another conundrum

[Outlander]

good luck though I think your taking a risk keeping what may be a virgin Q. I still feel that introducing a new mated Q would be safer way to go.

 

[Luminos]

good luck though I think your taking a risk keeping what may be a virgin Q. I still feel that introducing a new mated Q would be safer way to go.

If it were me, I'd be taking Hivemaker's advice.

 

[oliver90owner]

If it were me, I'd be taking Hivemaker's advice.

I wouldn't. It would have been done long ago!

 

[Loubylou]

I am now officially......
confused.com

 

[Outlander]

Louby, listen and take advice from such beeks on here as PH, OLLY90. Hivemaker, Itma to name but a few then you can't go far wrong. You may at times get some conflicting information but at least you can make an informed decision.

 

[Chris B]

I'll be amazed if you can buy a mated queen from anywhere late October so it's not likely to be an option anyway.

 

[Outlander]

I'll be amazed if you can buy a mated queen from anywhere late October so it's not likely to be an option anyway.

Chris I was looking into re-Q myself last week and made enquiries so there are some still.about. In the end i decided to unite.

 

[Loubylou]

If it were me, I'd be taking Hivemaker's advice.

I wouldn't. It would have been done long ago!

When you say 'done' do you mean mated long ago??

 

[oliver90owner]

I mean 'sorted' as soon as a possible problem like that was noted. Time of year and any procrastination is only likely to make things worse rather than better.

 

[Loubylou]

Ok, looking at my hive records and just to clarify things a bit:
I last saw the old queen on Sept 13th and then on my weekly hive inspections since I thought i was queenless (the old queen was so obvious, huge and amber coloured). However yesterday my local beek inspected with me and we saw a new queen darker and smaller. So she could have been in the hive anytime from 13th Sept onwards. So I would have thought she could be a mated queen???? What do folks think??

 

[drstitson]

AFAIK an off-lay queen won't necessarily look the same as one in full flow (ie could look smaller and darker). Do you not mark your queens?

"So she could have been in the hive anytime from 13th Sept onwards. So I would have thought she could be a mated queen????"

would YOU want to mate outdoors in the weather we've had for last 5 weeks?????

 

[Loubylou]

Fair comment. but here in Herefordshire we have had the odd day of sunshine and warmth, so I am trying to be optimistic.
Say if she had mated would she then immediately start laying eggs or would she know that the conditions are not right, ie it is too late and too cold and so hold off until next spring?
No i don't mark my queens but I shall next year as it will make life easier if they look like this new one - she doesn't stand out colourwise from the rest of the colony at all

 

[Hebeegeebee]

A queen usually starts to lay a couple of days or so after mating.
Some virgin queens don't look that much bigger than a worker, although they have longer legs. Once mated and the queen is laying, the abdomen increases in size. Not all queens look like some of the photos the 'breeders' show you. They are not necessarily going to show an 'average' queen. Queens often reduce in size before swarming - they can get noticeably thinner so better able to fly.

 

[Outlander]

If I had one colony as you do I would not want to risk it. I would buy in a queen at £25-£30 without more delay and with a little luck come through winter with my colony of bees with queen ready to go.

Everything you stated would not give me much of a glimmer of hope but it’s your colony Louby and who knows she just may not be a virgin but is it worth that risk.

£30ish now or may be £150ish for a spring colony.

 

[drstitson]

"would she know that the conditions are not right"

queen just turns the food that the workers stuff into her into eggs. they control the process.

 

[justme]

All very well saying requeen, as long as the old queen is removed first.

 

[oliver90owner]

I last saw the old queen on Sept 13th and then on my weekly hive inspections since I thought i was queenless (the old queen was so obvious, huge and amber coloured).

Yes. I have looked back at your posts since joining the forum. At these inspections, when you were clearly looking for the queen, what was the first time there were no eggs, no open brood, no capped brood?

Draw yourself a time line. The queen cell, if you were inspecting every week, would have been there for two inspections at least.

Usually at this time of the year the queens will start laying promptly on getting mated. If they do not start laying soon after suitable mating weather, they are likely not mated.

Being possibly Q- for five weeks now and just now found with another queen in residence with no signs of eggs, I have considerable doubts as to the fecundity of the current queen.

But the weather may have been warm enough for mating flights at times. Of course she could have been a supercedure queen long before September the 13th. There lies another conundrum...

 

[Outlander]

All very well saying requeen, as long as the old queen is removed first.

Well DERRR... Sorry I meant of course.

 

[Loubylou]

ok,if I buy in and introduce a new mated queen pronto, do I knock the so called virgin on the head first??

 

[REDWOOD]

yes remove the queen before introducing a new queen