Frame foundations

My point is simply that it HAS been done on Apis mellifera. We generally don’t assume that what happens with Apis mellifera ligustica only applies to ligustica we assume it applies to the rest of the species.

Shorter pupation is one of the most likely contributors but the cell size brings along the male survivorship as well.

The first egg that the foundress Varroa mite lays is haploid and therefore becomes a male (familiar?) then all the rest are females. It takes about 9 days for a female to make it from egg to maturity and then to mate. If it doesn’t make it to maturity, it is not viable. Even if it makes it to maturity, if it doesn’t mate it’s not viable. So out of the 10 or so eggs she lays only 9 or so are females and only between 1 and 2 of them makes it to maturity and mates in a large cell 21 day cycle (9 days pre capping and 12 days post capping).

A day shorter post capping reduces the number of viable females by 1 and it was already between one a 2 (1.5 + 0.5).

With Apis cerana pre and post capping times together are shorter by one day:
http://www.nba.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Beekeeper-May-2015-Quentin-Chollet-article-CORRECTED.pdf

making the results the same pre and post capping times as small cell Apis mellifera which has the results of 0.5 ± 0.5 (either 0 or 1) Varroa offspring.

I thought it was because they groom each other and remove infested pupae from the cell

edit
Yes, I knew I had seen something

Paper from the Journal of Invertebrate Pathology
Abstract

A behavioral and physiological resistance mechanism of the Asian honey bee (Apis cerana) to an ectoparasitic mite, Varroa jacobsoni, which causes severe damage to the European honey bee (Apis mellifera) in the beekeeping industry worldwide, is reported here for the first time. Parasitism by the mite induced Asian worker bees to perform a series of cleaning behaviors that effectively removed the mites from the bodies of the adult host bees. The mites were subsequently killed and removed from the bee hives in a few seconds to a few minutes. The grooming behavior consists of self-cleaning, grooming dance, nestmate cleaning, and group cleaning. Worker bees can also rapidly and effectively remove the mites from the brood. The European bee showed cleaning behavior at low frequency and generally failed to remove the mites from both the adult bees and the brood.

If varroa does so much better in drone cells, why would you want to mimic that in worker cells? Also a larger bee might have more blood to give but what of the effect on their bodies in general. Look at any of the mammal species that are unusually larger then their brothers and sisters. Small dogs live longer then large dogs, Unusually large humans tend to die of heart problems because their heart can’t support the larger size. Bees in standard foundation are 150% larger then they should be. I have to assume that would cause undue stress on the bees body and make it more susceptible to disease and pests. Not to mention being in a cell that is 150% too large for what it wants basically making your hive 100% drone comb for their purposes. Standard drone comb is only 1mm +/- larger then standard foundation worker cells.

I am not claiming that natural cell size(that is what small cell is really and what it should be referred to) is the end all be all cure for varroa. I am just saying why not move away from a practice implemented by commercial beekeepers which has clearly failed, and at the very least isn’t natural or correct for the bees.

I think that comparing bees from Asia with bees in the UK or even elsewhere is going to be difficult as there will never be a comparable way of life of the colonies.
In the UK our bees spend at least a few months of being broodless. The colonies are huge in comparison. Many colonies live in the open in Asia whereas elsewhere most colonies are confined within a hive or similar.
So many differences which are bound to affect the bees and their varroa load.
I haven’t had time yet to read all the papers put up by Micheal but I do feel that there is a lot more than small cells which control the number of varroa in a colony.
Just simple observation of comb built by the bees shows us that they make many different sizes of cell. Clearly they have reasons for doing this. In my own colonies. There are some very small cells…some are brood cells…and there are some huge cells…made for storing honey.
If you look at the bees in a colony…they are not all the same size…leaving aside the queen and drones. Worker bees vary in size too.
I don’t feel strongly one way or another but I think that it is misleading for new beekeepers if small cell foundation or regression is held as a main varroa control as it could lead to loss of colonies especially if the situation is not monitored satisfactorily.

Now it would be interesting to be able to measure whether they are brought up in different cell sizes or they have different patrilines

The other way A.c. manages is that the Varroa mostly infest drones and not workers. Again related to cell size. An A.c. drone cell is about 5.4mm while the top size for a worker is 4.9mm. The bottom size being quite a bit smaller.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiuyumYrLTLAhVEl4MKHWUdB2MQFgg3MAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mdpi.com%2F2075-4450%2F4%2F4%2F558%2Fpdf&usg=AFQjCNEJoUjO1oUpItExfKLxnFeN7Ans9Q&sig2=0GnP5ldwedQ1TLNOcPaFVA

“A. cerana cells are of two sizes: smaller worker cells (diameter of 3.6-4.9 mm, depth of 1.01 mm;
Tingek, 1996 in [1,42,45,46]) and larger drone cells (diameter of 4.7-5.3 mm). In
comparison, A. mellifera worker cell sizes were approximately 4.9 mm average”

We had this at a talk Last Saturday by the NBU (National Bee Unit) Jo Schup @Dee - is she your new girl?? she is Warwickshire, Gloucestershire, Shropshire, et al regional Regional Inspector - She is coming to look at my Flow hives when they get up and going.

Finally found what I was looking for:

That Queen Number I think is the wrong way around Apis m is 16 days!!

Is that really true?
I have friends who run foundationless hives, and have been for years. Some are treatment free some are not. All the colonies produce cells of varying sizes and the bees are Buckfast. None have made themselves smaller. What is this idea about bees in small cells making small bees?
What about drones? They are bigger and the bees just extend the cell to accommodate their size. Not having a go, just don’t understand.

No
Here’s a little project.
Does Scutellata get/deal with Varroa? Big bee
I know it gets Tropilaelaps

There you go…a research project!
Since the bees build the cell first…how would they know what size bee would grow? My guess would be that the growth of the larvae and pupae is dependent on the space permitted. For all we know perhaps very small bees have a special role in the colony…perhaps pollen or nectar harvesting.

Apparently Jo says Drones they give off a different odour

Michael Bush contends that large bees won’t use small cells happily. You have to make the bees smaller then small bees will make more small bees with a shorter pupation time.

No nothing to do with whether bees know they are feeding a drone for which they extend the cell. See my reply to horsehillhoney

Dorsata not Scutellata
Dorsata

common name: African honey bee, Africanized honey bee, killer bee
scientific name: Apis mellifera scutellata Lepeletier (Insecta: Hymenoptera: Apidae)

http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/misc/bees/ahb.htm Really good article

AHB suffers Nosema apis http://www.cabi.org/isc/fulltextpdf/2005/20053161519.pdf

Honeybees of South Africa (all species) http://www.sabio.org.za/?page_id=14

Many other basic Africanized Honey Bees traits include:
frequent swarming to establish new nests
minimal hoarding of honey
the ability to survive on sparse supplies of pollen and nectar
moving their entire colony readily (abscond) if food is scarce
exploiting new habitats very quickly and is not particular about its nesting site.
a highly defensive nature
responding more quickly and more bees sting
sensing a threat from people or animals 50 feet or more from their nest
sensing vibrations from power equipment 100 feet or more from nest
pursuing a perceived enemy 1/4 mile or more

Notes on Natural Enemies

Top of page
Small hive beetles (Aethina tumida) are pests of honey bees and can damage combs, stored honey and pollen. A study by Neumann and Hartel (2004) showed that A. mellifera scutellata remove unprotected eggs and larvae of the beetles and this behaviour plays an important role in the apparent resistance of African honey bees towards infestations by small hive beetles. They are also affected by the mite Varroa destructor in the same way as other bee subspecies

http://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/6362
A number of bacteria are associated with honey bees and in a study of those associated with A. mellifera capensis and A. mellifera scutellata by Jeyaprakash et al. (2003), Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium were found. These have also been reported from other honey bee subspecies; however, other sequences were found associated with honey bees for the first time, e.g. Bartonella, Gluconacetobacter; Simonsiella/Neisseria; and Serratia. Another bacterium, the parasitic microbe Wolbachia, is found in workers and drones of A. mellifera scutellata and hybrid workers of A. mellifera capensis and A. mellifera scutellata (Hoy et al., 2003).

Gene sequencing of a microsporidium from honey bees in Zimbabwe has found Nosema apis, a fungal parasite of honey bees, causing nosemosis or nosema (Fries, 2002; Fries et al., 2003).


In some areas of South America, Africanized bees have developed at least partial
resistance against V. destructor attributable in part to the removal behavior of the workers
(Moretto et al. 1991 a). These authors reported a Varroa removal rate, within 30 min after
infestation, to be approximately 38% compared to 5.7% of that in Italian honeybee workers
in Brazil, such as a lowered fertility rate of female mite in worker brood cells and shorter pupal
development time may well be involved in observed resistance (Camazine, 1986 ; Ruttner et
al. 1984).

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45352082_A_scientific_note_on_Varroa_destructor_found_in_East_Africa_Threat_or_opportunity
The introduction of Varroa into South Africa in 1997,coupled with the spread ofA. m. capensis led to an initial rapid decline in native honeybee populations over seven years (Allsopp,2004). Yet 12 years after the mite’s introduction, honeybees of both A.m. capensis and A. m. scutellata, feral and man-aged populations alike appear to exhibit levels of tolerance that have reduced the pest status of this mite to “incidental” according to Allsopp (2006).He further speculates that increased hygienic behavior and a lack of chemical control used by bee-keepers, is in part, responsible for this tolerance.
African bees appear to deal with mites more effectively than European bees. Hygienic behavior,especially the ability to detect and remove Varroa-infested brood is likely one important mechanism of mite tolerance in these bees. Yet hygienic behavior along with a lack of miticide use is unlikely to account for the levels of tolerance to Varroa expressed in the honeybees of East Africa. Other behaviors, such as grooming, increased swarming, absconding, and even management practices (or the lack of them, i.e., the use of acaricides) are likely to be important.

Now you tell me!! :joy::confounded:

They will USE them happily enough, they just may not build them.

Yes, My observation with A.m. is 16 ±1 typically with ±2 possible. The variance is to do with the weather. Really hot is sooner really cool is later.

It started with research by Huber. Then Baudoux. Then Pinchot, Gontarski, and most recently, McMullan and Brown.

Most of the results (charts etc.) from Baudoux’s research are in the older ABC and XYZ of Bee Culture books. (at least 1945 back to the turn of the century maybe). Quite a few articles were published in the bee magazines of the world written by Baudoux and quite a few disputing whether making them bigger by cell size was a good idea.

Yes, they get Varroa. Typically, however they are not on foundation and are on natural cell size and they don’t have issues with Varroa. If they are on foundation they are usually on 4.8mm foundation.

You have misunderstood me and taken it out of context.
When the bees build comb…the queen decides what to put in the cell depending on its size. If there is a patch of drone cells…she will lay drones.
If the cells are worker…she will lay worker and if the colony needs a new queen they will extend the worker cell and feed accordingly.
If you look closely at comb built by the bees without foundation…you will see worker cells of different sizes. Which is interesting and well documented.
Mainly, my point is that by regressing bees onto smaller cell brood comb is not the single varroa control as there are many other factors.
Recently, it has come to light that there is a different virus in some varroa…and it may be that bees are more able to cope with a varroa load which holds this.
Also, there is a lot of observation about grooming behaviour…which our European bees lack.
I know of a number of beekeepers who don’t treat for varroa…but they do follow other ways of controlling varroa and also monitor regularly and diligently.
When I have read some of the research papers in regard to small cell comb…I feel unconvinced and wary of misinterpretation of the results by some beekeepers.
However, I am always open to trying out anything to reduce the effect of the varroa and its associated viruses and bacteria.
I have one colony on natural comb and it is my intention to move towards using only natural comb built by my bees. If only to avoid the cost of buying the increasingly expensive foundation! I have quite a lot of natural comb from previous years. I might spend some time measuring the cells to confirm the cell sizes.
So far I have used several different varroa treatments but find that using the OA sublimator is the best treatment in regard to knock down, convenience and that it can be used at any time. I like the idea of not using the OA but know that I must have all the other factors for varroa control in place…and I don’t think that it will come down to just having bees using small cell brood comb.

Obviously I am basing my opinion on information I have gathered from other sources and beekeepers I have come to trust. I firmly believe that much of the plight of the honeybees is due to human interference, and there is enough credible information to show that healthy wild/feral bees are smaller, and build smaller cells. Of course with the huge volume of man-bred queens and strains there will always be “wild bees” who build larger cells because that is what they have been bred for. So it does not surprise me that you friends buckfast bees build larger cells, it’s what they have been bred to do. But if you were able to find a feral hive and compare the cell size you might find something totally different. Bees in the wild who survive varroa do so with a combination of tactics not just cell size. I think that regressed bees is one step in the right direction to helping the bees at large so even if it did nothing for varroa I would do it for them based on it being the right thing to do.

At this point for me it is all theory. I will keep everyone who is interested up to date about how things go and I will be honest about how it goes even if it is a disaster.

2 Likes

Yes please! You are a man of integrity - I wish everyone in construction was like you! :smile:

1 Like