# small cell study



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Nice study. Too bad it's just on Africanized bees.

I don't think there is that much difference, but I think some peole do. They like to point out that the mites have not devastated the feral Africanized bees and say that the Africanized bees are resistant. More likely they just live in small cell (natrual sized cell) hives.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hi Micheal,

yet we know that comb cell size has an effect on varroa reproductive behavior.

reply:

This is a profound statement from the study. If we KNOW this. Why so many detractors? I remember when Lusby's first made claims for 4.9 cell sizing. Not mentioning names, but it was said well lets see in three years of survivability. Then 4,5,and then 6 years with it being upped each time. Then, well can they produce? Then AHB and the saga continues......

The small width comb cells produced by Africanized honey bees may have a role in the ability of these bees to tolerate infestations by Varroa destructor, furthermore it appears that natural-sized comb cells are superior to over-sized comb cells for disease resistance.

reply:

Seems to me I've heard this mentioned before from an AZ beekeeper.

The fact that the bees were AHB or Hybrids of such doesn't effect the study. Haven't bees from africa been importated to US since the 1800's? Either way with the larger 5.2 and 5.3 combs (this is what they would roughly measure across the flats as they measured inner diameter in the study and not as beekeep do in the field) still shows and increase in infestation and I'd bet that the "resistant" AHB's on these combs would crash just like most US colonies. Micheal the cell size of EHB's according to older literature is right around 5.0mm and not the 5.2 - 5.3mm as used nowadays. Certainly one of the better studies I've seen.

Clay


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I agree on all counts, I'm just afraid, since detractors seem to find any excuse to ignore the small cell research, that the Africanized issue will be a detraction from the importance of the results.

I have thought all along that since we do not raise Africanized bees in hives and most Africanized bees are on natural comb, that is the reason for their surviving. It contributes on many fronts. The shorter time that the cell is capped, less room for the mites to breed, less attraction for the mites to the cell etc.

Actually, since I'm experimenting with PermaComb I'm very interested in the inside measurement of the cell. It's reassuring to hear numbers similar to my measurements.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

John Seets.
I am curious what your treatment protocal is and what your mortality rate has been.
(John uses permacomb in his broodnests)
Thanks, Bill


----------



## John Seets (Jan 9, 2003)

Bill;

I have no special things I do differently than most others not using PermaComb to get a handle on the mites. Mentholate all hives every August for Tracheal. Sugar roll test at other times to see what Varroa is doing. Found that treating with Apistan seems MUCH less effective than Checkmite even if I haven't used the Apistan for a year or more. I HAVE however, noticed that using wintergreen oil in feed prevents the decimating 2ndary effects of Varroa infestations such as Parasitic Mite Syndrome. I was pleased about this and the difference was apparent. According to the creator of PC, the miticide chemicals cannot permeate the plastic comb such as is the case with wax comb. Research indicates that the miticide chemicals have been shown to "build up" over time in the wax. I suspect that this would expose the mites to a constant low-level dosage of whatever miticide has been used thereby contributing to drug resistant mites even after the "strips" are no longer in the hives. This however, is supposition on my part.

Thanx.

John


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Since the PermaComb is the equvilant cell size to 5.15mm as opposed to 5.4mm I would guess that several seasons worth of cocoons would regress them and eventually you'd be on small brood cells.


----------



## Dee A. Lusby (Oct 4, 2000)

Michael Bush wrote:
Since the PermaComb is the equvilant cell size to 5.15mm as opposed to 5.4mm I would guess that several seasons worth of cocoons would regress them and eventually you'd be on small brood cells.

Reply:
Do not count on this, for as the bees get smaller (foundation size used here) the less the cocoons are chewed out. Also the years required to arrive will probably leave you with dead bees long before. Also the cocoons and wax supposedly then thinning the cells would be contaminated, so in the end what have you gained?

Somehow, always best to do it right from the beginning if possible.

Regards,

Dee A. Lusby


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Somehow, always best to do it right from the beginning if possible.

I agree. But as I understand it, John has been using he same PermaComb for brood for the last 30 years. I think it's pretty regressed.

I expect they would die from mites before you got there if that was your only mite control.


[This message has been edited by Michael Bush (edited March 21, 2003).]


----------

