# TF genetics



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Good luck with your efforts in trying TF beekeeping. I am trying as well.
In the Spring of 2014 I bought three packages from BeeWeaver. All three built up well to varying degrees. They all made it through winter, but two went queenless just before the flow started. While I was trying to decide what to my queen right hive decided for me by swarming.
I broke down the two hives that were queenless from double deeps into single deeps and froze the brood comb just in case. I used five of those brood combs to hive the first swarm. Then I did the same with the second swarm. Then I caught a third swarm and then a fourth from the same hive.
I combined the second and third swarms with the two hives that went queenless and am holding the fourth as insurance against the possibility of a combination failure.
I probably won't make much honey this year, but at least now I have five hives headed by daughters or grand daughters of the survivor queen. (fingers crossed) Maybe this blind squirrel found an acorn.
I don't know how many hives are in my area, but I do know there is a queen breeder of Russians in Heavener, Oklahoma named Velbert Williams. Maybe, there are a lot of drones in the area carrying the VSH traits. I have no way of knowing how quickly these traits get watered down or spread around.
I will say I don't know how my attempt at TF beekeeping is going to end up, I just know where I am today. As things unfold I will adjust my thinking accordingly and hopefully wisely.
Again, best of luck.
Alex


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

treatment free genetics seems to be an urban myth.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

mathesonequip said:


> treatment free genetics seems to be an urban myth.


 If by urban myths, you mean things such as wireless telephones, color tv.'s, space ships, horseless carriages and transmitting megabytes of data around the world in seconds so that people can discuss TF options in a TF forum, then I would have to agree with you that it, "seems to be". The TF approach may very well prove to be unsustainable, but I am going to find out for myself. If I have to resort to treatments to make a honey crop I will Eventually. Beekeeping is not my livelihood, I know that makes a difference in ones' approach.
I am not so hard headed as to believe I know the one and only way. Change doesn't happen by not trying anything new. 
Great things can happen when people cooperate. 
Sorry for the highjack, TerryC.
http://specialcollections.nal.usda....lection-screwworm-eradication-program-records


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

mathesonequip said:


> treatment free genetics seems to be an urban myth.


an urban myth no doubt but a rural america reality. 

really matheson, why not keep disparaging remarks to yourself or at least off this sub-forum.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Terry C said:


> The question in my mind is how much of the TF genetics that my breeder has produced is going to show up in the new queens ?


i think that over time and with successive generations of queens your bees will hybridize with whatever is in your local area. if you are lucky enough to have ferals surviving year after year and they are contributing drones to your matings then there is a good chance that you will be able to keep your bees off treatments and with acceptable losses. it's great that you are incorporating propagating more bees from your stock. between that and catching swarms from survivor colonies you may have a good shot at success. good luck.


----------



## exmar (Apr 30, 2015)

Very curious about this topic. I have two hives, the first one was sitting empty due to a winter die off at my brother's orchard. He said I could have it, so I went over to pick it up and discovered it had bees. I had previously opened it up and it was empty of bees. Evidently a wild or feral swarm had moved in that spring. I went back after dark, closed off all openings and hauled it home and set it up. That was eight years ago, I simply left it alone, kept the grass trimmed and provided water durinig dry spells. It was set up in a locust thicket. It continued to thrive, wasn't opened in all that time. Last year, the hive had physically deteoriated due to weather, wood rot, etc. I'd been trying to find a beekeeper to work with me and finally did last year. He came over and brought a "preowned" hive and transferred everything and added several supers. The bees performed great, he harvested a lot of honey, leaving two medium supers+ full for them. They made it through the winter and were showing signs of swarming this spring, so I called him and he came over and did a split using a hive I'd set up for that purpose. Both hives are doing great. I've also set up two additional hives using foundation, empty used comb and very old black comb and just baited them with swarm commander in hopes that it's not too late for another swarm to be interested.

The fellow who's helping me is a third generation beekeeper who's in his 60's and obviously knows what he's doing. I've been reading up on honeybees, particuarly all the challenges that face them. I asked about treatment's and he laughed. "I haven't seen a hive that strong with so many bees for twenty years. it was a wild swarm and where you're located (Way out in the country in SE Ohio) there are other wild swarms it's mating with, don't do anything." 

My question is, do the wild or feral bees have some resistance or ability to offset the challenges that "tame" hives face?

Apologize for lack of proper terminology.

Thanks for your time,

Ev


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Ev, if a colony of bees survived the onslaught of varroa, it must have traits that allow that survival. 99.9% of feral colonies were wiped out when varroa hit the U.S. in the early 1990's. For 10 years, there were almost no survivors. Gradually, the bees that could make it re-populated so that we have a reasonably high level of feral colonies in most areas where they can survive.

There is a fly in this ointment. If beekeepers in an area bring in mite susceptible queens, the drone population in that area will be saturated with genetics that overwhelm the resistance genes. If you want to keep bees treatment free, you MUST either be in an area where commercial beekeepers are rare or you must have a source for resistant queens that can be brought in.

There are 4 primary traits associated with survivor bees.

1. Brood breaks that interfere with the varroa reproduction cycle. Swarming or other man-made interventions such as re-queening a colony count as brood breaks. Unfortunately, this is the primary mechanism that I see in feral bees. It is a problem because swarming is a huge negative for honey production.

2. Allogrooming - where adult bees actively groom varroa mites off biting them which causes them to die. Allogrooming can be selected for by counting mauled mites on a mite board.

3. Hygienic behavior - adult bees detect varroa in brood cells and open them and remove the affected larvae. This behavior reduces the population of varroa. There will always be a few varroa in most colonies, but they will not reach economically damaging levels.

4. Reduced days to worker maturity. Variation is present for a worker bee to mature from an egg to an adult in 19 to 23 days. The life cycle of varroa is based on a 25 day cycle which corresponds to the drone maturity cycle. A female varroa mite will lay eggs in a drone cell, then typically 4 to 6 mites will emerge from the cell with the mature drone. In a worker cell, the same mite can only produce 2 or at most 3 mature female offspring. Shortening the worker cycle down to 19 days reduces this to a point that most foundress mites either do not reproduce or produce only 1 or 2 offspring.

This would not be complete without a discussion of small cell bees. Dee Lusby publicized the use of 4.9 mm foundation which is about .4 mm smaller than the manufactured size of foundation as used in the U.S. for the last 100 years. The thought was that the smaller natural sized cells would interfere with the varroa mites movements and/or that the resulting worker would mature in fewer days. I've had bees on small cell and on regular cell foundation for the last 11 seasons (since 2005) and have not been able to directly correlate mite resistance traits with small cell foundation. I do however find a few significant advantages of small cell foundation associated with spring buildup. For this reason, I run small cell in most colonies. Michael bush directly credits small cell with his bees survival. You can read about his experience on his website.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm


----------



## Terry C (Sep 6, 2013)

Fusion_power said:


> . If you want to keep bees treatment free, you MUST either be in an area where commercial beekeepers are rare or you must have a source for resistant queens that can be brought in.


 I think this is a big part of the reason for the successful non-treatment of the breeder I bought from . We're in a pretty isolated area , no mono-cropping here and no big commercial operations in the area . Until I got bees down here in The Holler I never saw any honey bees at all . Tons of other pollinators , but no bees . I was actually concerned that my virgin queens would not be able to find drones to mate with - a concern that has been proven wrong as I have 2 (probably 3 by now) new queens mated and laying now . I really wanted some honey this year , but it looks like that isn't going to happen . The other side of that coin is that all my hives have had a brood break , and I'm optimistic that this has knocked mite populations down to the point that they won't be a problem . I'll be doing some sugar shakes later this summer just to see where I stand just to bee sure . With any luck at all mite populations will remain low because of the isolation and minimal contact with "outsider" bees .
Now about SHB's , last year I used a frame top trap in the one colony I had . I think I caught maybe 5-6 all summer . The equipment I've built has been designed with as few small cracks etc as possible in hopes that this will help the bees control them by denying them any places to hide . Again , I'll be putting traps in a couple of hives (I only have 2) to monitor them .


----------



## exmar (Apr 30, 2015)

Thanks so much for the responses! Lots to "study on" as we hillbillies say. I'm in an area of "used to be" small farms, just growing up in brush and trees now, as small farms, like small anything in our current society aren't economically feasable. Based on my research and chatting with the County bee inspector the closest hives are about 18 miles away. My farm is about 60 acres which has grown up except for about 15 acres for hay, I did sow some white clover in that. Both the bee inspector and the fellow who is helping me commented that my hives look like Italians, but are more aggressive than they're used to. The bee inspector also commented on the number of bees and how productive they were. Neither of them will go near the hives without at least veil and gloves, I only do that when I'm moving frames, etc. Opening hives to inspect, etc. I have no problem, I've been stung twice to date. They commented they act like "wild" bees, whatever that means.

My brother who lives about 3/4 mile up the road (He got the North end of the family farm and I got the South) has feral honeybees we think, whenever his wife's flowers or shrubs are blooming. Smaller than I'm used to seeing and almost black? They are AGGRESSIVE, you don't prune or anything when they're about. Didn't think honeybees would go after you when they're collecting nectar, pollen, etc. these do.

"Honey production" isn't an issue with us. We primarily just want to help the bees, if I can get a dozen 12-16oz. plastic bottles of honey per year to mail out at Christmas we're happy. From the little bit I know about it, my heart goes out to those of you who invest the resources, including blood sweat and tears in this arena. 

The "sugar shake" seems of interest as it's non invasive, non chemical, etc. Is there a preferred time to do this?

Due to health issues, this may be the last year I have the fellow who helps me. I've already got a line on a used extractor, etc. as I may have to become a real beekeeper, rather than an interested owner or whatever. At least to the extent I want to be. Very glad I found this forum as I will have lots of questioins as I get into this.

Thanks again,

Ev


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

exmar said:


> My question is, do the wild or feral bees have some resistance or ability to offset _the challenges_ that "tame" hives face?


(italics mine)

that is a good question ev and a great response by dar. although the title of the thread is 'tf genetics', i'd like to key in on 'the challenges' managed hives face that you premise in your question.

the bees that we keep are indeed exposed to an additional set of stressors that their feral cousins are not. for example having more than one colony in close proximity is something that you don't find very often in the natural setting. since many of the diseases and pests are transmitted from bees to bees having multiple hives in the same yard increases the opportunity for communicating unwanted pests and pathogens. too many hives placed in one spot can also push a location's forage availability beyond what is healthy and/or productive for the colonies.

then there is the stressor to the managed colonies of having their hives ransacked from time to time as part of our need to inspect and manipulate them to suit our purposes, not to mention that feral colonies don't have anyone robbing resources from them.

another consideration is the complex ecosystem comprised of untold many different microorganisms within the hive, most of which are symbiotic with the bees and very likely necessary for a colony to function optimally and stay healthy. it's not clear how much or how little the things the beekeeper introduces to the hive (including feed) alter this ecosystem, but it should be recognized as a factor when comparing feral vs. managed colonies.

for these reasons i view the term 'natural beekeeping' as a bit of an oxymoron. i'm not trying to paint managing bees as a practice necessarily detrimental to the bees, and would suggest to the contrary that good husbandry has the potential to help the species. on balance i believe beekeeping by humans is doing that. 

regardless of one's treating philosophy i think most would agree that the more you can work within the framework of what the bees are trying to do and the least disruptive you can be the better it is for the bees, which in turn should translate into better success for the beekeeper.

you are fortunate ev to have access to those bees, my advice is propagate the heck out of them.


----------



## exmar (Apr 30, 2015)

Thanks Squarepeg. 

I guess the fundamental question I'm evaluating is, so far, keeping bees is successful for me. Now that I'm getting more into it, like all neophytes, want to do more for them. Every beekeeping forum I visit is full of treatments and things, none of which I'm doing. Am I doing enough? "If it ain't broke....." does come to mind. 

To mix "apples and rhutabagas," "...having more than one colony in close proximity." I remember when I was a kid, there was a huge sycamore tree, about 8 feet across at the base which had lost some limbs and developed holes at those points. Somewhere I have a picture of it with what "appeared" to be three different bee colonies in residence. At least there were large concentrations of bees hovering and landing on three different holes widely spaced. OK, that was in the late 50's, so bees then and now are the reference above to "apples and...." 

Perhaps I should move the two "trap hives" to another area(s) of the estate as I hadn't considered close proximity of hives to be an issue. 

I guess like everything else, the more I learn about bees, the less I think I know.

Will take your advice and "propagate the heck out them." 

Thanks again,

Ev


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

mathesonequip said:


> treatment free genetics seems to be an urban myth.


sigh... I do so enjoy living a myth... bought B. Weaver packages and queens beginning in 2005. Have NEVER done mite treatments, not even mite counts. My annual losses run 6-23%, and are weather and queen related. My bees regularly produce enough honey to sell at a local farmer's market the whole time the market is open. 

Terry, you were wise in buying B. Weaver bees... good stock. 

By the way, let's not tell the Weavers they are a myth, ok? Don't want to burst their bubble. 

Regards,
Steven


----------



## Terry C (Sep 6, 2013)

StevenG said:


> s
> Terry, you were wise in buying B. Weaver bees... good stock.
> 
> By the way, let's not tell the Weavers they are a myth, ok? Don't want to burst their bubble.
> ...


 Actually , I got my bees from a breeder right here in Stone County Arkansas . Ed Levi has been breeding from dark Russian stock for quite a while now and lives about 6 miles from me as the bee flies . For all I know he's buying his breeder queens from Weaver . I'm hoping that the genetics he has been breeding for have gotten into the local population . Surely his drones have had an effect on local feral colonies ... We shall see how it goes . The only thing I can do is monitor my hives to see if they're still maintaining low mite counts .


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

StevenG; Terry bought from a fellow that raises his queens from II Breeder queens, not from BWeaver. The II queens his breeder used to use came from Glenn in CA, where he gets any from now I don't know.

You should do counts, it may be interesting, what you find. My bees that have not been treated carry heavy mite loads, but show few or no crawlers. Some of them are swarm crazy, others are no worse than the average bees. Their temper varies from colony to colony also, but on average they are not as laid back as colonies that have been treated.

A few years ago I had a queen that dropped an average of 1 mite in a 72 hour natural mite fall each month from May until August. I messed around and let her swarm out before I had raised daughters from her. The averages now in my yard are 20s to 50s average per 72 hours. The count will grow until late summer when some colonies reach 100 to 120, then taper off. I always thought the queen I lost came from Weavers, but I got her from a beekeeper that would never say where he bought her. I have 6 queens from BWeaver due to be delivered the last of this month, I am interested in how they will actually compare with the 4 queens from my Bond Yard. 

I suspose beekeepers will always search for the Holy Grail of Beekeeping, the perfect Queen Mother.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Terry C said:


> The only thing I can do is monitor my hives to see if they're still maintaining low mite counts .


i took counts (alcohol wash) on a few of mine last fall and they ranged from 9% to 13%. when i reported that here several of the folks using commercial stock commented that infestations that high would likely collapse a colony or at least keep it from making it through the winter.

astrobee is also reporting that his resistant stock is tolerating levels that don't exceed 15%, (i think).

i'm leaning toward paying more attention to the broodnest during the late summer/early fall brood up period and looking for signs of disease as opposed to relying on mite counts. if the bees somehow have enough natural resistance to the viruses that the mites are vectoring the infestation rate may not be telling the whole story.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

I, also have BeeWeaver bees.

Alex


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

AHudd said:


> I, also have BeeWeaver bees.
> 
> Alex


 I forgot, I already said that. 

Alex


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Terry C said:


> ... what do y'all think the chances are ?


1184:863 the new queens will have a similar level of vitality and tolerance/resistance, and the mites they are co-habiting with will be of similar voracity.



Its incalculable. The fact is some of your new colonies will be stronger (under no treatment) than others. If you can mate them where tolerant/resistant drones are likely to be found/untolerant drones less likely, you'll improve your chances of getting more/stronger ones. 

The best way forward is to make lots of colonies, with these things in mind; accept that some won't thrive, and keep them all under conditions that will allow you to continually evaluate for the best to raise new stocks from. It will be your intelligent selection (and drone finding), and your intelligent management, that will safeguard and improve your bees in the long run. 

Unintelligent bee-'keeping' fails, unless you are lucky with ferals or local beekeepers being tf. 

That's called bee husbandry.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

mathesonequip said:


> treatment free genetics seems to be an urban myth.











I collected this cast last night. They came from a colony behind the vents seen in the background. The colony has been there for several years at least (strong testimony) and I saw it last year and early this year. This is at least the third cast -I collected the first, missed the prime and second - there may have been more. AFAIN non one has been treating them - other than with forebearance.

I can show you photos of 9 other long lived feral colonies I know locally, both rural and urban.

That there are no feral bees is (self-serving) myth. That bees cannot survive - and thrive - without treatments - is (self-serving) myth.

Bees do just fine when you stop genetically poisoning them.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

squarepeg said:


> (italics mine)
> 
> the bees that we keep are indeed exposed to an additional set of stressors that their feral cousins are not. for example having more than one colony in close proximity is something that you don't find very often in the natural setting.


I know of 2 local counterexamples SP. 5 colonies in a single garage roof (was 4) and three in a hung tile elevation. And like most beekeepers I've experience of fly-ins to empty hives adjacent to full ones. 

I think this is a myth grown up around a single study (be Seeley) at the height of the varroa epidemic, where distance was indeed a necessary advantage. It isn't any more. Its like cities emptying villages abandoned during the height of the Black Death. There was an advantage - at that phase. Pretty soon though everybody calmed down and people went back to living together because there are advantages. In the bees' case perhaps this is that casts don't tend to fly far/emerge without a new home already lined up...?

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

AR Beekeeper said:


> I suspose beekeepers will always search for the Holy Grail of Beekeeping, the perfect Queen Mother.


Like Nature, a husbandryman is always trying to create the ideal offspring.. from the ideal parents. Stop doing that and the organism's most fundamental health-giving mechanisms is lost. 

Undermine it (by treating an open mating animal) and you very quickly get pathetic and tragic utter dependence.

Mike (UK)


----------



## wadehump (Sep 30, 2007)

exmar said:


> Very curious about this topic. I have two hives, the first one was sitting empty due to a winter die off at my brother's orchard. He said I could have it, so I went over to pick it up and discovered it had bees. I had previously opened it up and it was empty of bees. Evidently a wild or feral swarm had moved in that spring. I went back after dark, closed off all openings and hauled it home and set it up. That was eight years ago, I simply left it alone, kept the grass trimmed and provided water durinig dry spells. It was set up in a locust thicket. It continued to thrive, wasn't opened in all that time. Last year, the hive had physically deteoriated due to weather, wood rot, etc. I'd been trying to find a beekeeper to work with me and finally did last year. He came over and brought a "preowned" hive and transferred everything and added several supers. The bees performed great, he harvested a lot of honey, leaving two medium supers+ full for them. They made it through the winter and were showing signs of swarming this spring, so I called him and he came over and did a split using a hive I'd set up for that purpose. Both hives are doing great. I've also set up two additional hives using foundation, empty used comb and very old black comb and just baited them with swarm commander in hopes that it's not too late for another swarm to be interested.
> 
> The fellow who's helping me is a third generation beekeeper who's in his 60's and obviously knows what he's doing. I've been reading up on honeybees, particuarly all the challenges that face them. I asked about treatment's and he laughed. "I haven't seen a hive that strong with so many bees for twenty years. it was a wild swarm and where you're located (Way out in the country in SE Ohio) there are other wild swarms it's mating with, don't do anything."
> 
> ...


I am in Jackson Ohio which is 8 miles from EXMAR. I have 14 hives that all came from caught swarms and cut outs I DO NOT TREAT AT ALL. My bees live and they die The last 2 winters that we have had were some of the worst on record with the length of cold snaps and snow. I have 1 out yard with 6 hives that was as high as 12 hive 3 summers ago due to splits,swarms and cutouts they are what is left. Some of these hives are going on 5 years with no treatments at all. So yes EXMAR they do offer the ability to fend off the challenges of todays beekeeping. All of my bees have mites as does yours it is just how they deal with them that sets them apart from the dead ones.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> an urban myth no doubt but a rural america reality.
> 
> really matheson, why not keep disparaging remarks to yourself or at least off this sub-forum.


If it were the genetics then the traits would be reproducible and every bee breeder would be incorporating those genes into their queens, like VSH. That may be Don's point.

And if you don't like someones succinct point, don't react to it. Your reaction only keeps it in play.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> If it were the genetics then the traits would be reproducible and every bee breeder would be incorporating those genes into their queens, like VSH.


The all the bees would live much longer and half the bee breeders would be out of business. Follow the money. Always, follow the money.

Besides that; the veterinary management model works for commercials. It pays better than our model. That's why they do it. 



sqkcrk said:


> And if you don't like someones succinct point, don't react to it. Your reaction only keeps it in play.


I disagree. Falsehood must be called. And interesting further points often emerge.

Mike (UK)


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

mike bispham said:


> The all the bees would live much longer and half the bee breeders would be out of business. Follow the money. Always, follow the money.


I disagree. There would still be plenty of business to be had. There was preMites.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

mike bispham said:


> I know of 2 local counterexamples


it seems that bees are always more than happy to provide us with counterexamples.  i suppose our individual realities are fashioned by our personal experiences mike. i live in a moderately wooded area with a low population density. my yards have 8 - 10 colonies within less than a stone's throw of each other which is much more crowded than is possible in nature, assuming that tree hollows are the preferred target of a swarm scouting out a new home. further, i've observed swarms fly right past baited traps and into the nearby woods. perhaps it all boils down to availability.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> I disagree. There would still be plenty of business to be had. There was preMites.


It stands to reason [...] there would be less. 

Its a version of planned obsolescence, or 'addiction'. Probably among the most profitable strategies in capitalism.

Much of the 'beekeeper' support industry' is heavily invested in bees being sick. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

squarepeg said:


> ... my yards have 8 - 10 colonies within less than a stone's throw of each other which is much more crowded than is possible in nature, assuming that tree hollows are the preferred target of a swarm scouting out a new home. further, i've observed swarms fly right past baited traps and into the nearby woods. perhaps it all boils down to availability.


I think so SP. In (proper) nature where trees grow to maturity and slowly decay, fall and are not cleared up quickly, there are often multiple local cavity opportunities. I've mention before cliff bees living in very close proximity - probably just budding off as often as swarming. If they can live closely, the chances are they will. They're not territorial - they don't try to see each other off - so there's really nothing except disease and forage opportunity to limit density. Where and when they can get away with it they will.

Around here we have 'solitary' bees that live in burrows and dry hollow stems. Where conditions are right these can quickly boom into 'colonies' of tens of thousands. That will probably come to and end as a result of disease at some point; then the whole thing will start over. 

We're seeing conditions in the (muddled and artificially prolonged) midle of an epidemic. Seeley was loking at the peak. There's no reason to think these conditions are normal. the only thing that's normal is boom and bust and the drive to reproduce.

Mike (UK)


----------



## wadehump (Sep 30, 2007)

sqkcrk said:


> I disagree. There would still be plenty of business to be had. There was preMites.


AH TO GO BACK TO Pre mites I would have 50 hives and working bees all day every day.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> If it were the genetics then the traits would be reproducible and every bee breeder would be incorporating those genes into their queens, like VSH. That may be Don's point.
> 
> And if you don't like someones succinct point, don't react to it. Your reaction only keeps it in play.


mark, i've felt for awhile now that while genetics are important there are other factors in play. i believe that location may be the most important factor insofar as it having adequate habitat and forage availability to support feral survivors, with management practices coming in a close second (i.e. leaving enough honey for the bees to overwinter on ect.). there's not likely to be a 'treatment free gene', and with outmating and polyandry it would be difficult to reproduce anyway. jmho.

i don't reply much to the top bar hive or commercial forums because i have no experience with those aspects of beekeeping and i don't feel i can contribute, but when i do it's not to throw cold water on the discussion because i don't happen to believe in what the others are doing. there is no need for that here or in any other forum.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

wadehump said:


> AH TO GO BACK TO Pre mites I would have 50 hives and working bees all day every day.


That's me.

Mike (UK)


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

mike bispham said:


> It stands to reason [...] there would be less.
> 
> Its a version of planned obsolescence, or 'addiction'. Probably among the most profitable strategies in capitalism.
> 
> ...


I guess if you want to look at things that way, you are right. I don't. So I am right too.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> mark, i've felt for awhile now that while genetics are important there are other factors in play.


That's my point, I guess. How could it be genetics when TF beekeepers keep bees of different origins? And why haven't those genetic traits been isolated and reproduced? Why isn't there TF genetics being propogated and spread across the Nation like an inoculation against a plague. There are loads and loads of new beekeepers who don't want to use chems in their hives and they have plenty of money to spend.

Saying it's "the money" is a cop out.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I know you guys would rather talk about something else. So, in deference to you all I am going to unsubscribe so you can get back to the discussion without a nonTF beekeeper making comments. Thanks for putting up with me.
MarkB


----------



## exmar (Apr 30, 2015)

I think this is pertinent to this "ever widening" discussion. Happened to see something on the ABC news tonight that the "Guv'ment" has decided to do something about the "honeybee" crisis. The USDA has commissioned a 15 or 150 million (I forget) dollar study to evaluate the situation. They did have some true facts, e.g. "one bite out of three of the food we eat is pollinated by bees." I suppose it's a good thing that they are actually noticing there's something wrong. However, IMHO, as big as the "Guv'ment" is the amount of money allocated is laughable, what findings or results will they possibly be able to produce?

Grumble, grumble. 

Ev


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> That's my point, I guess. How could it be genetics when TF beekeepers keep bees of different origins? And why haven't those genetic traits been isolated and reproduced?


(paraphrase) 'All bee races and strains have the genes needed for hygienic behaviours' Marla Spivak

They are just at low levels in treated populations, and populations unexposed to varroa. They are at much higher levels in feral populations. 

Many of the genes needed for better mite tolerance have indeed been isolated by Spivak, Kefuss, the Weavers and many others, and they have been spread around and shared. Your premise is incorrect. 



sqkcrk said:


> Why isn't there TF genetics being propogated and spread across the Nation like an inoculation against a plague. There are loads and loads of new beekeepers who don't want to use chems in their hives and they have plenty of money to spend.


Mostly because of endless 'drag' from those who believe, genuinely and/or conveniently, but mostly through sheer ignorance, that there is no milage in tf beekeeping. They put up a constant drone promoting the veterinary model of management, and shout down anyone who tries to put forward a different view. People, that is, like you Mark. 



sqkcrk said:


> Saying it's "the money" is a cop out.


Its a very big factor. If its possible to make money flow down a path, it tends to, largely regardless of whether the thing that's making it possible is a social good in the bigger picture. The big commercial beekeepers, farmers and agro-chemists have some of the best funded and most powerful lobbies in the world, and push their worldviews through the regulatory machinery, meaning official advice tends to be geared to their needs. Agro-chem farming - and beekeeping - on an industrial scale is what suits them. That type of management maximises reliability, and profit. More money. More money. 

Its also true to say the critical distinction between an open mating animal and one that is amenable to controlled mating, and the significances that flow from that distinction are not generally appreciated by a great many of the people making the rules and handing out advice. And those people who try to make that critical factor plain (me) seem to get shouted down hardest of all. 

And then, as I say, there are those can make money while bees are sick, and who'd lose part, or all, their livelihood if they were not. They naturally tend to push their 'understanding' of the situation.

All this has, collectively, supplied an environment in which a consistent narrative has won the day, telling a story about how beekeepers are saving the bee from the fatal mite, thus safeguarding the world's food supply. Many beekeepers (and participants in the chemical supply chain) feel a warm glow. It is all, forgive my English vernacular, complete b*****ks from start to end. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

exmar said:


> They did have some true facts, e.g. "one bite out of three of the food we eat is pollinated by bees."


Can you tell us what your evidence is for believing that to be true?

Mike (UK)


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

> They are just at low levels in treated populations, and populations unexposed to varroa. They are at much higher levels in feral populations.


All of the work I know about shows that HYG and VSH are not selected for by 'not treating' or 'being feral'. These are 'hypertraits' and need to be selected for directly through assays, not assumed to be a trait if survivors.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

deknow said:


> All of the work I know about shows that HYG and VSH are not selected for by 'not treating' or 'being feral'. These are 'hypertraits' and need to be selected for directly through assays, not assumed to be a trait if survivors.


I think I'd say any traits or combinations of traits that are present and useful will be located by natural selection, and refined over time. That's just how things work. That will include HYG and VSH.

What is the technical distinction between a 'trait' and a 'hypertrait', and from where does it originate?

Of course, in natural populations different 'strategies' will be located. There'll be a whole ecosystem of responses to varroa, and we'll see different ones in play in different places and at different times. The relationship between prey and predator is dynamic, ever-changing. And individuals, and strains, are in competition, bringing those that work best, and any particular time and place, to the fore. That's just how it works. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I think that is what you would say as well....but there is zero evidence that "survivors" (even AHB) assay particularly high in HYG or VSH.

There are many traits that are selected for in survivor populations, you have picked two to highlight that arent.


----------



## dsegrest (May 15, 2014)

I have given up on measuring mite-drop. That seems to have very little relationship to the infestation level. 

The important thing is not how many mites are in the hive anyway. The important thing is how the bees deal with them. having a high mite drop can mean that there are a lot of mites. It can also mean that the bees are doing a good job of getting rid of them.


----------



## Terry C (Sep 6, 2013)

dsegrest said:


> I have given up on measuring mite-drop. That seems to have very little relationship to the infestation level.
> 
> The important thing is not how many mites are in the hive anyway. The important thing is how the bees deal with them. having a high mite drop can mean that there are a lot of mites. It can also mean that the bees are doing a good job of getting rid of them.


 :applause: Ladies and Gentlemen , I believe we have a winner .


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

deknow said:


> I think that is what you would say as well....but there is zero evidence that "survivors" (even AHB) assay particularly high in HYG or VSH.
> 
> There are many traits that are selected for in survivor populations, you have picked two to highlight that arent.


Interesting: I stand adjusted, thanks. I wonder though how much of that "zero evidence" results from few people actually looking? 

Will you get back to me on that 'trait'/'hypertrait' distinction. (I tried searching 'evolution' and 'hypertrait'. Result 9, which is the first that seemed in the right ballpark area was to beesource and... you: 2010, telling me the same thing. Are you sure this isn't you're own coinage and concept Dean?)

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

dsegrest said:


> I have given up on measuring mite-drop. That seems to have very little relationship to the infestation level.
> 
> The important thing is not how many mites are in the hive anyway. The important thing is how the bees deal with them. having a high mite drop can mean that there are a lot of mites. It can also mean that the bees are doing a good job of getting rid of them.


Same here. The important thing to me is much honey do they store, and do they do it at least 2 years in a row. I don't even look for mites. If I saw DWV they'd get a black mark. I haven't seen any this year - but I haven't been looking all that hard.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>The important thing is not how many mites are in the hive anyway. The important thing is how the bees deal with them. having a high mite drop can mean that there are a lot of mites. It can also mean that the bees are doing a good job of getting rid of them.

"it's not about mite counts. It's about survival"--Dann Purvis


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

How is Dan Purvis surviving these days? I haven't heard anything from or about him lately.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

deknow said:


> I think that is what you would say as well....but there is zero evidence that "survivors" (even AHB) assay particularly high in HYG or VSH.
> 
> There are many traits that are selected for in survivor populations, you have picked two to highlight that arent.


 This is where I get lost in these discussions. If these survivor bees don't assay particularly high in these traits, then they do possess them to some degree.
I thought selecting for these traits through breeding was the whole point of the VSH program. I am not being difficult, but these two statements seem contradictory to me. :scratch:

Alex


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Michael Bush said:


> "it's not about mite counts. It's about survival"--Dann Purvis


Can I offer a new concept, illustrated in its descriptive: 'Surthrival'. Kind of 'hyper-survival'.

'Surthrival' encapsulates the necessity not to simply survive, but to survive better than the competition.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

> but there is zero evidence that "survivors" (even AHB) assay particularly high in HYG or VSH.


Survival is the objective, whether it is from hygiene or allogrooming or other traits is unimportant so long as economic traits are not compromised. In other words, as long as they make honey and don't need treatments and survive just fine on their own thank you, I'm satisfied. This is my 11th season treatment free. My bees are thriving.


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

Sqkcrk, I was wondering about Dan Purvis myself...I had great good fortune with his queens.

Terry C and AR Beekeeper, thanks for clarifying your source of bees/queens. 

Years ago, before this section of the forum was set up (TF Beekeeping) a few of us ventured out to report results on our TF beekeeping, and the bees we used. The "discussion" became quite violent and opinionated (imagine that! ) and some of the more "scientific" types wanted me and some others to set up controlled studies. I and others reported then that was not our purpose...we were simply reporting results of our field work with our bees. I AM NOT scientifically oriented, just not wired that way. I have great respect for those who are, and depend on their work. But for me, I'll let others do the breeding, others experience the losses, others reap the benefits when they sell bees they've developed to be treatment free. I will gladly pay them for their efforts, IF their efforts truly bear fruit. I don't care HOW my bees survive and thrive, I just care that they DO. Thus for me, mite counts and the attendant equipment is irrelevant and an unnecessary expense and waste of time. That is why I have chosen not to do it. I don't have enough time to do all I have to do, much less what I want to do, as it is. 

And that is why I suggest to newbees that they get proven bees... you do not have to reinvent the wheel, so to speak. If you try, and you do not have deep pockets, you are simply setting yourself up for grief. But then, opinions are like noses, everyone has one. 

Kindest Regards,
Steven


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i think that it is more likely than not that over the millennia that bees have been around that they have encountered novel pests and pathogens many times over and that varroa is just the latest and happens to be occurring during our lifetimes.

it is also likely that the traits that breeders are selecting for were already there in some form or fashion and are now surfacing again as needed to deal with today's threats. in the same way that other traits can be increased by queen and drone selection so can these.

it's just a wag on my part, but i'm thinking a change in the genome isn't really necessary let alone practical. commercially bred strains as well as the feral survivors that are developing resistance to mites suggests that those traits can and are becoming more prevalent in just the couple of decades since the arrival of varroa.

whether we'll see in our lifetimes the day that mite treatments won't be required in commercial settings is another matter.


----------

