# splits with queen cells



## rainesridgefarm (Sep 4, 2001)

I have been toying with the idea of making splits with queen cells vs breed queens. Has anyone done this successfully? I do whole box splits now in the same yard as swarm control and to do increase with breed queens. let me know your thoughts


----------



## IndianaHoney (Jun 5, 2006)

I raise my own queens, and I make splits using queen cells. It works well if done right, but even then you lose some due to failure of a queen to mate, or she dies while on a mating flight.

Here's what I do. I make either a two or three brood frame split with a frame or two of honey, and pollen. If its a two brood frame split, I shake some extra nurse bees in. I try to make sure that they have at least one frame of capped brood. I then move them to another yard at least two miles away. I leave them queenless for at least 24 hours, sometimes 48. I then give them a queen cell. Approximately 20%-30% are lost on mating flights. For this reason, I start new queen cells to replace the lost ones. This is done almost three weeks after the queen cells were put in, that way if the new queen is not laying by week four, I give them another queen cell, and some open brood to delay laying workers. This year, I'll simply make extra mating nucs to replace any queens that fail to mate.

Note that if the hive was ready to swarm, and has capped queen cells, don't give them another queen cell. Just make a split using the old queen, and make sure all the queen cells are in the parent hive.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Almost all my splits are with queen cells.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

I use my own and purchased (minnesota hygenic) cells.

my experience with queen loss is about as indiana honey suggest. rather than try and make up new cells to make up for this loss I combine but typically wait a bit longer (maximum of 21 days) to make certain a hive does or does not have a new queen. I like to keep the smaller nucs closed up for a couple of days (with cells installed). feeding nucs (especially in any cool or wet weather) is essential.


----------



## wayacoyote (Nov 3, 2003)

Tecumseh,
Off topic (I guess) but your mention of MH queens reminded me of the American Bee Journal article "New Direction for the Minnesota Hygienic Line of Bees" Dec 2008, ppg 1085-1086. The article mentions that the hygenic gene is ressessive, "A queen raised from a hygienic colony must mate with drones from other hygienic colonies for the colony to express the trait"

Did you know this when you started buying queen cells?
How are you're doing in expressing this trait?


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

wayacoyote writes:
Did you know this when you started buying queen cells?
How are you're doing in expressing this trait?

tecumseh:
to the first question: no I did not.... although I know (or though I did until you wrote the above) that the expression of hygenic behavior was considered to be a multiple allele trait. confused because you suggest(above) that the expression of the behavior is mendellian (which I think is different from a multiple allele trait)? 

as to the second question: I have never tested for hygenic behavior myself. as far as I can tell from casual observation the mh are quite similar to the weaver's all stars only perhaps one click darker and one click hotter.

but thanks for the heads up anyway wayacoyote.


----------



## wayacoyote (Nov 3, 2003)

Spivak wrote in the article that the virgin queen must mate with a hygienic drone for the hive to exhibit hygienic behavior and that it was a resessive trait. As for the multiple allele, i couldn't tell you.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

once again wayacoyte thanks for sharing this information. guess I need to resubscribe to the journal.

my original intention with the minnesota hygenic cells was to add some natural resistance to foul brood within my existing stock. although the f1 generation (hive and queen) may or may not display hygenic behavior you would expect the drones from these cells to pocess the recessive and have the possibility to pass this along.

I do like the idea of acquiring and producing cells from a known II sourced queen. most of us will be forced to rear queens or buy queens that are natually mated but at least in the case of II sourced queens (cells in this case) you do KNOW one half the linage.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Those hygienic queen cells will produce queens that produce drones that carry the hygienic gene.  That's a start.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

that was my thinking michael. plus adding a bit different blood line was a consideration.


----------



## wayacoyote (Nov 3, 2003)

Until this past year 2008, I've been making splits with whole boxes (10 frames) either allowing them to raise a queen themselves, or giving them a frame with a queen cell(s). While that worked, I didn't like that I had 10 frames worth of bees riding on the success of one queen sucessfully mating. This year 2008, we did splits into nucs as often as we could. That way, I only had 5 frames of bees riding on the success of that one queen. Every nuc that didn't suceed in producing a quality queen was simply combined with another nuc that did. It cut my risk to half. And it gave me the option of choosing which queens I liked the most for keeping.

Added:
Regarding "hygienics" Marla mentioned that the [approved - my term] MHB producers have been purchasing from them for 10 years and are now showing that they can open mate and produce reliable results. Yes, producing drones is necessary. We're starting a state-wide queen rearing program in KY to raise local queens (stay posted). I'm hoping that we can get the genetics in the wild and then, with sharing breeder-quality queens, make sure inbreeding doesn't occur. I'm currently trying to educate myself on this sex allele issue so I better know what I need to do and avoid.


----------

