# Foundationless hives



## jdpro5010 (Mar 22, 2007)

How do you handle comb rotation in a foundationless hive? This question came up in another thread, and was wondering about this myself. In other words if you remove 2 frames a year to melt down do you handle this in the same way you do with a foundation based hive? I usually take out the center 2 frames and add 1 frame on each side. Would I still handle this in the same manner?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Yes. You handle it exactly the same.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> Yes. You handle it exactly the same.


If you've started a hive with a package of bees on foundationless frames they will draw different sized cells, depending on where those frames are in relationship to the center of the brood nest or so I understand. If you remove the center two frames and then add two replacement frames to the outside and bunch the remaining frames into the center and if you do this over a couple of seasons it would seem like you would have a mess....in my opinion. Over time you will wind up with frames of drone brood sized comb throughout the brood nest...as you migrate those outside frames toward the center of the nest.

To the original question, I don't have a simple answer. I'm new to foundationless and I know that MB has been at it a long time. I'll be experimenting more this upcoming season.

Good luck


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

there are lots of options here.

i would suggest that the reason for taking the frames out of the center and adding them to the sides (or at least one reason), is that putting full sheets of foundation between drawn comb (in the brood nest) breaks things up (ie, the bees must cluster on either side of the foundation, which is not yet functional comb).

when you add a foundationless frame to a populous hive, the bees can still move "through" the foundationless frame while bees cluster on the top bar. this means that by the time the freshly drawn comb is "in the way", it is functional and working comb. this is a totally different dynamic than adding foundation.

in general, the bees will build worker foundation in the center of the broodnest, and more drone towards the outside...so adding foundationless frames to the outside may well get you more drone than you (or the bees ) really want/need. this is less of an issue with foundation, as it's already presized for worker comb.

adding to the center (or near the center) works well for us. we use popsicle sticks all the way across the top bar, and generally (not always) leave 2 fully drawn frames between empty frames, and only add frames when there are enough bees to fill the gap when a frame is removed.

frames with excessive drone cells are moved towards the outside of the box (not all at once....gradually migrated), and unless a frame is a total mess, there is no reason to cull it without first getting the bees to store honey in it first...extract, then cull.

keep the hives level from side to side. make sure you have a good comb guide all the way across the top bars. don't rush things.

deknow

c


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

deknow>adding to the center (or near the center) works well for us. we use popsicle sticks all the way across the top bar, and generally (not always) leave 2 fully drawn frames between empty frames, and only add frames when there are enough bees to fill the gap when a frame is removed.

Last spring I used foundationless frames on a sizeable scale for the first time. When I did as you've described in late March (early season splits for swarm mgmt), those foundationless frames placed into the brood area of the nest were ALL drawn as drone sized cells. I did move them out of the center of the brood nest but would caution any new beek to watch for this.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

beemandan said:


> Last spring I used foundationless frames on a sizeable scale for the first time. When I did as you've described in late March (early season splits for swarm mgmt), those foundationless frames placed into the brood area of the nest were ALL drawn as drone sized cells. I did move them out of the center of the brood nest but would caution any new beek to watch for this.


i'm going to go out on a limb and guess that one (or both) of the following situations apply to what you did last year:

1. the rest of the combs were built from foundation. the bees want about 15% drones, and if you give them 1 or 2 open frames in a hive that is otherwise close to 100% worker comb, you will get all drone comb. if you remove these frames and replace them with more open frames, you will get more drone comb. if you push these frames to the sides and add more open frames, they will start to build worker comb.

2. there was a reasonable flow on, and not enough open comb in which to store the nectar....or you were feeding. larger cells are built faster and with less resources (less wax). if they need to build comb in a hurry to store nectar, it will be drone sized cells.

deknow


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

deknow said:


> 1. the rest of the combs were built from foundation. the bees want about 15% drones, and if you give them 1 or 2 open frames in a hive that is otherwise close to 100% worker comb, you will get all drone comb. if you remove these frames and replace them with more open frames, you will get more drone comb. if you push these frames to the sides and add more open frames, they will start to build worker comb.


Yep, and I understand the impulse to produce drone cells....especially in the spring. And I think that many new beeks experimenting with foundationless frames will likely be putting those frames into a hive where the remaining frames were drawn from foundation.

My point is that it requires a good understanding nesting architecture and careful management. Unlike feral nests where the bees construct their comb to fit their needs and the nest remains unchanged from that point onward, human intervention in a manmade hive should be done thoughtfully and monitored carefully.

I appreciate the fact that you don't oversimplfy the process.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

If you pull a frame out and put an empty in it's place then everything is still where it should be. If they happen to draw drone comb, you can move it to the outside if you like. That's probably best, but it doesn't matter that much actually. The bees will raise the same number of drones regardless of what you do, but that's where you typically find drone comb in a feral hive. If you want to make it more complicated and if cell size is more of an issue you may want to integrate the concept of replacing old combs, with replacing combs that have larger worker cells.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

beemandan said:


> Unlike feral nests where the bees construct their comb to fit their needs and the nest remains unchanged from that point onward, human intervention in a manmade hive should be done thoughtfully and monitored carefully.


well, a couple of thoughts:

1. in an "all worker foundation colony", human intervention abounds. in an "all worker foundation colony", things are already way out of balance from the bees perspective....adding a full frame of drone brood or 2 is not necessarily "making things worse".

2. nothing says that you have to move frames around...the nest can be kept "intact" with all frames always replaced where they came from.

deknow


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

deknow said:


> well, a couple of thoughts:
> 
> 1. in an "all worker foundation colony", human intervention abounds. in an "all worker foundation colony", things are already way out of balance from the bees perspective....adding a full frame of drone brood or 2 is not necessarily "making things worse".


In general I agree. Keeping bees in a manmade, moveable frame hive with 'all worker foundation' is hardly natural. On the other hand adding a 'full rame or 2 of drone cells', without consideration to their placement or regard for the final mix of cell size doesn't seem wise either.



deknow said:


> 2. nothing says that you have to move frames around...the nest can be kept "intact" with all frames always replaced where they came from.


I won't argue with this either. But, as you well know beekeepers replace frames that were removed to make splits or to cull old frames. In my opinion, these activities are normal (for the beekeeper) but should be done with consideration of the resulting brood nest architecture. 

You don't agree?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

beemandan said:


> In general I agree. Keeping bees in a manmade, moveable frame hive with 'all worker foundation' is hardly natural. On the other hand adding a 'full rame or 2 of drone cells', without consideration to their placement or regard for the final mix of cell size doesn't seem wise either.


agreed...but i would submit that the hive full of worker comb is already out of balance, and that the addition of 1 or 2 frames of drones isn't likely to add to the problem. yes, there are downsides to having 2 frames of drones, especially if they are full sheets of comb...but there are downsides to keeping the bees from building drone comb with foundation as well. adding a few frames of drones is working towards balancing the system...not throwing it further off balance.



> I won't argue with this either. But, as you well know beekeepers replace frames that were removed to make splits or to cull old frames. In my opinion, these activities are normal (for the beekeeper) but should be done with consideration of the resulting brood nest architecture.


again, the use of foundation is already "disrespecting the nest architecture"...and plenty of "damage" can be done by moving frames of foundation and comb around....one does not need to be foundationless to face such dangers.

deknow


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>plenty of "damage" can be done by moving frames of foundation and comb around....one does not need to be foundationless to face such dangers.

Exactly.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

deknow said:


> again, the use of foundation is already "disrespecting the nest architecture"...and plenty of "damage" can be done by moving frames of foundation and comb around....one does not need to be foundationless to face such dangers.





Michael Bush said:


> >plenty of "damage" can be done by moving frames of foundation and comb around....one does not need to be foundationless to face such dangers.
> Exactly.


Have either of you ever heard me suggest otherwise?
I think you’d better sit down…..we’re in uncharted territory here….. we are in agreement for once.


----------

