Hi,
It might appear to some that the conclusions you are drawing are correct. But, of course, that is not strictly a correct conclusion to draw.
The statistics involved require a significant change to be found. Often in any one investigation this can not be accomplished, as reported 'under the stated conditions in Florida'.
In the good old days they would test, count the results and come to a conclusion. The tests would be simple and the correlation observed by drawing a line graph or the like.
Tests nowadays are, with the use of computers in particular, taking into account lots of possible variables. These all may have a small bearing on the result but they are all summative, thus all these together can make confidence in the achieved result much diminished. Hence the result is 'not a significant change'.
Furthermore, one type of bee in one area for one season may well yield a totally different outcome to another type of bee in another climatic region over several seasons (using a selective method where particularly 'promising' colonies are selected for the later results while discarding those colonies which appear to not help towards one's target outcome). Different methodology but the outcome might be much more obvious as a benefit to beekeepers and the bee. On the other hand, it may not.......
These experiments/studies are published for others to see the methodology, results found, etc, etc. which would enable others, who might try the same study, to benefit from the painstaking work already carried out.
I well remember Walter Marshall, head of the CEGB, telling us all that they had found no evidence to prove strong electromagnetic fields from (overhead) power lines were detrimental to health. I remember analysing what he said very carefully, over, and over again. I was, of course, not surprised when he (as Sir, and long deceased) was long forgotten that the evidence did actually emerge to prove otherwise.
Statistics used wrongly are said to be worse than lies and damned lies. Used honestly, studies often appear fruitless as this one apparently did.
Regards, RAB