So you do a check ...
Those kinds of checks won't tell you how many Varroa mites are presently tucked-up out of harms way in the cells of capped brood, and they won't tell you what your Varroa status will be in a week's time from now.
That's why I don't bother - never have - I just hit 'em with VOA. If there was a better/ cheaper/ more convenient way of keeping mites under control, then I'd be the first in line to use it.
yes.Anyone use these?
yes.Seems most use alcohol?
No.Does it work as well with a sugar roll?
Does the same thing. But more convenient. Pint jars break. If I had less then 10 hives I probably wouldn't have bought one. I wouldn't call it a gimmick though it does what its supposed to do.Is it just another gimmick as compared to the pint jar and 1/8 screen lid for mite checking?
Trin: There was a lot of discussion about the term phoretic in the aftermath of Samuel Ramsey's research. But with decades of research papers inundated with the term, and it being a large part of beekeeping vernacular, I believe we are stuck with it.Just to point out a definition....
Phoresis - Wikipedia
[Search domain en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoresis] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoresis
Phoresis or phoresy is a non-permanent, commensalistic interaction in which one organism (a phoront or phoretic) attaches itself to another (the host) solely for the purpose of travel. Phoresis has been observed directly in ticks and mites since the 1700s and indirectly in fossils 320 million years old, but is not restricted to arthropods or animals. .
Mites not under cappings are either phoretic (seeking to move to more prey) or more likely feeding on bees.
That being said, I am considering the point that an OAV treatment as soon as supers are pulled to see mite drop could be a worthy practice. Thanks for the information.
Same issue with the term 'vapourisation' (English spelling) in another thread. An absolute pedantic adherence to a particular meaning of a word really does need to give way to an alternative meaning as and when that word conveys a slightly different but generally accepted understanding.Trin: There was a lot of discussion about the term phoretic in the aftermath of Samuel Ramsey's research. But with decades of research papers inundated with the term, and it being a large part of beekeeping vernacular, I believe we are stuck with it.
I did it on 48 colonies in 2018. Only did 1 last year for youtube purposes. The point I am making is that it was not as effective as we have often been told. It was definitely not what I was hoping to find but here in the south we need to use OAV WAY to much.Kamon I do not know what your mite load was when you treated 5 times over 21 days and only reduced your mites by 70% but I take it that you then went to Apivar which then went on for 42 days, maybe if you took the Apivar out after 21 days you would still end up with 70% efficacy.