Drone Importance

[Tom Bick]

Two good questions and would be interested if there is something that discourage drones from the same hive of a virgin queen form mating with her.

Yes drones generally enter any hive and on the whole not challenged. It is common to see drones of different colours in a hive and some people mark drones similar to queens to see where they end up.

 

[mintmoth]

Yes drones generally enter any hive and on the whole not challenged. It is common to see drones of different colours in a hive and some people mark drones similar to queens to see where they end up.

So are they doing that to check out the state of the hive and see if there are any new queens likely, or do they just not have the same homing instinct of workers?

 

[Tom Bick]

Well in most cases it's a roaming instinct to spread as far as possible so as to increase the chance of meeting a nice virgin queen perhaps many many miles from their hive. But I have seen increased drone actively especially at the hive entrances where virgin queens are close to a mating flight. So it could be both.

 

[BrianO]

All interesting

"Do beeks know.... It is another thing. So much old fairy tales are going on."

Sometimes I wonder reading posts

What about the option of giving them ample brood space, no QE, leaving enough stores to negate the need for sugar syrup feeding, or fondant, ala Rose Hive

Let them , who knows they might know what they are doing !!! Decide on their ratios of brood to workers !!

 

[Finman]

All interesting



Sometimes I wonder reading posts

What about the option of giving them ample brood space, no QE, leaving enough stores to negate the need for sugar syrup feeding, or fondant, ala Rose Hive

Let them , who knows they might know what !!

That toy option makes no sense. I know after 50 years what they do. They do drones.
To try, how much they may do drones, is really odd idea. What do you do with that "fact"

 

[BrianO]

Mr Finman , read the Rose Hive Method , 50 or 60 years , you need to always be prepared to learn

 

[Finman]

Mr Finman , read the Rose Hive Method , 50 or 60 years , you need to always be prepared to learn

I have nursed my hives without excluder 50 years. Nothing to learn in Rose method.

 

[Little John]

Is there something about the queen's pheremones that discourages drones from her own hive in the mating game ...

Good question. That's always possible, of course, but quite hard to imagine if you watch a 'comet tail' of drones zig-zagging across the sky. They appear to be pursuing the queen visually (which would be one rationale for their having much larger eyes), plus any cross-wind would waft the virgin's pheromone away from the pursuing pack.

On this forum I've heard the opinion expressed that the v.queen can - to some degree - choose which drones she mates with. Again, that's hard to accept, especially in light of film footage ('Tales from the Hive', and 'More than Honey') which show the act of copulation - for the first time in history - where the first drone to catch up with the queen simply 'helps himself', as it were. The v.queen's abdomen is firmly grasped by that drone from behind, so she has no way of knowing the identity of her suitor.

LJ

 

[BrianO]

I have nursed my hives without excluder 50 years. Nothing to learn in Rose method.

That is a long time !, do you see no merit in the other aspects of this method ?

 

[Finman]

That is a long time !, do you see no merit in the other aspects of this method ?

It depends, what you are going to get from beekeeping, honey, drones, friends, magic, .. You may then find evidences that your style is the best.

 

[BeeBeeKa]

Well in most cases it's a roaming instinct to spread as far as possible so as to increase the chance of meeting a nice virgin queen perhaps many many miles from their hive. But I have seen increased drone actively especially at the hive entrances where virgin queens are close to a mating flight. So it could be both.

It would be great If drones needed to travel miles away to meet a virgin Quinn in a close proximity to her hive, as it would pose less danger on her in terms of travel hazards (predators i.e.) Unfortunately it seems to be not a case, so the v.Quinns travel long distances too.

What about the option of giving them ample brood space, no QE, leaving enough stores to negate the need for sugar syrup feeding, or fondant, ala Rose Hive
Let them , who knows they might know what they are doing !!! Decide on their ratios of brood to workers !!

Personaly I have no problem about giving the bees ample brood space unless it does not create too cold microclimate around a brood bee cluster. I also do not use a Q excluder (so far );
while use of syrup is not just economically beneficial, it`s also beneficial from a bee health point of view as it normally goes mixed with a different kind of remedies helping to cope with nosema, dysentery, diarrhea, chalk brood and so on e.t.c.
The nature is not perfect. Otherwise we would not get sick… and would not die

 

[Little John]

The nature is not perfect. Otherwise we would not get sick… and would not die

'Perfection' is one of the human races' more persistent imaginary ideas (or even delusions ?), and one that we have a rather selfish view of. I think you'll find there is a kind of 'perfection' in nature, with death being just one part of the cycle of life - for without death the planet would soon get very crowded !
LJ

 

[BrianO]

It depends, what you are going to get from beekeeping, honey, drones, friends, magic, .. You may then find evidences that your style is the best.

Not to sure about the Friends & Magic bit... was with you until that.

Lets just say that comment is about as useful as a Chocolate Teapot !!! ...

 

[BrianO]

Personaly I have no problem about giving the bees ample brood space unless it does not

create too cold microclimate around a brood bee cluster. I also do not use a Q excluder (so
while use of syrup is not just economically beneficial, it`s also beneficial from a bee health point of view as it normally goes mixed with a different kind of remedies helping to cope with nosema, dysentery, diarrhea, chalk brood and so on e.t.c.
The nature is not perfect. Otherwise we would not get sick… and would not die

But do we really know.... who is qualified enough to know and based on what science, to be confident that adding this and that to bee syrup actually makes a blind bit of difference to nosema, dysentry, diahorrea etc, etc.. Sure Gawd.. its hard enough to treat ailments in humans with years of micro analysis of pathogens etc.....

Maybe...... our best shot is leaving as much honey as can be consumed on the overwintering colonies !!

 

[mintmoth]

Good question. That's always possible, of course, but quite hard to imagine if you watch a 'comet tail' of drones zig-zagging across the sky. They appear to be pursuing the queen visually (which would be one rationale for their having much larger eyes), plus any cross-wind would waft the virgin's pheromone away from the pursuing pack.

On this forum I've heard the opinion expressed that the v.queen can - to some degree - choose which drones she mates with. Again, that's hard to accept, especially in light of film footage ('Tales from the Hive', and 'More than Honey') which show the act of copulation - for the first time in history - where the first drone to catch up with the queen simply 'helps himself', as it were. The v.queen's abdomen is firmly grasped by that drone from behind, so she has no way of knowing the identity of her suitor.

LJ

Have I got this right? If a queen mates with a drone from the same hive - her brother - a fair proportion of the eggs will be genetically the same as the sperm, so the egg will produce a drone, as though no fertilisation had occurred. Or is my basic school biology way off the mark here?

If that is so, the queen isn't going to produce enough workers for colony survival, is she?

 

[BeeBeeKa]

'Perfection' is one of the human races' more persistent imaginary ideas (or even delusions ?), and one that we have a rather selfish view of. I think you'll find there is a kind of 'perfection' in nature, with death being just one part of the cycle of life - for without death the planet would soon get very crowded !
LJ

A stone, a planet, a star… They all can exist billions of years without the need to die in order to free the vacant space If they “die” somehow, they do not experience any pain or suffer. That sort of “perfection” is more attractive for my perception than the one you described above Thus I come back to the statement: the nature is not perfect… Fix it

But do we really know.... who is qualified enough to know and based on what science, to be confident that adding this and that to bee syrup actually makes a blind bit of difference to nosema, dysentry, diahorrea etc, etc..

”Practice is a truth criterion”. Read successful stories re. application of a remedy, make sure the good results have been confirmed by independent and respectful beekeepers (the more positive reviews from different sources – the better), experiment on your own colony/colonies (the number you can afford), and if results are satisfactory and really help you to get rid of a problem – introduce it into your regular practice – that`s the only way I could recommend and implement myself

Sure Gawd.. its hard enough to treat ailments in humans with years of micro analysis of pathogens etc.....Maybe...... our best shot is leaving as much honey as can be consumed on the overwintering colonies !!

If you satisfied with the winter survival rates of your colonies - that`s fair enough. I prefer to rely on chemistry, biochemistry, medicine, and other kinds of scientific approaches, helping to fix nature errors… in my understanding of course

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

who is qualified enough to know and based on what science, to be confident that adding this and that to bee syrup actually makes a blind bit of difference to nosema, dysentry, diahorrea etc, etc.. )

Banu Yukel of Eig university and and Mohsin Dogaroglu ot the University of Thrace (both in Turkey) Based on field tests and compared to controls testing both fumagilin anf Thymol over successive years - there are others as well

 

[Little John]

A stone, a planet, a star… They all can exist billions of years without the need to die in order to free the vacant space If they “die” somehow, they do not experience any pain or suffer. That sort of “perfection” is more attractive for my perception than the one you described above Thus I come back to the statement: the nature is not perfect… Fix it

You keep using the words 'perfect/perfection' - would you care to take a stab at defining what you mean by 'perfection' ? (It won't be easy ) The other way of approaching this, of course, is to say "nature ain't perfect (undefined) - so learn to live with it."

If you satisfied with the winter survival rates of your colonies - that`s fair enough. I prefer to rely on chemistry, biochemistry, medicine, and other kinds of scientific approaches, helping to fix nature errors… in my understanding of course

Many years ago, skep beekeepers used to kill-off both their strongest and weakest colonies - this would suggest that they had an intuitive understanding that a colony will only be 'strong' in one regard, if it is weaker in another - so that a colony deemed 'stronger' by producing more honey (say) than other colonies, will be weaker in some other way - say, in regard to the fending-off of disease. This was a system that worked very well for hundreds of years.

These days, we (and not just beekeepers) have entered a phase of history in which we want 'more-and-more' from 'less-and less' - so we maximise crop yields with artificial fertilisers, we feed our ruminants animal proteins and nearly all livestock with antibiotics.
This is very clever - humans are quite good at being clever - but is it wise ? Wisdom is about anticipating long-term consequences - and we're far too selfish and short-termist (as a species) for that.

I think it is supremely arrogant ( - a smiley to hopefully show that I'm not being aggressive here) for human beings to consider that they have anything other that a superficial understanding of natural processes.

Scientists (and I speak as a former scientist) have become the new priests of our society, and many look to them for guidance and wisdom. But the way in which biological thinking is pursued is seriously flawed. It cannot be subjected to the same reductionist approach which is applicable to both physics and chemistry. To explain why, here, would take too long and no doubt irritate the natives. Perhaps I'll write a book about it. Or then again, maybe not ...

LJ

 

[Little John]

Have I got this right? If a queen mates with a drone from the same hive - her brother - a fair proportion of the eggs will be genetically the same as the sperm, so the egg will produce a drone, as though no fertilisation had occurred. Or is my basic school biology way off the mark here?

If that is so, the queen isn't going to produce enough workers for colony survival, is she?

If fertilisation occurs - regardless of the origins of the egg and sperm, then a worker will result.
If the fertilised egg/larva to which you refer is chosen within it's first few days of life for 'elevation' to a queen, then a queen will (probably) result - but one which has been subjected to in-breeding. Whether this turns out to have been a good or bad thing to happen, depends on what results. (*)
Some in-breeding is inevitable, and usually only becomes a significant problem in the long-term - such as when beekeepers in an isolated area continuously only 'breed from the best', rather than from the average, or - preferably - from known separate genetic lines.

LJ

(*) and what you're trying to achieve. If you want to produce a specific hybrid, then you deliberately engage in 2 lines of controlled in-breeding (AI, IMAs etc), before crossing those 2 lines to achieve your desired hybrid.

 

[BrianO]

These days, we (and not just beekeepers) have entered a phase of history in which we want 'more-and-more' from 'less-and less' - so we maximise crop yields with artificial fertilisers, we feed our ruminants animal proteins and nearly all livestock with antibiotics

I think it is supremely arrogant ( - a smiley to hopefully show that I'm not being aggressive here) for human beings to consider that they have anything other that a superficial understanding of natural

Agreed , agreed, agreed and agreed again ! Should be a " Sticky " on the above post !

I have NO scientific credentials, but 48 years into growing, collecting, studying , reading and generally being infatuated with all living creatures , and observing human, and at times my own interference in the natural order of things . It is clear to see that generally our interference in such matters is in most cases a another nail in the fragile ecosystem that is so vital for us to continue to survive.

To turn back up the Beekeeing path... After a crazy year of mistakes and frantic firefighting in relation to my own hives, and now in the downtime having time to read more and look back on the season.

Beginning to realise that whilst there is wealth of knowledge ,especially here, and hugely experienced Beeks, who are generous in their giving of advice. I , in my opinion, see mammoth posts quoting all sorts of interventionist methodology, some essential, at times.......BUT..... Very little on more natural forms of Beekeeping, as in working with the Bees and following their lead, as opposed to intensively trying to farm and control hem.

NB: Disclaimer.... above , to quote Kenny Everett meant in the "best possible taste "( substitute intention for taste ) not dissing anyone or anything, not criticising, just would love to hear opinions