Queenless hives?

[Birnambeekeeper]

I have 2 hives both same site which were in swarming mode. I did one AS but took the old queen to a new site leaving one cell in the original hive. The other cells I used to make an exta nuc and successfully requeened another hive. The other hive the cells were hatching in front of me and I took out the queens I could find leaving at least one behind. thing is both the original hives still have no eggs after over 3 weeks. I've already requeened one with a bought in queen (uk born). Could they both have virgin queen in? I have looked hard and can usually find the queen.. Thanks a lot for any replies

 

[Midland Beek]

A virgin queen is difficult to find. They are quite usually not settled on the comb like an egg-laying queen.

Given it it the height of summer and we have had good weather, you would hope to see eggs pretty soon.

A test frame should put you straight in respect of queenlessness..

 

[666bees]

I have exactly the same, split one hive after a swarm. One now has a laying queen and the other must have a virgin queen in because a test frame of eggs produced no queen cells. Would give them a bit more time. fingers crossed for you.

 

[Birnambeekeeper]

Cheers for the advice I think I will try the test frame of eggs. Hopefully have some queens hatching this week so will need to check before trying to requeen

 

[drstitson]

this year 3 weeks isn't a long wait for a virgin to mate and start laying - whilst a test frame won't do any harm you can wait a couple more weeks.

 

[oliver90owner]

must have a virgin queen in because a test frame of eggs produced no queen cells

Just have reiterate the true fact about test frames. The only definitive result is Q-.

The alternative result means nothing. It could be there is a queen present orit could mean there is not. Certainly some experience in the subject could lead one towards either result, but the fact remains - telling everyone that no queen cells drawn means Q+ is erroneous and should not be put on a forum such as this without qualification, where new beeks can so easily be deceived.

RAB

 

[enrico]

Please please be patient. Books give you the wrong idea and queens can take ages to get mated and laying. Give her time! We sometimes do no good by trying to guess if she is there or not!
E

 

[Birnambeekeeper]

I've requeened one hive (before I posted) but I realize this might have been a waste of time now! The other I will leave as suggested - weather not been great up here. Thanks. mark

 

[Birnambeekeeper]

just to say both hives now with laying queens and my bought in queen presumed dead! It just took some time and presumably due to the bad weather. Hopefully they will survive the winter now..

 

[666bees]

Is it wrong to say a hive with no queen will produce queen cells if given some eggs then RAB?

 

[Erichalfbee]

I can't answer for RAB (wouldn't dare ) but one of our BKA members last year had a split given to them where the queen cells "disappeared" and it took four weekly introductions of test frames before a queen cell was made and a queen was raised.

 

[666bees]

Erica what would be the point of putting test frames of fertile eggs in then. Or am I missing the point. (sorry will keep believing my instructor). Would think your members case is not the norm.

 

[oliver90owner]

Is it wrong to say a hive with no queen will produce queen cells if given some eggs then RAB?

Yes, it is wrong. A colony with no queen may or may not produce queen cells, if given a test frame. Could do but might not. For most circumstances, probably they will. The obvious exception is where laying workers have taken over the laying dutuies of the non-existent queen; in this instance the queenless colony may not raise queen cells with a test frame. Therfore your statement fails as you have stated 'they will' when clearly they may not.

What I have indicated is that if queen cells are not produced the colony could be either Q+ or Q-. So you cannot tell from that result.

The other result of adding a test frame is that of them building queen cells. That would indicate Q-.

I suppose in a very few rare instances, the bees might sieze the opportunity to raise a supercedure queen, if a queen was present and a dud. The likliehood of that happening is close enough, for all practical purposes, to zero.

You did not say that above, in post #3. You said quote 'the other must have a virgin queen in because a test frame of eggs produced no queen cells.'

That was simply not true. Knowing the other details, you may be quite confident, but your statement does not stand firm on it's merit alone. Passing that information to new beeks can clearly mislead them.

On this one you need to be precise. The only result that has any credence is that where queen cells are drawn.

RAB

 

[Drew]

Just have reiterate the true fact about test frames. The only definitive result is Q-.

The other result of adding a test frame is that of them building queen cells. That would indicate Q-.

I suppose in a very few rare instances, the bees might sieze the opportunity to raise a supercedure queen, if a queen was present and a dud. The likliehood of that happening is close enough, for all practical purposes, to zero.

You did not say that above, in post #3. You said quote 'the other must have a virgin queen in because a test frame of eggs produced no queen cells.'

That was simply not true. Knowing the other details, you may be quite confident, but your statement does not stand firm on it's merit alone. Passing that information to new beeks can clearly mislead them.

On this one you need to be precise. The only result that has any credence is that where queen cells are drawn.

RAB

So stating (forcefully) that something is definitive and then a while later that it is indicative (even if strongly indicative) isn't confusing for people?

Double standards anyone?

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Is it me or what? - but I understand exactly what Rab is trying to say.
Test frame in, queen cells built = no queen present.
Test frame in no queen cells built = queen may or may not be present.
Therefore when test frame put in the only definite, positive result is when queen cells are built therefore no queen present (assume failing queen as no queen also! simples

 

[666bees]

"Could do but might not. For most circumstances, probably they will." your quote Rab. So I'll go along with my original answer to the question, and yes it would have been a virgin queen in my hive since the hive was queenless. So I finish the reply by saying Rab may be the cleverest bee keeper in the world but may not. Could be the most argumentative though.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Erica what would be the point of putting test frames of fertile eggs in then. Or am I missing the point. (sorry will keep believing my instructor). Would think your members case is not the norm.

Sorry, 666bees, should have worded it properly. They weren't test frames. She was trying to establish a colony and get the bees to raise themselves a queen. It was a split from a stronger colony with a carefully chosen queen cell on one frame. This queen cell disappeared and I presume the bees tore it down. There never were any eggs apart from the ones introduced and on the last frame added they did indeed produce queen cells

 

[oliver90owner]

666,

You just carry on giving rubbish information to all the new beeks who read this forum (and others). They will lap it up. You can then sort them out when, after leaving their colony with laying workers - because they think there is a queen in residence - and the colony is doomed.

I will finish my conrtribution to this thread (well, at least this part of the thread) by saying I would be the first to admit that there are many others with much more experience, and who are better (and cleverer, as you put it) beekeepers than I.

However, I would certainly not put myself in the bottom bracket either, and have no intention of joining that group by giving out the wrong detail - especially where it is very important (always an issue of the well being of the clony if it happens to really need a test frame). BTW the definition of 'definitive' is: Final, decisive, unconditional; most authoritative.

If you have never seen a queenless colony that does not build queen cells when given a test frame you should read the appropriate forum threads - those of us who have.

Ask Polyhive, Hivemaker or a few others. Perhaps they will be able to mend your ways.

 

[Poly Hive]

Sorry Rab but no, I have better things to do.

PH

 

[666bees]

I never give rubbish information on purpose, I for one only ever give positive information, you may technically be right but in general I am. I believe Polyhive has said before that laying workers are extremely rare. But you are one of those ars.. that has to be argumentitive on a forum but would never say it to some ones face. Dont bring other people into it because you may find they dont agree with you but cannot be bothered to particpate.