Emergency queen cells

[beesleybees]

Hi guys,

I have a nuc that is queenless (my bad!!)

I gave then a frame of eggs and brood and they have built 2 emergency queen cells in the centre of the frame. Now, do I leave the 2 seal cells alone and alow them to hatch without intervention? Should I remove 1 queen cell

Im not to sure if the the first queen that hatches will destroy the second queen cell before see hatches, or should I say the workers. Is that what happens? They won't swarm like when they build swarm cells will they

 

[oliver90owner]

10 hives? Does it really matter? Just choose the best open cell and remove the other and any others a day or so before emergence. Personally, I would not raise an emergency queen in a failed nuc, anyway. They should not swarm, but bees will be bees. With 10 hives I would not be bothering about small details such as that.

 

[beesleybees]

Haha, run before you can walk spring to mind lol that's me!!

Still very much a newbie so still learning. This I a small swarm I collected, it had a mated queen in as they had built comb in the bush they had decided to stay in and she began laying. I could find her in the swarm but I collected them I a paynes poly nuc and they began building comb in the feeder compartment ( stupid design)

In my effort to stop them, I must have squished her

I could merge, but would rather build up and then merge at the end of the season if need be

 

[oliver90owner]

OK, just don't expect this queen to be of the best quality.

 

[bontbee]

FWIW, a recent publication from the Welsh BKA, written by Wally Shaw, discusses the suggestion that queens from emergency cells are inferior. He notes research* that indicates that queens from such cells are "anatomically identical", have the same number of ovarioles as non-emergency queens and have equal performance.

He suggests that the belief that emergency queens are inferior is probably based on last ditch attempts by the beekeeper to rear a new queen, ie by inserting a frame of eggs/larvae into a colony that has been queenless for a prolonged period and so has very few young bees to provision the queen larvae adequately.

He also maintains that colonies in the position of having to raise emergency cells don't swarm from emergency cells - their only "aim" is to raise a new queen.

I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on or experience of this?

*no source quoted - and I haven't looked for myself, either, yet.

 

[Little John]

He suggests that the belief that emergency queens are inferior is probably based on last ditch attempts by the beekeeper to rear a new queen, ie by inserting a frame of eggs/larvae into a colony that has been queenless for a prolonged period and so has very few young bees to provision the queen larvae adequately.

Sounds plausible. Wally Shaw tends to talk sense.

Another factor could be the age of the comb on which the emergency cell is being constructed - newer comb being softer and thus easier to tear down in order to reduce the angle of 'bend' which the developing queen is being subjected to.

LJ

 

[dickbowyer]

FWIW, a recent publication from the Welsh BKA, written by Wally Shaw, discusses the suggestion that queens from emergency cells are inferior. He notes research* that indicates that queens from such cells are "anatomically identical", have the same number of ovarioles as non-emergency queens and have equal performance.

He suggests that the belief that emergency queens are inferior is probably based on last ditch attempts by the beekeeper to rear a new queen, ie by inserting a frame of eggs/larvae into a colony that has been queenless for a prolonged period and so has very few young bees to provision the queen larvae adequately.

He also maintains that colonies in the position of having to raise emergency cells don't swarm from emergency cells - their only "aim" is to raise a new queen.

I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on or experience of this?

*no source quoted - and I haven't looked for myself, either, yet.

Can you give us a link please

 

[bontbee]

Hi, I did check the website for a link, but at the moment it seems to have been issued to Welsh members in hard copy only - I suspect it will be put up on the website in due course. I can try to find out if or when for sure, unless one of my Welsh colleagues already knows the answer...

 

[REDWOOD]

If someone want's a copy I will send them mine

 

[BeeJayBee]

If someone want's a copy I will send them mine

Could you scan it for email?

 

[REDWOOD]

I will do it the weekend

Sent from my GT-S5570 using Tapatalk 2

 

[oliver90owner]

Seems to me that reading skills are in need of improvement.

In my post #2 I wrote 'they should not swarm'. At that point I had no information as to the strength, amount of brood about to emerge, or whether the nuc was totally congested. Nothing at all. So I qualified my remark by saying 'bees will be bees' - meaning they should not swarm, but don't blame me if they change their minds.

Post #4 was just as factual and simple to understand by those with good reading skills. I did not write you should expect a poor quality queen, I said don't expect her to be of best quality. Most should be able to work out that while she could be adequate or even good, raising a queen from an emergency cell is not so likely to challenge the best possible. Perhaps a too subtle difference for many to grasp.

If you want to disagree with that, then go ahead. We obviously don't agree on levels of reading skills either. I have been around long enough to know that substandard queens don't go the distance - they tend to get superceded at an early stage. 'Tend' does not mean they do or will, but just means the probability is higher. Just the same as poorly mated queens raised too early in the season (so only partially mated due to inclement weather). If they last as long as the best, they were clearly not one of the sub-standard ones; if they are superceded late in the season, it is tough on the bees if the replacement does not get mated - and look out for drone layers in the spring. I might expect an old queen to fail over the winter, but I have experienced young queen failures too.

So read carefully and accurately. Read what is written, not what you think it says.

In mathematics (statistics) these results would show up as a skewed distribution graph rather than a normal distribution.

 

[BeeJayBee]

I will do it the weekend

Thanks

 

[REDWOOD]

Free
http://www.wbka.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Simple-methods-of-making-Increase-Final-reduced.pdf

 

[beeno]

Hi all,
David A Cushman "If they are strong enough colonies will swarm on all kinds of queen cells, not just swarm cells. This is not understood by all beekeepers, but is the reason why many colonies swarm unexpectedly."

 

[beecology]

OK, just don't expect this queen to be of the best quality.

I've been advised to the contrary, that such queens are some of the best, certainly for fast build up.

So, what are the pro's and cons in your view of emergency queens?

 

[oliver90owner]

Once again the unreading reads something different, into something written, that is simply not there. Try reading in context for once. Read the first post on the thread. The clue is there.

Why can't you quote properly, not try to take things out of context? Trying to prove a point which is patently not there? Cherry picking a quote and trying to use it as a generality is just simply cheating yourself and anyone else that falls into the same category, and causes the other unknowers to get even more muddled than you might be. Go back and read the thread properly. I think it is only the first two posts, so should not be too onerous for you. If you are lost after two posts, what hope do we have of you understanding the context of a thread running to even only a second page, as this one?

Yes, personally I prefer not to risk small queens with less semen storage capacity and more likelihood of laying in supers, more likely to be superceded later in the year or fail over winter. Iprefer not to encorage trouble further down the line. It is only compounding the present problems for most, although those types have likely forgotten any connection to the past after just a few days, let alone a few months.

Nothing about anything else. But if you have been advised to use emergency queens in
preference to others, go ahead. But do try to understand what you are doing and achieving, because if you don't you will get the runts. Your choice as always. Good luck in your beekeeping, because you will need it.

EDIT: Oops, more than doubly hard for you. You need to read the first four posts.

 

[beecology]

Once again the unreading reads something different, into something written, that is simply not there. Try reading in context for once. Read the first post on the thread. The clue is there.

Why can't you quote properly, not try to take things out of context? Trying to prove a point which is patently not there? Cherry picking a quote and trying to use it as a generality is just simply cheating yourself and anyone else that falls into the same category, and causes the other unknowers to get even more muddled than you might be. Go back and read the thread properly. I think it is only the first two posts, so should not be too onerous for you. If you are lost after two posts, what hope do we have of you understanding the context of a thread running to even only a second page, as this one?

Yes, personally I prefer not to risk small queens with less semen storage capacity and more likelihood of laying in supers, more likely to be superceded later in the year or fail over winter. Iprefer not to encorage trouble further down the line. It is only compounding the present problems for most, although those types have likely forgotten any connection to the past after just a few days, let alone a few months.

Nothing about anything else. But if you have been advised to use emergency queens in
preference to others, go ahead. But do try to understand what you are doing and achieving, because if you don't you will get the runts. Your choice as always. Good luck in your beekeeping, because you will need it.

Im not entirely sure I approve of your tone, arrogance and attitude but rather than try to belittle or insult you, maybe pity is more appropriate.

And so, thanks for answering my question (painful it must have been). Nothing taken out of context or 'cherry picked', just a straight forward question to an open ended statement.

A normal conversation may go something like this....

"OK, just don't expect this queen to be of the best quality"

"ah, ok, why is that?"

"well, its because........"

Alternatively it could go something like this.....

"OK, just don't expect this queen to be of the best quality"

"ah, ok, why is that?"

"Im not prepared to answer that without serving up a derogatory comment, have you not worked out I've kept bees for sometime and have no time to discuss things with mere beginners - at least not without indulging my superiority complex 1st"

"fair enough, whatever gets you through"

 

[rolande]

I've been advised to the contrary, that such queens are some of the best, certainly for fast build up.

Why are they be particularly good for fast build up?

 

[beecology]

Why are they be particularly good for fast build up?

I don't know myself, but was told that they are?

Have you got any thoughts on emergency queens (quality etc)?