Question about supers

Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum

Help Support Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Thanks for the responses guys, and the debate about naming conventions as regards supers and brood boxes, was errr....interesting! But coming back to my original question, do you think the bees will work the ‘unworked’ super/honey box etc ��. Cheers.
 
Thanks for the responses guys, and the debate about naming conventions as regards supers and brood boxes, was errr....interesting! But coming back to my original question, do you think the bees will work the ‘unworked’ super/honey box etc ��. Cheers.

I think that's quite likely, Redcap. They'll probably fill the top box and move down (that's what they do naturally) - so, it will at least help to get the top box capped.

The original super (or shallow) above the brood box, if filled with honey, would have formed a natural queen excluder. You probably didn't even need a QX above it. But if there is brood in there (particularly drone brood), when moving it to the top, remember to add an eke above the QX with an entrance to allow the drones to get out.

The empty shallow, now directly above the brood box, might quickly get used for brood unless you add a QX below it.
 
Thanks for the responses guys, and the debate about naming conventions as regards supers and brood boxes, was errr....interesting! But coming back to my original question, do you think the bees will work the ‘unworked’ super/honey box etc ��. Cheers.

As I understand your situation, after the mandatory name calling has finished, is you have a brood box with a queen excluder above, with an empty super and full super at the top with presumably a crown board and roof.

Your new configuration might well result in bees working the empty super but if they don't, you could swap a couple of empty frames for capped frames in the bottom super. This has been known to get the bees working the empty frames.

CVB
 
I think that's quite likely, Redcap. They'll probably fill the top box and move down (that's what they do naturally) - so, it will at least help to get the top box capped.

The original super (or shallow) above the brood box, if filled with honey, would have formed a natural queen excluder. You probably didn't even need a QX above it. But if there is brood in there (particularly drone brood), when moving it to the top, remember to add an eke above the QX with an entrance to allow the drones to get out.

The empty shallow, now directly above the brood box, might quickly get used for brood unless you add a QX below it.

Thanks MC very helpful... esp having the eke to allow drones already up there to escape...
 
As I understand your situation, after the mandatory name calling has finished, is you have a brood box with a queen excluder above, with an empty super and full super at the top with presumably a crown board and roof.

Your new configuration might well result in bees working the empty super but if they don't, you could swap a couple of empty frames for capped frames in the bottom super. This has been known to get the bees working the empty frames.

CVB

Thanks Charlie. Yes , having closed them up, I then wondered if I should have done what you suggest...I suspect that is now my plan B. Cheers.
 
Thanks Charlie. Yes , having closed them up, I then wondered if I should have done what you suggest...I suspect that is now my plan B. Cheers.

Make it your Plan A - as following the convoluted nonsense touted by that
"natural queen excluder" crowd simply generates problems you do not
want but they love - so they can 'help' you.

In honeybadgering always keep your excess stores separated out
from those on in the broodchamber, it pays.
The exception being whatever Plan is chosen for winter packdown, too
early for that work yet.


Bill
 
A lot will depend on how much forage is available. If there is still a significant nectar flow they will fill the boxes.

Things are beginning to slow down where I am.
 
Thanks for the responses guys, and the debate about naming conventions as regards supers and brood boxes, was errr....interesting!
[...]
Some would have it convention could be Lollipop 01 through to 09+1, regardless
of the difficulty(s) in then applying stack concatenation as identification for purpose.
That same group would argue also it matters not what goes where, just make more
room, wherever.
There are a number of (bee) driven factors an observer would see shoot holes in
"just a pile of boxes" approach to husbandry with - in mine and companions view -
Communication being at the top of the ranking order.
Technology is allowing some breaking insight into this aspect of hivebody management
yet long has it been recognised in Australia where the work is kept to the broodchamber
leaving courier bees and housekeepers to manage the extents (super) production
for the colony is most efficient. More supers - or whatever - simply clutters the
communication lines.
---

(Schneider & Lewis 2004) - Because of their generalized manner of operation, modulatory signals can influence many different workers and alter the performance of many different activities simultaneously. Modulatory signals may therefore be an important component in the organization of labor in honey bees, and social insects in general (Hölldobler and Wilson, 1990; Beshers et al., 1999; Hölldobler, 1999). However, compared to our knowledge of specific-functioning signals, our understanding of modulatory signals is rudimentary.
https://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/pdf/2004/02/M4206.pdf

---

Bill
 

Latest posts

Back
Top