Evidence-based beekeeping

[Talking With Bees]

I read The Barefoot Beekeeper a few weeks ago.

In the book the author says things like “... I have read, [Varroa mite] cannot reproduce above about 92F (33C)” (p. 17) and “according to the observations of a several long-time top bar beekeepers, these smaller cells [built on wild comb] appear to be less attractive to Varroa mites.”

The book made me curious about the science behind Evidenced Based Beekeeping and I would welcome your thoughts on what I found out.

The use of icing sugar in reducing varroa was the first scientific paper I came across ...

Thanks for any input.

 

[Poly Hive]

Icing sugar has been rubbished in trials as has small cells so where next for the faithful?

PH

 

[scuttlefish]

JAR also had an article a few years ago about excessive sugar dusting causing problem with open brood - 2005 I think...

 

[madasafish]

TBH supporters also claim their hives resist varroa better than normal hives.

I have to evidence to prove it's a claim which stands up to no scrutiny..

 

[Poly Hive]

Translate that one?

PH

 

[Chris Luck]

Leaving bees alone seems to work best regardless of the type of hive, although generally in my experience my Dadants perform better than my TBH's and Warrés.

The truth is that the bee keeping world is full of assumptions and learnt myths just like any other subject.

Chris

 

[MattC]

I suspect 'evidence based beekeeping' is about where 'evidence based medicine' was 30 years ago. Plenty of research out there, but no systematic approach to reviewing the evidence and no great sense of obligation to incorporate it into practice.

And at one level, I'd prefer it to stay that way. It's a hobby. I don't like bringing work home with me. I like it that you can ask 2 beekeepers one question and get 3 different answers. As long as what I'm doing is not obviously wrong or harmful to my bees, I'm happy. If I was a commercial beek, it would be different of course.

 

[Tom Bick]

I have this year after experimenting over the past couple of years converted my framed hives to foundationless and as a result expected a greater problem with varroa given the high drone comb in the hives its only this season but I have not seen a high load actually quite the opposite?

One year does not prove anything and I may yet have a fall but it will be interesting all the same how the next few years pan out. I have only in the past treated with thymol and occasionally a bit of lactic acid and intend to continue but will be interesting to see if I can reduce treatments.

I also have a TBH I got this back from a client this year after they decided they wanted a national so I got the TBH and bees. I populated the TBH last year with bees and when I asked the client what treatments she did last year she said non she had hardly any drop on the tray so never bothered. I have yet to check the drop on this hive so who knows but the hive is thriving.

Its early days but I think perhaps there is something in this natural comb? I have a theory the drones may play a part, they take the varroa and protect the workers and the workers see the drones as dispensable?

On a couple of hives early in the year during changing to just wired frames and the bees had established on them and built the comb I got a good few drones with deformed wings that was a worry if I had that then what would I have in the hive at the end of the year?? well I have not seen any more since or evidence of high load.

I see that this years thymol treatment will be interesting.

 

[oliver90owner]

“according to the observations of a several long-time top bar beekeepers, these smaller cells [built on wild comb] appear to be less attractive to Varroa mites.”

Evidence based? How much more woolly a statement than that would you believe as conclusive? It only 'appears' so. I would not take that as conclusive. Sounds more like a suggestion to me.

I read advertising hype very carefully. Some are brainwashed by the simplest selected 'so called' facts.

 

[Into the lions den]

Hear hear!

Like some other threads we have had recently there have been 'factoids' advanced all wreathed in weasel words, and some, in particular the inexperienced, swallow the writers bathwater and never notice the 'might', the 'perhaps', the 'possibly', the 'anecdotally', etc etc etc

There are writers who have some firm personal beliefs, which is perfectly fine, but they go way too far with the attachment of merit to their particular way of seeing life and doing things. Because it fits with their beliefs they are quite happy to ignore the work of some great researchers, and advance things like small cell and natural comb (only cited as they were things that were raised early in the thread) as the cure for all evils.

Will many of them be around to give you a new colony when following their guidance loses you your bees? Very few of them, they almost invariably hide behind 'you did not do it properly' or things like that, and then you can see the reason for the weasel words. Its their pre played 'get out of jail free' card.

Scratch the surface of the primary proponents of a system ( ie Arizona) and you sometimes find a can of worms and ulterior motives lurking in the bushes. Some are well meaning but way up the wrong tree (FGMO?). Some are well meaning and totally off their trolley.

Suspect *I* am in the last group, trying to make living at this in 2011/12!
Where WOULD I be without my Bayer cheques! <G>

 

[Walrus]

Here is a bit of evidence:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5131613/Stuff/German_Bee_Monitoring_Project.pdf

which leads to the following conclusions:

From the results of this study we can deduce a general recommendation for beekeepers who want to successfully bring their colonies through the winter season: an effective treatment against Varroa destructor is the best life insurance for honey bee colonies. In addition, wintering strong colonies headed by young queens will improve the chances of the colonies to stay alive over winter. Following these recommendations will not generate eternal honey bee colonies but will definitely reduce colony winter mortality.

None of that wimpy sitting on the fence there then!

 

[Andy Duff]

evidence based beekeeping is no basis for beekeeping at all, it is either conjecture or hypothesis.
To be valid it must be demonstrated to have worked initially and subsiquently by the claimant and then tested independantly by others using the same technique. If the results tally then there is a basis to test it in general conditions (this does not apply to astro physics were if the results do not match they introduce a new factor-dark matter)

I have discovered evidence and come to the conclusion that keeping bees causes climate change. I have written proof that every time I decide to inspect my hives it rains QED.

 

[Into the lions den]

Here is a bit of evidence:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5131613/Stuff/German_Bee_Monitoring_Project.pdf

which leads to the following conclusions:

None of that wimpy sitting on the fence there then!

That study has been about for a while now and seems to be one of the better ones, looking at the real world we operate in.

There are a lot of excellent studies out of Germany.

The bottom line is, in Europe at least, look at your own beekeeping first before blaming external factors. Most colony loss comes from that. Top of the heap is poor varroa control, from which flows all manner of other issues. The other side of the coin is that *excessive* chemical based varroa control can also be a problem, as reflected in the contaminants found. It all involves treading a fine line.

 

[Finman]

.
Evidence based,sounds first good but then real nonsense

i go to make my daily poo.....do i need evindences.
I am hungry, do I need evidences.

I tell about my experiences. Where I have my evidences.



I I have offered he lots of university research links and I wonder if someone have openen them, readed and understood.

That guy "scientific beekeeper" is humbug because he himself does not make science. He reads good reports and write them out with his long telling style. it is sometimes very difficult what he is informing. He started to write about things 2006. 6 years science!

One of the best was David Cushman. He had intelligence and I can trust what he says.

Best of all are MAAREC letters Australian reports are good and Canadians.

Commercial inform letter have lots mistake on purpose. For example chalck brood will be healed with they stuffs. They varroa stuffs kill mites inside cappings butt the whole writer's country is in troubles.

when I meet mistakes in basic experience things, it is easy to see what level writer he is.

.

 

[Finman]

.
Interesting has been the gene mapping of honeybees.
There were great articles about the origin of European honeybee.
They were developed in Europe and went spreaded to Asia.

After mapping European honey bee derives from Africa. it arrived in two waves.
First Italian type bees and later Black Bee type mellifera mellifera.

Killer bee genes have been found in the middle of USA which never have been In South America.
Genes have imported directly from Africa.

Almost fun has bee the spread of CCD. It is oly in USA but authors have found it from their country and and from so many other places.

Then the newspaper men. They seems to write what ever to get "Hollywood type wow" to their news.
Often the original research has been published 4 y ago but new and new versions pop up in news.

.

 

[rook66]

"JAR also had an article a few years ago about excessive sugar dusting causing problem with open brood - 2005 I think..."

True, Icing sugar and flour will dry up open brood.

 

[Finman]

.
Sugar dusting was invented in Helsinki University 10 years ago. Perhaps somewhere else too.
One evidence that no Finmen uses it. We have here very serious results if we do not have effective methods, -and we have.

Even long experinence professionals suffer from varroa. Its effecst have changec during 25 years.
Huge hives vanish off allready in Autumn.

Some say that they have never trouples but I do not trust on those lucky guys.
Varroa has changes its harm level. It was easy to handle 20 y ago but now it is serious.

Our expert said this spring. "ok, now we will stop talking. i go to look 150 hives yard where every single hive is dead." yes and 150 hives owner is not a beginner.
.

 

[Chris Luck]

I don't use anything Finman and I don't have any problems - that's a fact, my bees are fine with no related diseases, illnesses or other issues.

Anyone is welcome to come and see them.

Chris

 

[Tom Bick]

Chris do you use foundation in your hives.

 

[Brosville]

I think this is rapidly becoming hilarious, we have the archly "conventional" commercial beekeepers reporting hefty varroa problems, along with a lot of vitriol about those of us who choose to be trying to do things a little differently, and we also have someone who doesn't treat, or submit his hives to unnecessary intrusive inspection who has no problems.....

Which rather begs the question "why?" - is it hive type or management techniques? - I suspect it is mostly the latter - I've read into the matter widely, and the common thread in those who have no problems is that they leave the brood nest alone, and don't over-manipulate their colonies, which suggests to me that it is the "conventional" brigade who are getting it wrong somewhere.

My suspicion is that there is a lot more to "Nestduftwärmebindung" than meets the eye, and to keep disturbing it is counter productive - in the meantime I think it appropriate for those who trumpet loudest about their perception of shortcomings in (more) natural beekeeping should perhaps put their own house in order before attacking other more successful methods, perhaps learning from them where they're getting it wrong.......