Filipe Salbany- Somerset Beekeepers' Association online event

Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum

Help Support Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
  • Like
Reactions: mbc
Why would it be quite impossible to attribute the shift to less fecund mite strains to the bees?

How could the bees possible influence how many daughters a female mite has underneath the cappings of a cell?
[/QUOTE]

If a bee can detect varroa inside a cell, but can detect more varroa more easily than less varroa, what would happen?
 
There’s this snippet

Our results suggest that mites exposed to the removal of prepupae or older brood due to hygiene are unlikely to produce viable mites if they invade new hosts soon after brood removal.

From this paper
https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFil...500/491-Kirrane--Asynchronous development.pdf

But the paper we are discussing was quite clear that there was no evidence of greater uncapping in the survivor colonies than in the control colonies. So it can't be that.
 
If you have not tried Murrays bees they are a pleasure to work with fro all beekeeping aspects, and there are plenty of other UK based queen importers and breeder looking to improve the quality of bees whether local, AMM or just good all-round hybrids.
I have two of Murray’s ordered for this year and two of Ceri’s overwintering. Really looking forward to the season
My Stöfen queen was disappointing but I have a daughter so watch this space.
 
I couldn't help noticing we were motoring along quite nicely, then you stalled....

No, I identified that the study didn't at all say what you said it said, and set out why in a detailed post. If you disagree with my conclusion I'd expect you to do the same, and I'm sure you'll be courteous enough to do so.
 
No, I identified that the study didn't at all say what you said it said, and set out why in a detailed post. If you disagree with my conclusion I'd expect you to do the same, and I'm sure you'll be courteous enough to do so.
Nono, we we had a continuous discussion from that point (#154) to #159, at which point you said:

" How could the bees possible influence how many daughters a female mite has underneath the cappings of a cell?"

And I asked, by way of leading you to the answer (since that's what we been doing for the last few posts):

" If a bee can detect varroa inside a cell, but can detect more varroa more easily than less varroa, what would happen?"

Do you not know what would happen?
 
Last edited:
Nono, we we had a continuous discussion from that point (#154) to #159, at which point you said:

" How could the bees possible influence how many daughters a female mite has underneath the cappings of a cell?"

And I asked, by way of leading you to the answer (since that's what we been doing for the last few posts):

" If a bee can detect varroa inside a cell, but can detect more varroa more easily than less varroa, what would happen?"

Do you not know what would happen?

In theory they would uncap the cells with more varroa in, if they can detect them more easily, I suppose. But this isn't what the study showed. So I am not sure of the relevance of your question. I'm trying to stick to what the scientific study you have provided us with actually showed, rather than conjecture.

By far the simplest explanation for what is observed in the study is either

a) the study was too small to give meaningful results (and lets face it, it was, with only 10 or so hives in each group I believe), so discussing it is just a distraction

or

b) if it did give meaningful results, those results suggest natural selection of mites, rather than any resistant quality in bees.
 
In theory they would uncap the cells with more varroa in, if they can detect them more easily, I suppose.
Don't forget you stated that the bees couldn't possibly influence the number of infants laid in the cells...

So: if the bees uncap and disable those cells contain more mites, on account of those cells holding more fecund females, which mites will be making the next generation of mites?

Will it be:

A) the dead more fecund mites, and their dead infants, or?

B) the live less fecund mites, and their offspring?
 
Don't forget you stated that the bees couldn't possibly influence the number of infants laid in the cells...

So: if the bees uncap and disable those cells contain more mites, on account of those cells holding more fecund females, which mites will be making the next generation of mites?

Will it be:

A) the dead more fecund mites, and their dead infants, or?

B) the live less fecund mites, and their offspring?

If this mechanism is the one you want to believe is working, that's fine. My point is just that there's no evidence for it in this study, and the authors themselves didn't even suggest it. They even go as far as to specifically rule out VSH as a contributory factor, and if what you are describing isn't VSH, I don't know what is.

I'm just a bit surprised that you have picked a study to go "ahah - look - VSH!", when the authors quite clearly say "no, not VSH, sorry"
 
I'm loving this ... but I'm running out of popcorn.

There is clearly something going on with some mites in some colonies in some places .... somehow. I'm not sure there is an answer to what at present and I doubt that anything other than a serious academcic study covering a large number of colonies is going to tell us .... and I rather doubt that funding will be forthcoming for something that, if anything, could detract from the need for treatment with a commercial varroacide...

You two may have to agree to agree ... or is it disagree to agree or agree to disagree ? :icon_204-2:
 
That's interesting. How can we find out more?

Remember I was a moderator on Bee-L right through the core of the small cell cult and had to 'mud wrestle' with Dee Lusby rather too often for my liking...so veteran of facing sideways moves.

Make an assertion.
It gets challenged and explanations or citations asked for.
Turn it round and instead of answering the question ask for proof from the questioner.

I want a citation for your claim that the UK is importing large number of (sic) unresistant queens.

For sure there are breeders available in the bargain basement if you want unimproved stock...but the REAL professionals supply the lions share that come in...and their JOB is to provide the market with GOOD stock. People can muddy the waters all they like with emotive rubbish about profits and greed as if doing a good job and making a profit were mutually exclusive. They are actually mutually essential in any sustainable model. UK trait...to consider that profit=greed=bad. If you want anyone to be around to give you supplies of any kind that a profit can be made is essential. Sustainable business gives a reasonable product and delivers a good product the customer finds to be fair value. Crap product (such as ill adapted queens) very quickly equates to no business.

For clarity however...from this side...*I* do not know where to find these studies...and if I did, as they have been paid for by a group of Buckfast breeders in Europe I would have to ask their permission to publish...which I do not know whether it would be forthcoming as this is a semi permanent work in progress. I know of one breeder alone who has poured over 100000 euros into it and I think there are at least 14 in the group. I was told of the results of three of Jolanta's breeder lines...two were excellent, one was good....but others were not sufficiently developed in hygiene to be of use to the programme in this narrow sense. However as beekeepers we work with a wide range of criteria and in our OWN programme a line does not get into use unless it tests well of the key desirable traits. Jolanta does her own testing but this is for 'in house' use as the method is just for our own guidance and would not be considered a suitable sample size or scientifically robust.

However...you can go to the websites of many of the breeders of Buckfast and Carnica over there and find they publish pedigrees, and also provide either testing data or links within their sites as to where it can be found. Go look...despite appearances I am a busy guy and here I am still at the office at gone 9pm on Sunday having been at work all day.

Interestingly the two leading lines that tested so well went on to have a good life in their breeding programme over there. The most popular was her J23, which they renumbered F25 over there to avoid confusion, was (in Italy) a fabulous honey getter with great brood and zero chalk. Last time I was over there I was told there were at least 3500 queens in colonies in Piemonte and Puglia carrying her genetics plus some in the south of France. Oddly she did not start out life as Buckfast...she was a queen from Aberdeenshire of carnica descent but about three generations on.
 
If this mechanism is the one you want to believe is working, that's fine. My point is just that there's no evidence for it in this study, and the authors themselves didn't even suggest it. They even go as far as to specifically rule out VSH as a contributory factor, and if what you are describing isn't VSH, I don't know what is.

I'm just a bit surprised that you have picked a study to go "ahah - look - VSH!", when the authors quite clearly say "no, not VSH, sorry"

I didn't. I dropped it in as a study that had relevance to the thread, band the point being made at the time, and for anyone actually interested in scientific work about the phenomena of natural selection for the fittest strains in honeybees.

So: you seem, though you have been careful not to say say so, that it is more likely, once the high-fecundity mites, adults and offspring have been killed, that the next generation of mites will be made from lower fecundity mites and their offspring.

Would we expect fecundity characteristics to be transmitted from parents to offspring?

And if they were, wouldn't we be able to say that, contrary to your statement, the bees were indeed having an influence on mite fecundity?
 
Remember I was a moderator on Bee-L right through the core of the small cell cult and had to 'mud wrestle' with Dee Lusby rather too often for my liking...so veteran of facing sideways moves.

Make an assertion.
It gets challenged and explanations or citations asked for.
Turn it round and instead of answering the question ask for proof from the questioner.

I want a citation for your claim that the UK is importing large number of (sic) unresistant queens.

For sure there are breeders available in the bargain basement if you want unimproved stock...but the REAL professionals supply the lions share that come in...and their JOB is to provide the market with GOOD stock. People can muddy the waters all they like with emotive rubbish about profits and greed as if doing a good job and making a profit were mutually exclusive. They are actually mutually essential in any sustainable model. UK trait...to consider that profit=greed=bad. If you want anyone to be around to give you supplies of any kind that a profit can be made is essential. Sustainable business gives a reasonable product and delivers a good product the customer finds to be fair value. Crap product (such as ill adapted queens) very quickly equates to no business.

For clarity however...from this side...*I* do not know where to find these studies...and if I did, as they have been paid for by a group of Buckfast breeders in Europe I would have to ask their permission to publish...which I do not know whether it would be forthcoming as this is a semi permanent work in progress. I know of one breeder alone who has poured over 100000 euros into it and I think there are at least 14 in the group. I was told of the results of three of Jolanta's breeder lines...two were excellent, one was good....but others were not sufficiently developed in hygiene to be of use to the programme in this narrow sense. However as beekeepers we work with a wide range of criteria and in our OWN programme a line does not get into use unless it tests well of the key desirable traits. Jolanta does her own testing but this is for 'in house' use as the method is just for our own guidance and would not be considered a suitable sample size or scientifically robust.

However...you can go to the websites of many of the breeders of Buckfast and Carnica over there and find they publish pedigrees, and also provide either testing data or links within their sites as to where it can be found. Go look...despite appearances I am a busy guy and here I am still at the office at gone 9pm on Sunday having been at work all day.

Interestingly the two leading lines that tested so well went on to have a good life in their breeding programme over there. The most popular was her J23, which they renumbered F25 over there to avoid confusion, was (in Italy) a fabulous honey getter with great brood and zero chalk. Last time I was over there I was told there were at least 3500 queens in colonies in Piemonte and Puglia carrying her genetics plus some in the south of France. Oddly she did not start out life as Buckfast...she was a queen from Aberdeenshire of carnica descent but about three generations on.

Long post: I got as far as 'good stock

Did you offer a definition for your keyterm 'good' lower down, and if so, did it include qualities that obviate the need for varroa treatment?

My money is on 'No' and 'No'.

And on you trying to wriggle out of admitting that.
 
Yep....just like the old days. I could enjoy this!

Cite your sources about the 'unresistant' queens...you asserted.....I challenged...its YOU who needs to provide the answers.

I do not use any of our test results in UK marketing, they are in house tests. Want results we will send you queens and YOU pay for the tests...we are content with what we have.. We do pass our friends VSH Buckfast to clients and cannot get enough of them...the potential UK market is actually pretty big.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top