Bee Improvement Day in Cornwall

[the naked beekeeper]

See attached

 

[RoofTops]

I was sent a copy of this but the item on morphormetry rang alarm bells. Can I assume this is a pro-AMM day? I am not anti-AMM but I am not going to try and raise them where I live and would be reluctant to sit through a day where every speaker extolls their virtues as it would not really be applicable to my situation (living in Buckfastland).

 

[RoofTops]

I see there is an identical thread started 2 minutes later - does someone have a short term memory problem?

 

[For want of a better word]

I was sent a copy of this but the item on morphormetry rang alarm bells. Can I assume this is a pro-AMM day? I am not anti-AMM but I am not going to try and raise them where I live and would be reluctant to sit through a day where every speaker extolls their virtues as it would not really be applicable to my situation (living in Buckfastland).

When studying for my first degree we were encouraged to READ WIDELY....
I have even sat through lectures on benefits to farming utilizing herbicides, pesticides and Genetic Modification, even if it was totally against my ethics.
This means that now I am a grown up I can make my own decisions base on facts... and I am still learning!

 

[RoofTops]

Well I'd better go then! Actually, I think I will - but may not pay much attention during the morphometry bit.

 

[susbees]

Who is running it? Minor clangs going on here for other reasons...

 

[Red Bee]

Who is running it?

BIPCO http://www.bipco.org.uk/

 

[DanBee]

Well I'd better go then! Actually, I think I will - but may not pay much attention during the morphometry bit.

My thoughts exactly, RT. Prompted by the flyer for the event I posted this into the latest morass regarding "NZ" bees...

I received an email today with an invitation to a bee improvement meeting held over the border in Cornwall. I know one or two of the characters involved, and have a lot of respect for them and for what they are trying to achieve. However, I was dismayed to see that morphometry was prominent on the agenda. Why? Morphometry allows us to use physical characteristics to plot how genetically close a group of bee samples are to each other; morphometrical characteristics of the main strains are documented and clustering of plotted measurements indicates both 'purity' and compatibility. This would allow us to assess various locally-adapted stocks for their compatible inclusion in a breeding programme. However, in the UK it does not seem to be used for this purpose; rather it is used for determining whether a sample exhibits Amm characteristics or not. If we are to move towards selection based upon positive outcome, we must move away from the view that morphometry is a binary tool which relates to Amm-ness, and instead use it as a tool for determining compatible favourable breeding materials, thus we must open our eyes to the other corners of the morphometry plot

Jo Widdicombe is active within BipCo which bodes well. He is BIBBA's "local breeding groups coordinator" but is not an Amm bigot; he is happy for people to breed whatever works locally for them.

I would like to get along to the session and have pencilled it in on the calendar. Devon held a similar session about a year ago and it was well received, although whether it prompted the establishment of more breeding groups/programmes I cannot say yet - perhaps too early to tell after only one season.

 

[susbees]

Who is running it?

BIPCO http://www.bipco.org.uk/

That's a what, not a whom. OK, so I didn't read every word but where's the "human face" of this organisation? Which beekeepers are running it?

 

[Red Bee]

That's a what, not a whom. OK, so I didn't read every word but where's the "human face" of this organisation? Which beekeepers are running it?

Think Jo Widdecombe will be one.

 

[the naked beekeeper]

No short term memory problem mr RT..just thought I'd try to reach out to as wide an audience as possible. Not everyone checks all sub-categories.

Dan, I'll see you there anyway but the mophometry is not a binary tool used to test for 'AMM-ness.'

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you probably believe that 'we' are putting the cart before the horse and possibly discarding many good virtues of different bees and stocks, due to them not being AMM.

The reason we use morphometry is to test how closely within a strain we are working in order to maximise consistency in matings. Sure other bees have many good virtues. But we believe that you can select for and breed for all the virtues you need within native-type bees. It just needs observation and selection. To include 'the other corners' is needless, unncessary and moreover detrimental. It would just exacerbate mongrelisation = more unpredictable matings. How on earth could you maintain continuity with mongrels?

There's no need to look for and include foreign strains when we can select for and work with all the qualities we need within our own. And indeed, it would be to the detriment of the whole programme. You get some great mongrels and some horrid ones. Working within a strain evens that rule out a little more. Of course all results vary and selection is an ever-ongoing organic evolutionary process.

To conclude, it's not a petty AMM fayre type thing.
It's about working with and helping select a better bee for Cornwall and our temperamental maritime weather.
Of course you need to work with what works best for you and that will be tailored by each beekeepers wants and desires.
But we believe that we can produce a successful native bee and we can use morphopmetry to confirm we are working within a strain for consistency of results...not increased mongrel hybridisarion which you'll never be able to maintain anyway.

And yes, Jo Widdecombe is one of the main people organising it.
I'm fortunate enough to work with him and have a lot of respect for him.

 

[RoofTops]

I heard Jo Widdecombe speak at Holsworthy and I was impressed by what he had done but I still remain unconvinced what he is doing will work for me.

Unless all the beekeepers around me decided to select for a specific strain or I went over to using AI (neither of which realistically are going to happen) I am always going to be stuck with the local mongrel - "contaminated" as it is from time to time with the odd exotic. We had queens from Hawaii here a few years ago - but hopefully the source of those has dried up.

I remain one of those beekeepers who just tries to select for the best qualities from what grows locally but I really don't really care if it has flourescent yellow patches or 6 wings - providing it is docile, disease free as far as possible and survives long enough to bring in a honey surplus. The assumption only a "near-native" can do this remains unconvincing to me as plenty have bred good bees which are far removed from that standard.

However, I wish the Cornish group well as they may just have the geography to pull it off - for example Jo W live on Rame Head IIRC.

 

[dilys]

disease free as far as possible and survives long enough to bring in a honey surplus. The assumption only a "near-native" can do this remains unconvincing

I am not surprised you are not convinced because it's patently stupid. There are lots of reasons for favouring near natives but no-one claims they are the only ones that can produce a surplus without being nasty or disease-ridden.

Dilys

 

[the naked beekeeper]

No assumption at all RT.
On the contrary, there seems to be an assumption that native bees can't do this.

We just believe that it is just as possible to get good bees by breeding from a native strain as it is from other strains. So why look elsewhere?

Everyone has to be pragmatic and work with what is best for them.
In certain hotbeds of bee activity, mating is a mixed bag of mellifera allsorts!
As you say, so long as a local bee works well in your area, then I believe all beekeepers should work with those qualities and select to improve them.
Bringing in more genes only makes things harder in the long run and is un-sustainable.

 

[The Cumbrian]

Bringing in more genes only makes things harder in the long run and is un-sustainable.

Surely in the long term this importing of bees from all over the world (or at least it seems like that) is laying the country potentially more open to diseases and parasites.

 

[the naked beekeeper]

Surely in the long term this importing of bees from all over the world (or at least it seems like that) is laying the country potentially more open to diseases and parasites.

The risk is pretty minimal with imported queens (which are the only way to import genes en-mass), and such queens can come from similar countries disease wise to us. Europe for instance. They needn't be from Australia etc.

But any risk is a risk, sure.

 

[DanBee]

the mophometry is not a binary tool used to test for 'AMM-ness.'

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you probably believe that 'we' are putting the cart before the horse and possibly discarding many good virtues of different bees and stocks, due to them not being AMM.

The reason we use morphometry is to test how closely within a strain we are working in order to maximise consistency in matings. Sure other bees have many good virtues. But we believe that you can select for and breed for all the virtues you need within native-type bees. It just needs observation and selection. To include 'the other corners' is needless, unncessary and moreover detrimental. It would just exacerbate mongrelisation = more unpredictable matings. How on earth could you maintain continuity with mongrels?

There's no need to look for and include foreign strains when we can select for and work with all the qualities we need within our own. And indeed, it would be to the detriment of the whole programme. You get some great mongrels and some horrid ones. Working within a strain evens that rule out a little more. Of course all results vary and selection is an ever-ongoing organic evolutionary process.

Thanks for the clarification, NB, but perhaps I didn't make myself clear. To look just in the bottom left corner (the Amm corner) of the morphometry plot is to use the tool as a binary Amm selector. This appears to be your intent.

Think about how plots cluster - clustering indicates genetic similarity, regardless of where it occurs on the plot. True breeding (repetition of characteristics across successive generations) occurs when a population is closely genetically related and (relatively) stable. Hence any of the honeybee races have their own cluster locus on the plot; even Buckfasts (from the same breeder!) would cluster somewhere.

My point is that if we select on characteristics first, then use morphometry to indicate closely related individuals (i.e. compatible matings / true breeding) then we can improve based upon performance with morphometry giving the added benefit of predictable offspring and hence faster improvement. If we start by discounting any bees which fall out of the Amm corner - however well suited they appear to be - then we are not breeding from the best, rather we are breediing to a pedigree aesthetic.

If you believe you can select for everything from within Amm, how are you going to ensure Acarine resistance, particularly against a background of increasingly soft or reducing Varroa treatments?

 

[the naked beekeeper]

My point is that if we select on characteristics first, then use morphometry to indicate closely related individuals (i.e. compatible matings / true breeding) then we can improve based upon performance with morphometry giving the added benefit of predictable offspring and hence faster improvement.

If we start by discounting any bees which fall out of the Amm corner - however well suited they appear to be - then we are not breeding from the best, rather we are breediing to a pedigree aesthetic.

If you believe you can select for everything from within Amm, how are you going to ensure Acarine resistance, particularly against a background of increasingly soft or reducing Varroa treatments?

Hi Dan,

I agree with what you are saying in the first two paragraphs.
So largely I think we are on the same page (screen).

As I say, I don't think other strains of bee have any qualities, which are own either: do not have/cannot be be selected for/add anything needed.

On that basis alone, I don't believe we need to include other strains, but as I say, other reasons for not including them is that it makes the mated offspring much more unreliable (due to mongrelisation) and is also not sustainable.

As for disease, well that's something you don't know how resistant your bees are until you see it.
For sure an IPM will help.

I don't profess to have all the answers and I don't profess to say that any bee is better than any other. Ultimately we all need a local bee that we can dependably rely upon and hope to continually improve. I hope to be able to get more accurate results by working within a strain but if I couldn't/can't, I'm equally in favour of simply selecting from the best you've got. Pragmatism above all else.

You've been doing this for longer than me, so I take your comments on board.
Observation is the key and I hope to continually learn by doing, doing, doing.
And ultimately, not reading, reading, reading.
I like to see things for myself.

 

[DanBee]

As I say, I don't think other strains of bee have any qualities, which are own either: do not have/cannot be be selected for/add anything needed.

On that basis alone, I don't believe we need to include other strains, but as I say, other reasons for not including them is that it makes the mated offspring much more unreliable (due to mongrelisation) and is also not sustainable.

Hmm, I'm trying to steer you away from painting yourself into a corner. You seem to have got inherently intertwined the two separate ideas of improving by selective breeding and the need (desire?) to select for Amm. You are right to say that disparate breeding partners will give unpredictable results, but you should entertain the possibility that a non-Amm aesthetic may show the best set of desired characteristics. You may face a much longer quest to improve from a lower baseline, and you may have to select against some of the Amm characteristics in order to produce a productive, healthy, thriving bee for your locality

By discarding anything that doesn't fit the Amm aesthetic from the outset, regardless of quality, I am reminded of the yokel being asked for directions, who leans over the gate and says "Well I wouldn't go there from here..."

As for disease, well that's something you don't know how resistant your bees are until you see it. For sure an IPM will help.

What's your planned IPM regime for Acarine?

 

[the naked beekeeper]

Hmm, I'm trying to steer you away from painting yourself into a corner. You seem to have got inherently intertwined the two separate ideas of improving by selective breeding and the need (desire?) to select for Amm. You are right to say that disparate breeding partners will give unpredictable results, but you should entertain the possibility that a non-Amm aesthetic may show the best set of desired characteristics. You may face a much longer quest to improve from a lower baseline, and you may have to select against some of the Amm characteristics in order to produce a productive, healthy, thriving bee for your locality

By discarding anything that doesn't fit the Amm aesthetic from the outset, regardless of quality, I am reminded of the yokel being asked for directions, who leans over the gate and says "Well I wouldn't go there from here..."



What's your planned IPM regime for Acarine?

I can't do the fancy quote thing, but, what Amm characteristics are you thinking of? (to select against)

And isn't that the part of any programme? To improve characteristics for a better bee. Whether you call that 'improving temper' or 'against aggression', or something else. Of course you have to steer the whole project towards an ever improving one...no strain of bee is perfect. I wouldn't see it as going against something so much as improving the opposite virtue. Depends which way you look at it. Every strain has its tendencies. You just improve the opposite virtue.

I'm not looking for a perfect bee in all weathers, days and situations. And I don't think I'll ever get one.

Planned IPM for acarine...pass. I'm man enough to say I'm still learning and not ashamed to say I don't have the answers. But I do have possible suggestions and a willingness to learn, and as I say, learn by observation.

I'm very open to any ideas you might have as part of that process, particularly as a bee farmer with a vested interest in the health of his stocks.