Karin Alton(LASI) recommends vaping now

Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum

Help Support Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
B+ Without this information said:
:iagree:

Possibly sourced from the lowlands of the Rhine?
but to reiterate.....Without this information, I don't think anyone can say for certain.

Myttin da
 
I noticed quite a few people commenting about how aggressive they were (not just the 3 that she tried to suggest). This may be the result of their choice of source material or their open mating "strategy". It may even be the result of selecting for a single trait. Without this information, I don't think anyone can say for certain.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out as they expand their customer base.
I think most hobby beekeepers are more concerned that their bees are gentle.
Treating for varroa twice a year if needed is doable...Keeping difficult bees in a back garden is not.
 
....
Although she did say that they were originally A.m.m, I didn't get the answer I had hoped for (Proof of origin and the pedigree of their current breeding stock). This is disappointing as its the only way I can say if their strategy is sound.
I noticed quite a few people commenting about how aggressive they were (not just the 3 that she tried to suggest). This may be the result of their choice of source material or their open mating "strategy". It may even be the result of selecting for a single trait. Without this information, I don't think anyone can say for certain.

It’s possible that LASI are proceeding in the correct manner for the progression of viability and they do seem to have a large body of research in support of their methods. There is a paper published by Celle which seems to indicate a questioning of their own methods?

It remains doubtful if bee breeding can be compared with normal animal breeding even if adapted models are used to approach a realistic h². In a natural population of honeybee colonies the cloud of drones gives a solid basis for an extremely outcrossing system. Ebbersten (1996) makes clear that the depletion of genetic variation within a colony reduces its viability. The actual breeding according to the German studbook regulations for honeybee-breeding (DIB 2002) combined with the use of controlled mating results in a depletion of this kind of genetic variation. If the observed unexpected ranking of the daughter groups are a consequence of this depletion by decreasing the chance to have groups of bees able to react to ‘unexpected situation in the environment’ remains unclear. The literature depicting aspects of honeybee colony life depending on groups of unrelated supersisters is overwhelming (Jones 2004). Selection and breeding is done for the sake of a gain in the prediction of performance. Maybe that depletion of genetic variance in colonies counteracts the expected increased predictive value of selection. The fact, that about 30% of a group of colonies in a selection-program shows a unstable performance from year to year (Englert & van Praagh 1980) can be seen as another fact, suggesting a reconsidering of the way breeding is done with honeybees.
http://www.nev.nl/pages/publicaties/proceedings/nummers/17/87-91.pdf
 
There is a paper published by Celle which seems to indicate a questioning of their own methods?

That is quite an old paper that talks about the breeding system in use c2002. It is only really a discussion paper and, although it makes recommendations, it comes to no conclusions. The statistical model is actually a bit primitive now with the latest review only being implemented a couple of weeks ago.
Be very careful of quoting things like this out of context as there is a great deal of contextual information necessary to fully understand what they are refering to. I wonder how many beekeepers are even into z-scores.
Anyway, the effect of this review of the relationship matrix substantially increased the reliability (about double) and slightly increased the inbreeding coefficient of both queens and workers (at least on the pedigrees I have checked so far).

One discussion paper does not constitute a large body of research. Nor does a review of one breeders results relate to a completely different idea. LASI seem to exercise no control over the sires their queens mate with beyond a discredited drone flooding concept.
 
Last edited:
LASI seem to exercise no control over the sires their queens mate with beyond a discredited drone flooding concept.

I can't understand why they do that
Ratnieks is our only professor of apiculture ( isn't he?) you'd think they might have the resources and the will to inseminate their queens to exercise complete control over the mating.
Maybe the they are thinking that more joe bloggs beeks might buy their queens if they are convinced that their open mated daughters will be as "good" as their mothers. Or am I being cynical?
 
Well feedback from me will be tricky...since my LASI queen scarpered...she was a bit pathetic really....when I look back. She was a poor layer and spent far too much time yelling like a fishwife at her workers. I secretly think that they murdered her and left to live with more gentle bees in the Beehousies.
 
LASI seem to exercise no control over the sires their queens mate with beyond a discredited drone flooding concept.

Discredited in what context? Not everyone is after close control over mating and as in PBee's quote it's actually an advantage for bee colonies to be headed by queens mated with diverse drones.
I'm not up to your speed with matrix coefficients and z scores but I know a good bee when I see one and I've a fair idea about how to choose mothers to give a shooting chance at a high proportion of useful daughters when open mated in my area, I also recon however good these Germany carnies are their offspring would be pollution in the air for years to come only to fade away as their unsuitability to the environment bred them out, doesn't that tell you something about their long term sustainability?
Before everyone shoots at Ratnieks and the team at LASI the central theme of their breeding is done through II as I understand it and it's only some of hhe commercially available queens to the public that are open mated.
 
That is quite an old paper that talks about the breeding system in use c2002. It is only really a discussion paper and, although it makes recommendations, it comes to no conclusions. .....

.....One discussion paper does not constitute a large body of research. Nor does a review of one breeders results relate to a completely different idea. LASI seem to exercise no control over the sires their queens mate with beyond a discredited drone flooding concept.

It was published in 2006 and seems to be a review of 12 years breeding effort. It’s core point is also reflected to an extent in current work regarding immunocompetence and selection.
These findings suggest that genetic diversity is positively associated with immunocompetence in feral honey bee colonies, and that the benefits of genetic diversity are obscured in managed bees, perhaps as a result of artificial selection. We hypothesize that high genetic variability provides the raw material upon which natural selection acts and generates adaptive genotypes in unmanaged populations. Feral populations could be useful sources of genetic variation to use in breeding programs that aim to improve honey bee health. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10592-017-0942-x

On the drone flooding - It is a valid technique but it does probably depend, at least partially, on the fitness/size of the drones and the competition.
 
It was published in 2006 and seems to be a review of 12 years breeding effort. It’s core point is also reflected to an extent in current work regarding immunocompetence and selection.


Thats clever. I wish I could review work that hasn't been written yet.

In any case, the paper is just a smoke screen. It has nothing to do with the bees supplied by LASI
 
Last edited:
On the drone flooding - It is a valid technique but it does probably depend, at least partially, on the fitness/size of the drones and the competition.

What I mean is that it is not secure. You can only rely on instrumental insemination and island mating.

Nevertheless, drone flooding makes a certain kind of sense. If you can affect the proportion of drones that a virgin queen mates with, you exert a certain amount of influence on the progeny. How much influence is debatable. It depends on the competition from other sources and the fitness (age, diet, nurturing and susceptibility to pests and disease) of the drones you prefer the virgin to mate with. The more drone producing colonies you can provide, the higher you might expect the ratio of desirable to undesirable mates to be.
Don't get me wrong: I know its not completely reliable but I do use it on my open mated production colonies. I think most commercial queen raisers rely on this method too
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top