Do you keep bees the "Darwinian" way?

[B+.]

.

You see ... I'm a bloke with 7 hives in my garden with bees that are managing and thriving without being treated fo varroa ... I dont buy in VSH bees ... my colonies are headed by either home reared queens or are ones I've bought from UK Queen rearers or their descendants. I've never claimed any VSH qualities in my bees as I am convinced that at least some of the success I've had remaining treatment free has been about environmental and vocational influence... and the way they are kept. I've not lost many colonies over the years and the few I have lost have been otherwise explained. I would agree that people who make claims about VSH bees really need evidence to corroborate.. I know that B+ has masses of evidence to support VSH ... but I doubt these qualities could be maintained long term with open mated progeny in other areas where the drone pool is more varied and frankly suspect. So ... we need to look for factors that inhibit varroa and assist the bees in their endeavours to live with the pest...

You're right. In the UK, the density of non-VSH drones would be so high that the trait would be diluted generation after generation. However, if you could restrict the drones (or, more precisely, the drone-producing queens) to those expressing high-VSH, as they do at isolated mating stations. it would be ok to use open mating. People who talk about "drone flooding" are really just talking about increasing the concentration of a particular trait in the environment and making it more likely that a virgin queen will mate with drones from a queen that expresses that trait. It's always the queens you need to select.

 

[B+.]

Richard Noel did a video checking his 'VSH' queen, alcohol wash with a cup of bees from each nuc, the results were terrible. IIRC the other two nucs had better results but still high numbers.
I've had less varroa drop from some of my full colonies during a round of OAV.

I'm not sure what you saw but an alcohol wash doesn't measure VSH. It's only an assessment of the varroa load on the sample. SMR/VSH is where the workers target reproducing varroa mites and interfere with her reproduction. This, obviously, helps to maintain a low infestation of the colony but they may be reinfested by contact with other workers, or even drones which move freely between colonies.

 

[B+.]

Perhaps we should think differently. If we all encouraged our colonies to swarm, instead of preventing them, there would be lots more feral colonies who would be subject to natural selection. All we have to do is find the survivors in a few years.

Let's look at this another way: varroa (and other maladies) are transmitted through communication - contact between colonies. So, increasing the number of colonies in the environment, without also increasing their ability to resist pests/disease, wouldn't help selection. It would just increase the transmission rate.
During this c19 pandemic, we're all very much aware of the transmission number (R0) as an expression of the rate of growth of the virus. Increasing the number of wild colonies in the environment simply increases the transmission rate (R0).

 

[gmonag]

The only way to evolve a feral species is through natural selection, which involves most individuals (colonies) dying prematurely if they are not fit (Darwinian fit, not a gym member). Selection by beekeepers only improves their own population, and only in the criteria they choose. Once those genes go out into the world, as they all do because our bees live out there, they are subject to natural selection. The immediate effect is to disrupt the gene pool before any improvement can evolve. That is the constant situation we find ourselves in after 150 years of importation.

 

[Swarm]

I'm not sure what you saw.

A very poor result is what I saw

 

[madasafish]

The only way to evolve a feral species is through natural selection, which involves most individuals (colonies) dying prematurely if they are not fit (Darwinian fit, not a gym member). Selection by beekeepers only improves their own population, and only in the criteria they choose. Once those genes go out into the world, as they all do because our bees live out there, they are subject to natural selection. The immediate effect is to disrupt the gene pool before any improvement can evolve. That is the constant situation we find ourselves in after 150 years of importation.

Well considering the original population was almost decimated in 1921 that says something about the success of Darwinism as a strategy.

 

[B+.]

.

A very poor result is what I saw

Did he actually say he was testing for VSH?
Alcohol wash will only tell you how many mites are on the sample. It doesn't tell you anything about the behaviour of workers when they're confronted with varroa mites inside sealed brood.

 

[gmonag]

Well considering the original population was almost decimated in 1921 that says something about the success of Darwinism as a strategy.

Was it? Really? IOW was just like the US CCD. I'm sure it was not as bad as some thought. Just because Brother Adam said so does not make it true. They didn't get the cause correct either at the time.

 

[B+.]

Well considering the original population was almost decimated in 1921 that says something about the success of Darwinism as a strategy.

Evolution, as described by Darwin, takes a very long time and occurs without mans intervention. It clearly doesn't apply to managed bee colonies.

 

[Boston Bees]

Evolution, as described by Darwin, takes a very long time and occurs without mans intervention. It clearly doesn't apply to managed bee colonies.

Nor to feral colonies within flying distance of managed colonies, which is pretty much all of them.

 

[gmonag]

Nor to feral colonies within flying distance of managed colonies, which is pretty much all of them.

It does, as long as the gene pool is not constanly adulterated with imports.

 

[Boston Bees]

It does, as long as the gene pool is not constanly adulterated with imports.

No, because the actions of most beekeepers (feeding, artificially swarming, restricting swarming, treating etc etc) interfere with natural selection (which is a fairly delicate long-term process anyway) to such a degree as to render it almost completely ineffective.

Imports affect natural selection too of course, but arguably not nearly as much as the impact of beekeepers.

Darwin discovered natural selection by looking at a population of completely wild finches, not finches which were constantly being caught, housed, fed, possibly medicated and then released by humans.

 

[user 20297]

Evolution, as described by Darwin, takes a very long time and occurs without mans intervention. It clearly doesn't apply to managed bee colonies.

My understanding is that evolution can take place very quickly when the environment in which an organism lives is also changing quickly. We're not expecting new species or even sub-species to evolve. We're not looking for changes in morphology which are visible in any way. If any bee has traits which support the chances of success for the colony to which it belongs, that may be a contributing factor towards survival for bees with a related genotype. That trait doesn't need to be VSH and it doen't exclusively need to belong either to the queen or to the drones.

I think too much emphasis is being placed on the importance of the bees showing a consistent and active resistance to mite infestation. In the short term, the part of Seeley's work which suggests that the conditions in which bees live will affect their rate of survival is more significant,

The greater the number of colonies which are able to survive long term, the greater the variety and abundance of genes that will be in existence.

 

[domino]

Evolution, as described by Darwin, takes a very long time and occurs without mans intervention. It clearly doesn't apply to managed bee colonies.

Exactly.

 

[domino]

In the short term, the part of Seeley's work which suggests that the conditions in which bees live will affect their rate of survival is more significant,

Seeley is saying the behaviours developed by bees to tolerate varroa are effective in their environment. Not that putting bees in that environment ascribes any benefit.

 

[B+.]

My understanding is that evolution can take place very quickly when the environment in which an organism lives is also changing quickly. We're not expecting new species or even sub-species to evolve. We're not looking for changes in morphology which are visible in any way. If any bee has traits which support the chances of success for the colony to which it belongs, that may be a contributing factor towards survival for bees with a related genotype. That trait doesn't need to be VSH and it doen't exclusively need to belong either to the queen or to the drones.

I think too much emphasis is being placed on the importance of the bees showing a consistent and active resistance to mite infestation. In the short term, the part of Seeley's work which suggests that the conditions in which bees live will affect their rate of survival is more significant,

The greater the number of colonies which are able to survive long term, the greater the variety and abundance of genes that will be in existence.

Small changes can occur in behaviour and it's the cumulative effect that is valuable to beekeepers, but heritability of these changes can be very low initially.
In effect, this is what happens in selective breeding programmes where the population is graded and the high performing members used to produce the next generation. Each iteration (hopefully) moves the breeding population in the desired direction. As time passes, the frequency of these desired behaviours increases and there is more opportunities for participants to mate with individuals expressing the behaviour - so it develops.

 

[pargyle]

I think sometimes we underestimate the intelligence of bees ... they are quick learners and excellent communicators - perhaps not in the way we humans communicate but nevertheless they do it very effectively. Whilst I am doubtful about evolution within any sort of immediate time frame I do believe they have the ability for learning and who knows... perhaps colonies that manage varroa loads are doing things they have learned... coupled with the right environment... there are possibilities.

 

[derekm]

Evolution, as described by Darwin, takes a very long time and occurs without mans intervention. It clearly doesn't apply to managed bee colonies.

And it does NOT happen nice and steadly. Almost species wipe outs do occur. I thought they have traced most of homo sapiens down to just 7 women from whom all of us are descended.

 

[Erichalfbee]

I thought they have traced most of homo sapiens down to just 7 women from whom all of us are descended.

Not one?

 

[B+.]

Not one?

Isn't that taking polyandry a bit far?