Question about sugar roll

[bobba]

Hello everyone.

I am new to this forum and to bee keeping. I got first nuc this year.

I want to monitor for verroa, and understand my 3 options are:

1. Alcohol roll
2. Sugar roll
3. Or count mite drop with an OMF

From what I have read, I “believe” the Alcohol roll produces the most reliable/useful numbers.

However, I am hesitant about killing 100s of my precious little bees with an alcohol wash. Particularly why my colony is still working hard to draw new comb.

I know some people sprinkle sugar directly into the hives as a treatment for verroa, I understand this to be one of the less effective treatments. But could I use it as a method to monitor mite levels?

So; I put a Vaseline coated board under the OMF, open the hive, sprinkle the sugar in. Then give it 48h, remove the board and count the mites.

Has anyone got any experience with this as a monitoring method?

Is the sugar in the hive method harmful/disruptive to the bees?

Would it be any better than a standard mite drop count?

Or am I fussing way too much about a few 100 bees, and should just get on with the Alcohol roll?

Thanks in advance.

 

[eltalia]

Right now - dpending on your management success - the lay of queens
should be well ramping up into maximum numbers, likewise for VD
reproduction.
So it follows those few hundred 'sacrifices' are no problem.
Wash, and so be sure to be sure.

Bill

 

[SDM]

I prefer to vape oxalic acid and multiply the 48hr drop by 5.
Why kill bees when you can kill mites and get the same answer.
Plus it's quicker for me.

 

[eltalia]

I prefer to vape oxalic acid and multiply the 48hr drop by 5.
Why kill bees when you can kill mites and get the same answer.
Plus it's quicker for me.

The "treat anyway whatever" method. More of as you say "convienience"
than any applied beekeeping, as a science (Apiculture).

Bill

 

[Finman]

.
Sugar roll does not mean that you put powdered sugar into the hive over the bees.

It means that you put certain amount of bees into a jar and there you put sugar.
Look advices from Internet.

 

[Madge]

As Finman said, sugar roll is giving an estimate of the amount of Varroa in the colony, and sugar-dusting is just codswallop (an ineffectual method of treating Varroa).

Of the three methods you mentioned, I suggest a sugar-roll. A good video explaining how to do it is here: https://youtu.be/OE457iSYXM4

 

[bobba]

Thanks for all the answers.

I understand that Sugar roll does not mean that you put powdered sugar into the hive over the bees.

I should have given the thread a better name...

I only have 5 fully drawn frames, and a gang of seagulls has been hanging out around my hive in all the bad weather. I have seen them eat 100s of my bees. They seem to have cleared off now the weather has picked up again. So I want to avoid killing more bees if I can.

If it was a strong colony, then I could justify killing some for the greater good.

I have a OA vape on order, so am tempted by SDMs vape then count approach. Partly so I can test out the new toy! I know the treat first approach is arguably bad practice.

Thanks again.

 

[Madge]

... I understand that Sugar roll does not mean that you put powdered sugar into the hive over the bees. ...

No - I can see you considered sugar-dusting as part of varroa-board monitoring - although I've never heard of anybody combining the two.

Varroa-board monitoring can give you a rough idea of the Varroa load, but a sugar roll is more accurate, and it doesn't kill the bees. You just return the ghostly white-dusted bees to the hive, where they'll soon be cleaned up again.

So, in answer to your question, I think a sugar roll (or sugar shake) is the best and easiest method, and no bees are harmed.

 

[Hivemaker.]

No - I can see you considered sugar-dusting as part of varroa-board monitoring - although I've never heard of anybody combining the two.

Kitta, Randy Oliver did some tests, think he called it the accelerated mite drop of monitoring using powdered sugar, this is not the actual article, but I have read the updated version a while back, somewhere in his archive.

The application for sugar dusting that I most appreciate is as an “accelerator” for mite drop onto a dry board set under a screened bottom. This technique gives a quick, relatively accurate (data to follow in the next installment) assessment of the level of mite infestation in a colony. I call it the “shoot first and ask questions later” method. You eliminate a substantial proportion of the phoretic mites, and then after a few minutes, you’ve got an idea of the level to which your bees are infested!

I’ve used this method extensively over the past two seasons. Dust-accelerated mite drop has the great advantage of giving reasonably accurate results in as little as 10 minutes! Two of us working together can test yards of 36 colonies in about 20 minutes. If you are selecting for mite-resistant breeder queens, this method is great! I will cover the technique more thoroughly in the next installment.

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/pow...weet-and-safe-but-does-it-really-work-part-1/

 

[Madge]

Thank you, Hivemaker! I’m glad you told me about this.
Kitta

 

[bobba]

yes: "Dust-accelerated mite drop"! That is what I should have named this thread.

Someone had to invent it before me!

It has a better ring than "sugar in the hive method"

With the roll method, sugar or wash. I think of it like this:

If you have 29700 white balls and 300 red balls in a bag. And you picked 300 balls out of the bag, the expectation is that you would pull out 3 red balls.

However the probability of this happening is 22.6%

The probabilities of pulling out between 1 and 5+ red balls are shown for the example above.

0=4.8%
1=14.7%
2=22.5%
3=22.6%
4=16.9%
5+ =18.5%

Now I know this is not necessarily a true reflection because nurse bees are selected. And the probability's change with the mite numbers. And it is about triggering a threshold, rather then accuracy gauging the number of mites in a hive. And with frequent sampling and experience can produce more useful results. (Please do not panic from my one statistical example if you use this method, many have used it successfully)

However I think it demonstrates why it makes me doubt the accuracy of numbers produced by the rolls. Has anyone ever done 2 or 3 rolls in a row on the same hive, if so how were the numbers?

I cannot help but think of that Varroa EasyCheck contraption as being like a Varroa dice shaker.

My thinking is to use DAMD at regular intervals, say every 4 weeks through the active season. Then count the number of mites that fall. Obviously the mite drop from a single test will be hard to interpret, but over time and with experience it should give an indication of mite population.

All with the added benefit of killing less bees and more mites.

I know this would probably be way too much faf for someone with many hives. But for my 1 little hive, I think I can afford to give them a little extra fuss.

hummmm........ I'm still thinking about that new OA vape on order....

 

[eltalia]

Heh... I am sure the Americans would welcome your arguement being
as how pretty much over a half dozen mixes of climate and ethos
- including at least two "treatment free" dogmas - they have universally
done this topic to death, and why that refraction of views has them
locked into a resupply (mentality) each thaw as their bees die.
I'd don the rubber duds if you choose to run the theory past them.
/grinz/

Whilst you are pondering the "OA vape" have a look at the method
I link to - our choice for that day VD crosses our shores.
https://www.beehivethermalindustries.com/

Bill

 

[Madge]

yes: "Dust-accelerated mite drop"! ...
My thinking is to use DAMD at regular intervals, say every 4 weeks through the active season. ...

As the owner of one nucleus - yes, give it a go.

 

[bobba]

Just to be clear, I intend to treat with OA, but am pondering what monitoring method to use. (or to monitor with OA!)

I am not saying the wash cannot be used to effectively monitor and control verroa. Its complicated to explain, but bottom line is that anyone using this method is likely treating more often then compared to monitoring with a magic crystal ball. Obviously all monitoring methods are likely to result in some level of over treatment.

eltalia, regarding the link. I have seen several versions of heat treatments being used on you tube. Ones that are inserted into the hive, or ones you put the frames in. It relay looks like a lot of faf and seems very disruptive to the bees. I have seen some vidos where it has resulted in clouds of angry bees. Not something I would chance in a garden setting. Also I have yet to see any documented research as to its effectiveness.

 

[eltalia]

Also I have yet to see any documented research as to its effectiveness.

For MMK there is a mile of "documented research", for the looking.
Having rattled the manufacturer's stones it is very clear they are onto
something very doable here. Only problem for myself is they are not
a public listed company.
A secondry less attractive (to moi) offer is the work being done on
phages. Whilst in infant stage really that too may go somewhere for
those that choose to add 'medicine' to colonys.

Bill

 

[Murox]

It is such a pity that so much work on phages was destroyed and or lost during the russian revolution.

 

[bobba]

With the heat treatments like MMK, I think they may be best used at night when the maximum number of bees are in the hive. I see vids of them being used in the day when the forgers are out, and think it must miss a lot of mites.

I do hope the heat treatments will work as I think most of us would prefer to use heat than any kind of chemical.

I suspect we are a long way off any effective phages for treating bees. Phages will always be difficult to administer internally because an organisms own immune system will kill them.

However the Russians found a use for them as a surface disinfecting agent. So maybe they could be used for disinfecting hives.

The advantage of phages is that once isolated they are cheaply and easily produced. But unfortunately this discourages big money research. Witch probably explains the lack of phage research in the west.

I think we have covered the original topic. And are starting to diverge now.

So I would like to thank everyone who contributed to my first thread on this forum. Its nice to know there are friendly people out there who I can bounce ideas off.