What kind of bees do I have?

[Salamagundy]

Just been reading a very interesting thread about the productivity of different strains of bees this season.

As a newbee I can't judge because I don't know what kind of bees I have....

I can see that I have some dark bees and some lighter, with one or two tan segments, often with both varieties coming out of the same hive. In poor weather some hives are out and about when others have obviously decided to stay in and wash their hair....

Could anybody post some references to visual identification of honey bee varieties, if that's the way it's done, or direct us newbees to other reference material? My google searches didn't come up with much.

Is it possible to list what are generally accepted (!) as the characteristics of different strains?

(Apologies if 'variety', 'strain' or 'kind' offend the taxonomic-minded.)

Thanks.

 

[For want of a better word]

Try a search on the forum for Morphometry

there is a computer program you can try CbeeWing Morphometry

Will get very confusing if you have the popular hybridised so called B****ases !!

Copyright of a USA company !!

 

[Salamagundy]

Try a search on the forum for Morphometry

there is a computer program you can try CbeeWing Morphometry

Will get very confusing if you have the popular hybridised so called B****ases !!

Copyright of a USA company !!

Thanks, Icanhopit - looks like lots there to keep me busy.

B****ases??

 

[Hivemaker.]

B****ases??

Description of some of the local mongrels in Cornwall....Blackases, mainly a carni cross.

 

[Andy Duff]

What you start off with and what you end up with, will probably not be the same. Confused, you will bee

 

[DanBee]

Hang on. Morphometry is for fiddlers, IMHO. It is a useful classification tool in all biology apart from the breeding of honeybees, where it gets perverted into a binary pedigree measure. It could be very useful if applied appropriately, but is habitually mis-applied in the UK.

The important question is how well do your bees do in your location? Talk to other beekeepers around you, have a look at their bees if you can. Colour is a very poor indicator, and you will see the colour of offspring vary due to the multiple matings. Ideally what you want is a locally-adapted mongrel that demonstrates its suitability by surviving your climate, being healthy, and bringing in a surplus of honey - these features cannot be reliably selected for by checking eye colour and inside leg measurements. Function vs. aesthetics

 

[Andy Duff]

Hang on. Morphometry is for fiddlers, IMHO. It is a useful classification tool in all biology apart from the breeding of honeybees, where it gets perverted into a binary pedigree measure. It could be very useful if applied appropriately, but is habitually mis-applied in the UK.

The important question is how well do your bees do in your location? Talk to other beekeepers around you, have a look at their bees if you can. Colour is a very poor indicator, and you will see the colour of offspring vary due to the multiple matings. Ideally what you want is a locally-adapted mongrel that demonstrates its suitability by surviving your climate, being healthy, and bringing in a surplus of honey - these features cannot be reliably selected for by checking eye colour and inside leg measurements. Function vs. aesthetics

AND THEN-
Carniolians are introduced as an easy bee-keeping option and the local bees are contaminated? with looney genes

 

[susbees]

Hang on. Morphometry is for fiddlers, IMHO. It is a useful classification tool in all biology apart from the breeding of honeybees, where it gets perverted into a binary pedigree measure. It could be very useful if applied appropriately, but is habitually mis-applied in the UK.

The important question is how well do your bees do in your location? Talk to other beekeepers around you, have a look at their bees if you can. Colour is a very poor indicator, and you will see the colour of offspring vary due to the multiple matings. Ideally what you want is a locally-adapted mongrel that demonstrates its suitability by surviving your climate, being healthy, and bringing in a surplus of honey - these features cannot be reliably selected for by checking eye colour and inside leg measurements. Function vs. aesthetics

Unless you have a local large bee farmer near lots of your members with imported queens which proceed to produce nasty mutt crosses with your bees...Fortunately our local use of morphometry is not perverted

 

[For want of a better word]

Description of some of the local mongrels in Cornwall....Blackases, mainly a carni cross.

Buckasses ? the Ass being a mismatch betwixt a horse and a donkey ?

Returning to the OP my ref to wing morphometry would hopefully lead the beekeeper to investigate the whole gambit of honey bee identification, and IMOHO morphometry is just one tool towards that end...........

​

 

[stephenpug]

I think it depends on which drone (variety) the queen mates with can be 25+ so produce loads of mongrels lol

 

[DanBee]

AND THEN-
Carniolians are introduced as an easy bee-keeping option and the local bees are contaminated? with looney genes

The problem is not the strain that is introduced, but the disruption that occurs. Therefore I disagree strongly with the idea of 'parachuting' Amm into non-Amm areas in order to "re-establish".

I didn't give a carte blanche to start importing here there and everywhere, what I said was that the mongrels generally perform best. Locally, we have a very mixed set of genes but do not see the dramatic crossing effects that are reported. Then again, the characteristics of all races are a bit of a caricature, e.g. carnica is generally described in their mid-1900's state, and if you look at bred Carnicas and the professionalism of the German breeding systems you would be very impressed. The same applies for the Danish and their breeding.

What we have in the UK appears to be the most aspiration for one race, and the least ability - environment as well as organisation - for 'pedigree' breeding.

My simple rule is to breed from the best and ignore aesthetics

 

[PBee]

Then again, the characteristics of all races are a bit of a caricature, e.g. carnica is generally described in their mid-1900's state, and if you look at bred Carnicas and the professionalism of the German breeding systems you would be very impressed. The same applies for the Danish and their breeding.

What we have in the UK appears to be the most aspiration for one race, and the least ability - environment as well as organisation - for 'pedigree' breeding.

My simple rule is to breed from the best and ignore aesthetics

Would agree it's all to do with the breeder. I imported some Carnica queens from the Austrian Carnica Association a couple of years ago thinking they should be the best quality available. They were terrible - defensive and super swarmy. Two AS's in a season and they still kept trying!