# Bee Size vs Cell Size



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hello Everyone,

I have noticed a curious pattern with bee size. The bees are smaller during the spring. Larger during mid summer. Smaller again during late fall and earlier winter. Larger again during late winter.

This occures in both my large and small cell hives. At various times during the year, very little difference can be seen between large cell bees and small cell bees.

My observations of natural comb building in a top bar hive indicates the bees nest has a definite structure with certain size cells in specific locations. The utilization of these different size cells throughout the season would correspond with the different size bees seen throughout the season. Yet the bee sizes change even when the bees are restricted to a single cell size.

I had assumed that bee size was primarily the result of cell size and a dash of genetics/nutrition. But bee size appears to be a very complex situation.

Could bee size and the seasonal use of varying cell size complement each other? Maybe an absolute cell size like 4.9 isn't as important as is a good, tight seasonal fit with smaller comb/bees at the right time and larger comb/bees at the right time.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I can watch them the best in my observation hive. All the comb is 4.95mm except the burr on the bottom of the frames because it's wax coated PermaComb and they can't rebuild it. All the bees in this hive are smaller than my "large cell" bees but they vary a lot in size. Not only in diameter but in length. Of course some if it seems to be age. Younger bees seem to be shorter. But right now I'm seeing more variety of size than I did in the summer.

I think all of this is more complicated than it first appears. As you say, in my naturally drawn comb hives the brood varies in size from 4.8mm to 5.1mm but most is about 4.85mm. I do wonder if there isn't a purpose for the subcastes. Maybe assuming that all worker bees are alike and their function is merely a function of their age is incorrect. Maybe the different sizes have specialized funtions.

My other theory would be that a variety of bee sizes can utilize a variety of nectar sources.

Size seems to be a function of age, cell size and season.

It's a good thing this isn't complicated.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Michael,

I think that when two mostly independant functions like differing bee size and the seasonal usage of variable cell size comb produces the same effect, that effect must be pretty important. It seems that in creation, redundancy is always connected with something very important.

Small cell beekeepers know what some of the results are when there are not enough small cells. But I don't think anyone knows what happens when there isn't the appropriate mix of both large and small cell size.

If it's the fit between the bee and the cell size that's important and not just the absolute cell size. Lots of positive implications can result even from a very complex situation. These implications would require a complete rethinking of the methodology concerning small cell regression.

The massive colony loses and much of the downside associated with regression could be avoided.

For large cell beekeepers getting the positive results small cell beekeepers have experienced at great cost might be easily achieved.

Regards
Dennis
Thinking simple answers to complex cell size questions can lead to lots of management problems


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

I have placed a scale on the hive entrances to my large(3) and small cell(5) hives and photographed the bees. The bees can then be measured and compared using the scale.

I just shot and compiled the figures for my large and small cell bees for September and October.

Large Cell Averages
Sept Oct % <%diff>
1.37 1.31 0.95 5 bee length
0.96 0.94 0.98 2 wing length
0.45 0.38 0.82 18 thorax width

Small Cell 
Sept Oct % <%diff>
1.32 1.29 0.97 3 bee length
0.92 0.91 0.99 <1 wing length
0.45 0.35 0.77 23 thorax width

Both large and small cell bees decreased in sized. The most striking difference was measured in the thorax width which decreased in both large and small cell hives about 20%.

Visually, I cannot tell the difference in bee sizes between the large 
and small cell hives. The taper on the abdomens appears about the same.

It's interesting to note that this months large cell bees are almost 
the same size as last months small cell bees! 

I will be repeating this process on a monthly basis.

Regards
Dennis
I have tried to get the columns in the table to line up using spaces but this software removes them when they are viewed. You'll just have to do it manually.


[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited October 18, 2003).]

[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited October 18, 2003).]

[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited November 16, 2003).]


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys, 

I have just shot and compiled the figures for my large and small cell 
November bees. I have included another measurement which is abdominal 
width. It is measured across the front edge of the third abdominal 
segment, just above the tomenta.

The averages for both large and small cell hives are virtually 
identical.

Averages
Large
Sept Oct Nov
1.37 1.31 1.29 length
0.96 0.94 0.93 wing
0.45 0.38 0.37 thorax
0.46 0.46 0.47 abdomen

Averages
Small Cell Hives
Sept Oct Nov
1.32 1.29 1.31 length
0.92 0.91 0.93 wing
0.45 0.35 0.37 thorax
0.45 0.45 0.47 abdomen

It's interesting to note that the abdomen width has increased slightly for both large and small cell bees. Maybe both the bees and 
beekeepers pick up a little width during the winter. :> )

I though it might be interesting to post the actual measurements for both a large cell and small cell hive through time.

Single Hive Averages
Large Cell Hive
Sept Oct Nov
1.45 1.44 1.29 length
1.04 0.97 0.93 wing
0.42 0.37 0.37 thorax
0.46 0.46 0.47 abdomen

Single Hive Averages
Large Cell Hive
Sept Oct Nov
1.38 1.39 1.31 length
0.93 0.93 0.93 wing
0.40 0.35 0.37 thorax
0.45 0.45 0.47 abdomen

I will build a web page as more data becomes available next spring, detailing the size changes by hive. Maybe even with graphs and bells and whistles.

Best Regards
Dennis


[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited December 07, 2003).]


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Greetings,

I have constructed a web page at http://bwrangler.litarium.com/seasonal-bee-size/ concerning my observations on seasonal bee size. Only three months of data is in. I will update these pages, each month, as new data becomes available.

Regards
Dennis
Food for Thought


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I would say that small cell bees appear smaller to me at any time. I go to one of my hives that is not regressed and the bees look really large to me. But on the other hand, the small cell bees look larger this time of year than they did in the spring.

Also, when I find swarms or bees in houses and trees the ones that are (by human observation) recent are large. The ones that have been there for 30 years (or 10 or 15) are noticably smaller.

Part of the question in all of this is what part does smaller cell size play in the whole picture, including T-mites and V-mites. First, if the newly emerged (young bees) are where the T-mites reproduce and the newly emerged small cell bees have spiricles that are too small for the T-mites to get in, it may not matter if they get larger later. The most likely reason for small cell to be effective on V-mites is the shorter time before emergence and the tighter space for the V-mites to try to mate in. This is effective, regardless of if the bees get larger later or not. My most successful experiences with regression are using the wax coated PermaComb. A package of 5.4mm bees is more than happy to raise brood in this and the queen (from the package) seems to prefer to lay in it. This is pretty painless regression. I just keep pulling frames of honey out of the brood nest, and replace the center combs with the wax coated PermaComb. I don't do any shakedowns. I buy standard queens and they are happy to lay in it.

The big problem with getting small cell bees is simply getting small cell comb. The bees LIKE small cell comb. The regressed bees are then happy to draw small cell comb.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Michael,

Using the wax coated permacomb to 'regress' bees is an interesting concept. Any method that will reduce the pain and increase the gain with small cell beekeeping is a great innovation.

Once your bees are small, do they freely draw out small cell comb? My bees would only draw out about 6 frames max and then trash the small cell foundation by drawing out larger cell sizes. 

The only way I could get all small cell comb hives was to have multiple hives drawing out the small cell comb and then replacing large cell frames with small cell frames in a few of those hives. It took twelve hives to fill and build up five all small cell hives.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

When drawing comb for worker brood they seem willing to draw 4.9mm or if left to their own devices even smaller. When drawing comb for honey storage they want it bigger. Obviosly, when drawing drone brood, they want it bigger. The bees do not seem to want to drawn 4.9mm cells for honey storage. I think it may be more work than it is worth to try to get them to draw 4.9mm for anything other than brood.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Everyone,

The bees were able to fly a little bit so I captured another round of photos and have measured them for December.

Averages
Large
Sept Oct Nov Dec
1.37 1.31 1.29 1.33 length
0.96 0.94 0.93 0.96 wing
0.45 0.38 0.37 0.35 thorax
0.46 0.46 0.47 0.45 abdomen

Averages
Small Cell Hives
Sept Oct Nov Dec
1.32 1.29 1.31 1.32 length
0.92 0.91 0.93 0.92 wing
0.45 0.35 0.37 0.34 thorax
0.45 0.45 0.47 0.43 abdomen

The large cell bees are generally slightly bigger than the small cell sized bees. Both the thorax and the abdomen measurements decreased for both cell sizes.

Single Hive Averages
Large Cell Hive
Sept Oct Nov Dec
1.45 1.44 1.29 1.36 length
1.04 0.97 0.93 0.98 wing
0.42 0.37 0.37 0.37 thorax
0.46 0.46 0.47 0.45 abdomen

Single Hive Averages
Large Cell Hive
Sept Oct Nov Dec
1.38 1.39 1.31 1.32 length
0.93 0.93 0.93 0.90 wing
0.40 0.35 0.37 0.34 thorax
0.45 0.45 0.47 0.44 abdomen

With the limited amount of bee flight, it's harder to get enough properly oriented bees in the photos. Some sample sizes were smaller this time. With such marginal weather the bees tend to make quick flights and return to the cluster. Few loitter at the entrance.

When the bees are flying, three photographs randomly sample hundreds of bees. When their not flying freely, these shots probably sample less than a dozen bees. I had considered tossing out the Dec. measurements for this reason, but posted them with with these limitations.


I have tried to coax them out by disturbing the entrance. But the bees that come out are in a defensive posture and attack the ruler. Very few are suitable for measuring. And they quickly retreat back into the warmth of the hive.

I initially chose the photographic approach because it was quick and easy. It also allowed me to measure living bees. Another approach, that might be interesting, would be to collect bee parts and allow them to dry in a dessicator. The individual parts could be accurately measured and compared.

The problems with getting enough bees properly oriented during the winter to avoid visual errors would be eliminated. But drying may introduce it's own set of errors.

Some Thoughts
Dennis




[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited December 28, 2003).]


----------



## Hillbillynursery (Nov 13, 2003)

About the dried bees. The size may shrink but it would mainly bee seen in the thorax and abdomin. As long as you compare the dried bees with dried bees and not the photoed bees your numbers should be right on. The hardened exoskeleton will not expand on contract but the joints in the abdomin may cause the length to change after drying.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hey Dennis,

I was thinking of you when I saw this info. In ABJ, Jan. 2004 pg. 50. They talk about Apis Mellifera lingustica spinola. They state that body length are:

worker 1.2 to 1.3
drones 1.4 to 1.6
queens 1.6 to 1.7

If you apply this info to your measurements above what do you think about it?

Clay


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Clayton,

How do you get the ABJ so fast? :> )

Looking at my measurements so far, they are generally smaller than the averages all of my small cell hive bees.

I reverted to actually measuring my bees when I couldn't visually determine the difference between small and large cell hive bees last fall. From past visual observations, the bees are largest about midsummer and then again in late winter.

Early spring bees are the smallest. I have some pictures of small cell sized, early spring bees next to their overwintered small cell sized sisters at:
http://bwrangler.litarium.com/seasonal-bee-size/ 

How the measurements for these small cell spring bees and bees from large cell sized hives would compare to those measurements in the ABJ should be interesting.

It would also be interesting to known when the measurements for those ABJ bees were taken for an accurate comparison as bee size appears to vary quite alot depending upon the season.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hi Dennis,

The figures from china as we talked about last night are 10% smaller than your measurements. Lets assume that these bees are on natural combs, even if there on foundation its still obvious that there cells are much smaller than what is common in most westernized nations. Also the range of 1.2 to 1.3 maybe indicate the flucuation in size through out the season. Could this indicate our bees (I include myself here too) are not fully regressed in size? This would lead me to more questions than answers!

Now my curiosity is up! I will have to measure my bees. I really don't want to open a hive at this time though. You think I could measure a few dead bees (fresh ones)and get a somewhat accurate measurement? I really wish I had the equipment to weigh bees so I could compare with Wedmore's weights. Anyone no where I could find a cheap scale for weighing individual bees?

Well anyways what are your thought?


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Clay,

I'm not sure what the status of beekeeping is in China. It could be that the state provides foundation to all the beekeepers. 

I would be curious to know if the A.M.M in China is as large as Dave Cushman has reported it to be in England.

In my bee measurements, I wanted to measure the live bee. There could be lots of dynamics involved with bee size that would be lost with the dried ones. I think I'll measure a few live ones and then dry them out and measure them again to see the difference.

It seems these projects develop a life of their own. And I seem to end up with more questions than answers also.

The results of your project should be very interesting and adding weight to the parameters could yield some neat info. Maybe a jewelry or pharmacy would have a scale that could be used to weigh a few bees.

Some Rambling Thoughts

Best Regards
Dennis


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Maybe a jewelry or pharmacy would have a scale that could be used to weigh a few bees.

A reloading scale will measure down to 10th of a grain (1/70,000 of a pound) and I think they are available in metric also, but you could measure in grains and convert.
http://www.admiralmetals.com/metric_conv.htm 

Or take the measurement in grains and multiply times 0.0647986


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

MB,

why didn't I think of that! I have a reloading scale.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I thought you did.


----------



## stephan (Jan 6, 2004)

Hi all,
how much does a small and a bigger bee weight.
I have a scale (an old and very big one from a goldsmith) and once measured the difference of the outgoing and incoming bees.
Stephan


----------



## db_land (Aug 29, 2003)

Bwrangler,
Your Dec. measurements seem to indicate that the avg. overall length (both small-cell and large-cell) of the bees got bigger but the thorax and abdommen sizes got smaller. Therefore, something that is not being measured must have gotten a lot bigger. What could this bee? The head? Is 1/3 of the bee not being measured? Is there any way you can correlate bee size with a specific brood-cycle (egg-laying binge?) of the queen? THANKS for doing this study.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi DB,

I'm sure sample size had a lot to do with it. I usually shot a round of photos at each hive entrance and then repeated the process. When the bees are flying, a random sample for each hive is generated.

But when the bees are not flying freely, all kinds of things can happen. It seems that a few bees will briefly fly and then a small clump will hang around the hive entrance. The resulting shots could sample the same bees three different times. And I could concievable measure the same bee more than once.

With such limited flight it's much easier for the bees to drift. I could have measured the wrong bee three different times! :> )

And the few bees that are cluster toward the entrance could be comprised mostly of a specific age or subfamily within the hive. Other subfamilies or ages might cluster elsewhere in the hive.

These are some of the reasons I thought hard about including Decembers measurements. But I posted them for what their worth.

I hadn't initially thought about tracking the bees throughout the year. I probably would do it differently, now. Clay is going to do some bee measuring using different parameters. Would you be willing to do some measuring? I bet you can come up with a better scheme than mine.

Best Regards
Dennis


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hey Dennis,

I don't know if I will do a month by month measurment due to time limitations. But my plan is to to sample a few bees from each hive into a glass jar. Place in the freezer till they stiffen up to be handled. Measure and release them. Hopefully this will work out fine. I hope to weigh them too if I can find the scale cup for my reloading scale.

Clay


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

It got up to 50 degrees today and the bees were flying. So I shot January's bees and did some measuring.

The bees were able to fly a little bit so I captured another round of photos and have measured them for December.

Averages
Large
Sept Oct..Nov..Dec..Jan
1.37 1.31 1.29 1.33 1.36 length
0.96 0.94 0.93 0.96 1.00 wing
0.45 0.38 0.37 0.35 0.36 thorax
0.46 0.46 0.47 0.45 0.44 abdomen

Averages
Small Cell Hives
Sept Oct.. Nov..Dec..Jan 
1.32 1.29 1.31 1.32 1.34 length
0.92 0.91 0.93 0.92 0.98 wing
0.45 0.35 0.37 0.34 0.37 thorax
0.45 0.45 0.47 0.43 0.48 abdomen

The sample was alot better this time than in December. The measurements for individual hives were very consistent. The bees were almost uniform size in my Russian hive.

The increased abdomen width in the small cell bees was very apparent on the photographs, even before measuring.

There's still not much difference betweeen large and small cell bees overall.

But discounting Decembers measurements, which were probably not very representative, both kinds of bees are getting larger through the winter.

As interesting as the results are to me, measuring bees is getting very tedious. It's as bad as counting mites on mite trays became after 6 years.

Clay, weighing bees is looking better all the time. :> )

Regards
Dennis

[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited January 09, 2004).]


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

I went out and gathered half a dozen dead bees and a few live ones in front of my large and small cell hives. I took some photos and did some measuring.

The dead dry bees had no change in wing length. 

I couldn't detect any change in thorax width as all the measurements were within variances I had seen before.

Bee length varied by up to about 20%. Most of that is due to the shrinking length of the abdomen. The shortest were about half the lenght of the longest.

Abdomen width remained constant, although the max width was far foward of its location on a live bee.

I shot a photo with both live, dead, small cell and large cell bees in one shot for visual comparison. But I forgot to set the camera in macro mode! The shot was too blurry to post. I couldn't see much difference between them. But I seem to have had this problem before :> )))

This test was quick and dirty. A better approach would be to measure the same bee alive and then dried. Next time.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hi Dennis,

I have finally got my hands on a fresh bee. Just landed in the snow as I was going into the house. I grabbed it and have made a few measurement.

length 1.26cm
wing length .97cm
thorax length .405cm as best I could tell
abdomen no measurement

Granted this is only a single bee. Best I could do for now.

Clay


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Clay,

It looks like you measured one of mine :> )

I measured thorax width rather than length.

Wouldn't it be interesting if lots of people from around the would measure a couple of bees during and post the results. The measurements could be catagorized by season, type of bee, foundation cell size, etc.

What do you think? The scope would be much wider than one guy making 300 measurements a month.

Regards
Dennis
I will cross post this at biobee.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hi Dennis,

I like the idea. We should make sure we are all measuring the same thing too. I will conform my measurement of the thorax to the width next time. I assume the abdomen is width too? I put that bee in the freezer to preserve it. I will measure it again. I was so excited to see a bee that I didn't think to make sure we were measuring the same. (well I at least got one hive thats alive, I dare not disturb any of them in -20 weather though (night)).

Clay


----------



## WineMan (May 16, 2003)

Theres a whole line of colonies right out the back door and I see bees on the snow. With the snow, any day that the sun comes out they poke their little heads out thinking its mid summer even though its only 30 degrees.

Whatcha want me to measure?? However, they'd all be those "big" bees. I might be able to measure some from the extracted attic though...I know there is some small sized cells in those combs.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

>Wouldn't it be interesting if lots of people from around the would measure a couple of bees during and post the results. The measurements could be catagorized by season, type of bee, foundation cell size, etc.


OK, I'm taking a stab at this. I don't have real small cell bees but I do have bees raised in Permacomb. This hive was a caught swarm from this spring that was queened with cordovan, in September I requeened with NWC. It's very easy to tell the two types apart.

I cleaned the bottom board Sunday of all debris and this evening I harvested the new bees that have accumalated. Some of them were quite hard to measure as when they warmed up in my hands they started squiggling about.

My only way of measuering was with dial calipers, so all measurements are in thousands.

The first thing I did was select the healthiest ten bees each of the two species and weighed them for an average weight.

I could not get them to open their wings for a good reading so I opted to just measure one wing length.

The oldest bees that were hatched summer through September, 

Cordovan,
weight 13.1 grains ave.
length .484 mean spread of .080
wing .393 ms .054
thorax .160 ms .011
abdomin .172 ms .011

The NWC, hatched October and later;

NWC,
weight 13.8 grains
length .479 ms .092
wing .360 ms .031
thorax .161 ms .015
abdomin .174 ms .011

Time consuming, no fun, but interesting. I hope you can get some use of these figures.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Bullseye Bill,


Are you measuring in inches with those calipers?

I converted your NWC weight to metric:

13.8 = .894

cordovan weight:

13.1 = .849

I have a reason I need metric measurements. My goal with all this measuring is to compare modern bee weights and lengths with pre 1920's info.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

>Are you measuring in inches with those calipers?


I do not have any metric measureing devices so I used my dial calipers that measure in one thousandths of an inch.

I will have to pick up a metric six inch scale for taking measurements off of drawn comb. I used to have one that was metric on one side and the other was inch, I haven't been able to find it for a long time. I have a lot of comb that I have collected through all of last year that I still haven't measured yet.

The weight, did you convert it to grams? If so, next time I will set my electric scale to grams instead of grains.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Why'd you have to ask that? I multiplied it by the number MB gave in a few posts previous to this one. I think it might be in milligrams. Now I feel stupid for not looking into that :>(


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

OK, what he posted was 7000 grains in a pound. We know from reloading that is the amount to divide by to see how many rounds we can reload from a pound of gun powder.

There are 453.6 grams in a pound
437.5 grains in an ounce
28.32 grams in an ounce
15.43 grains in a gram

and 25.4mm = one inch

So my NWC bee that weighed 13.8 grains weighs .894 gram

and my Cordovan that weighed 13.1 weighs .849 gram

I don't know how you did it, but you were right.

I'll have to work on the .001 ths to mm



[This message has been edited by BULLSEYE BILL (edited January 15, 2004).]


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Cordovan, summer hatch
weight 13.1 grains ave.
.849 gm
length .484 mean spread of .080
12.29mm
wing .393 ms .054
8.61mm
thorax .160 ms .011
4.01mm
abdomin .172 ms .011
4.36mm

The NWC, hatched October and later;

NWC,
weight 13.8 grains
.894mm
length .479 ms .092
12.16mm
wing .360 ms .031
9.14mm
thorax .161 ms .015
4.08mm
abdomin .174 ms .011
4.41mm

Basic equation is 25.4 x .??? = mm

Hope you can use these numbers, I'd like to know how these relate to large and small cell bee numbers.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Went and campared to Dennis's posted numbers.
A. I must be putting the decimal in the wrong place
B. His small cell abdomins are larger than his large cell abs.
C. Either my bees are shorter, or I'm mushin'em when I measure, but I wasn't.
D. My numbers relate to the lower end of the numbers posted in the ABJ
F. Exactly from what point should I measure from on the wing? My measurements are quite a bit shorter, perhaps I should have included the shoulder joint?


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

My small cell bee abs did measure wider than my large cell bees did in January.

I have posted some seasonal pictures of small and large cell bees toward the bottom of the page at http://bwrangler.litarium.com/seasonal-bee-size/ 

There's alot more to bee size than meets the eye :> )

Regards
Dennis


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I still think I can tell just by looking in the middle of summer. I can't seem to tell now, so I'm assuming there are times they are quite different and times they are not.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

>"The structure of a natural broodnest indicated that the bees use the smaller cell sizes from fall through the early spring. When the broodnest expands during the summer, larger cell sizes are incorporated into the broodnest. They comprise over half of it."


I was wondering if it might be due to better nutrition that they were larger after the flow?
To think that they were actully taking themselves to a larger and healthier size because of a better diet goes against all the theories on small cell.
Perhaps the bee scientests of old were studying the bees available to them in the summer through fall and believed that the larger size was the natural size of the bee. Hence the standard sizing of our foundation.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I dont think we know exactly all the reasons why cell size was increased, but any theory can help.

How do you think that goes against small cell theory, I am a little cloudy here.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

It was pretty clear in most of the old literature that the cell size was 5 cells to an inch which ='s about 5.05mm. Todays 5.4mm is almost but not quite what the drone size was back then. I don't think this is due to the fluctuation in size caused by diet. I would agree that diet, optimum nutrition; would probably make for a bit heavier bee. But probably not in the terms you are thinking of. From my studies it was pretty clear they were indeed trying to breed a bigger bee due to the though that the bee could carry more nectar per trip.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I think there are two issues here. Cell size. And bee size. If the cell size is small, those of use who have tried it have seen less mites and diseases. One question is, in a natural system where there are small cells and larger cells used for brood, what size are the bees? Are small cell bees actually smaller bees? In the summer it looks that way to me. But that is what bwrangler is trying to find out.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

An interesting quote from the 1975 edition of 'ABC and XYZ of Bee Culture', page 134:

In 1876 when A.I. Root, the original author of this book, built his first roll comb foundation mill, he had the die faces cut for five worker cells to the inch. While the bees built beautiful combs from this foundation, and the queen laid in the cells, yet, if given a chance they appeared to prefer their own natural comb not built from comb foundation. Suspecting the reason, Mr. Root then began measuring up many pieces of natural comb when he discovered that the initial cells, five to the inch, from his first machine were slightly too small. The result of his measurements of natural comb showed slightly over 19 worker cells to four inches linear measure, or 4.83 cells to one inch.

In Later years, H. H. Root, about to begin work on a new foundation mill, confirmed the measurements of his father, namely, 19 1/2 cells to four inches linear measure(4.83 cells to one inch), taken across the vertical cell walls. Measurements taken in the two diagonal directions downward between parallel walls were slightly more, if anything. This would make from 825 to 850 cells to the square decimeter, including both sides of the comb. The drone size would be 496. The reader is requested to remember these figures for that which is to follow further on.

When A.I. Root made a comb foundation with the same dimensions as the bees make--4.83 instead of 5 cells to the inch--he found that the bees and queen accepted the new foundation, and this has been the judgment of the bees and beekeepers for the last 65 years. To put the matter another way, 5 cells to the inch, 20 cell to the four inches is too small, while 19 1/2 cells to four horizontal inches is just right. This has been the standard, apparently , for the bes makers of brood foundation in the United States for the last 70 years.

Taking 825 to 850 cells to the square decimeter as standard, including both sides, Ursmar Baudous a Belgian, in 1893 concieved the idea that cells larger that 850 to the square decimeter would or could develop correspondingly larger bees....

(The text elaborates on Europes first effort to enlarge the bee which was 17 years after AI's first measurements establishe 19 1/2 cells per 4 inches. The next page describes work done by Dr. O.W. Park showing cell size was just one factor for bee size)BW

(quote continued on page 136)BW

....A.I Root, in the early seventies, and later M. T. Pritchard and H.H. Root, tried out various sized cells in honeycomb. Clearly it was shown that when the worker cells are too small--five to the linear inch--bees and the queen, when given a choice, preferred the larger cells--4.83 to the linear inch. Conversely, when the cells are too large there are difficulties that counter-balance the good.

The bees, and particularly the queen, if given their choice will select the normal-sized cells or 825 to 850 cells to the square decimeter. Its is well to note, too, that it is by no means proved that larger bees will produce a correspondingly larger amound of honey. We must not be mislead by enthusiasts not trained in scientific work. Too much may be taken for granted. As Caesar on old said, "Most people are inclined to believe what they want to believe." 

(end of quote)

A table is reproduced in the text. The 4.83 that the Roots refer to works out to about 5.21mm to 5.375mm cell size!

And it's apparent that the early foundation makers were not impressed with Europes idea of a larger bee or larger foundation. They didn't proceed along those lines. 

So what happened?

I'll bet A.I.'s first measurements were taken, in the spring, from the lower 1/3 of a natural brood comb. The bees would be using the smaller cell sized portion of the broodnest at that time. The rest of the comb would have honey and pollen in it.

He built his foundation mill at 5 cells per inch (5.0mm - 5.1mm) and tested the resulting foundation later in the season. The bees prefered their own comb to that foundation. This wouldn't surprise any small cell beekeeper whose has tried to get small cell foundation drawn any later than spring.

He measured the foundation the bees prefered in early to mid summer. Surprise, the brood mostly occupied the larger worker cells sizes that make up most of the broodnest. He built a new foundation mill with this larger size and the bees freely accepted it. This is no surprise to any beekeeper who has tried to get large cell sizes foundation drawn out at any time during the season.

A. I. was looking for one cell size and failed to see the seasonal dynamics involved with variable cell and bee sizes. He was opposed to working outside the natural size range of comb so didn't produce a product that artificially enlarged the bee as they did in Europe.

What if A.I. had asked himself why his cell measurements were different?

Some thoughts and way too much typing :> )

Regards
Dennis





[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited January 17, 2004).]


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

>I dont think we know exactly all the reasons why cell size was increased, but any theory can help.
How do you think that goes against small cell theory, I am a little cloudy here.


Wired, did BW's EXCELENT post help, or do you still have a question?
PS, glad to see your still around.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

OK here is Wedmores recordings of bee weights it is a copy from Robert Brenchely so I don't have to do all that typing







He does. There's a table of 'representative weights'; I don't know how 
its arrived at.. This is from the revised Second Edition, 1945, I don't know 
whether its in the original 1932 edition. 

Weight of worker on emerging 110mg

Weight on 8th day 158mg

Weight at 3 weeks old 100mg

Weight of old forager 80mg

Average weight of empty field bee 95mg

Average weight of loaded field bee 133mg (he regards this as a possible 
overestimate, so the figures aren't his)

Weight of old, starved field bee, say 60mg.

Its a start but not particularly helpful.

Regards,

Robert Brenchley
Birmingham UK


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

OK this is a big "IF", but what IF the weight remains relatively the same for both a larger and smaller cell bee? What can we conclude about the dynamics of the bees structure? Do you think we can conclude like Dee likes to allude too that its like a suit of armour (the exoskeleton) that just contract and expands (a tight or loose fit)? Comments?


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Clay and Everyone,

The table in the 1975 edition of the ABC and XYZ of Bee Culture, page 135, has some weights associated with different cell sizes.

The table is measuring the following parameters cells per sq. dm., Span, Wing root width, Wing Length, Thorax, Tongue, Body Length, Cell width, Comb thickness, Cells Volume, Sac capacity, Wing width, Weight at.

It's a very interesting table. I will try to reproduce some interesting portions of it. Beesource removes any extra spaces so I don't know how it will come out so I will have to insert some leading zeros, etc.
Cell.Cell..Wing...Thora.Body..Weight 
Area Diame.Length.......Lengt.At
0650 5.960 10.500 4.480 16.00 145
0700 5.750 10.106 4.312 15.40 138
0750 5.555 09.731 4.152 14.82 134
0800 5.375 09.375 4.000 14.28 129
0850 5.210 09.037 3.856 13.77 124
0900 5.060 08.718 3.720 13.28 119
0950 4.925 08.418 3.592 12.82 115
1000 4.805 08.137 3.472 12.40 111
1050 4.700 07.875 3.360 12.00 108

All measures are in mm and mg. Cell Area is cells per square decimeter. Cell diame is cell diameter. Thora is thorax. This work was first published in the January 3, 1934 editon of 'Bee World' by Baudoux, the originator of larger bees are better bees idea.

These weights show bigger bees are heavier bees.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys,

Well, the table came out almost right. I can go back into the editor and it looks perfect. I think both the post reply and editor must use a different font than appears when it's posted. But it still readable.

I think measuring and weighing bees through time will provide some very useful information. I had posted my bee size stuff on bee-l and got some interesting responces. Others had seen the seasonally smaller bees on large cell comb. When pollen sub was feed in the spring, no more small spring bees.

Now for some speculating :> )

What if seasonal nutritional availability is one factor in the seasonal fit between comb size and bees size.

Maybe smaller, lighter spring bees require less nutrition to raise in a small cell than a larger bee in a large cell. Maybe more small bees could be raised on the overwintered pollen and scanty early spring pollens which would be available at that time. Maybe impacts on the colony are reduced when smaller bees are lost during more hazadous early spring foraging.

Maybe, later in the spring and early summer, when a greater amount and variety of pollens become available, larger bees are raised in larger cells. Maybe these larger bees are more efficient foragers or ???.

It could be that cluster heating is also a factor. Maybe more small bees can be raised with a clusters heating capacity than larger bees. That capacity would be at a minimum in the early spring and that need would be the greatest.

I know from my own measurements that the data in Baudoux's table is not as tight as it may seem. And it certianly doesn't reflect what the bees do when left to themselves, as he was trying to invent a larger, better bee.

Regards
Dennis


----------

