Beginners Queen rearing.

[masterBK]

One easy method for beginners not yet considered. When colony has built up and has one or two supers carry out a Demaree. Three days later insert swarmboard with rear entrance between top super and top BC. Queen cells will be produced in top BC. One week later reduce queen cells down to one good one. Leave them to get on with it. 4 weeks later new queen should be laying. Then either unite top BC to bottom BC (removing old queen) or seperate off top BC onto own stand as new colony

Alternatively 9 days after carrying out the Demaree divide top BC into 3 nuclei each with one queen cell.

 

[eltalia]

As with many 'answers' to questions put here - and elsewhere - I note
yet again whilst no doubt the question is read it is seldom heard... an'
so the answers drift into badmington like diatribe as a game of sorts.
The result is often a field of ambuiguity in a truism of "ask a question
and get X# answers". The OP's question now follows that 'rhule'(sp).

Paraphrased, a chap in his second year of holding beehives asks for
a method a pensioner might use to raise queens from maybe 4
colonies next season.
Assuming all conditions even exist at that time, and assuming queens
are indeed raised to laying, just what are the chances of inbreeding
occuring (ever) in this beekeeper's lifetime?

Also - offtopic...
..is it so in Britain today gene pools are so saturated that like the
monarchy of the 17th century blood has to be sought far afield, and so
today the word "import" when used amongst beekeepers does
automatically suggest queens being bought to the island?

As full disclosure, back when I ran commercially it was policy to
swapout 20% of queens each Autumn - our peak pollinating time -
done partly as a brood break tool come production incentive, but
mainly as I saw such practice as environmentaly responsible in that
these queens were always imported, and often from 4, 000 kms away.

Bill

 

[B+.]

Also - offtopic...
..is it so in Britain today gene pools are so saturated that like the
monarchy of the 17th century blood has to be sought far afield, and so
today the word "import" when used amongst beekeepers does
automatically suggest queens being bought to the island?

No. The majority of bees are mongrels after repeated crossing with races from all over Europe which have been imported over the last century.
This doesn't stop people from learning to raise queens, but, it does mean that serious bee breeding can only be conducted using instrumental insemination.

 

[Poly Hive]

I attempted to answer the question Eltalila

It is typical forum (most forums anyway) for topics to drift.

PH

 

[Finman]

.
Everybody does as they want. Most keep their swarming queens from year to year.

To rear 10 queens (for 2 hives) does not need 100 hive owner's rearing method.

And local queens.... I do not know what is local. ... I have a colony in church tower, and it is a Real Bad Ass.
.
.

 

[Beefriendly]

No. The majority of bees are mongrels after repeated crossing with races from all over Europe which have been imported over the last century.
This doesn't stop people from learning to raise queens, but, it does mean that serious bee breeding can only be conducted using instrumental insemination.

A point worth mentioning, is that for those without access to isolated mating sites or the desire to set up Instrumental Insemination.....which is the vast majority of beekeepers in the UK. Breeding mongrels is just about all they can breed.
It's unsatisfactory from a genetic improvement strategy due to mongrels not breeding true, but there is little else to play around with. Long term, if sufficient people cull and select then their might be an improvement around a local area. But as I find that there are more and more beekeepers who work off the charts and struggle with simple things like varroa control, it's unlikely to happen in my neck of the woods.

 

[B+.]

A point worth mentioning, is that for those without access to isolated mating sites or the desire to set up Instrumental Insemination.....which is the vast majority of beekeepers in the UK. Breeding mongrels is just about all they can breed.
It's unsatisfactory from a genetic improvement strategy due to mongrels not breeding true, but there is little else to play around with. Long term, if sufficient people cull and select then their might be an improvement around a local area. But as I find that there are more and more beekeepers who work off the charts and struggle with simple things like varroa control, it's unlikely to happen in my neck of the woods.

Indeed.
Unfortunately, local improvement could only occur if some beekeepers brought in superior performing colonies / queens from elsewhere.Otherwise, the performance of queens mating in that area must always drift back to the mean for that area.

 

[Beefriendly]

Indeed.
Unfortunately, local improvement could only occur if some beekeepers brought in superior performing colonies / queens from elsewhere.Otherwise, the performance of queens mating in that area must always drift back to the mean for that area.

Sorry B+ that is incorrect, selection of good stock and elimination of bad will improve the locals in a given area, assuming that sufficient beekeepers get involved in the project.

 

[B+.]

Sorry B+ that is incorrect, selection of good stock and elimination of bad will improve the locals in a given area, assuming that sufficient beekeepers get involved in the project.

Quite right. You'd eventually establish a group of mongrels that performed more, or less, the same (there'd be some variation about the mean, but, it wouldn't be significant).
Lets look at it simply: suppose you have a limited case where only 2 colonies existed in an area. There were no other colonies within flying range. Suppose they scored 2 and 3 for a trait you were interested in. That would give you a mean of 2.5 [(2+3)/2=2.5]. How would you raise the mean performance?
The only way to do it would be to bring in new stock. Now, with only two colonies in the area, you wouldn't need very many colonies and they wouldn't need to be vastly superior e.g. (2+3+3)/3=2.6, so, you'd achieve a modest improvement simply by adding one colony performing as well as the good one. Of course, if it performed at the same level as the lower performing colony, you'd get (2+3+2)/3 = 2.3, so you'd need to be sure the new colony performed at least as well as the better performing colony.
Now, the situation becomes more complicated when, instead of having 2 colonies within flying range you have 20 (or even 200). The effect of a single high performing colony on the resident group of colonies would be minimal (the denominator would be so high as to dilute the effect so the new colony would have to be vastly superior, or, there would need to be a lot of them before any significant effect would be observed).

 

[For want of a better word]

I attempted to answer the question Eltalila

It is typical forum (most forums anyway) for topics to drift.

PH

Who was the actress who said... I used to be like Snow White... but I drifted?

From simple queen rearing to multivariate Bayesian statistics in how many posts

Yeghes da

 

[B+.]

From simple queen rearing to multivariate Bayesian statistics in how many posts

Sorry.....that was the simplified version

 

[Finman]

.
Actually queen rearing of a beginner is not difficult. Every one learn with doing. Perhaps not very well alone.

2 summers ago I had a box full of swarm bees. I started queen rearing in it. I got only worker size queens. It means, nothing. Such "eternal learning" case.

Last summer I had a box of brood frames and bees. They were in swarming fever. I got 20 good queens from that very easily.

 

[Beefriendly]

. That would give you a mean of 2.5 [(2+3)/2=2.5]. How would you raise the mean performance?.

I wouldn't do anything, I'd let natural genetic crossover (the bees genome has the highest rate of any known) and mutations produce the variability and select only those that were above the average.
Do you think your Carniolan lines simply spontaneously came into being?

 

[B+.]

I wouldn't do anything, I'd let natural genetic crossover (the bees genome has the highest rate of any known) and mutations produce the variability and select only those that were above the average.
Do you think your Carniolan lines simply spontaneously came into being?

Not at all. They took a great deal of work over many generations, but, that was using a homogeneous population (which fulfilled the conditions for the statistics used). You wouldn't have that with mongrel colonies.
This is all getting way off topic now.

 

[Beefriendly]

Not at all. They took a great deal of work over many generations, but, that was using a homogeneous population (which fulfilled the conditions for the statistics used). You wouldn't have that with mongrel colonies.
This is all getting way off topic now.

Brother Adam managed to do it without quoting any fancy statistics and with many different strains creating the ultimate true breeding mongrel!
You put your Carniolans back into the normal breeding environment and all is gone in 2/3 generations as they become mongrelised. That has always been my criticism of this work, the end product is no better than buying a Buckfast/Italian/Carniolan queen of good provenance, except you can skip the varro treatment. The interesting bit, as far as any beekeeper is concerned, is whether that hygienic trait is still expressed in F1 queens that have bred with the local rag tag? I suspect not. So where does the project end up if you cannot breed bees with hygienic traits outside of isolated crosses or II?

But me thinks you miss my point..... if all you have is mongrels to work with that is what you do. And in most of the UK that is the situation and it is unlikely to be changed. Pouring continual scorn on those working to improve their local lot is ...shall we say a bit elitist!

 

[B+.]

Brother Adam managed to do it without quoting any fancy statistics and with many different strains creating the ultimate true breeding mongrel!
You put your Carniolans back into the normal breeding environment and all is gone in 2/3 generations as they become mongrelised. That has always been my criticism of this work, the end product is no better than buying a Buckfast/Italian/Carniolan queen of good provenance, except you can skip the varro treatment. The interesting bit, as far as any beekeeper is concerned, is whether that hygienic trait is still expressed in F1 queens that have bred with the local rag tag? I suspect not. So where does the project end up if you cannot breed bees with hygienic traits outside of isolated crosses or II?

But me thinks you miss my point..... if all you have is mongrels to work with that is what you do. And in most of the UK that is the situation and it is unlikely to be changed. Pouring continual scorn on those working to improve their local lot is ...shall we say a bit elitist!

I don't think I've quoted any "fancy statistics" (only a simple average). Br Adam will certainly have ranked the performance of colonies within family groups. He couldn't have selected for performance without this.
As I've said before, the traits will be diluted over the generations if you put no effort into maintaining it. That's not to say there's no benefit. Clearly, the drones from introduced colonies would mate with local virgin queens (and vice versa) so local colonies would be influenced (subject to heritability of the trait). Even if you criticise breeders for the work they do, I'm sure you'd happily take the benefit. In any case, if you rely on swarms and local mongrels, you've contributed nothing to the breeding programme (although you may benefit from it).

 

[Beefriendly]

So you don't disagree ( in answer to your first question) that a small population of mongrels can increase their potential by crossovers and random mutations, all of which can (and has) been selected for by the beekeeper? Something you seemed to intimate by your question couldn't happen? { advice...don't argue genetics with a geneticist ]
Good.
I'm not criticizing breeders B+, far from it, merely asking questions about the end product. I'm very happy to take advantage of their bees but recognize the limitations they impose on my future queen rearing.
The questions I'm asking refer to the background population of the UK and how your (or anyone else's bees )will influence its future direction and whether demeaning anyone attempts to deal with the problems they have in front them helps.
Your end product is simply buy and buy every few years. Which is fine for many (including myself) but many want to breed from what they have...so a long term solution/strategy would be an interesting theoretical and intellectual proposal.
Without recourse to isolated matings or II how might you approach this?

 

[wightbees]

Control flight time mating is one way, it has been quoted at 85% This would be a huge difference than random mating. Team work is the key though!

 

[B+.]

So you don't disagree ( in answer to your first question) that a small population of mongrels can increase their potential by crossovers and random mutations, all of which can (and has) been selected for by the beekeeper? Something you seemed to intimate by your question couldn't happen? { advice...don't argue genetics with a geneticist ]
Good.
I'm not criticizing breeders B+, far from it, merely asking questions about the end product. I'm very happy to take advantage of their bees but recognize the limitations they impose on my future queen rearing.
The questions I'm asking refer to the background population of the UK and how your (or anyone else's bees )will influence its future direction and whether demeaning anyone attempts to deal with the problems they have in front them helps.
Your end product is simply buy and buy every few years. Which is fine for many (including myself) but many want to breed from what they have...so a long term solution/strategy would be an interesting theoretical and intellectual proposal.
Without recourse to isolated matings or II how might you approach this?

If you culled all the poor performers, you'd reduce the denominator so your average yield would increase, even in the current generation. That is a trick, just as adding frames of brood from other colonies is. It increases your yield but isn't a true reflection of the performance of that queen. So, if you base your selection on these distorted figures, you're fooling yourself.
As for the idea of waiting for random mutations, that's a long term process with a huge amount of testing work. I wouldn't even consider it. However, if you want to spend your time on it, don't let me stop you. Personally, I wouldn't raise daughters from F1 queens. I'd use them as drone mothers and production colonies. This gives benefits of improved behaviour, honey gathering, etc during the queens own lifetime. Her drones influence the virgins from swarms etc. so, I'm even helping people who take no interest in the quality of drones their virgins mate with.
I would say, those working within the programme gain the most from it. I've had hygienic behaviour for longer than I care to remember and am working on developing VSH now. My honey yields are higher than anyone in my area and my bees are infinitely better behaved. When I look back at how things were when I kept local mongrels, there is just no comparison. I'd rather give up beekeeping altogether than go back to that!

 

[Beefriendly]

If you culled all the poor performers, you'd reduce the denominator so your average yield would increase, even in the current generation. That is a trick, just as adding frames of brood from other colonies is. It increases your yield but isn't a true reflection of the performance of that queen. So, if you base your selection on these distorted figures, you're fooling yourself.
As for the idea of waiting for random mutations, that's a long term process with a huge amount of testing work. I wouldn't even consider it. However, if you want to spend your time on it, don't let me stop you. Personally, I wouldn't raise daughters from F1 queens. I'd use them as drone mothers and production colonies. This gives benefits of improved behaviour, honey gathering, etc during the queens own lifetime. Her drones influence the virgins from swarms etc. so, I'm even helping people who take no interest in the quality of drones their virgins mate with.
I would say, those working within the programme gain the most from it. I've had hygienic behaviour for longer than I care to remember and am working on developing VSH now. My honey yields are higher than anyone in my area and my bees are infinitely better behaved. When I look back at how things were when I kept local mongrels, there is just no comparison. I'd rather give up beekeeping altogether than go back to that!

And for us lesser mortals?