended to want the brood nest combs spaced approximately 1-1/2" on center.

So, I moved away from narrow frames and went to all foundationless. At least around here, the bees (in general) seem perfectly content to draw fairly straight combs at 1-3/8" spacing and the worker cell sizes range from 4.8 to 5.3 mm, with the median size being approximately 5.2 mm.

It would be interesting to see how your results compare at a more Northerly latitude.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,738 Posts
Bees do not smell - they have chemical receptors for specific compounds. They don't have noses as we do, so it's unlikely that other smells can mask the important ones.
????
Do a Google for "bees smell explosives" or "bees smell drugs" - which will return lots of hits which should change your mind as to whether bees have the capacity to smell or not. Having a nose is not a pre-requisite.
LJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Discussion Starter · #89 ·
Bees do not smell - they have chemical receptors for specific compounds. They don't have noses as we do, so it's unlikely that other smells can mask the important ones.
I think the postulate is that environmental effects or viruses or genetics can interfere with the function of the chemical receptors. If indeed bees lose the function of their chemical receptors, it would probably cause general dysfunction of the colony.

i have chemical receptors on my tongue. Recently, a virus interfered with how those chemical receptors communicated to my brain (putatively).
I lost my sense of taste - my perception of the signals those receptors send to my brain. This only happened on part of my tongue, interestingly enough.
I had a good supply of Horse Paste on hand, so I recovered from the virus fully within 10 hours of first symptoms. However, the effect on what I perceive as taste has dissipated slowly. Some things don't taste as I remember them still after 7 weeks.
I also could smell sweet potato casserole very strongly for a few days, even though there was none in the house. I can still just barely smell it if I try, but it isn't bothersome any more.

The point of this line of discussion is that at least in humans, viruses can interfere with our ability to perceive chemicals in the environment. It isn't a far reach that the same could be true of insects.

If something is interfering with the bees' ability to smell, whether it is a chemical that affects their development or a virus that affects their function, it could cause very significant and unpredictable changes in their behavior. For example, it is well known that sick bees fly away to die. how do bees know they are sick? Is it due to self-assessment, or is it due to cues involving interactions with other bees? If something caused healthy bees to perceive they were sick, a perfectly healthy colony could collapse without explanation. The experiments with ants and butyric acid come to mind.

We don't know what we don't know.

Only well thought out careful experiments will ferret out some of these things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
Does the smallpox virus still exist?
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=AOaemvJXoYIY1a9AQ0v_QhRhg6PszknGZw:1642173610238&q=Does+the+smallpox+virus+still+exist?&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&vet=1&fir=asiPgDJQVOyC9M%2C7rkT6QdH-OwD-M%2C_&usg=AI4_-kS0iOJsV9moinGacPv87SOs2rWzVw&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj758m1xbH1AhWtg-AKHdghCFoQ9QF6BAgeEAE#imgrc=asiPgDJQVOyC9M
Currently, there is no evidence of naturally occurring smallpox transmission anywhere in the world. Although a worldwide immunization program eradicated smallpox disease decades ago, small quantities of smallpox virus officially still exist in two research laboratories in Atlanta, Georgia, and in Russia.


I think the last case was in the 80's. Also the USSR fall around that time frame put their lab resources in jeopardy. Knew a smarter guy then me that had to go over to help protect the samples, I'm sure that got classified pretty quickly. They say they are keeping the samples for research on vaccinations, but I question lab accident waiting to happen.

So there is hope that we can get a mite eradicated with enough resources. Just remember small pox was much worse that covid, it destroyed the Native Americans.

There is still a lot that we don't know about the little bug. Some of the most recent research taught us what it ate (Thanks Sammy), but we are just learning the basics of the mite. Now the little bug is blind, but what is it using to navigate? Can we use that against them without effecting the colony? Does a larva emit a pheromone when it is time to be capped?: Drone brood vs worker brood how does the mite know, does it run around the rim, different smell, or are they just getting lucky? That was one of the theories of small cell foundation, but why did it not work - were the mite more successful in drone brood (sorry I was not there for the experimenting)? The mites are very fast and I was surprised by that. If only one mite goes in a cell the daughter are inbreed with her brother, how does that work? If there are more foundress mites there can be some gene swapping, but a some point the larva will be killed with to many mites or does it?

I also have alot of questions for your guys that used/tried small cell foundation for a TF option. Do you still run small cell? Is small cell a myth, was that just the smallest cell anyone ever measured? I have many more question about small cell that deserves its own thread. Don't answer these hear I have to start or find another thread.

Todd
Actually, related "poxviruses" are still around, evolving and mutating around the globe, and continue to pose risks for humans.

Rare related cases appear more often than we are told and are growing in numbers.

As for small pox "destroying" the Native Americans. That assertion is highly exaggerated, as we're still here and growing in numbers, just in case someone is actually looking.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
406 Posts
One rabbit trail not well traveled is, if we were to find bees that were not prone to robbing and unfriendly to foreign drones, a lot of our mite problems would probably go away.
Or, if we find that both habits contribute significantly to the mite problem, we could consider robber screens as a standard feature of all hives in all apiaries. The thing is, they are not widely seen as a useful tool and only work if everyone uses them. No need to wait for genetics to fix that problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
Or, if we find that both habits contribute significantly to the mite problem, we could consider robber screens as a standard feature of all hives in all apiaries. The thing is, they are not widely seen as a useful tool and only work if everyone uses them. No need to wait for genetics to fix that problem.

What?! You mean, everyone 'doesn't' already use them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Discussion Starter · #92 ·
agreed, blaming the big guys sells well but many of them put a lot more work in resticance selection the the spliters... a
Blaming the big guys is easy. Because the wannabeekeepers envy the people who know what they are doing and are making money doing it.

Envy is a powerful thing to hook to. It sells.

The birds always peck at the brightest-colored fruit. Betty Davis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,826 Posts
A.Novice wrote:
If something caused healthy bees to perceive they were sick, a perfectly healthy colony could collapse without explanation.

Me: I did not see that one coming. I must ruminate on that one for a while.

Crazy Roland
 

·
Registered
5 ,8 ,10 frame, and long Lang
Joined
·
3,980 Posts
perceive it was time to brood up
perceive it was time to fly out.

messed up perception would be had to test for.

GG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,123 Posts
Because the wannabeekeepers envy the people who know what they are doing and are making money doing it.
I don't think that's it... my gut is they feel they are smarter (DK effect) and the commercials are stupid for the way they manage their bees.. the echo chamber of the net reinforces and inflates them... That most certainly the way I was when I started ... I was anti lang, foundation, big ag, grafting, treatment, etc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Discussion Starter · #96 ·
Some of the newer evolutionary theory actually is much faster than we have previously thought. **** Sapiens have been evolving over the last 100 years, going from a five cusp molar to a four cusp molar. This isn't very new I was exposed to it in the 80's. So evolution happens in spurts and once a trait is recognized as better it pushes through the population very fast. Human skulls have been collected and studied for a long time. This is why the missing links are not found very often, not many exist.
There are a lot of things written which don't make any sense at all.

Humans have had 4 or 5 cusp molars, vestigial 3rd molars, etc. for a long time.
Selection within a group for existing traits is not evolution, it is selection.
It is no more evolution than clay (not yet a brick) is a house.
Actual mutation (something new) would need to occur and be selected for.
That something new would need to increase the complexity of the organism, resulting in a "higher" life form.

If the prevalence of 5 cusp molars is decreasing - which looks like devolution as 4 is arguably lower in complexity than 5, - it could result from many things. There is no evidence of a widespread change in the human genome in the last 100 years which would account for it, as far as I know. Perhaps I am wrong, but I don't see it as likely in this case.

There are a lot of these little homilies which are not based on actual evidence. I prefer the Potawatomi explanation of (for example) why the bear has a short tail, or why the chipmunk has a striped back. They make more sense and are more likely to be true.

Evolution has a hard time with very quick changes, such as loss of habitat, new predator or parasite.
Evolution doesn't have a hard time. It doesn't care. It is a conjecture of how things change, and of how life forms of greater complexity arise according to a certain view of complexity. Nothing more. It doesn't have a purpose and is never defeated. It never wins. It never accomplishes anything. It has no goals.
Humans may be unhappy about how things change, but that is like being unhappy about entropy.

Virus evolution is different in that you cannot kill your host too fast. They need the infected host to walk around and infect more host. Once someone gets sick and dies of a respiratory virus it pretty much stops spreading. So theoretically, each new corona virus will be a little weaker but more contagious. Also mammals have been living with changing viruses since the beginning of time, viruses were here first.
Agreed virus evolution is different. That is, if using "evolution" in the colloquial sense, as viruses are observed to mutate, but not to develop appreciable increases in complexity. Different isn't more complex, it is just different. Most viruses infect hosts that will either die or kill the virus (recover). When a virus enters its host, the clock starts. It needs to produce more viruses quickly, which can infect other hosts. Otherwise, its progeny will not survive.
However, if its host lives two weeks, and spreads the virus' progeny to other hosts, and then dies, or if the host lives two weeks, and spreads the virus' progeny to other hosts and then recovers, the viruses in the host die after two weeks. Either event has the same effect on the virus' progeny. By design, an infectious virus must mutate rapidly, as this allows it to infect hosts who have an immune response to its distant ancestors who invaded the same host a year previously. While rapid mutation tends toward viral survival, viral virulence is equivocal. There are exceptions to the foregoing, but SARS Cov2 isn't one of them.
When viruses arose is unknown. They were clearly not the first life (if they can be called alive) as they are parasitic on life forms having cells. My personal theory is that viruses were initially developed by life forms as a type of weapon, much as penicillium chrysogenum produces penicillin as a weapon against bacteria. Of course there is no evidence for that...
I just want to put a flea/mite collar on my bees and the mites will just bite once and die. The mites can't see, so if I just leave the lights on after an inspection, that way the bees can see them and remove them.

I just hate those little mites. OK I hate leaches about as bad.
Agreed. I want some of those mite collars too.

Leeches. And mosquitoes.

Maybe we can get mosquitoes to go after the mites. what could possibly go wrong?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,144 Posts
That species gain complexity has not been observed.
This is complicated to answer. I will give an example from honeybees as it is relevant. Acarine disease hit England in the early 1900's and virtually wiped out the native bees. Some Italian colonies were found to be resistant. Breeding from the resistant colonies eventually led to all colonies in England having some level of resistance to Acarapis woodi. Was this evolution? Was it re-selection of existing genetics? I submit that it was both. The genes for resistance already existed in low numbers in some populations of bees. Wiping out the susceptible colonies in just a few years left only the resistant colonies to re-populate.

What happened when tracheal mites made it to the U.S. in the 1980's? It was really bad. Lots of treatments were devised to keep bees alive. Eventually, the bees took care of the problem by selective breeding where the living colonies were resistant and the dead colonies did not reproduce. It helped that Buckfast bees were already in the U.S. and queens were sold by Roy Weaver. On a more personal level, I lost all of my colonies in 1988 to tracheal mites. I purchased 10 colonies from a "leave them alone" beekeeper, moved them into hives with moveable combs, and ordered enough Buckfast queens to get all of them to resistant genetics in one step.

I submit that evolution is not necessarily in huge steps, but often is just a very small step where one set of traits is favored over another. When was the last time you treated your bees for tracheal mites?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
672 Posts
However, the effect on what I perceive as taste has dissipated slowly. Some things don't taste as I remember them still after 7 weeks.
I also could smell sweet potato casserole very strongly for a few days, even though there was none in the house. I can still just barely smell it if I try, but it isn't bothersome any more.

The point of this line of discussion is that at least in humans, viruses can interfere with our ability to perceive chemicals in the environment. It isn't a far reach that the same could be true of insects.
Admittedly haven't spent much time pondering from this angle. My wife has lost her taste for several things, friends have lost taste (or mostly smell) for months, but in my case being viralized had a temporary effect on these "senses".

I have done some pondering with some locals as to the use of honeybee healthy, or essential oils in the hives. This was before I knew some folks use essential oils strictly for mite reduction. For me it didn't make sense as the bees are working in near total darkness with what I perceive as touch and smell (and I guess taste) being their cues. Not trying to start a riot here, but inundating the hive with extra smells seems like it could be counter-productive, like driving to work in a fog.

So viruses affecting long-term cues and confusing everyone. I'll think on this for a bit. Thanks
 

·
Premium Member
Overwintering 6-frame Nucs
Joined
·
711 Posts
Do a Google for "bees smell explosives" or "bees smell drugs" - which will return lots of hits which should change your mind as to whether bees have the capacity to smell or not. Having a nose is not a pre-requisite.
We are probably entering "pedantic" here - but bees do not have the generalized olfactory senses we attribute as a "sense of smell." They have evolved specialized receptors for specific chemical signatures. Some of these are mimicked by other chemicals (e.g. explosives,) but they are not "smelling" as we think of it. Therefore, we should not anthropomorphize bees and think we overpower their ability to detect a pheromone with a "bad" smell. Yes, some specific chemicals can interfere with specific detection, and viruses (hello, COVID!) can attack those receptors internally.

I'm not sure "smell" has a scientific name, but when people say bees do not have a sense of smell, they are referring to the comparison to the human analogue.
 
81 - 101 of 121 Posts
Top