From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 10:30:43 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-90.4 required=2.4 tests=AWL,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR, SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Delivered-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Received: from listserv.albany.edu (unknown [169.226.1.24]) by metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3393749097 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:24:54 -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 n1SF1MMU014128 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:24:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:24:50 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0610E" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Message-ID: Content-Length: 89697 Lines: 2062 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 23:14:47 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Keith Malone Subject: Testing in Alaska MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Joe, > Too late but it is a test. > Better you than me to do this test. I hope you see some positive results from this testing. What are you looking to find out with this test? Just how are you performing this test? > The truth is that I have been way to busy and I thought better to test than wait another year. > Yes, not much progress can be had in a beekeepers year, seems the season is always to short and even shorter still for us in Alaska. > I will know if late fall/early winter is possible. > I would think it might be possible but entering at this time might be stressful for the colony which in itself could affect colony survival also, but this would be somewhat an unknown factor which would be hard to detect or conclude. If things work out okay that is all that counts. > I will leave them in the bus all year. > That's good it will save the problems of many indoor wintering troubles. > The only problem I have read about is the potential for bacteria. > Which is a potential always anywhere. > As this is a Nuc thread I will humbly depart. > Joe, it is not a problem, I just was not sure if you were talking nucs or something else. If I see myself writing on a different topic I simply shift subject and carry on. It is good to hear of testing, experiments, trials, and the such being done in the upper one, there is no university or government agency going to or is doing this for beekeeping in Alaska and it is up to us the humble beekeepers to do it. It is my hope that the Local Association here will sponsor some experimenting and concerted partnership testing with local beekeepers to improve wintering and make a push to make wintering bees the norm instead of the odd thing some beekeepers do. Also, if beekeeping is to ever be a sustainable thing up here beekeepers must learn breeding and queen rearing techniques along with increase methods. I will emphasize that as many beekeepers as possible must be working, learning, and teaching together to get to a state of sustainability. You know as well as I do why we need to reach a sustainable state. We as beekeepers up here will need to do all this work on our own, You, some others, and I are already doing this but many more need to come aboard and help the advancements that are to come inevitably. . .. Keith Malone, Chugiak, Alaska USA, http://www.cer.org/, c(((([ , Apiarian, http://takeoff.to/alaskahoney/, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akbeekeepers/ , http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Norlandbeekeepers/ , http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ApiarianBreedersGuild/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:07:22 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: mite drop [collection methods] In-Reply-To: <20061028004728.3793.qmail@web53401.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I will be brief here in thoughts as I try to keep working and doing things to keep mind in control as I sort tings out. But reading though...in doing mite drops, and I don't see this take on it brought up to often in counting for accuracy, you must be careful,...so as not to scew results! for there are perhaps 3-4,probably 4 if I remember correctly different categories of mites in a given beehive, and I am not talking different categories of varroa. I mean different beneficial and other mites in a beehive that have always been there, that would IMPOV drop to the bottom of hives and could be construed counted in varroa mite counts by inexperienced personnel doing tests/counts. Or they could be mites normally living on bottom boards that would end up in the debree anyways. Also color would vary from sort of whiteish to the deeper browns so so might think immature and adult and actually they just lighter color and not immature varroa. Perhaps you should talk about distinguishing different types of mites by category found in a beehive as when old and dropping down just like varroa they could be confused. But just a thought here....... Dr Needham comes to mind here in my thoughts for maybe wanting to consult. Respectfully submitted, Dee A. Lusby Small Cell Commercial Beekeeper Moyza, Arizona http://groups.yahoo.com/group/organicbeekeepers/ ____________________________________________________________________________________ We have the perfect Group for you. Check out the handy changes to Yahoo! Groups (http://groups.yahoo.com) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:06:04 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late_1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello All, In a recent discussion on Bee-L: --------> Scot Writes: >> …The upsizing of bees is documented all over the magazines and >>literature of the period.... Peter Borst wrote: >…People have measured the cells from bees in frameless hives >around the world and have established the natural cell sizes. These numbers >simply don't support the whole "upsizing" theory…. --------> Scot has a good point, this info is well documented. Looking at the honeybee research taking place around the globe, it appears the Bee-L list (that most beekeepers believe is the place one had to be if one wanted to find progressive beekeeping techniques and cutting edge research in the honeybee field) is falling behind the curve due to continuing resistance from the influential speakers of the list to acknowledge this well documented information concerning the upsizing of honeybees. Please find below, a link for the abstract to a scientific study just published in October of 2006 by John B. McMullan and Mark J.F. Brown, at the Department of Zoology, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, which was published October 17, 2006 online at Apidologie In this citation, researchers “undertook this study to find out if present- day honeybees could revert to the cell-size of the 1800s..." I respectfully ask of the influential speakers of the Bee-L list; How can the scientific community / research (that many influential speakers on this list hold up as highly credible and essential to prove all things beekeeping) be conducting research based on the fact that honeybees have been upsized from the 5.0 mm size found in honeybee cells during the 1800’s to the present days 5.5 mm?,,, While on the other (or same) hand, we are expected by these same influential speakers here on Bee-L to ignore the scientific research community that seems to have moved forward and fully accepts the upsizing theory as fact, as determined factual by the which the basis for the study referred to directly below was founded. --------> "The Influence of Small-Cell Brood Combs on the Morphometry of Honeybees (Apis mellifera)" "Abstract - Until the late 1800s honeybees in Britain and Ireland were raised in brood cells of circa 5.0 mm width. By the 1920s this had increased to circa 5.5 mm. We undertook this study to find out if present- day honeybees could revert to the cell-size of the 1800s..." http://www.edpsciences.org/10.1051/apido:2006041 --------> At a symposium held at the Department of Zoology, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. Researchers stated; “The period from the late 1800s to 1920 experienced a major change in the cell size of honeybee brood combs.” http://www.tcd.ie/Zoology/text/Symposium.pdf --------> Best Wishes, Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FeralBeeProject/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:32:07 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Maurice Organization: prive Subject: Re: My husband Edward W. Luslby MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Dee..I am so sorry for your loss. My thoughts are with you. Here comes another folk poem: Maurice from Belgium He is dead, busy bees He is dead, busy bees; he's dead, busy bees! Go tell the sad news to the flowers on the leas; Go tell the sad news over forest and fell, He's dead, busy bees, who served you so well. He is dead, busy bees; he's dead, busy bees! In the stillness of the night his soul found release, So soft his breath ceased no watcher could tell. So peaceful his end, who loved you so well. He is dead, busy bees; he's dead, busy bees! The winter is coming and soon it will freeze; Your stores may be low, for I've no means to tell, Now he's dead, busy bees, who served you so well. He is dead, busy bees; he's dead, busy bees! How oft he sat with you and smoked at his ease, And watched your swift flight as you flew o'er the dell, Now he's dead, busy bees; who served you so well. He is dead, busy bees; he's dead, busy bees! The crepe on your hives is astir in the breeze, Attune your low notes, as tolls the last bell, With the song of the hive, as he loved it so well. R. E. Richardson, 1948 -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 12:36:07 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: The Honeybee Genome Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello All, Here are some links to videos that explain more about the honeybee genome project, and a few of the 'more informative articles' concerning the honeybee genome that were selected from amoungst the plethora of news articles that are currently clogging up the blogs and inboxes of beekeepers all around the world. Streaming videos: The honeybee genome (4 videos) http://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/honeybee/index.html Hear more about honeybee behaviour and the significance of the sequencing of the bee genome in the 26 October edition of the Nature Podcast. http://www.nature.com/nature/podcast/v443/n7114/nature-2006-10-26.mp3 Insights into social insects from the genome of the honeybee Apis mellifera http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7114/pdf/nature05260.pdf Genomics: How to make a social insect http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7114/pdf/443919a.pdf >From hive to human. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v443/n7114/pdf/443893a.pdf Best Wishes, Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FeralBeeProject/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 13:29:13 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=93late_1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I am not a bee researcher, but I do have a background in engineering and worked with some world class PHD's in a research lab for 5 years. I can tell you from working at a large forture 500 lab that in a particular field lets say amorphous metals there are 1000's of citations from eastern Europe & Russia. We routinely ignored many of these articles as many came from underfunded researchers who did not have modern research facilities or analytical equipment. When I see a study by Marla Spivak, Tom Seeley or one of the other dozen or so respected bee researchers on small cell I will take the claims more seriously. Finding one or two articles from someone no one has every heard of means nothing at this point. Nice try though. What makes the small cell cult seem so wacky are the claims that all bee diseases and problems with invasive pests just magically go away on small cell. In fact I'm waiting to hear soon how the small cell magic even solves a SHB infestation too ....shazam! My experience with science has taught me that the world is not so simple. Interactions can be very complicated and a seasoned researcher must assemble a well thought out study to sort out the different variables. So on the surface the breadth and scope of the claims made on this board concerning small cell just don't pass the basic science lab smell test. I suspect that for that reason there has been no credible study by a major researcher completed as the claims just do not have enough basis to warrant a full scale study. btw I have personally asked Marla Spivak about 2 or 3 years ago what she thought of the small cell claims and she gave me a general answer of not likely credible. I just don't see anyone beyond the backyard wannabee scientist making any substantial claims on small cell..... do you? -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 21:40:22 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Joe Mc Cool Subject: brittle homemade foundation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Please, when making homemade foundation are there any "additives" I can put in the wax to reduce its brittleness ? -- Thanks ____________________ Joe Mc Cool Snark, currently LEYC 028 37548074, 07802572441 -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 21:59:08 -0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Edwards Subject: Re: The Honeybee Genome MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Streaming videos: The honeybee genome (4 videos) > http://www.nature.com/nature/videoarchive/honeybee/index.html Oh dear! How painfully inarticulate - I cannot remember the last time that I heard so many 'ers', 'ums' and 'aahs'. What a pity - it should have been so much better. Best wishes Peter Edwards beekeepers@stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk www.stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 19:49:39 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9Clate_1800=E2=80=99s_to_1920=E2=80=9D?= Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mr. Waggle has raised the question of whether there is proof that honey bees were effectively "upsized" by the use of larger than normal foundation. The article he mentioned certainly doesn't prove it, nor does it attempt to. The authors were trying to see if their bees (Apis mellifera mellifera) could be downsized in hope of reducing the varroa infestation. Ironically, they were unable to get a reduction in size that corresponded to the reduction in cell size. Despite the cells being some 7% smaller, the bees were only 1% smaller. I don't believe there has ever been proof of bees being permanently "upsized" by foundation. Root discussed this at some length in his 1890 book. He said: "Several times it has been suggested that we enlarge the race of honey bees, by giving them larger cells. I have little hope of any permanent enlargement in size. Worker bees reared in drone cells are, if I am correct, sometimes extra large in size, but as to whether we can make them permanently larger by such a course, I am inclined to doubt." But beyond this, there isn't really any way to determine with any degree of accuracy what the sizes of bees were before the widespread use of larger foundation. And, it is simply not plausible that the practice would have any lasting effect, since size is not an acquired characteristic. Larger bees or smaller bees could be bred, or evolve over long periods of time, but the genetic component wouldn't be altered simply by raising them in bigger cells. The range of size of the races of bees today can easily be verified using bees living in skeps, box hives, etc. which are still widespread. Continuing, there is the separate issue of whether smaller bees are less susceptible to varroa. This has not be been proved, either. Apis cerana has varroa but can coexist with it. We don't know that this is because of their smaller size, or it is based on different behavior. The naturally smaller bees of Africa appear to develop very high loads of varroa mites. The various theories for why smaller bees would have fewer varroa have never been verified. In order to determine whether small bees are less susceptible to varroa, a controlled experiment would have to be done. All other variables would have to be eliminated -- something many proponents of smaller bees fail to acknowledge. You would have to be able to rule out environmental factors, climate, inbreeding of varroa, etc. In other words, the experiment would have to be set up using ordinary bees raised on small cell foundation, in a temperate climate, infested with run of the mill varroa. These would be compared side by side with bees managed the normal way. The Arizona experiment has been conducted in a semi-tropical climate, with bees that are probably African hybrids. They are isolated to such a degree that the varroa may be inbred which could significantly reduce their vigor. In the US, in most areas where bees are kept, there is a continual transit of bees from south to north, and back south to a lesser degree, which could allow varroa to hybridize and increase vigor. Also, the application of chemicals tends to make the surviving mites more vigorous. So, if you don't keep bees in isolation, you are bound to pick up new strains of chem. resistant mites, small hive beetles, etc. So we have two separate questions. What is the natural size of the various races of bees? To me this was adequately settled by researchers measuring bees on natural comb. In much of the world bees are kept without foundation, so they have ample opportunity to "revert" to whatever size is natural for that race. It seems to clear to me that European bees are generally bigger than African types, and that the larger foundation is not out of the normal range for them. It is obvious that the smaller African hybrids would be quite comfortable on smaller cells; that is what is sold in Africa. The other question is whether smaller bees get less varroa, and if these smaller bees are as productive as normal bees. We have nothing but anecdotes here. Personally, I have heard that the Arizona bees don't make much honey. That would be a real problem for anyone hoping to profit from the keeping of bees. But they might make good pets. By the way, these are my own opinions which have arisen from the extensive reading and observation I have done. Any and all opinions that I hold are subject to revision upon the receipt of better information. If good clear evidence is provided to support these theories, I would want to see it. pb -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 14:57:22 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From late 1800s to 1920 Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Joe Waggle writes: "Abstract - Until the late 1800s honeybees in Britain and Ireland were raised in brood cells of circa 5.0 mm width. By the 1920s this had increased to circa 5.5 mm. We undertook this study to find out if present-day honeybees could revert to the cell-size of the 1800s..." Reply: I would like to add here in addition that more studies are being done on smaller size, and some have been for a few years now out side the USA and it is nice to see them starting to come to press. But BEE-L readers should note here that this is Britian and Ireland and sizing of this area and sizes do chance from equator to poles and in areas like the mediterranean and much of USA just to pick out two other areas, the original cell sizes noted and written about in archives do go back to 4.7mm quite a bit. As for if regression is possible......well, it is now being down all over and in several different climates be it EU, or Nordic States, or Asia countries, or S. America besides those of us in the USA now....... One would think after a while if even we/I in Arizona can do it for regression for now over 23 years then to solve problems of mites and secondary diseases and survive, then others can also.......... Sooner or later the circle comes round to from which it started going astray....FWIW! Respectfully submitted, Dee A. Lusby Small Cell Commercial Beekeeper Moyza, Arizona http://groups.yahoo.com/group/organicbeekeepers/ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail (http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 15:07:48 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: How does one sort mites for accurate counting?? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi all: I have seen this post a lot on other lists: > I count anything that's red or brown the same. I don't try to count the white ones. First of all they wouldn't have survived, and second they are hard to find. My to Posts like this: Only one problem be it red or brown or white.......namely is it varroa, and then knowing there are different types of varroa and some not like ones beekeepers most think about, ..... technically you have to sort by what is the problem varroa from the unproblem mites or you get just mite counts and then treat..... WRONGLY!!!..... hurting then the delicate balance inside a beehive that has always been there with co-existance........ Then to consider...........if you put the BAD varroa then back into harmony with the bees and they are no longer a problem............ Just what are beekeepers doing by treating hives..............????? except to make jobs and imbalance for themselves and poor bees.......... Is this PROPER.............and how did we get down this road? So question again: If you are seeing white and now you say red or brown mites ARE THEY THE SAME species???? Are you looking to see or just looking for mites and yak yak to say hey I got mites so you can belong to the problem gig!!!!!! But knowing you can control and no problem say with SC regression as many are doing today.............now it's time to start looking to see what has been going on and with hindsite see just what are the mites falling?????? For if scientists can tell them apart ..........are they laughing at us and getting free work given to them sort of at who's expense.............or are beekeepers just that dumb not to have listened close to them for what they said and follow more corrective paths to help themselves get their hives better? So again.........if they can easily be told apart with looking closely......... It's about time to start and so again since I have already mentioned the subject on another post here: HOW DO YOU SORT THE MITES FALLING AND YOU ARE SEEING!!! And yes I am shouting this...........for the white and red and brown, etc cannot all be the same! You certainly just don't see mite and treat do you??? Think about it and consider from hindsite now what is actually happening for unbalance and work and who's expense? Respectfully submitted, Dee A. Lusby Small Cell Commercial Beekeeper Moyza, Arizona htto://groups.yahoo.com/group/organicbeekeepers/ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call rates (http://voice.yahoo.com) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 01:00:24 -0600 Reply-To: scot.mcpherson@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Scot Mc Pherson Organization: The Mc Pherson Family Honey Farms Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From "late 1800's to 1920" Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter Borst: I don't believe there has ever been proof of bees being permanently "upsized" by foundation. Root discussed this at some length in his 1890 book. He said: "Several times it has been suggested that we enlarge the race of honey bees, by giving them larger cells. I have little hope of any permanent enlargement in size. Worker bees reared in drone cells are, if I am correct, sometimes extra large in size, but as to whether we can make them permanently larger by such a course, I am inclined to doubt." Me: Peter, but he was so right. The bees are NOT permanently larger. Remove the foundation, and they do revert over the course of a few swarming generations. In 1890, foundation was just recently introduced by Root, some of it sent to CC Miller at request. Foundation was not simply used as a staple the way it is today, it was used to start a hive to help keep comb straight, but it was most common to not be "over-used" when new frames were inserted into the hives. This is why the statement by root was made, and he is still right. Even though now more than 100 years later we use foundation and now also complete artificial combs for almost 100% (I realize there are tons of exceptions) of our comb building needs, we are not looking at a permanently sized bee, we are looking at bees still being raised on the artificial sized combs. Like I have said many times now in the past, all one has to do to see it is stop using foundation to see what happens. Its not rocket science or amorphous metals, its simply watching it yourself with your own eyes. With Respect, -- Scot McPherson The McPherson Family Honey Farms Davenport, Iowa USA -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 10:52:12 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: brittle homemade foundation In-Reply-To: <20061029214022.GA15924@benburb.demon.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Joe > when making homemade foundation are there any "additives" I can put in > the wax to reduce its brittleness ? I can't recommend any additives, but you should examine your production method. You need to do the production work in a very high ambient temperature and ensure that you store the finished wax above 4 degrees C at all times, the slightest freezing will cause embrittlement. The other alternative is to invest in a two stage roller mill. It is possible to anneal sheets that have already become brittle, using hot air or a honey warming cabinet to raise the temperature to the point where the foundation becomes suddenly more transparent. Regards & Best 73s, Dave Cushman, G8MZY http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman or http://www.dave-cushman.net Short FallBack M/c, Build 6.02/3.1 (stable) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 07:42:01 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late_1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Peter Borst wrote: > article he mentioned certainly doesn't prove it, nor does it attempt to. Mr. Borst, I think it would be better classified as scientific research by John B. McMullan and Mark J.F. Brown, at the Department of Zoology, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland, which was published October 17, 2006 online at Apidologie, rather than magazine type article that seems to be implied by yourself. Borst wrote: >The authors were trying to see if their bees (Apis mellifera mellifera) >could be downsized in hope of reducing the varroa infestation. Ironically, >they were unable to get a reduction in size that corresponded to the >reduction in cell size. Despite the cells being some 7% smaller, the bees >were only 1% smaller. Here, you are attempting to enter misinformation to bolster your position, it seems to be a commonly used tactic generally referred to as fabricating evidence. Please, tell the readers where they say anything about varroa? Also, you are suggesting a failure of the research by assuming that they were “unable to get a reduction in size that corresponded to the reduction in cell size-(Quote by Borst)” This is another fabrication. IF you read the abstract, you see that they were wanting to evaluate the “resulting changes in honeybee morphometry”, and say NOTHING about ‘wanting to get a corresponding reduction in bee size‘ as you so boldly claim. Please, provide the readers with where it implies that the researchers were trying “to get a reduction in size that corresponded to the reduction in cell size (Qoute by Borst)”? >The Arizona experiment has been conducted in a semi-tropical climate, with >bees that are probably African hybrids. They are isolated to such a degree >that the varroa may be inbred which could significantly reduce their vigor. Here you are assuming many things. Assumptions are just that assumptions, and do not hold up to your own standards of wanting scientific information. Here in SW PA, I have significantly reduced my varroa in my colonies using small cell and am seeing similar success with my bees. Best Wishes, Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FeralBeeProject/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 07:15:34 -0600 Reply-To: davehamilton@alltel.net Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: DaveHamilton Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From "late 1800's to 1920" Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Joe I would like to know more about the Feral Bee Project. I know of a home that has a huge comb in a wall, how do I know those are feral bees and that the population isn't dying off and being repopulated by swarms? Dave -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:56:27 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: My husband Edward W. Luslby Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dear Dee, I am truly sorry to hear about Ed. Folks used to say bees know when their beekeeper has passed on... It's a beautiful thought. I first learned about you and Ed in an article in Bee Culture. I was then impressed with the self-sustaining nature of what you and Ed were doing. And over the years, in discussions here, your freely offered input has often shed light on things from a different angle. I have always appreciated that. Stay strong! Waldemar -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:17:43 -0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Edwards Subject: Re: brittle homemade foundation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Joe > >> when making homemade foundation are there any "additives" I can put in >> the wax to reduce its brittleness ? No, but if you are using just cappings wax, the addition of wax rendered from brood combs may help (assuming, of course, that you are not making foundation for cut comb). Best wishes Peter Edwards beekeepers@stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk www.stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:38:11 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: NYS Bee Inspectors (formerly, Color of Aster and Goldenrod Honey) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>Most people I know agree that there should be a threshold. I think it's 50 in Maine; to me that seems fair. That certainly would broaden the pool and bring in some qualified people. And bring in inspectors into areas that don't have any inspectors at this time! An inspector need not be a dictator except in cases where there are governing laws such mandatory eradication of foulbrood. There are a lot of new beekeepers out there who could greatly benefit from an experienced beekeeper's visit to offer evaluations/suggestions. When I was a new beekeeper, I did not feel right about asking an experienced beekeeper to travel 20 miles to give me his opinion about my hives. On the other hand, my (now retired) inspector took his time to advise and let me know how other people manage their hives. This was certainly very helpful to me in the early days. And in the early days, I kept bees in an area that had made it illegal to keep 'bees, swine' etc.! To me, asking an inspector not to own hives is like asking my mechanic not to own a car. If the state feels there could be a conflict of interest, it should provide a vehicle to appeal or provide feedback on inspection services to registered beekeepers. Waldemar Long Island, NY (currently w/o an inspector) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 10:18:28 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: MRH Subject: Where is Langstroth's journal? 155th anniversary of the Langstroth Hive MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Where is LL Langstroth's journal? 155 years ago today, In late afternoon on Oct. 30, 1851, LL Langstroth was walking home from his bee yard in Philadelphia, in an area now part of the U of Penn campus, when he figured out how to make a movable frame hive utilizing bee space so that the bees wouldn't cement the frames in place. He said he could barely restrain himself from shouting Eureka. Years later he wrote that after discussing the matter with a guest at his house he sketched the idea that night in "a private journal that I still have in my posession." Mann Library at Cornell has a journal, a picture of which is displayed on their website, which has Rev. Langstroth's sketch of the movable frame, but this is a journal started in 1852. See http://exhibits.mannlib.cornell.edu/beekeeping/atlantic/page2.html. I have corresponded with the librarian. This cannot be the journal to which he refers, the journal that he wrote in on the night of Oct. 30, 1851. Where is that journal? Marc Hoffman -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 10:43:59 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: Where is Langstroth's journal? 155th anniversary of the Langstroth Hive In-Reply-To: <200610301529.k9UFFrKo009828@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > Where is LL Langstroth's journal? It is in the Mann Library. I do not think that Langstroth's original manuscript has been digitized. I doubt it ever will be. Langstroth should have been a physician, his handwriting is illegible! He suffered from what I suspect may have been bipolar disease, diagnosed as "maladies of the brain" in the mid-1860s. At times his writings were in reverse/mirror image, something also done by DaVinci (although DaVinci did it on purpose). I was privileged to see and read Langstroth's original manuscript at the Eastern Apicultural Society conference in 2002. Well, to say I "read" it is a stretch at best, his handwriting was atrocious! I believe Langstroth's wife had to decipher the original journal. Anyway, Mike will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Langstroth's original manuscript has been digitized. Aaron Morris - I think, therefore I bee! -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 07:46:33 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: mark berninghausen Subject: Re: NYS Bee Inspectors (formerly, Color of Aster and Goldenrod Honey) In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20061028080706.027441d8@pop.together.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 50 for the Maine State Apiarist and 150 for his Inspectors. No number restrictions in PA. New Jersey restricts the Inspector to no pollination. Jerry Hayes, I believe, has instituted new restrictions on FL Inspectors. I don't know what other East Coast restrictions are, but SC and VA have full time state employees who do Apiary Inspections as part of their duties. Ohio used to do the same with 7 regional Inspectors, State Employeed, and 1 Inspector from each county or two, who were paid for by their County Extension System. So, there are various ways of setting up restrictions. It's just a matter of how important it is to the people of NY, the beekeepers of NY and the folks who control the monies at the Dept. of Ag & Mkts. New York State's Dept of Ag & Mkts has an Apiary Industry Advisory Committee. I wonder if they have solicited input from the state's beekeepers and if they have passed that input on to the Dept.? Mark --------------------------------- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail. -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 08:30:07 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: brittle homemade foundation In-Reply-To: <20061029214022.GA15924@benburb.demon.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Joe: Making foundation at home is easy and has been done since way back in the late 1890s or so. It got a lot easier with the advent of embossing rollers. We have taught others how to do it now for going on 2 decades and it is not hard. Embossing rollers can in USA be gotten from hawlwey Honey Company in Iola Kansas by calling Raymond Cooper and they are so easy to use. Wax is not brittle when worked right... but there are tricks though not hard. Most when done after being show can take a sheet and bend it in circles and use it and it works so well, whether thick or thinly made and we do thicker for more wax for the bees to use to have to make cell walls faster by thinning the base sort of. You keep it from getting brittle by layering and cooling slowly, and also by addition of propolis scrapings that adds additional benefit of scenting the foundation then to smell like home where they shellac for sterility and homemade foundation is readily drawnout. You also learn to store for aging process also. Respectfully submitted, Dee A. Lusby Small Cell Commercial Beekeeper Moyza, Arizona http://groups.yahoo.com/group/organicbeekeepers/ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited (http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 17:15:27 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late__1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee R esearchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all Joe and Peter are wrangling about the admissibility of scientific work that is not carried out by well known names in USA. I do not think that John McMullan reads this list, but I can vouch for his integrity having known him personally for several years. There is certainly no difference in the standards of work carried out at Trinity compared to US academic establishments. However I think his work has been misquoted and miss understood, the main thrust of his work was testing out the theory that acarine (tracheal mites) had a harder time infesting bees that had been raised in small cells. What he in fact managed to show was that the tracheal orifice only changed a very minor amount when compared to changes in other body dimensions that do occur with cells of different sizes. Regards & Best 73s, Dave Cushman, G8MZY http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman or http://www.dave-cushman.net Short FallBack M/c, Build 6.02/3.1 (stable) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:06:52 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From "late 1800's to 1920" Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline While the "proof" offered in this thread is more "argument" than actual proof, there is tangible evidence that one can examine in the form of old foundation mills. A collection of these old mills exists at the Ohio State University facility at Wooster, OH, a part of the "Bee Museum" collection. I neglected to bring my calipers with me when I last visited, but I asked Dave Heilman (who worked at the facility with Jim Tew until budget cuts eliminated the funding for his post) about this specific issue, and he stated that the old mills in their collection did have smaller cell sizes than the foundation currently sold by the beekeeping supply houses. Anyone who is interested could likely contact Jim Tew and gain access to the equipment to measure the cell sizes, and maybe even run some wax through the old mills. Ohio State can't be the only collection of old beekeeping gear on the planet, so there may be other artifacts scattered about. So, the question of what foundation cell sizes were used in the USA in years past can be answered with authority, and I leave it to someone in Ohio to confirm Dave's statement with some hard numbers. I am not taking a stance in the discussion one way or the other, except to mention that any/all participants might do well to recall Trofim Denisovich Lysenko's career, the basic concept of the chromosome, and the concept of "regression to the mean". -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 11:27:58 -0900 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Keith Malone Subject: Drone egg pictures MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, I am looking for, and would like to see, some good drone egg pictures taken with an electron microscope or similar showing close up of the top of the egg or the opposite end of the egg that is attached to the cell wall. The upper end of the bee egg has a minute opening which was left when the egg cytoplasm, which had abutted against the nurse cells of the egg follicle, withdrew into the egg. I would like to see a picture of this opening. Are there any pictures out there showing this? . .. Keith Malone, Chugiak, Alaska -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:29:59 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late_1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian Fredericksen wrote: >I can tell you from working at a large forture 500 lab that in a particular field lets say amorphous >metals there are 1000's of citations from eastern Europe & Russia. We routinely ignored many of >these articles… Hello, I don’t know what amorphous metals have to do with honeybee research, but I would recommend that you read some of the superb honeybee research coming out of Germany, UK and a few other European countries, and you will find that Seeley and other USA researchers routinely collaborate with scientists in Europe, and the work done there that I have seen is of high quality. >When I see a study by Marla Spivak, Tom Seeley or one of the other dozen or so respected bee >researchers on small cell I will take the claims more seriously. We are not talking small cell claims here! This thread specifically addresses the “upsizing of honeybees during the time period of the late 1800’s to about 1920. This makes it a large cell claim. :) But, since you brought it up, please tell me who these “dozen or so” respected bee researchers are in this world? Are there any ’outside the USA’? I do Btw have a collection of excellent honeybee research documents from several of the highly respected researches in Europe. Most researchers here in the USA (except for the work by Page), as far as I know are not conducting research in my specific point of interest, so I go to Europe for the information where most of this research specific to what I want is being conducted. But I think the readers are beginning to see your hard stance on this issue. You seem to be implying that research conducted outside the USA is to be ignored because they do not have any respected bee researchers and also have old outdated equipment. Please expand on your position and maybe explain to our friends across the pond why they should ignore, lets say Charles Butler, scientist in the UK, and maybe why research from that there Swiss scientist Francois Huber should be ignored also. But nice try Brian. Best Wishes, Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FeralBeeProject/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:40:08 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late_1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian Fredericksen wrote: >When I see a study by Marla Spivak, Tom Seeley or one of the other dozen or so respected bee >researchers on small cell I will take the claims more seriously. I forgot to add. For the record, I’m not trying to convince youself, PB or anyone else of anything. You are welcome to ignore my posts as you routinely do with research from Europe. My posts are for those that lurk and tend to email me with a word of ‘thanks for the information‘, or those that wish to discuss the issue at hand. Best Wishes, Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FeralBeeProject/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:50:23 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late__1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee R esearchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dave Cushman wrote: >However I think his work has been misquoted and miss understood, the >main thrust of his work was testing out the theory that acarine >(tracheal mites) had a harder time infesting bees that had been raised >in small cells. Dave, I was referencing this study listed below that about the 'influence of Small-Cell Brood Combs on the Morphometry of Honeybees' not the tracheal mite study. But please tell me, whatis miss quoted or miss understood about his statement in the abstract that says: “Until the late 1800s honeybees in Britain and Ireland were raised in brood cells of circa 5.0 mm width. By the 1920s this had increased to circa 5.5 mm.” =====> The Influence of Small-Cell Brood Combs on the Morphometry of Honeybees (Apis mellifera)" "Abstract - Until the late 1800s honeybees in Britain and Ireland were raised in brood cells of circa 5.0 mm width. By the 1920s this had increased to circa 5.5 mm. We undertook this study to find out if present day honeybees could revert to the cell-size of the 1800s..." http://www.edpsciences.org/10.1051/apido:2006041 Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FeralBeeProject/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 21:42:22 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From "late 1800's to 1920" Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit DaveHamilton wrote: >Joe >I would like to know more about the Feral Bee Project. Hi Dave, The purpose of the Feral Bee Project is to organize a group of beekeepers who have a common interest in sustainable beekeeping and wish to encourage the highest degree of locally adapted genetics in their honeybee colonies. Members discuss methods of how to trap feral honeybees, assessing swarms, bee removals and all other related topics. And also to provide a forum where sales of feral queens or trades may take place. I know of a home >that has a huge comb in a wall, how do I know those are feral bees and that >the population isn't dying off and being repopulated by swarms? This can be difficult to accurately age a colony, but I look at the debris in the void and at the comb. In the wild, wax worm and other scavengers will live off the debris at the bottom of the void and will immediately move up and begin to destroy comb that is not protected. In very large nest structures, even if the void is reinhabited quickly by a swarm, you will still see evidence of waxworm damage due to the swarm not able to protect comb towards the bottom nest structure. Sagging or misshaped cells can be a sign that may suggest the nest was not habited for a time. So very large nest structures that have black comb, bee cocoon build up, and no evidence of wax worm damage or wax moth cocoons on the sidewalls, debris or comb would be suggestive of continual habitation for 4 or more years. If a feral colony had an abundance of new comb and evidence of waxworm damage, it would be suggestive of a colony of bees that recently inhabited a void that was previously occupied. In some cases, interviewing the homeowner can provide clues to the age of the colony, but I am usually skeptical of the homeowner clams and weigh it against the evidence found in the void. But on one particular occasion, I interviewed a elderly woman that had bees in a farmhouse. She knew an impressive amount about bees, just from watching the bee activity outside her house. This lady had such a keen memory, she was able to tell me the years the colony swarmed and the years the colony thru 2 swarms. She continued to describe years when the bees seemed louder in the walls during winter, made her dog bark and spring cleansing flights ect. This colony is the one pictured on the front page of the feral bee project. Using this information provided by the homeowner and by looking at the evidence in the void, there was sufficient evidence to suggest this colony was living in the wall from 1995 (surviving the varroa, and the crashes of 95-96) till 2002 when I removed it. I don't age colonies as a determination of resistance anymore, unless it happens to be a very large nest structure with black comb, these massive feral colonies 4 or more years old are a gold mine for supurb genetic materal!!!! I am actually focusing on collecting ferals from specific areas, such as the remote woodlands, rather than ‘aging colonies‘. It seems from assessing ferals from many different areas and different ages over several years. I have found that the emphasis on where the genetics are caught, rather than how old the colony may be, is a better predictor of what quality of bee you will get. Interesting also are the breeding populations that exist in these micro habitats. Remote woodland ferals for example will be found during assessments to have certain traits more pronounced than ferals found in the low land farm areas. Best Wishes, Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FeralBeeProject/ -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:56:42 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From "late 1800's to 1920" Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: <7b2725290610300906s58b10bb2r2a7a84d29ca45371@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit James writes: there is tangible evidence that one can examine in the form of old foundation mills. Reply: It is good of you to post this. Then added to this is the way work was done then, using them that resulted in smaller variance, vs more modern assembly lines with fudge factors of stretching. For until one physically works with actual embossing rollers dipping wax by hand the old way to understand the principles, you cannot visualize what has transpired and changed......... Best Regards, Dee- ____________________________________________________________________________________ Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call rates (http://voice.yahoo.com) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:40:29 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E2late_1800=E2s_to_1920=E2?= Supported By Honeybee Researchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Peter Borst writes: The Arizona experiment has been conducted in a semi-tropical climate, with bees that are probably African hybrids. They are isolated to such a degree that the varroa may be inbred which could significantly reduce their vigor. In the US, in most areas where bees are kept, there is a continual transit of bees from south to north, and back south to a lesser degree, which could allow varroa to hybridize and increase vigor. Also, the application of chemicals tends to make the surviving mites more vigorous. So, if you don't keep bees in isolation, you are bound to pick up new strains of chem. resistant mites, small hive beetles, etc. Reply; Interesting, since AHB wasn't declared arriving until 1996 and then with a black colored swarm right next to our most southern apiary in Sasabe, not that they weren't supposed to be breeding true still at that time FWIW and all findings for first years were next to only yards where SC bees were kept too FWIW, and this delaration was made also in year we publically stated we were now ready with new embossed new rollers with new foundation to start going down to 4.9mm size to see if we could get rid of secondary diseases, from the 5.0mm-5.1mm sizing we were already regressed down upon (dadant 900 in sales catalogs/Magazines) since the mid- 1980s. So were we africanied with first regression in size to 5.0mm or just the second going into 4.9mm to 4.8mm range making foundation by hand? Also in souther Arizona there is commercial beekeeping other then us. and Stockwell's relatives of Miksa just this past spring still sent 400 colonies to almonds, along with hosterman 400 and Miracle about a 1,000 in our area not counting outers, but there is no traffic here as you say for we do all keep private yards like in other places spread out FWIW. But would this almond pollenating make for more hybridized mites, gee dunno! Also these others use various treatments for for that too, gee dunno! where hard or soft, or the feeding of sugars back once all honeys taken for crop. Also we take all the golf course bees in baskets to help the metropolitian areas from those so-called killers that you seem to think abound, so the swarms caught from town from hobbyists and others can be recycled back to the wild for renewable resource to fly back to get caught another day. But we keep the golfers playing and tournaments going for you'll gotta relax.............but a constant insource for new polluted blood to mix into our poor bees so they isolated like you think.......dunno......Tucson lab thinks they all africians them there swarms in baskets. Ending, all I can say is we are serving communities keeping bees at bay the way we always have cause others to frightened to do it, putting up with new influxes of bees diseases though our bees seem healthy compared to others dying each year. Only work in half bee suits as others too hot to work in with heat, and don't see any mite or secondary disease problems since last size down (bees lived on 5.0mm to 5.1mm but couldn't produce for us on desert). Just came thru 7 hard years of dought and kept building up in spite of it, doing what we have always done. Only thing changed was the comb size and if only changing comb size made our bees healthy and happy and easy to work, and we can help commmunity with phobia's of fear for orchestrated killer bees, then maybe poor Ed working with me the past 3 1/2 years in wheel chair and then walker and then by walking by self until he just left me means that if he could work them and they are now fine means you can too, for the migratory around us is no real isolation, nor bees we take to help others. Also, if side by side comparison is needed, then it is side by side commercial bee yards and ours are okay, sorry about the rest......but then we/I have said all along what we were going to do and did, and have done up front, out in open........... Dee- ____________________________________________________________________________________ Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited (http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:26:51 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From late 1800s to 1920 Supported By Honeybee R esearchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: <4546251F.7080508@lineone.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dave Cushman writes: What he in fact managed to show was that the tracheal orifice only changed a very minor amount when compared to changes in other body dimensions that do occur with cells of different sizes. Reply: Well, this is good then what you write for changing opening for vagans to enter or not enter and for way hairs react. Good this was seen and documented. Respectfully submitted, Dee A. Lusby Small Cell Commercial Beekeeper Moyza, Arizona http://groups.yahoo.com/group/organicbeekeepers/ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates (http://voice.yahoo.com) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:55:31 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late___1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeybee R esearchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Joe > “Until the late 1800s honeybees in Britain and Ireland were raised in > brood cells of circa 5.0 mm width. By the 1920s this had increased to > circa 5.5 mm.” There is nothing wrong with the statement above, which applies in UK, for which there is ample evidence in the form mentioned by Jim and seems to apply in a similar fashion in USA. But it does not tell a complete story... In USA over the same period, the morphometry of bees must have changed considerably due to the change in racial type preferred by beekeepers, This swung from being largely AMM as originally imported, to only 3% AMM genes today, with Italian types and Carniolan derivatives in the majority. The AMM is a different bodily structure to the Italian bee and builds a cell that is larger in average size by a factor of 0.2 mm to 0.4 mm. The Carnica has a natural cell size that is between the two, but on the larger side of centrally between the two. That situation is different in UK as much of the mongrel background of today contains a high proportion of the larger bodied AMM genes and has done throughout the period. Regards & Best 73s, Dave Cushman, G8MZY http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman or http://www.dave-cushman.net Short FallBack M/c, Build 6.02/3.1 (stable) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 07:12:45 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dave Cushman wrote: >But it does not tell a complete story... I think there is another plausible explanation as to why the size of cells shifted from 5.0 to 5.4 mm. When foundation mills were first made in the US, they were somewhat crude by today's standards and it was probably easier to set the size to 5 cells to the inch, rather than at an uneven rate such as 5 to 1.063 inches. Root says: "the best specimens of true worker comb generally contain five cells within the space of an inch, and therefore this measure has been adopted for comb foundation." It is true that larger sizes were tried but if they are too large, the bees make it all into drones. However I think the slightly larger size is closer to the correct size for A. mellifera and A. carnica. [Cell size of races, from smallest to largest] 4.5 - 5.0 A. m. scutellata (South Africa) A. m. lamarckii A. m. litora A. m. yemenitica A. m. adansonii A. m. scutellata (Tanzania) A. m. capensis A. m. sahariensis 5.0 - 5.5 Africanised A. m. unicolour A. m. monticola A. m. ligustica A. m. mellifera 5.5+ A. m. carnica Although 24 distinct taxonomic races of A. mellifera have been described (Ruttner, 1988) there is only one clear case where a race of A. mellifera exhibits natural tolerance towards V. destructor i.e. mite infested colonies can survive indefinitely without assistance from beekeepers. This is the Africanized bee (AHB) a hybrid of A. m. scutellata from South Africa and A. mellifera from Europe mite populations in AHB fluctuate during the year but their numbers rarely exceed several thousand while mite populations in both A. m. scutellata and A. m. capensis colonies have been reported to regularly exceed 10000 Although reproduction of Varroa sp. is affected by the space between the developing bee and cell wall, reducing cell sizes as a mite control method will probably fail to be effective since the bees are likely to respond by rearing correspondingly smaller bees which explains the close correlation between cell and bee size. Source: "Reproduction of Varroa destructor in South African honey bees: does cell space influence Varroa male survivorship?" -- Stephen J. MARTIN, Per KRYGER -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:34:55 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late____1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Honeyb ee R esearchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: <45470F83.1030204@lineone.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dave Cushman wrote: > The AMM is a different bodily structure to the Italian bee and builds > a cell that is larger in average size by a factor of 0.2 mm to 0.4 mm. > The Carnica has a natural cell size that is between the two, but on > the larger side of centrally between the two. > > That situation is different in UK as much of the mongrel background of > today contains a high proportion of the larger bodied AMM genes and > has done throughout the period. What has bothered me about the small cell discussion and most other "breakthroughs" is the lack of controls.Too many variables are dismissed and all is attributed to one factor. Jim's comment on regression to the mean is interesting when applied to small cell discussion and coupled with Dave's post, paints an interesting picture. Genetically big bees need larger cells. It seems more likely that cell size changed because of the race of bee rather than an attempt to build a bigger bee. Small bees in large cells will not get larger just because of the cell size. They will regress to the mean, even if you start with abnormally large or small bees. Within a group, you can and will get larger bees and smaller bees depending not on cell size but environmental factors. No matter how big you build a house, its occupants will regress to the mean. Feed them the unnatural diet of a pro football player and they will get bigger, but their children, if fed a normal diet will regress to the mean. Bees are the same. Bees vary in size between races. There is not a universal natural size that all bees regress to, but each race has its own mean. Dennis Murrell's work showed that small cell had little bearing on the size of the bees and that size was more related to season than cell size. He also showed that bees tend to build a range of brood cell sizes. My own experience with 5.0 cell size in Maine has not led to a decrease in Varroa or healthier bees. When I could not care for them because of cancer, they failed. The ones on 5.0 actually did worse than those on larger cells when neglected. I keep getting back to race being the dominate factor in Varroa tolerance. There may even be factors withing specific races, but that would be of much lesser importance. Some recent research on human cancers indicate that specific cancers have higher fatality rates in different races. You can be of one race and the same cancer will be slow glowing while those of another race see it spread quickly. So is race actually the issue? Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:17:58 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: How does one sort mites for accurate counting?? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > technically you have to sort by what is the problem varroa > from the unproblem mites or you get just mite > counts and then treat..... WRONGLY!!!..... The absolute number of mites is not important at all, nor is it more correct to count only the mature (reddish-brown) mites than it is to count all mites, including the white (immature/non-reproductive) ones. One is tracking the rate of population increase over time if one hopes to have useful data, so as long as one is consistent in one's approach, the specific method used in counting is irrelevant. While there are some fairly well-known extension and research types that have spoken of a "threshold", this concept is inherently defective, as one cannot determine the rate of population increase with a single measurement, and larger populations of bees are certain to imply larger mite counts than smaller colonies of bees that are infested at the same rate of mite infestation. The concept of a "threshold" is a surrender to whining beekeepers who want someone to wave a magic wand, and make the problem "easy" to deal with. > hurting then the delicate balance inside a beehive that has > always been there with co-existance........ I've yet to see "co-existence" with varroa unless some sort of tactic is used to reduce the mite population. > Then to consider...........if you put the BAD varroa then > back into harmony with the bees and they are no longer a > problem............ I've never seen a "good" varroa mite. I've seen some harmless ones, but they had one thing in common - they were all dead. :) > So question again: If you are seeing white and now you say > red or brown mites ARE THEY THE SAME species???? If they are not the same species, then a lot of people have somehow missed something that might be important. I don't see how it might be all that important, as all varroa seem to be parasites of bees, and the same treatment approaches seem to work in the same way, planetwide. > HOW DO YOU SORT THE MITES FALLING AND YOU > ARE SEEING!!! And yes I am shouting this...........for the > white and red and brown, etc cannot all be the same! The general consensus appears to be that they are different developmental stages of the same mite. -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:31:05 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Greetings, In my 1949 edition of the Hive and the Honey Bee, I find this interesting and relevant passage by Henry C. Dadant (inventor of crimp-wired foundation): "Cells of natural comb vary ... By taking the measurements along rows of hexagons, side by side, sealed worker brood has been found to vary from 5 cells measuring 1 1/32 inches to 1 1/16 inches." "Standard comb foundation usually is made on dies providing 857 cells per square decimeter" [this figure is based upon the measurements just quoted] "Races of bees such as the Italian, Carniolan and Caucasian build cells of practically identical size, and accept *standard foundation* readily." "The native-German black bees build smaller cells." So, Dadant was taking the size 5.3 to 5.4 as the *natural size* for Italian, Carniolan and Caucasian bees and using it as the standard. Meanwhile, Europeans were trying to upsize the Black bees (A. m. m.) to be as bigger than these sizes. (quote: "They experimented with comb foundation having 760, 700, and 640 cells per sq. dec. ... the excessive claims of Baudoux were not substantiated.") Bottom line, according to my reading of this work, the standard of 5.3 to 5.4 was based on natural comb sizes of Italian, Carniolan and Caucasian bees. Apis mellifera mellifera was a smaller bee that they tried to upsize. pb -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:57:38 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Upsizing of Honeybees From =?windows-1252?Q?=93late_____1800=92s_to_1920=94?= Supported By Hon eyb ee R esearchers in Ireland In-Reply-To: <454750FF.5030701@suscom-maine.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bill > It seems more likely that cell size changed because of the race of > bee rather than an attempt to build a bigger bee. There have been attempts in UK to build bigger AMM bees, Beowulf Cooper established that AMM was in fact very adjustable in body size and could be 'trained' to use cells as small as 4.7 mm and as large as 5.9 mm. Over a roughly forty year period many colonies were 'upsized' and some today live quite happily on 5.9 mm combs (with an apparent reduced varroa load). The number of colonies involved in these trials has been quite large and even in areas where the trials stopped twenty years ago, there are still many instances of large bees and large cell sized combs. There are many beekeepers that took part in these trials that are alive today and many of them are convinced that the enlarged bees were capable of gathering larger crops, however I have never seen adequate evidence of this alongside control comparison colonies that were not upsized. I did make some experiments involving shaking some large sized bees onto smaller foundation (5.0 mm - 5.1 mm) about two thirds of those colonies responded by reducing in size although many took three regression attempts to achieve it, but there was a portion of the total that stubbornly refused to go below a cell size of 5.6 mm. Regards & Best 73s, Dave Cushman, G8MZY http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman or http://www.dave-cushman.net Short FallBack M/c, Build 6.02/3.1 (stable) -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:00:41 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Eric_Brown?= Subject: Re: How does one sort mites for accurate counting?? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:17:58 -0500, James Fischer wrote: >The concept of a "threshold" is a >surrender to whining beekeepers who want someone to >wave a magic wand, and make the problem "easy" to >deal with. I disagree. What little experimentation I've done has indicated that there exists in my hives a very intelligible threshold, and I think that's consistent with various formal studies. Of course, there are other variables to consider. You mentioned colony size, Jim, and that's certainly true, but if I look in a hive in August and say to myself, "that's a normal, full-strength-for-the-time-of-year colony," then I think I've accounted for that variable pretty well for in-the-field purposes. Sure, there's always more to consider, and there's no one answer, but I think I'm well within reason to make a lot of management decisions based on mite counts, even apart from rate of increase. In fact, given that thresholds would normally be based on mite counts from the latter part of the season, I think the rate of increase then is pretty insignificant, especially if we know the rate of increase will very soon drop to zero (hives going broodless) anyway. Eric -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:47:59 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: How does one sort mites for accurate counting?? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jim Wrote: >The absolute number of mites is not important at all, >nor is it more correct to count only the mature (reddish-brown) >mites than it is to count all mites, including the white >(immature/non-reproductive) ones. I don’t do mite counts, but I would like to make comment: Counting all aged mites and sexes of mites the same is simply a NUMBER that tells the beekeeper nothing about how the colony may be dealing with the mites. The only thing overall mite counts tell you accurately is the number of mites that fell to the floor. This number suggests in no way what the colony may have done to cause the mite to fall to the floor. If you count white (immature mites) and tan (male mites) separate from the red (adult females). And damaged adult females separate from non damaged adult females. Now you have some information that is useful, and can give a beekeeper a clue that might suggest how the bees are attempting to cope with the mites. Then the beekeeper can go into the broodnest for verification. Consider *Varroa mites molt 2 times during development under the capped cell and appear white for a few hours to about a day after molting, immature mites are white, * male mites are tan and cannot live outside the capped brood cell, * the first mite laid in the cell does not reach maturity till the 17 or 18 day of the honeybees metamorphosis. Finding tan and white mites in the debris would be valuable information, as it would suggest that the bees are uncapping cells or chewing down brood on or before the 17 or 18 day of bee development. Finding many male and immature females might be suggestive of severe mite pressure in developing worker brood, and would be cause for further investigation. Damaged adult females for obvious reasons might be suggestive of grooming abilities. And non damaged mites may suggest a clumsy or ill varroa mite. Now you have a tool that can help identify desired traits, and may help in the selection process, instead of a bunch of numbers and slapping in treatments. Best Wishes, Joe Waggle Ecologicalbeekeeping.com ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' Feral Bee Project: -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info --- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:21:07 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Grant Gillard Subject: Keith's Polystyrene Nuc In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Keith Malone graciously shared his polystyrene nuc plans. His thread came in on Oct 23, under the heading of "Commercial Success:" For those of you who missed it, his link/URL is: http://akbkeepr.blake.prohosting.com/styronuc.htm (By the way, thanks, Keith.) A couple of questions arose as I looked into this. First, I asked locally at the industrial contractor's supplier about 60 psi high density polystyrene, and all I can get is 25 psi. They offered to order 60 psi, but they would be buying a whole stack. I only need a few sheets. Here's my real question: if I go to my big box retailer of home improvement (the ones with the staff that knows very little about home improvement), how do I know the density of the extruded polystyrene? I may have to settle for something less dense. I just want to know what I'm getting, but no one seems to know what is on the shelf. Is there a correlation to thickness and "R" value? Keith, your nuc appeared to be constructed with white polystyrene. All we have locally is blue and pink (and they told me colors will vary between manufacturers). Are there differences in the product, aside from density? Grant Jackson, MO --------------------------------- Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call rates. -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info ---