Queens, Drone Congregation Areas, and the English Channel.

[OXFORDBEE]

If you can point me in the direction of the paper I'm more than happy to read it, but I'm quite happy with the paper I've posted as the analysis is sound.

If I was running a commercial operation for extracted honey, the effort required to keep going down stacks of supers vs a quick lift of a crownboard to see if the bees need more supers would encourage me to top super. I would be able to run more stocks of bees (and get more honey) with top supering as I would have more time available to manage more hives.

 

[Nic Rhodes]

so what do do the peer reviewed scientific papers say? edit not the first to ask for a paper!

 

[beebreeder]

Back to DCA's
For anyone of a practical nature and time to spare read this item http://beeinformed.org/2011/08/drone-fishing/

 

[OXFORDBEE]

Yeah that one said that but there was another that came down on the side of underneath. *shrug*

Some good advice here: http://www.beehive.org.nz/tips-and-advice/tips-advice-index?q=tips-and-advice/taa-supering-up

PH

Thanks for that. It was useful and had the text:

Supers are usually added on top of the previous super. This is the easiest way to put on supers as less lifting is required and you can easily check the existing super to see if another is required. Bottom supering involves lifting one or more nearly full supers off and adding the new super directly above the brood nest. It demands a lot more work, which is only warranted if supering has been delayed and combs in the top super have been completely capped over.

It is almost impossible to state how often or how many to super a hive, as honey flows vary from year to year and region to region. A general rule is to add enough supers to last until the next planned visit. This may be one, two, or even more, supers depending on the flow. In a good honey flow, strong hives can fill a super in one to two weeks, or even two days, though this is rare. Depending on the flow you may need up to four or five supers above the brood chamber.

 

[OXFORDBEE]

And for drone congregation areas:

http://www.beeculture.com/storycms/index.cfm?cat=Story&recordID=603

 

[TBRNoTB]

What a short-sighted post. And for info the author only started out being a member of the BBKA at local level and went on to do academic study on bees after an army career I believe before emigrating to Spain. Can't believe that forumers are picking on a slightly awkward sentence and taking ridiculous and irrelevant potshots at the BBKA once again. Actually, I can. Sigh...

 

[TBRNoTB]

I know the discussion has got quite academic, but as a newbie I was wondering why you needed to keep seven supers one one hive? It was obviously a strong colony but.....any longer and he would need a ladder!

 

[BeeJayBee]

...it is an interesting subject.

Can we discuss it some more.

Thanks everybody for the other links.

With worker bee encouragement [the Queen] leaves the hive and flies some distance to what is known as a drone congregation area (DCA), where she mates on the wing with up to 20–30 drone bees, but usually fewer.​

I had understood that to mean that the maximum number recorded ranged between 20 and 30 drones, with the norm being fewer - but obviously at least one.

5. Drones can make several trips to a DCA in an afternoon, returning to the hive to refuel when necessary. Each mating flight lasts about 30 mins.
6. The number of drones in a DCA can vary enormously, from hundreds to thousands.
7. Usually, 7 to 11 drones will mate with a queen. About 90 million sperm will be deposited in her oviducts, and a mixture of about 7 million of them will be stored in her spermatheca

A few other spoken-out-loud and slightly disjointed thoughts, about drones really, as well as fairly basic genetics and inheritance.

If beekeepers, by using pre-formed foundation or routine destruction of cells, control the numbers of drones (or drone cells) to either attempt to defeat varroa or reduce the numbers of non-productive bees in the hive, they destroy sick ones as well as stopping potentially healthy drones from developing.

Some beekeepers are using 'drone trap frames' http://scientificbeekeeping.com/fighting-varroa-biotechnical-tactics-ii/ that entice the colony to produce drone cells, that are then destroyed along with any varroa.

I've read that parasitised drones aren't likely to be able to make the mating flight anyway, because they're weaker and less fertile than healthy ones. Destroying healthy drones reduces the numbers of drones that can mate with a queen so, perhaps, reduces the gene pool and might even remove the potential for any developing varroa-resistance to be passed on.

When a hive becomes queenless, for whatever reason, workers often lay eggs that develop into drones - it's a way of continuing that colony's genes when those drones take off to a DCA and mate.

For bees, and bee genetics, in general and in the long term, is it a good thing for a beekeeper to control the numbers of drones? Does it strengthen or weaken the local gene pool?

Does drone culling, if carried out ruthlessly, either routinely or to try to control varroa, make it less likely that a young queen's mating flight will be successful, or doesn't it make any difference because the varroa infected drones probably wouldn't be up there with her?

Back to DCA's
For anyone of a practical nature and time to spare read this item http://beeinformed.org/2011/08/drone-fishing/

What a thing to do! Probably not something I'll try though.

I know the discussion has got quite academic, but as a newbie I was wondering why you needed to keep seven supers one one hive? It was obviously a strong colony but.....any longer and he would need a ladder!

Hope it's okay, I've started a new thread for this question because it could lead to a lot of discussion

It's here http://www.beekeepingforum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=195208#post195208

 

[jakethedog]

Hi BeeJoyful, a nice save of what could be a good thread.

 

[jakethedog]

something else to throw in (without derailing the thread) as a side thought is the idea put forward by Roger Hoopingarner that regular drone culling to control varroa could actually be selecting for strains which favour worker brood.

 

[BeeJayBee]

Hi BeeJoyful, a nice save of what could be a good thread.

Even so, I seem to have managed to kill it. I hope somebody will answer your question though.

 

[jakethedog]

Even so, I seem to have managed to kill it. I hope somebody will answer your question though.

mine wasn't really a question -just an aside on the back of your last post. personally I'd like to see the subject of congregation areas expanded.

 

[Poly Hive]

I have always understood that drones from workers were sterile and didn't mate.

When queen rearing is discussed and I am guilty of this too, drones are rarely mentioned.

However to state the obvious with no drones the very best of virgins are useless.

Coupled with queen rearing should be the encouragement of drone production from the best hives you have to help ensure those virgins that have taken so much effort to produce are mated well.

PH

 

[susbees]

I have always understood that drones from workers were sterile and didn't mate.

The eggs are unfertilised (therefore drone) and in smaller cells (worker). IF they hatch one per cell then there is no reason to assume they are unviable sexually...just weedier so unlikely to compete.

BUT the "king cells" I took apart in a DLQ colony last year (unmated queen) had two larvae so would likely have died. Very much a last ditch attempt at adding their stamp to the gene pool!

 

[BeeJayBee]

mine wasn't really a question -just an aside on the back of your last post. personally I'd like to see the subject of congregation areas expanded.

So would I. it's fascinating.

I have always understood that drones from workers were sterile and didn't mate.

I've read somewhere that a tiny percentage of drones in any colony are from worker-laid eggs. And there's an article about Thelytoky (new word for me) ... the ability to rear workers and queens utilising the eggs from laying workers, or in some cases virgin queens on Dave Cushman's site http://tinyurl.com/88gjmfo

In my mind it doesn't make sense for worker egg-laying to evolve and be controlled within a queenright colony, kick in fairly rapidly when queen pheromones vanish and/or emergency queen cells might have failed, and then be totally useless.

If that was the case then surely it would make more sense for all the workers to simply leave a queenless colony, and try to find a nearby one that will accept them, but that doesn't seem to happen. They invest time and energy to rear drones that, as susbees says, are probably quite small, but at least it's an attempt to continue the genetic line.

... BUT the "king cells" I took apart in a DLQ colony last year (unmated queen) had two larvae so would likely have died. Very much a last ditch attempt at adding their stamp to the gene pool!

*Scurries off to read something about "king cells" ....

When queen rearing is discussed and I am guilty of this too, drones are rarely mentioned.

However to state the obvious with no drones the very best of virgins are useless.

Coupled with queen rearing should be the encouragement of drone production from the best hives you have to help ensure those virgins that have taken so much effort to produce are mated well.

Exactly!

I suppose that's what I'm getting at too. And also the impact on future generations of bees, especially if, for example, all careful beekeepers are systematically destroying drones in their hives, including those that are then found to be relatively varroa free ... It seems to be a bit of a Catch 22 situation really.

I now know a bit about the 'island reared queens', where they're sure of the gene pool and presumably do a lot of drone-rearing too, but it's a rare situation for breeders to be in. Or is it?

 

[RoofTops]

I know a beefarmer who is doing his own queen rearing on a tip of land poking out into the sea. Inland, he has put something like 50 colonies spread around to flood the area with drones of the type he wants. The drones come from colonies headed by queens he bought unmated from Denmark and they are spread several miles inmland. The queens were bought unmated to save cost and after locally mating these queens with no particular type of drone he now has a source of drones of the characteristics he wants - the drones of course not inheriting any genes from the drones their mothers mated with.

The system is not totally foolproof but it seems as if his drones are dominating the area around the queen mating apiary.

 

[Poly Hive]

With the numbers that will work of course but...

An old friend of mine in Ross-Shire was doing rather well with AMM until another person started up with Italians. Both were/are bee farmers and my friend was by far the bigger of the two. However the intro of the other strain stuffed my friends position completely. The crosses were not nice and not great workers either.

PH

 

[mbc]

I know a beefarmer who is doing his own queen rearing on a tip of land poking out into the sea. Inland, he has put something like 50 colonies spread around to flood the area with drones of the type he wants. The drones come from colonies headed by queens he bought unmated from Denmark and they are spread several miles inmland. The queens were bought unmated to save cost and after locally mating these queens with no particular type of drone he now has a source of drones of the characteristics he wants - the drones of course not inheriting any genes from the drones their mothers mated with.

The system is not totally foolproof but it seems as if his drones are dominating the area around the queen mating apiary.

The "ring of steel" theory of flooding an area with desirable drones to the exclusion of all others is only ever partially successful. I think this is mostly down to wonderlust in drones and their easy acceptance into almost any receiving hive. Drones can quite easily "leapfrog" over vast distances to spread their mothers genes.

 

[RoofTops]

I agree, it is not totally foolroof, but his hives go out to about 3 or 4 miles from the queen breeding site and because a lot of the area is either military owned or farmland he knows there are no other bees inside his "area". Of course drones will fly more than this distance but numerically his drones would be expected to predominate.

I suppose the problem is only time will tell and this was his first year. It is possible drones which fly say 8 miles might be expected to be faster and fitter than his couch potato drones and thus be more succeful mating with the queens. Which begs the question of course of whether queens can choose which drone they mate with.

Or perhaps the visitors from far away will be too kna****ed to compete?

 

[susbees]

With the numbers that will work of course but...

An old friend of mine in Ross-Shire was doing rather well with AMM until another person started up with Italians. Both were/are bee farmers and my friend was by far the bigger of the two. However the intro of the other strain stuffed my friends position completely. The crosses were not nice and not great workers either.

PH

Hence why four of us have had to do an initial three day II course....training in progress...