From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 07:35:53 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-86.8 required=2.4 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,ADVANCE_FEE_2, AWL,NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Delivered-To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Received: from listserv.albany.edu (unknown [169.226.1.24]) by metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA8B487D1 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:28:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1SCLoX9010061 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:28:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:28:37 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0201A" To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Message-ID: Content-Length: 107403 Lines: 2152 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 15:08:19 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: P-O Gustafsson Subject: Feeders MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > From: GImasterBK@AOL.COM > > Can you use this feeder on a hive with a screened bottom board in the winter > rather than a standard bottom board? I never had anything else than the screened bottoms in the picture. The difference (and this is the never ending discussion...) is that we don't use upper entrance. Neither with screened bottoms nor solid. That will also answer Bob Stevens question if I remove the Plexiglas feeding plate. When I don't have ventilation through it doesn't matter if I remove it or not. No warm moist air that will condense on it. On some hives I can find a few mm of condense water in the feeders at spring but generally they are dry. When the bees can't get into the feeders and propolis the lid tight there will be some slow movement of air through on hives with lids that's not perfect flat. To avoid mold in feeders I put some vinegar in the feed to change ph. Very little is needed, I use 1 liter of 60% vinegar to 1000 kg of feed and it makes a difference on black mold. A lot more can be used without harming the bees, it might even reduce chalkbrood, but that's another story. Bob, instead of going back to remove the plexiglas you can cut the bottom corners to allow the bees to go out into the feeder to clean it up when finished. This will probably allow enough air for top vent system to work. I'm not so sure you would get water dripping back into the hive from condensation when condensation will happen on the cold surface and that might be more on the vertical plexi inside feeder instead. Give it a try on a few hives to see, it would save one visit in the autumn. > Bob Stevens: The hives took down about 60 lbs. of high fructose corn syrup That sounds quite a lot of feed to me. I wonder if the amount of feed needed is so much greater with top ventilation than without. When I'm not sure about the % of sugar (dry weight) in the syrup you use I can't compare. I'm using white sugar that I dilute myself when we don't have the price (tax?) reduction on corn syrup you have compared to cane sugar. An average winter consumption from september until first flowers in may would be 16 to 20 kg dry weight of sugar in my location. Even if we don't have the cold temps of inland climate we got the length of winter and bees can some years be unable to fly for 5 to 6 months. The ready made bucket feeders I wrote about holds 16 kg of 75% inverted sugar and is what many use for wintering a colony. That's only 12 kg dry weight sugar. That will take them through winter, but can require some extra feed in spring when brood rearing starts. Comparing cost, I see that Mann Lake bucket feeders are almost as expensive as the styro feeders I use. When looking at the speed the bees take down syrup, each styro feeder can be used for 3 hives if you don't have too far to go between yards. -- Regards P-O Gustafsson, Sweden beeman@algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~beeman/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 00:02:58 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Scott Moser Subject: Small Hive Beetle Greetings, Recently, the SHB has been found in our area. I found myself in a discussion about prevention/treatment. Those of us discussing it were aware that Checkmite+ was the only approved method for use in the hive, but what stumped us were chemicals that could be used to treat the ground around the hives. I was aware that Guardstar can be used, but others were suggesting alternatives. Some said that since the product was used outside the hive, it didnt require FDA approval. I want to be able to go to the next club meeting and present information about ground treatments that could be used to break the life cycle of the mite. Were they correct in telling me that you could use other chemicals like granular Dursban or Grubex, that are used to treat for lawn grubs? If so, what other treatments can be used? If not, could someone point me in the right direction to find the info I need. Thanks for your help with this! Scott Moser ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 08:16:56 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Ellen Anglin Subject: Re: Feeders In-Reply-To: <200112301533.fBUFXIG25437@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Be careful with plastic feeder buckets! I get used frosting and fruit filling buckets from my local bakery They are nearly identical in appearance to the Mannlake feeder buckets- I just hade to drill or punch my own holes in the lid to use as a feeder bucket. They work fine for the initial use, but it only takes a amount of propolis on the lip of the bucket, or in the seal-ring area, and then they leak steadily. Unless the hive is strong enough to feed off of and clean up the steady drip, you have a real mess, and robbing galore as the syrup dribbles out the enterance. I had a leaking plastic feeder bucket kill one of my strongest hives last winter before I realized it was leaking and soaking the cluster. Has anyone else had similar problems with other plastic buckets? Still, Bakery buckets are the best I've found for storing my honey crop. Vanilla frosting, cream and fruit donut fillings leave little or no fragrance behind once the buckets are washed up, and the smaller buckets are much easier for me to handle- I can barely lift and lug five gallon size bucket! I'd much rather tote two small buckets, and not torque up my back! As a hobbiest, I have found quart size canning jars the best solution. They are free or nearly for the asking at estate sales, garage sales, and from neighbors, who are usually eager to empty their cellars. ( I have tried to get gallon size jars, but they are in great demand in my area. Most restaurants, if they have any extras, charge a dollar for them, because so many people want them for craft projects. Replacing lids once they rust out or go missing is almost impossible too.) I can fill up a box full of quarts, put on lids with holes punched in them, and then place as many as I want over the top bars, or on top of a queen excluder. An empty body or super surrounds them, and seals everything up tight. I use NEW quart and pint size mason style jars to package my honey, so I always keep a bag of standard lids around to replace ones that get mangled, propolized, or lost. These same lids work great as feeder lids- better than the ring lids, in fact. Any returned or donated jars, chipped jars, or recycled jars that aren't perfect and shiny go into my box of feeder jars, so I always have plenty! I may have to handle more jars, but the bees seem to like the increased feeding area, and I only have to remove the empty jars and replace them, so the feeding is constant. Also, if one breaks or develops a leak, I only lose one quart of syrup- not a gallon or more! I realize that on a larger scale, this won't work, but for a small number of hives, it works nicely! Ellen in Michigan James Fischer commented on feeders: The plastic bucket type feeders sold by Mann Lake (and others) work great, are easy to sterilize, and are stackable. One can buy a 1 Gallon ($4.25 each) and a 3.1 Gallon size $6.95 ea). See them here: http://www.mannlakeltd.com/catalog/page28.htm They can sit directly on the frames or on the inner cover. Store them for winter in the basement, as exposure to extreme cold can make the lid rims brittle over time (it would be nice to see a heavier-gauge plastic used). --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online at Yahoo! Greetings. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:04:53 -0500 Reply-To: mpalmer@together.net Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: michael palmer Subject: Re: Feeders MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James Fischer wrote: > One can buy a 1 Gallon > ($4.25 each) and a 3.1 Gallon size $6.95 ea). > > Gallon paint cans are less than $2.00 > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 14:51:33 +0100 Reply-To: man@mbox301.swipnet.se Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Mats Andersson Subject: Re: Bee-Pro In-Reply-To: <200112281248.fBSCm5G23559@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Allen wrote: "Is Bee-Pro a good substitute? Is it better than yeast? " And i wonder: What's the deal with feeding the bees yeast? I recently got a recipe for sugar dough that is a mix between yeast (10%) and powdered sugar (the remaining 90%). I tried it to see what it looked like and the consistency was perfect. However, i was very sceptical to feeding yeast to my bees. Can you tell me a little more? Is it OK for the bees to eat yeast? Is it even a substitute protein source? /Mats Andersson, Stockholm Sweden ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:30:23 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Al Lipscomb Subject: Re: Small Hive Beetle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Moser [mailto:smoser@RURALCOM.NET] [cut] > Those of > us discussing it were aware that Checkmite+ was the only > approved method for use in the hive, but what stumped us were > chemicals that could be used to treat the ground around the > hives. I was aware that Guardstar can be used, but others > were suggesting alternatives. Some said that since the > product was used outside the hive, it didnt require FDA > approval. In the use of any pesticide, the label is the law. Use of any pesticide, for any reason, outside of the applications described on the label is illegal. >Were they correct in telling me that you could use other chemicals like granular Dursban or Grubex, that are used to treat >for lawn grubs? Worse than wrong! Many of these products, under the right conditions, could wipe out your hives. If I recall Dursban can be a real danger to your bees. Accidental contamination of equipment can wipe out a hive, or worse weaken it which will allow the beetles to gain the upper hand. I have had no luck with any chemical treatment. Hives with Checkmite still have beetles running all over them. The best way I have found to deal with beetles is to keep my hives strong and pull any frames that show beetle larvae. Once larvae are established they drive the bees away and expand rapidly in that area of the hive. Once they get into the brood area the queen stops laying and it is all over. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:27:10 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: polystyrene miller-type feeder MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" In spite of their price, I bought 15 of the polystyrene miller-type feeders this fall. It was late in the season and I was anxious to feed bees with little time left in the season for the bees to take the feed. By the time I got the feeders painted and on my hives it was mid/late October. Fortunately we had one of the warmest autumns on record and the 15 feeders were sufficient to service my 4 yards averaging 20 hives each. Pros: The feeders hold a lot of syrup. My bees are in very good shape this fall and feeding was actually unnecessary other than to get Fumidil-B into the hives. The recommended 2 gallons of medicated syrup (I used HFCS) was easily held by the feeders, hence only one fill was required. With warm weather (a full week of uninterrupted flying weather) the bees emptied the feeders within the week. When the weather was less ideal, days when bees didn't fly at all or only in the afternoon, they didn't take the feed as readily and in some cases I had to empty the excess feed to remove the feeders for use in the next yard. Some hives only took a gallon or so, which was noted in my records to see how those hives are in the spring. I view fall feeding as the start of the next season rather than the end of this season. By the time the feeders got to my last yard I figured it was useless to even use them figuring the window of opportunity had passed, but I used them anyway. I was evaluating them and figured I'd push the envelope just to see what I could see. Roughly half the hives in the final yard took all the syrup. The feeders were installed in the yard the weekend before Thanksgiving. I hauled about 12 gallons of syrup out of that yard the first week of December. It had not occurred to me to leave the feeders on over winter, but I like the idea. Cons: 1) The feeders I bought are sized for styrofoam hives, not standard Langstroth hives. I was warned of this prior to purchase. A telescoping cover will fit on top of the feeder and close it, provided the telescoping feeder is square and placed correctly. And correct placing is a close fit with no more than 3/8 inch leeway on any side. Improper placement or uneven telescoping covers leave enough room for bees to rob from the feeder resulting in many drowned and assassinated bees. However, when the telescoping cover is placed improperly the bees will take all the feed in a day, just not the bees you're intending to feed! 2) The feeders can be in the way if you're also dusting your bees. If the bees take longer to empty the feeders than you intend, a half empty/half full feeder makes it very hard to get into the bees. This can be a problem and upset dusting and inspection schedules. Of course, this con can be avoided with better scheduling of one's fall chores. 3) They're pricey! At just under $30 US they make for one of the priciest pieces of equipment I own outside of the extraction room! I hope the new model that Bob spoke of will be more reasonable. The cost of styrofoam equipment always AMAZES me! Aaron Morris - thinking I'll have to purchase polystyrene hives to match my feeders! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:19:29 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: Bee-Pro quick thoughts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" This message was originally submitted by bee@ANTHIEN.COM to the BEE-L list at LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU. It was edited to remove quotes of previously posted material. ----------------- Original message (ID=C67BFF88) (76 lines) ------------------- Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 10:33:27 -0800 From: "adony melathopoulos" Reply-To: To: Subject: Re: Bee-Pro quick thoughts If I remember correctly, the amino acid requirements of bees was established by a German researcher in the 1960s by feeding a full amino acid mixture to caged bees and by deleting one amino acid at a time and watching the effect on the nursing glands. Seems to me that most of these natural protein substitutes, like brewer's yeast, soy flour, fish meal, have all the essential amino acids in excess. What seems to make one better at brooding up a colony than another is: 1) how palatible the substitute is and 2) how much fat is left during extraction. The amount of ash and trace minerals may also be important. The evidence I have seen suggests if a protein substitute has the right fat content, it does not matter what it is, the biggest increase in brooding will follow with how much pollen is added to increase palitability. Adony ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "W. Allen Dick" Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 17:36:17 -0500 >>>I'd like to know if anyong using this product has seen a noticable >>>increase in brood rearing that can be atributed to Bee-Pro. Has anyone >>>studied the contents of the product to see how the proteins compair to >>>real pollens. Any comments would be appreciated. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:56:48 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: polystyrene feeder MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Oops! It's been brought to my attention that the styrofoam feeders were $19.95 which puts them at just under $20, not just under $30 as I wrote. Apologies for my error. Sincerely, Aaron Morris ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 13:51:41 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Antioxidant qualities of honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit More on the topic that includes other uses as an antioxidant. http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc98/9_12_98/Bob1.htm In summary, dark is usually better but as a food it is middling compared to most other foods so designated, plus you can eat more of them compared to honey so get much more benefit. If you like lots of broccoli. But its use as an anti-spoilage agent in meats is very promising as well as its use in skin creams. Could open up very large markets. So there are some very promising uses, just not necessarily by itsself as a sweetener and antioxidant. From a health food point of view, it needs to be compared to sugar. There it wins hands down. Interesting that the research was conducted to find a market for darker (soy bean) honey. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:34:38 -0800 Reply-To: bee@anthien.com Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: adony melathopoulos Subject: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Should Varroa and honey bees, left to their own devices, evolve towards a less harmful relationship? How about AFB and bees? During my holiday I read a great article by an American evolutionary biologist named Paul Ewald (Scientific American, May 2001, 284: 32-33) that may shed light on these questions. Dr. Ewald has challenged a long standing theory that diseases and parasites necessarily tend towards being less harmful (virulent) to their hosts. His theory suggests whether a condition will tend, over evolutionary time, to being benign or harmful depends the way the disease gets to its next host. The theory suggest the "tendency of a parasite tending towards benignity is reserved for conditions passed directly from host to host. Someone too sick to mingle with others would indeed be a dead end for the most dangerous infections, but Ewald showed that infectious agents that used intermediate vectors fpr transmission, such as malaria's mosquitoes and cholera's contaminated! water, are free to evolve towards greater destructive power. The theory predicts that a disease like Varroa, that spreads easily among colonies, will evolve towards being more benign to bees, while AFB, that can lay dormant in the environment, being vectored by next cavities, will tend to be more virulent. The implications of Ewald's ideas on bee diseases was recently explored in a recent article and the abstract of that article is available online: Fries, I. and S. Camazine. 2001. Implications of horizontal and vertical pathogen transmission for honey bee epidemiology. http://www.edpsciences.org/articles/inra-apido/abs/2001/03/fries/fries.html The abstract reads: The degree to which a disease evolves to be virulent depends, in part, on whether the pathogen is transmitted horizontally or vertically. Eusocial insect colonies present a special case since the fitness of the pathogen depends not only on the ability to infect and spread between individuals within a colony, but also on the ability to spread to new individuals in other colonies. In honey bees, intercolony transmission of pathogens occurs horizontally (by drifting or robbing) and vertically (through swarming). Vertical transmission is likely the most important route of pathogen infection of new colonies. Theory predicts that this should generally select for benign host-parasite relationships. Indeed, most honey bee diseases exhibit low virulence. The only major exception is American foulbrood (AFB). In light of current ideas in evolutionary epidemiology, we discuss the implications of horizontal and vertical pathogen transmission for virulence of AFB and other honey bee disea! ses. __________________________________________________ D O T E A S Y - "Join the web hosting revolution!" http://www.doteasy.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 22:12:17 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: David Westervelt Subject: Re: Small Hive Beetle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all. It's not where they are used it what they are used for. (Target pest) If you are going after the SHB it need to be on the Label. If you have Fire Ants and treat for them it might kill the SHB if they are in the same area. Be careful with Dursban - some of the other granules they gas of killing your bees from about 18" away. Thank You. David ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 07:20:37 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Borst Subject: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" quote: > Vertical transmission is likely the most important route of >pathogen infection of new colonies. Theory predicts that this should >generally select for benign host-parasite relationships. This theory is full of holes. Given my experience this year with a yard of 15 untreated hives, I can say that the most important route of infection is not swarming. Only one hive swarmed but they all became sick and died from mites. I don't see how a benign host/pest relationship would *ever* develop in a fatal disease. Besides, the whole theory rests on human non-involvement. In other words, nobody treats. Then we sit back and watch 99.9% of the world's honey bees die. Then we wait for several thousand years for the repopulation by varroa tolerant bees. Evolution is an exceedingly slow process and can hardly be depended upon for our purposes. That is precisely why humans will stay involved, rendering the theory untestable. It does, however, point to a goal which is to develop bee lines which can coexist with varroa, rather than imagining that we can be rid of the pest. But that is not evolution -- it is selective breeding, which can bring about good as well as negative effects. -- Peter Borst ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 23:58:17 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Dick Allen Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? >Ewald showed that infectious agents that used intermediate vectors for transmission, such as malaria's mosquitoes and cholera's contaminated water, are free to evolve towards greater destructive power. >The theory predicts that a disease like Varroa, that spreads easily among colonies, will evolve towards being more benign to bees, while AFB, that can lay dormant in the environment, being vectored by next cavities, will tend to be more virulent. So, what does this mean for the virus diseases that are showing up in honey bees that are believed to be vectored by varroa? Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 23:36:17 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bob Bassett Subject: Re: Small Hive Beetle In-Reply-To: <200201021306.g02D6NG04532@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Friends, Last year, a friend of mine used Dursban granules in a yard of about 25 hives, in an attempt to kill Hive Beetles. He noted the Dursban was a strong smelling substance, when he applied it. The end result is that he lost 16 hives from the Dursban in one week Bob Bassett rj.bassett@wellspoke.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 23:35:03 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Dick Allen Subject: Re: Antioxidant qualities of honey Beekeepers: A couple of weeks back Aaron Morris had this to say in regards to Ahlert Schmidt's post Radicals & Honey: >It seems that's a message that the NHB (and beekeepers too) should be shouting from every mountain top! Well today I received the January 2002 issue of the American Bee Journal. In it was an article entitled "Scientific Health Research as a Platform for a Marketing Strategy". The article was by Marcia M. Cardetti, Director of Scientific Affairs for the National Honey Board. The article did mention that honey is an effective antioxidant in meat products as Bill Trusdell pointed out. It also mentioned a project underway at the University of Georgia to try to eliminate Clostridium botulinum spores from honey. Wouldn't that be grand. We would no longer have to tell people how *poisonous* honey is to babies! Now if the Honey Board would begin printing articles such as that in the more general magazines that non-beekeepers read... Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 08:53:56 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Small Hive Beetle In-Reply-To: <200201030501.g0351QG29185@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" > Many of these products, under the right conditions, could wipe out >your hives. Right. When I kept bees in San Diego in the 80s, some yards were plagued in summer by small black ants. I used to use Chlordane, till it was outlawed. Then I switched to Diazinon powder, sprinkled on the ground around the hives. Worked OK. Then, one summer the ants got way out of hand in a yard of 80 hives. They were driving the bees out. So, I dumped most of a 50 pound bag in circles around the hives, about 8 inches away from the hives. The temperature that week went up to 100 or so, and the stuff began to vaporize, which created toxic fumes. The bees started pouring out of the hives, dying. I had to move the whole yard. Fortunately I was able to borrow a truck with a 20 foot bed and a boom loader. The were still dying after I got them moved. Chemicals and honey bees don't mix well. -- Peter Borst ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 09:28:41 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Mike Rossander Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Peter Borst wrote: >... I don't see how a benign host/pest relationship would *ever* develop in a fatal disease. I don't have enough experience as a beekeeper to agree or disagree with you about the transmission of mites between beehives, but there are many examples of fatal diseases developing into more benign relationships with the host. Human pathologies are the best studied so the best examples I know of are the childhood diseases - chickenpox, measles, mumps, etc. They are excellent examples of pathogens that the archeological record shows were far more virulent than they are today. (Steven J Gould had some very good essays on this topic. I think they were in "The Panda's Thumb".) >... Evolution is an exceedingly slow process and can hardly be depended upon for our purposes. Actually, the current understanding of evolution is not that slow at all. The argument goes that species tend to stay stable for relatively long periods until something in the environment changes enough to bring the accumulated random mutations to the fore. Once a beneficial adaptation really takes hold, it propogates across the species very quickly. The concept is called Punctuated Equilibrium and was very well described in another Scientific American article several years ago. (Sorry, I'm not able to look up the exact issue right now.) I do believe that new pathogens would qualify as a significant and comparatively sudden new environmental pressure. >... But that is not evolution -- it is selective breeding, Here, I think you are making a distinction without a difference. Selective breeding is evolution. Humans are part of the environment for bees. We can pressure them toward resistance mutations or we can counter-balance other environmental factors and pressure them away from those same mutations. >... which can bring about good as well as negative effects. Evolution also has both positive and negative effects. Evolution and selective breeding are both about trade-offs. I was reading an article in the paper just this morning that scientists discovered a single gene in mice that prevents cancer but apparently causes many of the debilitating effects of aging. Okay, I'll get off my soap box now. But the original article that adony melathopoulos cited was very good. I recommend it. Mike Rossander ______________________________________________________________________ This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Cap Gemini Ernst & Young Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 10:32:40 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Thomas Cornick Subject: Re: Antioxidant qualities of honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/2/02 2:15:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, bhfarms@SUSCOM-MAINE.NET writes: > In summary, dark is usually better but as a food it is middling compared > to most other foods so designated, plus you can eat more of them > compared to honey If dark honey replaced the refined sugar in the average modern diet I think you would find the contribution of antioxidants and flavones to be quite significant. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 06:24:36 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Allen Dick Subject: BEE-L FAQ and Guidelines (Revised DEC 8, 2001) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit BEE-L is a moderated discussion list with published standards & guidelines. Discussion covers a wide range of bee-related subjects. Anyone with an interest in bees is welcome to join. GUIDELINES: BEE-L has rules that everyone who wishes to post messages to the list must observe. Please see http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/BEE-L for details. In particular, DO NOT INCLUDE QUOTES OF PREVIOUS ARTICLES WHEN REPLYING. Contributions including quotes that are not absolutely necessary to understanding will usually be rejected WITHOUT NOTICE. FAQ: Our FAQ is our archive of posts running back more than a decade. Every post that makes the list (and well over 90% do) goes into these archives and can be easily found by a search at any time now or in the future. We are very pleased at the high quality and wide variety of input from members all over the world. Please see http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/BEE-L to access the archives. In a sense, we are writing a book together. The BEE-L archive search engine is much more powerful and flexible than many on the web. Please take time to read the help page and experiment a bit. You will be well rewarded for your time. BEE-L WEB PAGE: Links to our rules, the sign-on messages and access to our FAQ can be found in one easy-to-use page at http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/BEE-L. BEFORE YOU POST OR REPLY TO BEE-L: Please visit http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/BEE-L periodically to review our guidelines and especially before posting to the list. Please also, before posting basic questions, do a quick search of the archives (at the same page) to see if there are answers there. If not, or you are not satisfied with the answers, then by all means post your question to the list. REJECTED AND LOST POSTS: If you post an article to BEE-L and your article did not appear on the list within 24 hours, you will also find information there on what might have happened. There are more possibilities than simple rejection by moderators. CANCELLING AND CHANGING YOUR BEE-L SUBSCRIPTION: Easy-to-use forms to easily and quickly change, suspend, or cancel your BEE-L membership are available at http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/BEE-L VIRUSES AND WORMS: BEE-L is moderated and is also text-only. Binaries and attachments are rejected. The moderators also reject any SPAM that is sent to BEE-L. Members therefore should never receive viruses or worms from BEE-L. Nonetheless anyone who sends and receives email on the Internet is vulnerable to receiving malicious programs in email from known and unknown persons. Therefore members are STRONGLY ADVISED to get and use two programs: a firewall and a virus checker. CURRENTLY RECOMMENDED SOFTWARE: Zone Alarm is available as a free download at http://www.zonelabs.com/ for personal use. It is simply the best available, and simple to use. Don't trust the firewall built into Windows XP. It, and many others out there simply won't do the trick. A personal version of AVG anti virus is available as a free download from from http://www.grisoft.com/ and it can be set to update automatically or updated manually (for free) over the net whenever you like. Please be sure to update your anti-virus daily so that your computer does not get infected with new worms that come along daily, and thus become a nuisance to the rest of us. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 13:17:55 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Antioxidant qualities of honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thomas Cornick wrote: > > In summary, dark is usually better but as a food it is middling compared > > to most other foods so designated, plus you can eat more of them > > compared to honey > If dark honey replaced the refined sugar in the average modern diet I think > you would find the contribution of antioxidants and flavones to be quite > significant. Yes, you are right but that is a might big "If". The problem rests with the cost of sugar compared to honey when only talking about a sweetener. Those that want the qualities that honey gives will pay. But most of us buy by price. Organic foods are a prime example. Grocery stores sell them but they usually amount to about 10% of the market. They may offer better healthful qualities, but price negates any advantage. And honey already has the "health" advantage over sugar. Check any of the literature in the Organic movement. So the market for honey as healthful sweetener is about at where we can expect it to remain. Might get a little bump. Broccoli is a great antioxidant and cancer fighter. I cannot see a local McVeggi opening near us soon with Broccoli Burgers. Since we are talking Ifs... If US price controls were removed from sugar the price drop would be substantial and make honey even less competitive as a sweetener. Be happy for the sugar lobby. As noted the area that honey makes a big difference as a value added product is, first, in preserving meats. It extends shelf life considerably. Less spoilage means more profit. The second is in skin care products. There it does more than act as an antioxidant but has a range of benefits. To me, that has unbelievable potential. And this is where the NHB can earn their keep. Bill Truesdell Bath, Me ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 13:45:51 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Mike Rossander makes several excellent points. And I don not wish to debate the nature and process of evolution at all, but I must take issue with this: >> But that is not evolution -- it is selective breeding > Here, I think you are making a distinction without a difference. Selective breeding is evolution. Humans are part of the environment for bees. I have never heard anyone state that selective breeding is a form of evolution. Selective breeding introduces a variety of procedures and criteria that simply do not exist in nature. For example, nature does not favor line breeding and in fact, tries to keep a large gene pool to prevent inbreeding. Inbreeding and hybridization are just two examples of human intervention. Criteria such as color and shape, applied from everything from flowers, vegetables, to dog breeds etc., produce weird and wonderful varieties that probably never would have occurred and most likely never would have survived if they did occur. Regardless whether or not selective breeding is a good thing or not (most people would agree that it is, having given us most of the domestic plants and animals we use), I simply do not see how it can be *equated* with evolution. I think, for better or worse, humankind parted ways with "Nature" several hundred years ago. pb ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 14:19:02 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Borst Subject: horizontal and vertical pathogen transmission Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >From -- "Implications of horizontal and vertical pathogen transmission for honey bee epidemiology" by Ingemar FRIES & Scott CAMAZINE (Apidologie 32 (2001) 199–214 © INRA/DIB-AGIB/EDP Sciences, 2001): >In the case of Varroa, which is a worldwide menace to beekeeping, we believe apicultural practices are responsible for maintaining virulent forms of the pathogen. > >... beekeepers could benefit if they instituted simple practices that reduce horizontal transmission. For example, the size of apiaries can be limited, and colonies can be placed to minimize drifting. Furthermore, the transfer of bees and brood between colonies should be limited as should all practices that increase the risks for within hive defecation of bees or crushing of bees. The authors are attempting to place the blame for this problem on normal beekeeping practices and suggest radical changes. They are completely unspecific about these changes. What does it mean "the size of apiaries can be limited"? There are many beekeepers with very small apiaries (12 hives) already and the disease problem is not less than those with large apiaries. And how could a beekeeper with 2 or 3 thousand hives put them in groups of 12 , with 5 mile perimeters? This would require hundreds of very small apiaries. What does it mean "the transfer of bees and brood between colonies should be limited"? Again, some beekeepers never transfer brood, others do it all the time. The authors offer no useful guidelines whatever except "do it less". Do they honestly believe that if we had apiaries of two or three hives, spaced ten feet apart and never crushed any bees, they wouldn't get sick? How does this account for the fact that bees escaped into the wild soon succumb to varroa? Presumably they are far enough from other hives, and are not exposed to *any* beekeeping practices. I think that NO ONE has adequately explained HOW the varroa mite became so widespread so quickly. The only theory that even comes close (and it is only a theory, so far as I know) is that infested bees may abscond into stronger colonies and take the mites with them. (This is not mentioned in the paper.) But aside from that, it appears that what the authors are describing is the elimination of commercial beekeeping altogether, and possibly that of sideline beekeeping as well. Even to test their theory would mean a cessation of treatments, which I believe would result in the loss of over 99% of the honey bee colonies in the US. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 15:26:08 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Adony Melathopoulos said: > Should Varroa and honey bees, left to their own devices, evolve towards > a less harmful relationship? How about AFB and bees? > During my holiday I read a great article by an American evolutionary > biologist named Paul Ewald (Scientific American, May 2001, 284: 32-33) > that may shed light on these questions. Here is the full text of the article mentioned: http://130.94.24.217/2001/0501issue/0501profile.html Varroa and honey bees, left to their own devices, seem to do nothing but die. The lack of feral colonies seems proof enough. Maybe this relationship might change, but no one wants to suffer the losses in hopes of seeing a change emerge for the benefit of future generations. In contrast, AFB seems to be something that will force >>beekeepers<< to evolve, at least in the view of a study in New Zealand, mentioned in APIS (Feb 2000): http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis_2000/apfeb_2000.htm#6 Which says, in part: "Most AFB infections in beehives are due to beekeeping practices... Research has shown that materials most likely to carry infective levels of AFB spores are: 1) extracted honey supers, which are often taken from AFB hives and then put on clean hives, generally a year later; and 2) frames of brood and honey, which are often moved unknowingly from hives with subclinical AFB (those not showing symptoms) to clean hives. The same studies revealed that feral colonies, drifting bees, and contaminated hive tools, smokers, gloves, foundation, queens and even the soil in front of hives are of little consequence in spreading the disease." So, Mr. Ewald might correctly compare beekeepers and AFB to mosquitoes that spread malaria. Even the most careful beekeepers. And he'd be right. But how many of us are willing to change our practices as the NZ study implies we should? Are beekeepers willing to "evolve"? Can we even afford to? I do not "dedicate" supers to the same hives every year. To do so would require a stock of drawn comb at least 15% larger than I currently keep, and would imply that some years, some supers of drawn comb would not be deployed, which seems wasteful. Does anyone do this? Given that AFB spores are "undetectable" until one sees symptoms, how can one even do a split without possibly creating two AFB-infected hives from what was only one hive with dormant spores? But can anyone afford to stop making splits and buy packages instead? If the New Zealand study can be accepted as generally true, it follows that state inspection programs faced an impossible AFB inspection and control task from the start. Without very extensive beekeeper records of splits, frame moves, and super placements, the only sure option would be to treat all hives in the same apiary as the foulbrood-infected hive. (No wonder burning was considered the only sure cure.) There has been some recent mention of state bee inspection programs being lost due to lack of funding. Is inspection as critical as education? Was it ever? It might be cheaper to take the money spent on AFB inspections, and use it to pay the US Postal Service to run everyone's supers through their new "anti-anthrax" irradiation equipment every winter. This would at least assure 100% certainty that one's supers start each season AFB-free, which is much more than any inspection strategy can assure. Hive beetles also seem to defy all but draconian control measures. I read of one queen breeder partly "shut down" over hive beetles last year, but beekeepers who move their hives are harder to inspect than breeders, and thereby may present a greater risk. In a recent real-world example of "better inspection", California barred entry by migratory beekeepers who simply had dirt from Texas on their trucks or pallets, imposing requirements that put bees at risk, cost beekeepers money, and even then could not be viewed as "effective" on any but a public relations level. Never mind that the spread of fire ants within California itself was simply ignored, with millions of in-state vehicles moving between known infested areas and non-infested areas every day. Migratory beekeepers ("the few, the proud, the sleep-deprived") can't be asked to stop at every state border for the delay of an inspection that would attempt to detect every case of hive beetles, mites, or even fire ants, but it is impossible to argue that they are not significant vectors for the spread of pests. But what makes sense? If beekeepers themselves are a big part of "the problem", should those of us in states that remain free of the hive beetle insist that all truckloads of bees get state trooper escorts to insure that they don't even stop for gas in our states? What about the beekeepers closest to our own hives? Should we demand that everyone somehow prove that they are inspecting their hives? Heck, how many people reading this even own a cheap microscope, and know how to do a post-mortem on bees to find tracheal mites? I'd guess that about 1 in 10 beekeepers has even tried this. (I get depressed when I have to capture and kill some bees, pull their little heads off, and put them one by one under the scope. It is no fun. It is tedious. Perhaps it is easier to just blindly toss menthol bags on the top bars every fall.) What about beekeepers who don't belong to any group? Do we show up in force, and inspect their hives against their will, or impose some form of mandatory inspection standards upon them? I know three local beekeepers who don't belong to groups - two are too old for meetings at night, and one is too busy working at his day job, raising a family, and going to night school. Is mere lack of meeting attendance valid cause for concern about competency? What about the retired guy with 50 hives, no helper, and a one-frame-at-a-time harvesting technique? Does anyone think he will inspect any hive more than once a year, at most? Does anyone have the heart to even bring up the issue of regular hive inspections in his presence, given that he has been keeping bees longer than any of us have been breathing? Is mere age and experience valid cause for confidence about competent follow-through? What about guys like me, who can't even claim to have a sensible strategy for diseases, due to the clear presence of mites, and pure undeserved, amazing, good luck in avoiding disease outbreaks: a) I sugar dust all hives with mite falls that increase in June/July (smart) b) I treat 100% of hives with Apistain in fall, even if mite falls are minimal (stupid!) c) I treat 100% of hives with menthol in fall, even if no tracheal mites found (harmless) d) I treat 100% of hive with a plain sugar/Crisco patty (harmless) e) I treat no hives with TM without clear proof of need (stupid? smart? gamble?) ...the punch line being that mites can be found with relative ease by unskilled labor like myself, while "proof" of a need for TM may be impossible for anyone to find until it is "too late". I guess I'd rather burn a few hives than contribute to creating antibiotic-resistant foulbrood, but without coordinated action, hive beetles will likely become as common as varroa, and all our attempts at "treatment" of mites and diseases will fall short of eradication, only making all the surviving "nasties" much more nasty, and worse yet, resistant to everything in our arsenal. At the rate we are going, it appears to be only a matter of time until we all become cast members in a remake of a very bad 1950s monster movie, firing machine guns and shoulder-launched missiles at the giant mutant varroa mites heading east towards Washington DC, after having destroyed Cedar Rapids, Iowa. ...which means that only the mountains protect me. Varroa can't climb far. But seriously, what happens after what comes next? What's the NEXT voodo-magic talisman we wave at the mites after we see them laughing at organophosphates? What's left in our bag of tricks? Nuclear warheads? When do we get down to developing a consensus on "current best practices", and then making commitments to implement those practices on an organized basis, rather than continuing to thrash uncontrollably with random, uncoordinated, and inconsistent actions reminiscent of a drunk in the final stages of delirium tremors? When do we start trying to simply equal what New Zealand quietly does now? jim ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 18:27:31 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Al Lipscomb Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Borst [mailto:peterborst@PERSIANARTS.ORG] > Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 1:46 PM > To: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu > Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? > [cut] > > I have never heard anyone state that selective breeding is a > form of evolution. Selective breeding introduces a variety of > procedures and criteria that simply do not exist in nature. > For example, nature does not favor line breeding and in fact, > tries to keep a large gene pool to prevent inbreeding. > Inbreeding and hybridization are just two examples of human > intervention. Selective breeding could very well be part of evolution. The process does not care what gives the trait an advantage. One species developing traits that benefit another species, and then become a breeding/survival trait are not at all uncommon. Nature does not try anything, that is anthropomorphic! A closed breeding environment, such as a species becoming isolated on an island ,happen all the time. With DNA a closed population has a big disadvantage, but closed is a relative term. [cut] > Regardless whether or not selective breeding is a good thing > or not (most people would agree that it is, having given us > most of the domestic plants and animals we use), I simply do > not see how it can be *equated* with evolution. I think, for > better or worse, humankind parted ways with "Nature" several > hundred years ago. > > This sounds very much like "special pleading" ( http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/special-pleading.html ). We would need to understand how we "parted ways", to put us apart from the rest of nature. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 19:11:28 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" PB: I think, for better or worse, humankind parted ways with "Nature" several hundred years ago. AL: This sounds very much like "special pleading" We would need to understand how we "parted ways", to put us apart from the rest of nature. PB: It is just my opinion. I know the moderators don't want us to get into an extended discussion about evolution, so I propose we drop it. As far as understanding the parting of ways, I would recommend "The End of Nature" by Bill McKibben, to anyone who wants to ponder the issue. -- Peter Borst ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 21:51:48 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Michael Housel Subject: Re: Antioxidant qualities of honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/3/02 1:46:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, bhfarms@SUSCOM-MAINE.NET writes: > Broccoli is a great antioxidant and cancer fighter. I cannot see a local > McVeggi opening near us soon with Broccoli Burgers. > When giving lectures one of the items I always stress is the use of honey on Broccoli just before steaming. It is the only time my grandkids eat seconds. It removes the bitter tastes. This opens the conversation for the Got Milk and Honey, Honey and Mustard [secret ingredient number 2] for sandwiches, and Homemade breads with Honey. Ever try Orange Juice with a spoonful of Honey. The money that the honey group has wouldn't work on one representative. The tag along with a krafty group to just use our little secret honey. 95 million homes can be wronged just by not eating the cancer fighting broccoli with honey. Michael Housel Orlando ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 04:07:44 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Aleksandar Mihajlovski Subject: Re: Antioxidants In-Reply-To: <200112310500.fBV50oG07522@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > I find that MY really dark honey from 1999 had lot less antioxidant properties ("per se"),< Bill Truesdell write: "The test using apple slices to demonstrate the antioxidant properties of different honeys is not a good test of an antioxidants effect in the body." I agree with You about that, and that is why I made statement "per se". But I think we all know why nobody can protect name "honey" or "propolis" nad etc. as his brand name. We are talking about multi-material natural substance(s) which are NEVER the same. Their effects in (or at) the human body can NEVER be measured/compared because also humans are different. My point was that experiment with apple slices somehow illustrates results from numerous (old and some new) research's results/explanations about different ingredients/properties od honeys - about ageing, heating or different ways of (wrong) storing/processing of honey. Generally, it seems to me, that here in Europe we are much more sensitive (than anywhere in the world) about these subtle properties - but as beekeepers we have always trouble to SHOW the customers why we think that our raw, never heated and fresh honey is (maybe) better and therefore they should pay more. It is interesting that raw honey maybe cannot help you to stay alive, but can conserve your body for sometime after death (as in the case of Alexander The Great) because honey and meat is an old story - Ancient Greeks and Romans widely used honey as we did with refrigerator in the present times. Also is old story why modern industry is not able to use honey substantially - honey is always different. ===== Aleksandar Mihajlovski, editor of Macedonian beekeeping journal: "Melitagora" Ul. Helsinki 41 a, 1000 Skopje, Macedonia Tel./Fax(modem): ++ 389 2 363-424 E-mail: melitagora@yahoo.com Join "Apimak", Macedonian discussion group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apimak __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:06:42 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Antioxidant qualities of honey (and brocoli) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael Housel wrote: > When giving lectures one of the items I always stress is the use of honey on > Broccoli just before steaming. It is the only time my grandkids eat seconds. Which opens up another use of honey. I do like broccoli, but there are agents in some foods that react with an individuals taste buds to give a very different taste to the food than most experience. Broccoli is one of them. Some people love it, like me, but others cannot tolerate it. It actually tastes different, usually very bitter and inedible. Maybe honey could mask the taste and allow those with super sensitive taste buds to it to enjoy it. But then, maybe not. No amount of honey would get me to eat a bite of liver. I can detect it in parts per trillion. Okra, maybe, but not liver. Bill Truesdell Bath, Me ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 07:45:29 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Mike Cooper Subject: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I would think it more likely that the Hosts (bees) evolve to become more resistant to the disease. Hence the disease become more benign. Michael E. Cooper ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:37:16 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Michael Housel Subject: Re: Antioxidant qualities of honey (and brocoli) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/4/02 9:08:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, bhfarms@SUSCOM-MAINE.NET writes: > No amount of honey would get me to eat a bite of > liver. I can detect it in parts per trillion. Okra, maybe, but not > liver. > The use of honey on the broccoli before steaming is no enough to sweeten but meant to be a wash to get the sprays used in growing. Using orka in chili with prunes juice[elimenates e-coli in beef] and a little honey always gives me a natural better tasting meal. Liver and onions, with a full pan of onions with honey and butter. Burn a few onions by preheating the pan then add the rest in two different times with butter and a Touch of Honey. Onions are three different flavors with burnt the sweetest like the bell peppers. The idea is to use Honey for its antioxidant qualities. Michael Housel Orlando ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 18:39:07 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Allen Dick Subject: Northern Bees in Winter/Northern Beekeepers in Winter MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For anyone interested, I did an illustrated study of temperatures in an overwintering hive this morning and posted it at http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Diary/ allen PS: Joe Meijer and I will be in southern California and Arizona for two weeks, beginning with the AHPA convention on the seventh. Anyone who would like to have a visit, or get together, please contact me direct at allend@internode.net ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 22:16:11 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Al Lipscomb Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > -----Original Message----- > From: adony melathopoulos [mailto:bee@anthien.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 3:35 PM > To: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu > Subject: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? > > [cut] > > The theory predicts that a disease like Varroa, that spreads > easily among colonies, will evolve towards being more benign > to bees, while AFB, that can lay dormant in the environment, > being vectored by next cavities, will tend to be more virulent. > I think that there are other things to consider in this model. If a new disease is introduced into a population and results in 100% fatality then there is no room for evolution to do anything. Evolution depends on random changes to DNA that result in traits that improve survivability (or at least do not hinder it). If there is not enough time, or enough population, then the random trait has little chance of showing up. If a mutated bacteria kills its host before it can spread, then it may not last too long. In a dense host population the time needed to spread could be only a few hours. I can see where bacteria that evolved to be less deadly would be more visible to research under these conditions. Consider the SHB. It can live outside the hive on rotting fruits and vegetables. It can pressure the honeybee population as much as it wants and still maintain a breeding population after the last hive in an area is destroyed. When a parasite jumps hosts the new host does not seem to do very well. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 13:44:55 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Layne Westover Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>> arl@Q7.NET 01/02/02 09:16PM >>> > -----Original Message----- > From: adony melathopoulos [mailto:bee@anthien.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 3:35 PM > To: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu > Subject: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? > > When a parasite jumps hosts the new host does not seem to do very well. The theory I remember from graduate school is that a disease or parasite that has "co-evolved" with its host in one part of the world, when introduced to a "related" host (maybe the same genus but a different species) in another part of the world will most often be "more virulent" to the new host, agreeing with the above statement. The concept being that in order for a parasite to survive, its host population must also survive. If it killed all of its hosts, it would die out too. Therefore, a parasite that had co-evolved with the host that was to be controlled would not be as effective a bio-control agent as one that had not. It therefore follows that Varroa would be a very effective bio-control agent for EHB, as we see it is. Layne Westover, College Station, Texas ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 21:01:00 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Tom Barrett Subject: horizontal and vertical pathogen transmission Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello All Surely if all of us stopped treating for varroa the strong mites would wipe out the weak bees and also wipe themselves out. Next the stronger bees would survive with mites until a balance was achieved. Thus the selection processes would give us a beekeeping environment whereby varroa did not cause us a problem. But of course we all know that this cannot be allowed to happen. Beekeeping would be a dead duck for many years until the colonies of the surviving bees could be used to restock the beekeeping world. And what of pollination in the meantime? I could see the genetic modification brigade busily generating crops that did not need pollination and then when the bees came back they would not be needed for pollination. So meantime we must soldier on with the chemicals, and to a lesser extent the IPM treatments, waiting for the silver bullet, and hoping like mad that the silver bullet arrives before resistant mites are wiping the bees out anyway. And at that stage the treatment for varroa is well and truly stopped since it is useless! Another fine mess .. (Laurel and Hardy) Sincerely Tom Barrett Dublin Ireland ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 13:49:45 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Mike Cooper Subject: Section 18's MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" A few weeks ago there were a couple of messages concerning State/EPA Section 18 inspections. Some of the comments made were a little unsettling, probably from a lack of information. I visited with the Idaho State Department of Agriculture Pesticide Office and came away with the following information regarding Section 18's: Industry is usually heavily involved in the Section 18 application process and along with the manufacturer most often makes the initial request for a Section 18 to the state pesticide regulatory authority. Before EPA will issue a Section 18 the following from the code of federal regulations must the adhered to: 40CFR Section 166.20(a)(10) says "Description of proposed enforcement program. Prior to approval, the applicant shall provide an explanation of the authority of the applicant or related State or Federal agencies for ensuring that use of the pesticide under the proposed exemption would comply with any special requirements imposed by the Agency and a description of the program and procedures for assuring such compliance." If the state cannot assure the USEPA that it can enforce the conditions of the approval, the EPA would not be expected to approve the request. This topic has been discussed at meetings with the USEPA in Washington, DC this year by state advisory groups. If growers are not willing to reveal where treated hives are located, or are otherwise uncooperative with state inspection personnel, the Section 18 should not be considered. Refusal to cooperate may be interpreted as an indication that some beekeepers are violating the conditions of use and trying to hide it. If the EPA has to take action to deny the requests for a Section 18, it may also result in an increased effort by the FDA to check honey for illegal residues of Checkmite (coumaphos) (of course they would also check for the normal battery of pesticides that they usually check for, in addition to the residue of concern). High levels of cooperation by the beekeepers is strongly recommended . Below is a handout that our office gives out to help explain what is needed to get a Section 18 request approved at the USEPA. The state's responsibility is to see that the conditions of the Section 18 are complied with by the grower/beekeeper. That is required for all Section 18 approvals and is listed in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). SECTION 18 EMERGENCY REQUESTS Section 18 of Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act provides for emergency exemptions to allow the use of a pesticide to meet an urgent, non-routine situation where: 1 No effective pesticides are available or registered for use to control the pest under the conditions of the emergency; and 2 no economical or environmentally feasible alternative control practices are available; and 3 the emergency situation: a will cause significant economic loss to the affected crop; and b involves a new pest; and c won't pose significant risk to human health; and d won't present significant risk to threatened or endangered species, beneficial organisms or the environment. Section 18 emergency requests generally involve the use of a pesticide on a food crop for which no residue tolerance has been established. Information which must be presented in support of the emergency requests include: 1 Evidence that the pesticide will be effective in controlling the pest(s); and 2 appropriate toxicology and residue data in support of this use; and 3 an analysis of the economic impact to the affected industry if such a pesticide is not available to control the emergency problem; and 4 other pesticides with common modes of action; and 5 residential uses; and 6 potential for residues to be found in groundwater. A coordinated effort by growers, commodity groups, manufacturers and University of Idaho Extension System personnel is important for providing accurate and complete data. This information is essential for a timely approval by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA requires a 45-60 day review period for Section 18 emergency request. Therefore, requests submitted to the Idaho Department of Agriculture should be received well in advance of the anticipated use period. If this system gets abused the industry could finds itself without the chemical tools it may need to survive. Michael E. Cooper, Chief Bureau of Feeds and Plant Services Plant Industries Division Idaho State Department of Agriculture P.O. Box 790 Boise, ID 83701 Phone: (208) 332-8620 Fax: (208) 334-2283 e-mail: mcooper@agri.state.id.us ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 13:35:17 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Richard Yarnell Organization: Oregon VOS Subject: Re: Antioxidant qualities of honey In-Reply-To: <200201031319.g03DJVh06465@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, Dick Allen wrote: > Well today I received the January 2002 issue of the American Bee Journal. > In it was an article entitled "Scientific Health Research as a Platform for > a Marketing Strategy". The article was by Marcia M. Cardetti, Director of > Scientific Affairs for the National Honey Board. > It also mentioned a project underway at the University of Georgia to try to > eliminate Clostridium botulinum spores from honey. Wouldn't that be grand. > We would no longer have to tell people how *poisonous* honey is to babies! Be careful what you wish for. Should they succeed, I can forsee such processing becoming a requirement, regardless of what that processing does to the quality of the honey or the cost of the processing. I have no problem suggesting that honey should not be fed to babies. I've never had a customer quit buying honey because I've told them that news. I'm careful to explain that infant digestive systems are may not be capable of dealing with the botulinum toxin until they're about a year old and that they should consult with the pediatricion before feeding honey. It's not much different than feeding strained peas until the kid's gut can handle the roughage. Most of these people have been eating honey all their lives without a problem. If the explanation is accurate and logical, they will appreciate your candor. But if we had to cook the honey or filter, we'd lose most of our retail customers and most of the good honey we produce would become part of a blend in someone else's package. --------------- Richard Yarnell, SHAMBLES WORKSHOPS | No gimmick we try, no "scientific" Beavercreek, OR. Makers of fine | fix we attempt, will save our planet Wooden Canoes, The Stack(R) urban | until we reduce the population. Let's composter, Raw Honey | leave our kids a decent place to live. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 23:40:29 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Tom Barrett Subject: Ipereat varroa treatment Comments: To: irishbeekeeping@yahoogroups.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello All I received the following e mail from a beekeeper friend of mine who keeps his bees in Co Wexford (Ireland) and has tried a varroa treatment named 'Ipereat' which he purchased when in Italy. Has anybody heard of this product or is it just another 9 day wonder? I did ask him to consider using Bayvarol next Spring or using an insert with a varroa floor to find out the varroa status of each hive by measuring natural mite fall, before any more reliance is placed on this product. Any feedback most welcome. Sincerely Tom Barrett Hello Tom Have translated that info from Italian but to be quite honest it just gives info on how to administer it and the results of experiments with it.I'll just condense it for you.Its composition is water,simple sugars,organic acida,{ph solution 1+-0,5},purified and sterilised propolis and essential oils.Comes in a liquid form and sold in 1 and 1.5 litres respectively.Before applying, it should be heated to between 35 and 40 degrees celsius in a bain marie and then administered to the colony using a syringe or sprayed directly on the bees between the frames at the rate of 3cc per frame and a total of 25cc per hive.This should be done twice over a period of 16 to 20 days ie 8 to 10 day interval.It is more effective on a sunnless day with temperatures not less than 10 degrees celsius. It can be applied at any time of the beekeeping year{provided the temperature is as above directed}, even over a cluster with the exception that in this case there is just one dose of 50 to 60 ccs.It has been found effective in cases of chalk brood and will also knock down braula.I know nothing of its effects on tracheal mites or any of the other ailments known to affect the bees.This is one of the questions to be asked.They recommend not using it on freshly caught swarms until they have established their new home and just before the new brood have hatched out. Can be used with supers on and experiments have shown no ill effects on bees,honey or queen. This is basically it Tom and now I will just give a brief account of my own experience with it: I used it at the above specifications in late October on 11 double brood hives of the nature of a national and a commercial brood chamber.That previous spring these same hives were checked using bavoral strips for 48 and 72 hours and the maximum mite fall was just 2!! in just 3 of the 11.In October this product showed varroa in all hives.They were checked over a period of 18 days,second treatment after 9 days.The mite drop showed a steady increase up to the 13 and 14 day and then dropping rapidly to tens and twenties.I finished counting them on the 19 day but were still dropping in small numbers.In some hives at the beginning daily numbers of 6 and 7 hundred were to be found culminating in an overall average of 2500 and a maximum of 4020.There was also one or two with just a few hundred.I was also finding transparent mites which am told are to found only in the cells,this is an interesting indication of the strength of this product.On administering the product the bees did'nt seem unduly disturbed,indeed no smoke was required,although there was an ivy flow on at the time which would account for this. Most of the mites were alive but thankfully the floor was vaselined quite well.There was also a good knock down of the braula and again seemed quite a large number were alive and kicking.Clearly ipereat seems impressive and surely deserves a place in IPM.? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:38:41 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Inger Lamb Subject: hive beetle inspections MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It is my understanding that there was USDA money available last year to = assist states interested in doing inspections for hive beetles. Can = anyone tell me more specifics about this program and if it is still = operating? Thanks Inger Lamb, secretary, Iowa Honey Producers Association ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 05:45:48 EST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Robert Brenchley Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All. There may be a parallel with myxamatosis here. It's a rabbit disease which was imported to Britain from South America, where it was apparently a mild disease, in, I think, the 1950's. When I was in my teens, around 1970, any rabbit you found with the disease would be half dead. By the 1980's, populations were building up, but myxy rabbits were still a common sight. I've lived in central Birmingham since, where I've only seen one apparently wild rabbit the whole time (hopping around the allotments in the snow a couple of days ago) but last year I attended a conference north of London, where the whole area was covered in incredible numbers of rabbits, there must have been thousands of the things. This was at the height of foot and mouth, and I was unable to look closely. This appears to be a case of resistance developing in a population; I'm not sure how you'd differentiate this from the elimination of more lethal strains, which is so often put forward as a parallel development. It sounds logical, but does it happen in practice? Regards, Robert Brenchley RSBrenchley@aol.com Birmingham, UK. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 23:36:45 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Ipereat varroa treatment MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom related the experience of a friend with "Ipereat": > I used it at the above specifications in late October... > That previous spring these same hives were checked > using bavoral strips for 48 and 72 hours and the maximum > mite fall was just 2!! in just 3 of the 11. > In October this product showed varroa in all hives. Nothing against this product, as I agree that any proposed method or technique deserves a fair hearing, but the evaluation methods as described lack a basis for comparison. The higher number of dropping mites and larger number of hives with a significant mite drop in fall may well be due to nothing more than the normal population growth of varroa over summer. One can expect varroa population to increase at a very high rate in the summer months. If one monitors "natural" mite drop on a regular basis, one finds that spring mite drops are insignificant, while summer and fall drops are much much higher. One finds that treatment is best applied during June and July to "knock back" high mite populations to a subcritical level before they overwhelm the colony in Aug or Sept. Since summer is when crops of honey are being made, one of the few treatments that can be used on an ad-hoc, as-needed basis without concern for crop contamination is powdered-sugar dusting. So, without some form of intervention during the summer, one must expect a much higher mite population, and hence mite drop in October, even if one were to repeat the same test (for example, using bavoral) with the same methods used in the spring. > In some hives at the beginning daily numbers of 6 and 7 > hundred were to be found culminating in an overall average > of 2500 and a maximum of 4020.There was also one or two > with just a few hundred. The numbers are impressive. The numbers are high enough to make one wonder how the colony survived as long as October. Sadly, without a frame of reference in the form of at least a head-to-head comparison with some other method of known potency, the numbers are impossible to evaluate. It is a shame that a few hives were not treated with bavoral at the same time as the Ipereat treatment on the other hives. This would have given a basis for comparison, and allowed one to gain a feel for the relative merits of the product. > I was also finding transparent mites which am told are to found > only in the cells, this is an interesting indication of the strength > of this product. I have a hard time agreeing that this could have been the result of killing varroa "in the cell". Long before being able to penetrate the brood-cap wax into the sealed cell, the vapor pressure of the fumes alone, regardless of the composition of the substance would be high enough to drive the bees from the hive, or even kill the bees from asphyxiation. Anything volatile and powerful enough to penetrate into a sealed cell would also be cause for serious concern about impact on wax and honey, if not brood. In my view, spring treatments for varroa are useless. Think about it - assume you have a single-digit mite fall using whatever test method you wish. Since you have no chance at all of killing all the mites in spring, you are exchanging one small number of mites for another small number of mites, and in the process, exposing bees, wax, and mites to a pesticide during a period that may be too cool to allow the pesticide to be fully effective. No matter what "small number" you start with in spring, you are sure to see the number grow rapidly as brood area increases in warmer weather. No matter which "model" one uses, the starting number of mites makes no difference - the important parameter is the mite reproductive process itself. jim farmageddon (where we got our first snow yesterday) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 22:38:38 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: adony melathopoulos Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It was good to see all the discussion generated from the post. I am of the same opinion as Tom Barrett and Robert Brenchley; if varroa were introduced to a population of European honey bees the two species would evolve towards a more benign relationship. Strong support for this argument is that the closest relative of A. mellifera, A. cerana, has had a much longer relationship with varroa (V. destructor) and the relationship is far less damaging to the host than it is in A. mellifera. Dr. Ewald's ideas are interesting in understanding how diseases and hosts have evolved in nature. Applying Dr. Ewald's ideas to managing pest in honey bees, however, would take considerable thought and, in agreeing with Peter Borst, would not be the most fruitful immediate area of practical study. I am convinced of Robert's wisdom in stating we first and foremost need a new acaricide, and very quickly behind it, research into how to limit acaricide use, such as a good breeding program. Nonetheless, it is interesting to note, Dr. Ewald's theories are proving fairly robust in predicting how cholera evolves virulence: Ewald on cholera: 'Theory holds that water in which microbes can thrive serves as a vector that lets dangerous virulence continue or worsen. On the other hand, treated water would kill cholera strains relying on diarrehea for transport; only mild strains would survive because their hosts would be healthy enough to transmit the pathogen to other people. 'Essentially this is what happened in 1991,' Ewald says, referring to a cholera outbreak in Peru that spread through Latin America.... [He and his students found] that over the 1990s Chlie's cholera [whose water was trustworthy] did indeed become less virulent, wheras highly toxic strains persisted in other counries [Peru and Guatemala, whose water is unsafe]. So, perhaps the idea should not be poo pooed (pun intended) all together, and may yet serve honey bee pest management. As Peter pointed out, the area obviously needs more study and thought before it has applications to bees, as I imagine Dr. Fries and Camazine, the authors of the Apodolgie article on the same topic, would heartly acknowledge. All ideas, after all, need a place to start. At the very least Dr. Ewald's theory gives us a new way to think about why certain bee parasites or diseases are virulent and why others are benign, which, in my opinion, is a good days work. PS I liked Dick Allen's question about what the theory means on varroa vectored viruses. Regards, Adony --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release Date: 12/4/01 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 02:06:27 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit adony melathopoulos said: > I am of the... opinion... if varroa were introduced to a population > of European honey bees the two species would evolve towards > a more benign relationship. > Strong support for this argument is that the closest relative of > A. mellifera, A. cerana, has had a much longer relationship with > varroa (V. destructor) and the relationship is far less damaging to > the host than it is in A. mellifera. I wish it were as simple as the proponents of this view hope, but I must disagree. These are different bees, and very different mites. Apis cerana is able to tolerate Varroa JACOBSONI, while Apis mellifera is plagued with the much more destructive Varroa DESTRUCTOR. (They named it "destructor" for a good reason!) While both situations can be described as "bees and mites", the similarity ends there. The fact that Apis Cerana colonies can tolerate the presence of Varroa jacobsoni does not imply anything about the ability of Apis mellifera to survive Varroa destructor. These are two different bees, and two very different mites. The mites are much more dissimilar than the bees are. To make such a leap of faith would be similar to seeing a group of 3-year old porpoises drive off a nurse shark in a Cousteau documentary, and then tossing one's children into the waters of Australia's Great Barrier Reef with instructions to do the same if encountering a great white shark. Both are cases of "mammals" and "sharks", so the comparison is just as inaccurate as the comparison between the two sets of "bees" and "mites" at issue. Here's just one of many reference documents available on the web that can help clarify a few of the many differences between the two mites: http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/maa/selai/vk/fakhimzadeh/detectio.pdf Which says, in part: "Varroa destructor Anderson & Trueman is an external parasitic mite of honey bees. Varroa jacobsoni Oudemans was found on Apis cerana Fabricius, in Java (Oudemans 1904) and until recently was generally believed to be the same specie as V. destructor (Anderson & Trueman 2000). Even though Varroa from different population are physically alike, their virulence toward A. mellifera is not uniform (Camazine 1986; Ritter et al. 1990; Moretto et al. 1991; Anderson 1994; Eguaras et al. 1995; De Jong & Soares 1997). According to Anderson & Fuchs (1998) the mite that was described in 1904 as V. jacobsoni is still restricted to the Asian honey bee, A. cerana as a host. Only two of the 18 different haplotypes concealed within the complex of mites infesting A. cerana have switched host and have become pest of A. mellifera worldwide. Both belong to V. destructor, and they are not V. jacobsoni (Anderson & Trueman 2000; Anderson 2000). These species differ significantly in size, reproductive characteristics (Anderson 1994) and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) cytochrome oxydase I (CO- I) gene sequences (Hunt & Anderson 1999; Anderson & Trueman 2000; Anderson 2000). According to Anderson & Trueman (2000) V. destructor is larger than V. jacobsoni. Apparently, only V. destructor is capable of causing extensive damage to bee colonies (Hunt & Anderson 1999)." Much of the confusion between the two mites was because varroa mites were not as well-documented as bees, and at first, the text-only description of Varroa jacobsoni from 1904 (no photomicrographs in 1904) seemed a good "match" for the mite found. It was not until "mug shots" were matched up that the authorities realized that they had accused, tried, and convicted the wrong mite. Here are the mug shots, showing the gross physical characteristics of the two types of mites, which are clearly different enough to see, once one has side-by-side photos. http://www.anu.edu.au/BoZo/trueman/labsite/successes.htm One is a mere minor pest. The other is a hemoglyph-sucking, virus carrying, mass murderer of the sort that prompts one to ask Sigourney Weaver for advice. Why ask her? She has significant experience with things like varroa. Look here: http://hosted.avpnetwork.com/aliendomain/alien26.jpg jim farmageddon ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 09:07:27 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Allen Dick Subject: Re: Do bee disease evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I am of the... opinion... if varroa were introduced to a population > > of European honey bees the two species would evolve towards > > a more benign relationship. It does seem to be happening in a number of places -- with and without the intervention of personkind. allen http://www.internode.net/honeybee/diary/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 18:52:15 -0000 Reply-To: Gavin Ramsay Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Gavin Ramsay Subject: Cell size and Varroa invasion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear All It has been said (by a Dutch student, see below) that Varroa may be sensitive to the distance between the rim of the worker cell and the larva. If it is too far to reach the larva, the mite may stay out of the cell and so not reproduce. How might small cell size impact on this behaviour? I suppose that it is not the best time to ask 4.9 trialists (in the N hemisphere at any rate) to look to see if the headspace above larvae in 4.9 cells is deeper than normal (or shallower for that matter), but does anyone have any observations? all the best Gavin. The Dutch University dissertation (look for Chapter 8): http://www.agralin.nl/wda/abstracts/ab3010.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 20:04:45 +1000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: T & M Weatherhead Subject: Re: Do bee diseases evolve to be more benign? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim wrote > Apis cerana is able to tolerate Varroa JACOBSONI, while Apis > mellifera is plagued with the much more destructive Varroa > DESTRUCTOR. (They named it "destructor" for a good reason!) > While both situations can be described as "bees and mites", > the similarity ends there. But A. cerana is also able to tolerate V. destructor and A. mellifera is in the situation where V. jacobsoni will not reproduce on. Nor will V. destructor reproduce on A. cerana that is the natural host of V. jacobsoni and V. jacobsoni will not reproduce on the A. cerana that is the natural host of V. destructor. Why will V. destructor reproduce, quite successfully, on A. mellifera whereas V. jacobsoni will not? Trevor Weatherhead AUSTRALIA ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 09:40:07 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: James Morton Organization: Central Science Laboratory Subject: Re: AFB infection rates MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Brenchley wrote: > Thanks for the answers to my query. The only thing is, both the main > factors mentioned so far - cell size and colony density - also applied in the > UK, and we didn't have an epidemic. It's possible, of course, that acarine > disease may have reduced colony density here before another factor - such as > cell size increases - came into play. .. I'm rather slow to respond to this post, but it may be worth mentioning that AFB was also a big problem in the UK in the first half of the last century. From memory, I think that it was estimated that 8% of colonies were infected with AFB prior to the introduction of official controls on the early 1940s - a policy of compulsory destruction of all AFB infected colonies and no antibiotic use. Since then AFB has been a diminishing problem in the UK. Currently it is found in around 0.5% of colonies inspected. Probably the actual incidence is somewhat lower. James -- ___________________________________________________________________________ James Morton South-Eastern Regional Bee Inspector Central Science Laboratory National Bee Unit CSL website: http://www.csl.gov.uk National Bee Unit website: http://www.csl.gov.uk/prodserv/cons/bee/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 11:36:19 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Stan Sandler Subject: Re: Bee-Pro quick thoughts In-Reply-To: <200201021558.g02FwJG08977@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Adony wrote: >...The evidence I have seen suggests if a protein substitute has the right fat >content, it does not matter what it is, ... Please post what information you have on the RIGHT fat content, Adony (or where to get that information). I posted that question previously and if I recall the replies correctly, non fat soyflour was too low, and full fat soyflour was too high. Brewers yeast has no fat, so one could obtain the optimum fat content by adjusting the soyflour percentage and/or using a mixture of full fat / non fat soyflour. Here are some interesting (to me) facts from Hive and Honeybee: -Bees do not need lipids (fats) or indeed even pollen in order to synthesize or secrete wax. -Sterols are nonsaponifiable fats (don't make soap in alkali). Man can manufacture cholesterol from fats, but many insects can't and must obtain them in their diet for normal growth -"Gontarski (1954) showed that young bees feeding on sugar solution alone showed considerable development of the abdominal fat bodies" (so they were manufacturing some fat from sugars). -"The incorporation of corn oil in the basic bee diet (Haydak and Dietz, 1965) did not result in increases in brood rearing activity, hypopharyngeal gland development or the average dry weight of emerging bees reared on the test diet. It was concluded that adult honey bees do not require require supplementary lipids." -Phospholipids were found to inhibit feeding. Regards, Stan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 08:43:32 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Michael Bassett Subject: Re: State wants interview with me regarding Cumaphos use On Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:21:38 EST, David Westervelt wrote: E . > For the last 3 years my fathers company has been inps.They have ask all >about the way he used the strips,if he was wearing gloves, did he have the >LABLE with him when he was putting the strips in,What did he do with the old >used strips My question is how did/does anyone dispose of these strips and conform with the label. the label I have says to wrap in newspapers and dispose in a sanitry land fill. I don't know about the rest of the country but we haven't had a landfill in Massachusetts in 20 years. when I used the formic acid gel packs the label stated if it all had evaporated to put in a land fill or incinerator, so my interpetation of the labels is that an incinerator is not a replacement for a land fill or they would have included the incinerator on the check mite label. any comments would be appreciated mike bassett massachusetts