From SYSAM@UACSC2.ALBANY.EDUMon May 22 07:14:06 1995 Date: Mon, 22 May 95 08:35:25 EDT From: Aaron Morris To: dicka@cuug.ab.ca ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 14 Mar 91 10:21:00 EST Reply-To: Discussion of Bee Biology Sender: Discussion of Bee Biology From: MTS@IFASGNV.BITNET Subject: FEBRUARY ISSUE OF APIS--PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT TO MTS@IFASGNV.BITNET FILENAME: FEBAPIS.91 Florida Extension Beekeeping Newsletter Apis--Apicultural Information and Issues (ISSN 0889-3764) Volume 9, Number 2, February 1991 BEE BULLETIN BOARD Wildbees BBS, a beekeeper-run computer bulletin board system (BBS) has been installed in California. The Operator (SYSOP), Mr. Andy Nachbaur, is trying to reach out to what he says are the "hundreds of beekeepers I know who have computers." The bulletin board is available 24 hours per day and transmits at 2400 baud. The phone number (209-826-8107) is for computer data only and requires a modem for access. According to Mr. Nachbaur, here's what you can do right now: 1. Leave messages for Bob Brandi, President of the American Beekeeping Federation. 2. Leave messages for Jim Robertson, President of the California Beekeepers Association. 3. Leave messages for anyone using the system. 4. Retrieve LD-50 values for pesticides. 5. Download several years' worth of newsletters and bulletins provided by Malcolm T. Sanford, Extension Apiculturist, University of Florida. I am particularly proud of the last item. The Florida Extension Apiculture Program is a partner with a producer in this pioneering effort, an example of extension information being made available to a broader audience. I urge anybody with a yen to experiment and the proper equipment (computer, modem and communications software) to call up Wildbees BBS and tell them I sent you. MORE ON QUEEN QUALITY Last month's article on queen quality provoked several comments on this controversial subject. It was suggested that selecting only for number of ovarioles, spermatheca volume, number of spermatozoa and presence or absence of nosema was not necessarily good practice. That's because these characteristics cannot be correlated with behavior. For example, what the beekeeper cares about is how defensive or how productive the offspring of the queen (the colony) might be, not the number of her ovarioles. Although this is true, these characteristics are still important because they show that physiologically the queen will be able to produce the number of workers necessary to maintain a healthy colony. In addition, in the absence specific genetic information on selected queens, these measurements provide an all- important yardstick to compare individual queens. I mentioned last month that the New Zealanders were not ignoring the genetic aspects of quality queens. Neither are U.S. beekeepers; this was the general theme of the American Beekeeping Federation's recent convention in Mobile, AL. A queen breeding workshop was held to discuss how improved stock would help the beekeeping industry cope with the African honey bee. Three resolutions of the convention were adopted as a result: 1. WORKING for establishment and implementation of a program under which the U.S. Department of Agriculture or state departments of agriculture will certify queen rearing operations that demonstrate that such operations ensure adequate control of matings to produce gentle stock. 2. RECOMMENDING that importation of a particular honey bee stock be allowed if and only if that stock has an identifiable beneficial trait that has not been found in existing U.S. honey bee populations; that the dissemination of stock be allowed if and only if the stock has been quarantined and regularly examined for at least one year without detecting any disease or parasite of honey bees; and that the Federation be consulted prior to all proposed importations of honey bee stock. 3. SUPPORTING the concept of the establishment of a central honey bee stock center. The last resolution arose as the result of a proposal by the Walter Rothenbuhler Honey Bee Research Facility at The Ohio State University. Sue Cobey and Tim Lawrence, now affiliated with that facility, discussed how a central honey bee stock center would help the industry. This would not be a free service, however, and only time will tell whether there will be significant financial commitment by beekeepers to support such a venture. CITRUS HAPPENINGS As the Ides of March approaches, beekeepers are readying their colonies for the annual pilgrimage to citrus groves. Many bemoan the fact that citrus honey production isn't like it was in the old days. To some that time period is far in the past, but to others it was just yesterday. Changes over the last decade have vastly changed citrus culture in Florida, affecting beekeepers in the bargain. An article in the December, 1990 issue of Citrus and Vegetable Magazine specifically discusses the effect of freezes on the citrus industry. According to the author, threat of cold has created problems ever since the Spanish introduced the crop more than 500 years ago. The industry at the turn of the century was centered in Gainesville and Palatka. Freezes in 1894 and 1895 forced citrus southward, although production continued in Lake, Orange and Marion counties until freezes in the 1960s and the 1980s finally put most growers out of business. Today, the article says, the northern growing area is above Interstate 4, with state road 70 marking the boundary between the central and southern region. In the northern region, dead trees are a common sight, and growers have only three options: replant, sell out or find alternative crops. Most choose the latter two. For those that stay in business and/or choose to replant, the article says, small, well-protected, specialty fruit will probably be the mainstay. The "new" central citrus growing region has increased in acreage, the article continues; northern growers are moving south to avoid cold and southern growers are looking to expand. This area, however, can still suffer from cold temperatures. The 1989 freeze did a lot of damage, but a good deal of replanting will occur in the region. The central area will continue to produce most of the fresh fruit in the future. Southern Florida is the last hope for commercial-scale freeze-free citrus production, and there are many high density plantings in the region, the article says. After the 1989 freeze, those that could no longer afford to plant in freeze-prone areas moved into this region. The southern area will continue to be the major area for process fruit. Shifting citrus culture continues to affect beekeeping in many ways. There are different soil conditions in the coastal and southern flatwoods areas than in the more northern areas on the Florida ridge. Although few studies exist on the subject, many think the deep sand ridge soils produce better nectar quantity and quality than shallower soils nearer the coast. Applications of systemic toxic materials like aldicarb, though not a problem on the ridge, have been implicated in reducing honey bee field force through contaminated nectar from trees grown in the shallower soils of coastal areas. Citrus culture continues to feature new varieties and be characterized by high density plantings, especially in the south. Although many agree this affects nectar production, it is not known exactly to what extent. One reason for this is that it takes several seasons of experience to determine suitability of locations for nectar production. Not only beekeepers, but citrus growers, too, must continually adjust their thinking based on change. Another article in the same magazine describes an outbreak of termites and fungi on newly planted groves in southeast Florida, something not previously experienced. Apparently the insulating wrap that is used to protect the young trees from frost also provides termites a moist, dark tunnel protecting them while girdling trees. Fungi then attack trees damaged by termites. It is believed that clearing the palmettos and pines in the area has limited the termites' food supply. The insects have been forced onto citrus, which is not a preferred food, as a last resort. Commercial pollination strategies should continue to be investigated in each area and customized based on the kind of fruit being produced. No grapefruit, for example, is being produced in either the north or central regions. Presently, most pollination done in citrus groves is provided free for the nectar received. However, there is information suggesting that certain specialty varieties require cross pollination. Thus, the opportunity for marketing pollination to growers exists. In the future, it may be possible to convince citrus growers to remunerate for colonies because of their pollinating efforts, whether or not nectar is abundant. I know of at least one beekeeper who has successfully marketed pollination services in large groves in southern Florida. There is evidence that during times when beekeepers' movements are heavily regulated (such as citrus canker, tracheal and Varroa mite introductions in the 1980s) citrus managers were concerned about maintaining bee populations in the groves. Introduction of the African bee may also bring new opportunities to beekeepers in citrus-producing areas. Numerous feral nests may be hazardous to workers in groves, resulting in a cry for beekeepers to consult on the problem. The use of poisoned bait stations and trap hive technology to remove wild bees could also be coupled with commercial pollination contracts to ensure adequate populations of bees in groves when they are most needed. In the 1985 article "Symbiosis: The Florida Bee Industry-Citrus Connection," The Citrus Industry, Vol. 113, pp. 265-258, I wrote, "The citrus- beekeeping industry symbiosis, like most mutually beneficial relationships, is tenuous and constantly changing. Certainly, the citrus canker and freeze situations threaten to disrupt it. In addition, use of pesticides can also bear bitter fruit. The key to keeping the relationship harmonious is communication between persons involved. The beekeeper must empathize with the problems of the grove owner and vice versa." This may be even more relevant advice for beekeepers in the 1990s. COMMENTS ON BLUEBERRY POLLINATION I received interesting feedback on the blueberry pollination article published last month. Dr. Chris Plowright at the University of Ottawa writes: "Contrary to what you said in the newsletter, the technology DOES exist for mass-rearing bumble bee colonies in large quantities. The European company called Koppert now rears more than 10,000 colonies per year (for greenhouse pollination of tomatoes), and we ourselves ("Bees-under-Glass Pollination Services Inc.") expect to rear about 1,500 colonies this year and about 5,000 next year. The problem with this, however, is that bumble bee colonies are expensive to rear--the price varies between about $400-$600 per colony; and although it is highly likely that one good strong colony placed in the middle of a 100-acre blueberry field would, in a year of scarcity of wild bees, increase the value of the crop by more than $600, PROVING that to the satisfaction of the grower is pretty difficult." Dr. Philip Torchio of the Bee Biology and Systematics Lab, Logan, UT, was kind enough to send his thoughts on the subject. He says that blueberry pollination is not restricted to only bees that "buzz pollinate." The major problem of honey bees on rabbiteye blueberries is not inability to buzz flowers, but the flower's long corolla and narrow opening which make nectar collection difficult. This is also the reason both carpenter bees and bumble bees make slits in the corolla. Once slits are made, other species (including honey bees) use these openings only to collect nectar. His work on highbush blueberries, Dr. Torchio says, has convinced him that only 250 nesting females per acre of the bee, Osmia ribifloris, is required to achieve maximum pollination potential. The large numbers of pollinators usually recommended, he says, are often referred to in honey bee terms ( so many colonies per acre). However, it is not true that twice as many colonies of honey bees will necessarily result in twice as many foragers. This is because foraging populations of most bees (including honey bees) tend to disperse until maximum numbers of foragers per unit space are established to collect resources at high efficiency rates. Commercial blueberries (highbush, rabbiteye and lowbush), Dr. Torchio says, should be thought of as separate crops. Since it is obvious that honey bees are not the best pollinator of any blueberry species, he concludes, efforts to develop management strategies for alternative pollinators are needed. Dr. Plowright says: "...the best native bees to encourage are those species (such as Habropoda) which are SPECIALISTS on the crop. The main point here is that the activity period of such specialists coincides in time with the flowering of the crop." He concludes that what we should be doing is finding out how to manage appropriate parts of the landscape to build up nesting populations of these alternative pollinators. In an effort to monitor the blueberry crop more closely this season, a working group headed by Dr. L.K. Jackson of the Fruit Crops Department at the University of Florida has been formed. Because so little is known about rabbiteye blueberry cultivation in Florida, the working group is developing a scouting card which is designed to obtain basic information on crop conditions throughout the growing season. Monitoring the number of honey bees, bumble bees and flowers with slits in fields over a period of years should provide valuable insight about blueberry pollination. If you wish to receive information on the activities of the group, contact Dr. Tim Crocker, Fruit Crops Department, Fifield Hall, Gainesville, FL 32611-0511, ph 904/392-1996. BEE ATTRACTANTS The idea of increasing pollination potential by applying substances attractive to honey bees has been around a while. Many substances [e.g. Bee Line (R)] are based on using sugar to attract the insects. However, these may also attract pests, as well as pollinating bees. The use of pheromones (odors) narrows the field by attracting only certain species. Honey bee pheromone attractants are now on the market which appear to have potential to increase bee pollination, however, hard evidence of their cost effectiveness is not yet available in all situations. Recently, Dr. Dewey Caron and the University of Delware conducted an informal survey on the use of a product called Bee Scent (R), produced by Scentry, Inc. There is evidence that in Virginia and Georgia, the product has increased apple pollination as well as that on pears, plums, cherries, melons and cucumbers. According to Dr. Caron, Bee Scent (R) does have a role to play under some circumstances, although at about $25 per acre, another bee colony may be a better alternative. As reported by Dr. Caron, Dr. R.K. Fell in Virginia observed some increase in pollinating activity. Dr. Fell, however, said that caution in recommending Bee Scent (R) was in order. Bees should be the first priority and the attractant viewed as a way to direct bees to areas where pollinating activity is needed. The manufacturer of Bee Scent (R) has technical bulletins available on most of the fruits mentioned above. The January, 1991 issue of Agrichemical Age reports on another honey bee pheromone-based attractant, Bee-Here (R), in an article entitled: "To Bee or Not to Bee." According to the article, past experiments with attractants have only been partially successful. Bee-Here (R), however, contains a stronger concentration of pheromones in a controlled-release formulation which remains stable and has a long shelf life. In a trial in a Texas peach orchard, the material was definitely responsible for increasing bee activity and fruit set. It also helped pollination of melons and cucumbers in both Texas and California. The article quoted Dr. Al Knauf, technical development specialist for Fermone Corporation that markets Bee-Here (R) concerning variability of results: "...the material is going to work best under borderline conditions; that is, when conditions are not completely favorable to bee activity." When natural conditions are good for pollination, results will be minimal. As an example, according to the article, the conditions in the San Joaquin Valley were ideal for cucumber pollination last year (usually once in every seven seasons) and although Bee-Here (R) brought the bees to the crop, they did little pollination. According to Mr. Mike Turbetti, branch manager of Wilbur-Ellis, Stockton, CA, maybe the cucumbers didn't need pollination by bees, but Bee-Here (R) attracted them in any case. Sincerely, Malcolm T. Sanford 0740 IFAS, Bldg 970 University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-0740 Phone (904) 392-1801, Ext. 143 FAX: 904-392-0190 BITNET Address: MTS@IFASGNV INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 14 Mar 91 10:25:00 EST Reply-To: Discussion of Bee Biology Sender: Discussion of Bee Biology From: MTS@IFASGNV.BITNET Subject: MARCH ISSUE OF APIS--PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE RECIEPT TO MTS@IFASGNV.BITNET FILENAME: MARAPIS.91 Florida Extension Beekeeping Newsletter Apis--Apicultural Information and Issues (ISSN 0889-3764) Volume 9, Number 3, March 1991 FOOD INSECTS NEWSLETTER--BEES AS FOOD Those with interest in the subject rejoice that in spite of the editor's retirement, The Food Insects Newsletter will be published for a little while longer. The November, 1990, Vol. 3, No. 3 issue has two articles prominently featuring honey bees. Dr. Michael Burgett at Oregon State University describes his experiences with bakuti, a Nepalese culinary preparation of giant honey bee brood. Because the giant honey bee doesn't exist in the U.S., Dr. Burgett has successfully used European honey bee brood. Bakuti, Dr. Burgett says, is based on the extraction of water soluble protein and liquid fats from whole larvae and pupae while still in the wax comb. Sections of comb are placed in a woven, fabric bag and hand squeezed over an open container that collects the liquid phase. This is then heated and gently stirred until it becomes the consistency of soft scrambled eggs. The odor and flavor of bakuti, Dr. Burgett describes as "nut like." To make it more acceptable to the U.S. palate, Dr. Burgett mixes an equal volume of Philadelphia brand cream cheese and serves the preparation on crackers. Overall acceptance rate is about 85 percent. Eating honey bee brood is not confined to Nepal. It is carried on around the world. In fact, "honey hunters" in African and Asia, Dr. Burgett says, are really in search of bee brood, which is valued for its nutritional and organoleptic qualities. In the same issue of the newsletter, Dr. Justin Schmidt, USDA ARS, Tucson, Arizona took on the task of tasting adult bees. These are rarely eaten, according to Dr. Schmidt, for two possible reasons: (1) the sting deters (too spicy) and (2) they simply taste bad. Dr. Schmidt then froze both adult workers and drones and tasted the various parts. Worker thoraces tasted fine, but were somewhat crunchy due to the wings, legs and other roughage. Heads, however, tasted like paint thinner. Abdomens were pungent and aromatic like curry spices, but with the added benefit of being slightly bitter and hydrolytic. Although workers in general did not suit his palate, Dr. Schmidt described the taste of drones as "great." This is understandable, Dr. Schmidt says, because drones have no known or meaningful pheromones or chemical defenses. Worker heads, on the other hand, are loaded with 2-heptanone (alarm pheromone), which smells bad, while abdomens have a blend of esters found in alarm pheromone and venom. Thoraces have no pheromones and thus are universally tasty. Dr. Schmidt concludes: "My feeling is that workers are not eaten by many vertebrate predators, not only because they sting, but also because they taste so nasty." Anecdotes or relevant research concerning bees or other insects as food should be sent to The Food Insects Newsletter, Department of Entomology, 545 Russel Labs, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706. Because funding is limited, a $5 donation is requested for those reading the newsletter on a regular basis. Although lighthearted in approach, the newsletter seriously recommends insects as food for both humans and domestic animals. As a recent issue of the Whole Earth Review said: "Doesn't it make more sense, for example, to eat locusts (as generations of Africans and Native Americans have done) than to dump tons of pesticides on them? (And from all reports, they are quite tasty, similar to fried shrimp.) In fact pound for pound, insect pests are often more nutritious than the crops they eat!" COSTS OF BEEKEEPING REVISITED As I stated in last year's September issue of this newsletter, Dr. Roger Hoopingarner and I published an article in American Bee Journal, (Vol. 130 (6):405-407, June, 1990) called "The Costs of Beekeeping--I. Survey of Commercial Beekeepers." It was accompanied by a figure listing the average, minimum, maximum and totals of sixty-six different costs for commercial beekeeping operations (those managing over 400 colonies). The second in this series has just been printed, "The Costs of Beekeeping--II. Survey of Sideline Beekeepers," American Bee Journal, Vol. 131 (2): 114-115. The same costs as listed in the first article are compared with those from sideliners (less than 400 colonies). My offer in September still stands. Write me at the address below and I'll be glad to send you reprints. CERTIFICATION AND LONG RANGE PLANNING Jim Bach, President of the Apiary Inspectors of America and Chief Bee Inspector in the state of Washington, said at the recent convention of the American Beekeeping Federation that the U.S. beekeeping industry suffers because it has no long-range plan. And not only does the industry have no plan, it also has no formal planning process. The result of this is a patchwork of regulatory efforts, Mr. Bach said, that are not coordinated. To help rectify this situation, Mr. Bach has published a draft document entitled: "A National Honey Bee Certification Program Proposal." This ambitious document's purpose is to impose uniform inspection procedures and health standards while allowing states the right to deny entry to colonies, queen bees and their attendants or packages of bees having undesirable pests, diseases, or AHB (African honey bees). It will also allow each state to direct the movement and placement of colonies which meet their import criteria. The document recommends: 1. The American Beekeeping Federation and National Honey Producers promote a U.S. National Certification Program (NCP) in the 1991 congress. 2. Congress provide a clear mandate to USDA to create a National Certification Program (NCP) for the beekeeping industry, primarily oriented toward movement regulations and provide funding for this effort. 3. That the National Associations of State Departments of Agriculture's (NASDA) steering committee on beekeeping be declared the primary advisory committee in establishing the NCP. The details of the above plan are not yet clear. A draft document has been distributed to industry leaders and a revised draft is expected to be published after March 1. A copy is available from Mr. Bach, 406 GA Bldg. Ku- 13, Olympia, WA 98504. As a further guide to the planning process, industry leaders might look to the New Zealand Beekeepers Association's Industry plan, to be adopted by March, 1991. The mission statement is "Better Beekeeping, Better Marketing." Six goals have been established and under each, a number of objectives. The first goal is to increase industry profitability. This includes establishing a honey stock stabilization scheme, ensuring awareness of standards for exported organic honey and formulating quality standards for the whole industry. The second goal is to improve beekeeper education and training, while a third is to improve industry co-operation and communication. Objectives under the latter goal are to establish an industry code of practice and evaluate the present condition of the New Zealand Beekeeper national magazine. Another goal is to improve public relations by publishing an industry profile targeting agricultural groups and the general public. In addition, research policy is being improved by establishing an apicultural research fund and seeking to increase external funding for beekeeping research. Finally, there is the goal of ensuring adequate, cost-effective government services. A primary objective is to have in place an improved and industry-funded AFB inspection and control service by March 31, 1991. The New Zealand plan is broader than the certification proposal authored by Mr. Bach. The U.S., though, has far more regulatory problems; the NCP proposes to regulate American and European foulbrood, tracheal mites, Varroa mites and the African honey bee. New Zealanders are only concerned about American foulbrood. Even so, widening the certification proposal to also include the other goals in the New Zealand plan would result in a comprehensive U.S. beekeeping long-range plan. This is apparently already being considered by the NASDA Honey Bee Steering Committee, according to the Executive Director, Mr. J.B. Grant, who spoke on the subject at the American Beekeeping Federation convention in Mobile, AL. Soon to be released will be the document entitled: "Honey Bee Pests--a Threat to the Vitality of U.S. Agriculture." This is a blueprint for establishing a national honey bee strategy for the U.S. beekeeping industry. BEE STINGS AND REACTIONS Insect stings and reactions to them are complicated subjects. The biggest concern at the present time surrounds those persons who are severely allergic to insect venom. However, allergy to many things, from peanuts to penicillin, can be just as serious. There also continues to be disagreement among those in the medical community about what constitutes allergic, life-threatening reactions. The subject of insect (honey bee) stings will also receive more press coverage as the African honey bee becomes established in the United States. Treatment for victims suffering stinging incidents involving this bee, however, will be more based on the venom's poisonous effects on the body. Most sensationalized deaths in Latin America resulting from large-scale stinging attacks have been caused by large doses of venom, resulting in toxic reactions, not life- threatening, allergic reactions. With the coming of the African bee, it will be important in the future for beekeepers to be more aware of bee stings and possible reactions to them. Dr. Scott Camazine at Cornell University has written an authoritative article on the subject (Hymenopteran Stings: Reactions, Mechanisms, and Medical Treatment, Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America, Spring, 1988, pp. 17-21) in which he tries to put into perspective the risks of death due to insect stings. Most people, according to Dr. Camazine, have a great fear of venomous animals. However, he says, insect stings are a minor health problem. Approximately 40 deaths occur each year because of stinging insects, most in the Order Hymenoptera: ants, bees and wasps. Of these it is estimated that honey bees cause half. Allergic reactions to penicillin kill seven times as many persons and lightning strikes kill twice as many. In contrast, the nation's largest killers are cardiovascular disease (100 persons per hour) and automobile accidents (one person every 10 minutes). Ironically, Dr. Camazine says, one is at more risk of dying in an automobile accident on the way to the hospital to be treated, than dying of the sting itself. The frequency of insect sting allergy, according to Dr. Camazine, is probably less than 1% of the population and only a small percentage of that develops severe reactions. Even with arrival of the African honey bee and associated stinging incidents, Dr. Camazine concludes there is no reason to suspect that bee stings will become a significant health hazard. That's the good news. The bad news, however, Dr. Camazine says, is that the African bee may promote even more irrational fear of insects and stings than already exists. This can be responsible for anything from changes in lifestyles to debilitating behavior. Indeed, this fear itself may provoke systemic reactions. At least one physician believes that all systemic reactions are not necessarily life- threatening. According to Dr. H.S. Rubenstein (The Lancet, February, 1982, pp. 469-599), many persons who are stung experience frightening systemic reactions, but the majority of these are not life-threatening. Death from a bee sting comes about through a number of mechanisms, Dr. Rubenstein says, the most important of which appears to be atherosclerosis (build up of deposits on and hardening of arterial walls). External factors (environmental temperature, site of the sting) are also important. Disagreement about reactions, Dr. Rubenstein says, comes from four sources: (1) the frightening presentation of the systemic reaction; (2) misuse of the term "anaphylaxis;" (3) multiple causes of "bee- sting" deaths; and (4) lack of information about the systemic reaction. The frightening aspect of being stung cannot be ruled out as a cause of a systemic reaction. As Dr. Rubenstein says: "A patient who suddenly develops hives, shortness of breath (sometimes with bronchospasm), and giddiness or syncope (sometimes with hypotension) is terrified, as are those about him. The patient may think he is going to die, as may his family or physician. What people need to know, therefore, is that the vast majority of patients, particularly if aged under 25, will quickly recover." In addition, according to Dr. Rubenstein, patients who have these terrifying experiences need to know that there is no evidence either that they came to the brink of death or that they are at greater risk of dying from a subsequent sting than anyone else. It is this last statement that raises a few eyebrows; conventional wisdom in the past has accepted that reactions are likely to get infinitely worse with each sting after a person suffers a systemic reaction. It is lamentable, Dr. Rubenstein said, that in bee sting cases physicians did not check vital signs before administering adrenaline; even more lamentable is that patients who die as a result of stings generally have post mortem diagnoses of atherosclerosis, not anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis is very rare in humans, he said, and except in specific cases in which it truly applies, should be replaced by the neutral, non-prognostic, non-frightening and non-specific term "systemic reaction." Multiple causes of bee sting deaths are the rule, rather than simply anaphylaxis, according to Dr. Rubenstein. Other potential complications besides atherosclerosis include sepsis, cerebral oedema, defibrination syndrome, haemorrhages, emboli and neuroencephalomyelitis variants. The fact that 90% of those who die after a bee sting are over 25, whereas most who sustain allergic reactions are children, argues strongly against allergy. Only 12% of adults in one set of necropsy findings died of anaphylaxis, 20% had severe and 42% mild atherosclerosis and about one-third had pulmonary oedema. Fright cannot be ruled out, Dr. Rubenstein said, nor can very warm environmental temperature. As he stated: "One may readily see how (1) a hot summer day, plus (2) strenuous exercise, plus (3) coronary atherosclerosis, plus (4) a bee may add up to death, whether or not one invokes an allergic mechanism..." Dr. Claude Frazier, an allergist from North Carolina, takes exception to some of Dr. Rubenstein's remarks. He says people do die from insect stings and may do so within five minutes. There is usually insufficient time to get medical aid. If one is stung and has hives and wheezing, Dr. Frazier says, he could be in danger of death and should receive epinephrine immediately. He may also go into shock and have to be watched for several hours. People do not die from atherosclerosis, insists Dr. Frazier, they die from anaphylaxis. Thus, the controversy continues. The times that I have asked what are the pros and cons about injecting epinephrine, I've been told that generally it's preferable to inject when in doubt. There are risks, however, according to Dr. Frazier, especially to those with severe hypertension, narrow-angle glaucoma, or coronary insufficiency. One should also be careful with those suffering diabetes or hyperthyroidism, pregnant women and the elderly. Nevertheless, he says the dosages necessary to abate a severe systemic reaction to insect venom are small enough that they present little risk. And, Dr. Frazier concludes, there is no contraindication to epinephrine if a person is suffering an anaphylactic reaction. However, according to Dr. Frazier, in order to legally be allowed to give an injection, one must first be certified by a physician. Training can only be conducted if state legislation has been adopted. Fortunately, Dr. Frazier says, fourteen states (including Florida) have passed this legislation. The training consists of two objectives: (1) recognition of the symptoms of systemic reactions to insect stings; and (2) the proper administration of a subcutaneous injection of epinephrine. This training should be provided to any person involved with people outdoors, such as school personnel and camp counselors. Dr. Frazier has provided me with a sample bill. Should anyone be interested in seeing such a document, I can provide a copy on request. I also can make copies of Dr. Camazine's paper. Finally, I can provide a copy of Hint for the Hive No. 122, "Bee Stings and Reactions." This contains valuable information provided by H.R.C. Riches, who published the article, "Hypersensitivity to Bee Venom," Vol. 63, No. 1, Bee World, 1982. Sincerely, Malcolm T. Sanford 0740 IFAS, Bldg 970 University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-0740 Phone (904) 392-1801, Ext. 143 FAX: 904-392-0190 BITNET Address: MTS@IFASGNV INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Mar 91 14:40:23 CST Reply-To: Discussion of Bee Biology Sender: Discussion of Bee Biology From: William Hobson Subject: test test ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Mar 91 15:02:17 CST Reply-To: Discussion of Bee Biology Sender: Discussion of Bee Biology From: Merry Makela Subject: Subscription to BEE-L I would like to subscribe to Bee-line. I am a research scientist at Texas A&M University, Department of Entomology and am currently building a model to simulated honey bee population dynamics. Thankyou. ========================================================== Merry Makela | makela@kelsun1.tamu.edu Knowledge Engineering Lab | Department of Entomology Texas A&M University | ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Mar 91 17:06:51 EST Reply-To: Discussion of Bee Biology Sender: Discussion of Bee Biology From: Mark Hayes Subject: test In-Reply-To: Msg of Fri, 22 Mar 91 14:40:23 CST >Received: by BUACCA (Mailer R2.05) id 6516; Fri, 22 Mar 91 16:53:34 EST >Date: Fri, 22 Mar 91 14:40:23 CST >Reply-To: Discussion of Bee Biology >Sender: Discussion of Bee Biology >From: William Hobson >Subject: test >X-To: bee-l%albnyvm1.bitnet@tamvm1.BITNET >To: Mark Hayes > >test Message received, loud and clear. And here's a message to the list owner: TAKE ME OFF! I have sent more than one UNSUB command, to no avail. If you're going to restrict subscribers' ability to leave a list at will, you really ought to be more responsible about taking them off when they request it! Please. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 08:18:00 -0300 Reply-To: Discussion of Bee Biology Sender: Discussion of Bee Biology Comments: @BRFAPESP.ANSP.BR, @FPSP.HEPNET, @BRFAPESP.BITNET - .BR gateway From: "Ricardo Defaveri Murer - tel: (0192) 591544" unsubscribe Ricardo D. Murer BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET