New queen, old brood, when will she lay?

[ugcheleuce]

Hello everyone

Myth or fact? If you put a new, unmated queen into a queenless colony, the new queen will not start laying if there is still existing closed brood.

My two main beekeeping mentors say opposite things in this regard and I'm wondering if you can tell me whether the above belief is myth or fact (according to you). Or, if you know that it is a fable and you know where the fable came from, or know of a URL that says so, please tell me.

Thanks
Samuel

 

[oliver90owner]

Myth.

Think about it.

Natural swarm. Queen emerges 8 days later and will not lay for about another ten days minimum. That is eighteen days and any brood will have emerged in 21 days, so there is a very good chance that most, or all, brood will have emerged before the queen gets into lay. And those are minimum figures for her to startvlaying.

I would suggest that is where the myth originates. Now if you introduce a virgin to a colony with a laying queen, there must be a very good reason for so doing? Personally can't think of one so perhaps you can? Certainly won't happen often. So myth!

 

[Finman]

.
i can tell it is a strange myth.

2 days ago I gove a new queen to the colony and it started to lay at once.

But in some cases it is like a fact.
If you kill the queen, you get emergency queens. Its brood cycle is 10 days.
Then from emerging to mating and laying it is minimum 10 days. Together it is worker's brood cycle 21 days.

 

[ugcheleuce]

Queen emerges 8 days later and will not lay for about another ten days... so there is a very good chance that most, or all, brood will have emerged before the queen gets into lay. ... I would suggest that is where the myth originates.

That's what I thought as well (if it is a myth).

Now if you introduce a virgin to a colony with a laying queen, there must be a very good reason for so doing?

No, my question relates to introducing an unmated queen into a queenless colony. The queenless colony may still have unemerged brood in it (e.g. if the beekeeper killed the queen, or if the colony is the result of split).

The beek who says it's a myth is an amateur beekeeper with about ten hives and lots of book knowledge, and the beek who says it's a fact is a professional beekeeper with hundreds of hives and decades of experience.

 

[ugcheleuce]

Two days ago I gave a new queen to the colony and it started to lay at once.

Note that my question relates to unmated queens, not mated queens. I'm not sure if you mean the same.

 

[Finman]

Note that my question relates to unmated queens, not mated queens. I'm not sure if you mean the same.

I surely note. I understand perfectly the idea because that phenomenom has been under my eyes.
Oliver and I explained how the idea arises.

 

[Finman]

No, my question relates to introducing an unmated queen into a queenless colony. The queenless colony may still have unemerged brood in it (e.g. if the beekeeper killed the queen, or if the colony is the result of split).

.

Supercede queen is born when old queen is laying. Virgin starts to lay after 10 days if weathers are good. And often old and young queen lays at same time.

Or in the hive where excluder hinders them to kill each other.

There is no mechanism which hinders virgins start to lay except the weather.