# Small Scale VSH genetics and hybridization



## marshmasterpat (Jun 26, 2013)

This is a by product of the other thread ( http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?305151-VSH-bees-and-hybridization ) . It is a very education thread and I would like to thank everyone. Will be rereading it for a while to digest it all. 

However, in that thread they are looking a mainly larger operations and I can see how that could be used to flood the local area with VHS genes much more easily than for a small scale operator with say a limit of 20 hives. But is there any thing specific that a small time bee keeper could do to increase the odds of maintaining VSH genes in the local population and their apiary.

So I was wondering what a small time operator could be doing beside purchasing VSH queens and just doing the standard replace the queen. I know some of mine have some mite resistance, but then lots of data points to it is the second year the issue typically explode. So I might not know what type resistance I have till next summer. So more intensive testing of VSH traits will be done in the spring before I start raising queens. 

So I am looking for specific practices that a small type beekeeper could do within the operation of under 20 hives to help maintain VSH traits after introducing the initial VSH queen (or a few queens) to the mix. 

My ideas are:

If someone purchased II queens would it be worth keeping them in a double nuc with queen on bottom, a queen excluded and let the thing explode in population, build some Queen Cells. Then pull the queen and create a new nuc with standard set up, move the exploding portion and let them swarm. You would keep you EXPEN$IVE II queen investment and gain 1 nuc with F1 genes and add swarms to the local population with F1 VSH genetics. And keep doing this throughout the summer. I could still be raising F1 queens for the operation from grafting (or however) and would slowly increase the expression of VSH genes locally. 

A second method would be to regularly introduce excess drone foundation to the VSH hive. I could then pull and replace it weekly and keep spreading that foundation among all the surrounding hives to try to more quickly saturate the local apiary/population with VSH drones. That would increase the chances of the operator's F1 of being successful in mating with a VSH drone and would increase the VSH gene in the surrounding areas. 

Are these lame duck attempts or would they work? Any other ideas that would work.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

marshmasterpat said:


> If someone purchased II queens would it be worth keeping them in a double nuc with queen on bottom, a queen excluded and let the thing explode in population, build some Queen Cells. Then pull the queen and create a new nuc with standard set up, move the exploding portion and let them swarm.


Not wise.

II queens don't store the level of sperm that a naturally mated queen does. They typically don't last as long. That's why breeders will keep their II queen in a nuc, or bound into a 3 frame area within a standard hive. In addition to it helping them find the queen (and newly hatched larvae), it restricts their laying ability and enables them to finish out the year. As they don't store the same level of sperm, they usually can't turn themselves into gang buster layers, meaning if you leave her not in check, and she isn't able to lay the eggs to cause the hive to explode, sometimes the hive will supersede her.

I don't know this for certain, but if you let the II queen just lay like gang busters, she wouldn't last long. Then you would have wasted a boat load of cash on an II queen.

You would be better off keeping the II queen restricted to laying ability but graft from her, creating your own queens, rather than letting it swarm.



marshmasterpat said:


> A second method would be to regularly introduce excess drone foundation to the VSH hive. I could then pull and replace it weekly and keep spreading that foundation among all the surrounding hives to try to more quickly saturate the local apiary/population with VSH drones.


It likely won't do anything.

Spreading drones from one hive to another doesn't really do anything. It's all about flooding Drone Congregation Areas with the right drones. DCAs are formed mysteriously. They don't really know how, or where, they are formed, although they have a tenancy of being formed in some of the same spots year after year. Hives that are located in similar areas, even if not genetically connected, will typically have drones attend the same DCAs. Queens then travel to _different_ DCAs than the ones the local drones attend. At least typically. This would mean you can spread the drones around your own apiary all you want, it won't really do anything to affect the DCAs that the queens you are attempting to raise are likely to visit, and it won't change future genetics.

It's equivalent to buying 4 single grass seeds. You could plant them all in one spot, or spread them out across the whole yard. In the end, it doesn't really matter. It's a drop in the bucket of the overall picture.

You could, however, spread your hives out. Say you had 20 hives. Divide them into groups of 4. Put one hive location in the center, than move each other group 2 miles away, on each point of the compass (one group 2 miles north, another 2 miles east, ect.). Acquire open mated VSH queens, and put them in each of your four out yards. Then acquire an II queen. Graft from her, and have the offspring mate from the central yard. These mated queens can then next year be used to replace the outyard queens, and you purchase a new II queen and repeat.

Probably the best way to do it on a small scale.


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

Specialkayme said:


> DCAs are formed mysteriously. They don't really know how, or where, they are formed, although they have a tenancy of being formed in some of the same spots year after year. Hives that are located in similar areas, even if not genetically connected, will typically have drones attend the same DCAs. Queens then travel to _different_ DCAs than the ones the local drones attend..


That's the theory but I have seen virgin queens of mine mate over my own apiaries a couple of dozen times.
They are supposed to travel to a distant DCA but that is not always the case.
If you are confident about the qualities of a queen, producing a lot of drones from her should be a very beneficial strategy.


----------



## beekuk (Dec 31, 2008)

Specialkayme said:


> II queens don't store the level of sperm that a naturally mated queen does. They typically don't last as long.


Depends on who is doing the inseminating, they can head full size colonies and be productive for three years, often superior to naturally mated queens.

http://169.237.77.3/courses/beeclasses/IIvsNM.pdf



jonathan said:


> That's the theory but I have seen virgin queens of mine mate over my own apiaries a couple of dozen times.


Likewise, many times.


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

It sounds like you are looking for ways to control mating other than using II. It is really tough to do other than flooding an area with desirable drones. It is easier to flood an area, earlier in the year, if you have strong healthy overwintered hives ready to produce queens and drones before the rest of the colonies in your neighborhood. Or, make friends with as many surrounding beekeepers as possible and give them queens or cells to produce the desired drones.

As for II queens, Pete is correct, there are a lot of factors that play into longevity.


----------



## marshmasterpat (Jun 26, 2013)

Thanks guys. The beauty of this site is folks with experience can give some guidance to those with none. 

Would love to be able to set out my hives in clusters 2 miles around, but that is just not feasible. No other bee keepers I know of in a surrounding 2 mile circle or so. There were a few folks with a hive or two but most seem to have lost them. Maybe I need to find a nearby congregation area and add some VSH hives around it. 

But I know most the feral hives in the immediate area have issues with mites. Have seen mites on foragers on 2 of the 3 feral hives I know of in the mile or so surrounding area. Folks around here say the bees do not stay for long. So either mite issues or maybe someone dumped alot of russians (lol).


----------



## Eduardo Gomes (Nov 10, 2014)

marshmasterpat said:


> However, in that thread they are looking a mainly larger operations and I can see how that could be used to flood the local area with VHS genes much more easily than for a small scale operator with say a limit of 20 hives. But is there any thing specific that a small time bee keeper could do to increase the odds of maintaining VSH genes in the local population and their apiary.


Helo marshmasterpat

I've read here that beekeeping is local . It is a great common sense this statement .

Alongside this another : beekeeping is dependent on the size of our operation . For 4 or 40 hives the right strategy is one, to 400 or 4,000 hives probably the right strategy is another.

I'm not saying anything new to anyone, just want to point out the fact that you started this thread teres was a great choice.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

marshmasterpat said:


> If someone purchased II queens would it be worth keeping them in a double nuc with queen on bottom, a queen excluded and let the thing explode in population, build some Queen Cells. Then pull the queen and create a new nuc with standard set up, move the exploding portion and let them swarm. You would keep you EXPEN$IVE II queen investment and gain 1 nuc with F1 genes and add swarms to the local population with F1 VSH genetics. And keep doing this throughout the summer. I could still be raising F1 queens for the operation from grafting (or however) and would slowly increase the expression of VSH genes locally.


When I buy an II breeder queen, my objective is to get as many daughters as quickly as possible. Your suggestion quoted above is not utilizing your invest very well. When you decide to invest in an II queen, you must have the skills and resources to make a good number of queens. It doesn't have to be a 100 queens, but certainly more than 2 or 3. If not, you'd be far better off buying F1 daughters from a good breeder. Its been my experience that II breeder queens are a mixed bag. Some are great and some not. For the most part, I do not restrict laying in my II breeders. I let them build up like normal colonies and overwinter like normal colonies. This makes grafting more work (more boxes to deal with), but it gives me some level of confidence that her daughters will be good performers. Very rarely have I had an II queen who couldn't maintain a full colony go on to produce daughters that were superstars. Some may argue this point, but that's been my experience. 

Given you can't control your matings, your options are going to be limited and progress will be slow. Perhaps you should practice your queen rearing skills next season with your existing stock and then in the following season try an II breeder queen. In that year try to make 20 good queens. Overwinter these and repeat the following year with a new II queen. Assume you can get an II queen for $300. If you make 20 daughters, then you've effectively bought 20 queens for $15 each - sounds like a bargain to me. If you get good you could shoot for 30 queens and sell 10 - even better. All the while be evaluating the mite resistance in your stock - you may be surprised. However, be selective in your breeding. Daughters that are not thriving (or have undesirable traits) need to be looked at closely and if all other things are ruled out, they may need to be culled. This will be a long-term endeavor, but even in your situation with limited control of matings, I believe that you can make progress.


----------



## beepro (Dec 31, 2012)

You can buy a II queen and start grafting lots of F1 daughters.
Then using the same II queen for drone combs put some frames in each of the
F1 daughter's hive. This is one way to flood the area with VSH drones when they goto
the local DCA. There are many ways to improve on the drones flooding method I think.


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

beepro said:


> You can buy a II queen and start grafting lots of F1 daughters.
> Then using the same II queen for drone combs put some frames in each of the
> F1 daughter's hive.


That is a good recipe for producing a high percentage of diploid drones. You might want to read up on csd locus.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

marshmasterpat said:


> However, in that thread they are looking a mainly larger operations and I can see how that could be used to flood the local area with VHS genes much more easily than for a small scale operator with say a limit of 20 hives. But is there any thing specific that a small time bee keeper could do to increase the odds of maintaining VSH genes in the local population and their apiary.
> 
> So I was wondering what a small time operator could be doing beside purchasing VSH queens and just doing the standard replace the queen. I know some of mine have some mite resistance, but then lots of data points to it is the second year the issue typically explode. So I might not know what type resistance I have till next summer. So more intensive testing of VSH traits will be done in the spring before I start raising queens.
> 
> So I am looking for specific practices that a small type beekeeper could do within the operation of under 20 hives to help maintain VSH traits after introducing the initial VSH queen (or a few queens) to the mix.


Pat,

One of my main management system items is to make sure that the bees own natural defences are not interfered with. As part of that - and this is a personal theory - I think that the tendency for mites to preference drone rather than worker cells may be an evolved defence that maximises the rise of resistance the local population.

It goes like this: having mites that prefer drone cells tends to take out those colonies - and their genetics - that are poorer mite managers more often. Its not necessarily the case that the colony will perish from a varroa explosion, or by being worn down, but that those colonies that don't manage mites well tend to not reproduce because they put up fewer drones.

That's part of an approach that tries to be systematic, but largely hands off - by not getting in the way of what nature can do best. I don't really want to select for narrow vsh; I want all and any mite-management behaviours, known and unknown, to have a chance of coming forward. 

None of this rules out any of the other sorts of things that have been spoken about here. Its rather a supplementary thing, sort of: hands off in the right places is as important as hands on in the right places. 

For the same reason I run unlimited brood nests. I want my flourishing colonies to be able to put up as much drone as they see fit. It won't always be a good thing - some may flourish for a year then fall over - but in the long run I think the advantage will play out as nature intended. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

Mites prefer drone cells over worker cells because the 3 day extra development times makes a huge difference to the number of viable daughter mites produced by each female foundress mite.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00130823


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

jonathan said:


> Mites prefer drone cells over worker cells because the 3 day extra development times makes a huge difference to the number of viable daughter mites produced by each female foundress mite.
> 
> http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00130823


That's looking from the mite's perspective

Bees prefer mites that prefer drone cells because the colony can carry on without many drones. Swarms can get away; new queens can be mated - sometmes to better effect. 

Local populations prefer mites that prefer drone cells because that supplies a mechanism whereby bees that manage their mites better put more drones in the air. That's a critical mechanism in the long run.

All this is co-evolution, and an 'arms race'. You have to look at all sides.

Taking the first and most obvious explanation offered and assuming the case to be closed is often a mistake.

All that is my theorising only...

Mike (UK)


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

mike bispham said:


> That's looking from the mite's perspective


But it is the mite which chooses which cell it enters. Various papers have put forward estimates which show that mites prefer to enter drone cells by a factor between 8 and 12 as opposed to choosing a worker cell. If you are suggesting that the bees can manipulate which cell a mite enters it would be good to see some evidence for that.



> The higher number of mites found in
> drone cells compared to worker cells (Fuchs,
> 1990) may result from a higher rate of invasion
> into a drone brood cell per se, compared
> ...


http://www.apidologie.org/index.php?..._2_ART0004.pdf

Invasion of Varroa jacobsoni into drone brood cells
of the honey bee, Apis mellifera
WJ Boot J Schoenmaker JNM Calis J Beetsma


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

"Taking the first and most obvious explanation offered and assuming the case to be closed is often a mistake."

Ever heard of Occam's Razor?


----------



## Eduardo Gomes (Nov 10, 2014)

mike bispham said:


> All this is co-evolution, and an 'arms race'. You have to look at all sides.


This concept that Mike has *co -evolution* is very valuable.
In the study conducted by Dr. Seeley around wild swarms in Harnot Forest he concluded:"_The Arnot Forest colonies proved to be infested with V. destructor, but their mite populations did not surge to high levels in late summer. To see if Arnot Forest bees can suppress the reproduction rate of mites, colonies of Arnot Forest bees and New World Carniolan bees were inoculated with mites from an apiary and the growth patterns of their mite populations were compared. No difference was found between the two colony types. Evidently, *the stable bee-mite relationship in the Arnot Forest reflects adaptations for parasite (mite) avirulence, not host (bee) resistance*._" in Honey bees of the Arnot Forest: a population of feral colonies persisting with Varroa destructor in the northeastern United States* Thomas D. Seeley.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

jonathan said:


> But it is the mite which chooses which cell it enters. Various papers have put forward estimates which show that mites prefer to enter drone cells by a factor between 8 and 12 as opposed to choosing a worker cell. If you are suggesting that the bees can manipulate which cell a mite enters it would be good to see some evidence for that.


How about the last paragraph of the quote you've just provided?:

"Alternatively, the behaviour of the bees may
be affected by the presence of either drone
or worker larvae in such a way that the rate
of invasion is also affected."

These are unknowns - look at all those 'may's. 

More importantly they are factors viewed from the colony level. What matters is how things play out at the population level - that is; how natural selection for the fittest strains prioritises those behaviours such that the conversion from available energy to offspring is maximised.

Try reading my last post again Jonathan and considering the making of arrangements from the perspective of the local population. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Fusion_power said:


> "Taking the first and most obvious explanation offered and assuming the case to be closed is often a mistake."
> 
> Ever heard of Occam's Razor?


Yes. But that doesn't say: 'Accept the first reasonable sounding explanation offered and close the enquiry"

The fact is that predator-prey relations are a two-way dynamic affair. Both strive for short-term advantages, and both shape each -other - both create adaptations in each other. They co-evolve. Looking at things from one side only is necessarily incomplete. 

This becomes more obvious once you start looking at things from the perspective of a natural local population. 

My suggestion is that, ceteris paribus, those bee-mites strains in which mites 'prefer' drone cells (and/or 'bees 'prefer' mites to enter drone cells) have a much more sensitive adaptive mechanism than those that don't. Because the male route to genetic transmission is more crippled than would otherwise be the case - and that is a big difference-maker.

Imagine the opposite case: mites 'avoid' drone cells. A genetically mite-vulnerable colony can go on throwing just as many drones as it cares to into the air; a situation which will weaken the entire local population. 

Its easy to see that strains carrying such an arrangement will tend to be replaced by strains that don't.

(Note: it doesn't matter where the mechanical cause lies - in mites 'preferring' drone cells, or in bees somehow sheparding mites into drone cells. We can think about this level of causality without having any knowledge of the details) 

As I say, this is just a theory of mine. But I think there's something of that sort worth noting, and it leads me to want to minimise the interference I make in each individual colonies' lifestyle choices. 

So my apiaries have unlimited brood nests and thus perhaps at least one systematic self-righting mechanism for varroa vulnerability that is missing in limited brood nest apiaries. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

mike bispham said:


> Try reading my last post again Jonathan and considering the making of arrangements from the perspective of the local population.
> Mike (UK)


Your post seems to be a pet theory which offers no evidence to support it. We could speculate re thousands of possible mite tolerance methods which do not actually happen in real life.
Why does a bee with a mite on its body not just fly out and commit altruistic suicide. Would be a great strategy but they don't do that.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

jonathan said:


> Your post seems to be a pet theory which offers no evidence to support it. We could speculate re thousands of possible mite tolerance methods which do not actually happen in real life.


There's a difference between theorising and speculation - but you're free to characterise my thinking as you choose. 

Considering the dynamics of co-evolution from the perspective of a population under natural selection is a standard method of gaining understanding. It forms a test: if you can't see how a mechanism plays out under natural selection, you're missing something.

Of course the mechanical details are interesting, and important to a fuller understanding. 

Adaptation due to natural selection for the fittest strains isn't a theory - its a fact. And its a critical factor to an understanding what organisms are, and how they relate to their environment - including their predators. Unless you're looking at things through the lens of natural selection playing out in a local population, you're missing the greater picture. 



jonathan said:


> Why does a bee with a mite on its body not just fly out and commit altruistic suicide. Would be a great strategy but they don't do that.


Perhaps because they have evolved better ways of managing mites. Perhaps they haven't located that strategy yet. Perhaps there are reasons we don't appreciate that make that a poor strategy. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I believe Jonathan to be correct, in that just because you can theorise or speculate how a method of resistance might happen, does not mean it in fact does happen, in real life.

Take an easy to understand example from the African plains. I have seen film of a group of 3 lions charging into a herd of hundreds of wildebeest, and killing one. The wildebeest seem so stupid because if they could only understand, if the whole herd turned _en masse_ on the lions, they could easily mob them by strength of numbers and trample the lions underfoot. So one could speculate this as a possible means of resistance for the wildebeest, against the lions.

Of course we all know that this scenario has been playing out in Africa for thousands of years, and although this means of resistance is in theory possible, it has never happened.

Yet I sometimes see this logic used on Beesource. IE it would be possible for a certain thing to happen, in theory, and next minute the person is talking like it's a fact. Even though it may not be.


----------



## mbc (Mar 22, 2014)

lions sometimes get trampled by wildebeest, so generally go for the weak ones, I'm not so sure this is a good analogy.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes (Nov 10, 2014)

Oldtimer said:


> they could easily mob them by strength of numbers and trample the lions underfoot.


I believe wildebeest they don't do that because it is in their genetic code / instincts entered the behavior "run away" when they see a lion running toward them.

If for any unknown reason a great number of wildebeest with the instinct "don't run away" mate and pass this trait to the next generation so the lions had to be careful.

My question on the proposalof Mike Bispham in its "pure and harshly" form: let's leave the natural selection do their job , we are for 10 to 20 years with virtually no bees because the vast majority will not resist until it reaches again the previous number will take some time... but ok it was worth it , the aim justified this option.

But unfortunately for bees and beekeepers we spent those difficult 20 years and now that we had a tough bee to varroa , there is another " bogeyman of bees " as or more fearful we will place again at ground zero . I don't know the future as anybody here but is a scenario as likely as any other (remember please Velutina hornet in Europe). 

That said I still believe that the solution in the medium term will be the genetic clearance stronger lines , more and more local . Until we get there , we have the chemical , organic and biotech . Surely we are all doing the best we can with what we have and according to our beliefs and experiences to help our bees.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Eduardo Gomes said:


> My question on the proposalof Mike Bispham in its "pure and harshly" form: let's leave the natural selection do their job , we are for 10 to 20 years with virtually no bees because the vast majority will not resist until it reaches again the previous number will take some time...


I'm not recomending a 'pure and harsh' 'Bond' approach for anyone. I'm just saying: recognise the problem for what it is: its treatment-addiction with no end in sight. A good understanding of genetic husbandry and natural selection is an extremely useful - perhaps essential - part of the cure. 

Population crashes due to new predatory organisms are a common part of nature. Full population recovery from a resistant surviving core can be very rapid. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Eduardo Gomes (Nov 10, 2014)

It was too much join you and your ideas to pure and harsh method of Kefuss Live and let Die.
I ask you to apologize me!


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

mike bispham said:


> Population crashes due to new predatory organisms are a common part of nature. Full population recovery from a resistant surviving core can be very rapid.
> 
> Mike (UK)


That's forgetting that historically the more common outcome has been extinction. Have you studied the effect of new predatory organisms Mike? What has happened in my country over the last thousand years is a very sad example.

Your mistake is once again to think that because adaptation can in theory happen, it always does. But mostly, it doesn't. If you name all the species that ever lived, only a very small portion of them still survive most are extinct. Many of those over the last few thousand years since humans started spreading other species around the planet, as we have done with varroa, or, the ultimate predator, humans themselves who destroy not just the organisms, but their habitats.

Even your own country used to have wolves, lions, and bears.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Aside from the three that Oldtimer mentions, according to this article, the UK has lost 421 species in only the past 200 years.

I didn't notice any bees on the list, but there are 10 species of extinct wasps on that list.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Eduardo Gomes said:


> It was too much join you and your ideas to pure and harsh method of Kefuss Live and let Die.
> I ask you to apologize me!


I'm not sure but I think we might be having translating difficulties Eduardo!

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Interesting talk on breeding for vhs by Dean Stiglitz here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqNjbwCQB4Q

The discussion on vhs starts at about 38:00 (look for the coloured diagrams to disappear) He's doubtful about the reliability of vhs queens, and speaks of the way selecting for vhs (which is hard) tends to mean other useful mite-managing behaviours get missed, and consequently retreat. His advice: select from your own local bees on assessments of survivability, productivitity and (if it matters to you) temperament.

At 50:20 (in response to a question) Dean talks a little about how insect populations tend (in nature) to have a 'boom and bust' character. 

There's a bit of discussion about the video here: http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...etics-and-Breeding-Bees&p=1189996#post1189996


Mike (UK)


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I'd suggest reading this thread carefully:
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?277652-VSH-Breeding&highlight=vsh+assay

I don't know anywhere else that all this information is available, in one spot, and part of a discussion with significant input from several recognized experts.
Note the lack of assay involved in the Pol Line breeding. Note that no one knows how 'VSH' the best of these selected stocks actually are.

Bottom line is that if you want to do small scale breedin of VSH, you need to bring in selected stock regularly (every year? every other year?), or you need to actually do assays to measure VSH behavior. Virtually no one is doing the latter as far as I can tell.

deknow


----------



## Eduardo Gomes (Nov 10, 2014)

I was reading from the beginning to about half. Very good thread about the VSH. Thanks deknow for the reference.


----------



## marshmasterpat (Jun 26, 2013)

Thanks everyone for the advice and comments, I will ponder them all as I wonder what to do. I will get to read the thread deknow posted this winter and digest it, thanks for that link.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

jonathan said:


> That's the theory but I have seen virgin queens of mine mate over my own apiaries a couple of dozen times.


You've seen virgin queens mate over your apiaries. You do not know if they were _*your*_ virgin queens mating over your apiary with *your* drones.

Still, it's possible. It's also possible that a swarm will move into a soggy cardboard box or an old tire that sits 2 feet away from the parent colony. Not the norm, not something to be regularly counted on, but has happened quite a few times.

There are no absolutes in life, beekeeping is no exception. Go with the odds, the statistics, and the research and you'll be better off than trying to find one or two instances where the same was off in an attempt to disprove the research. Just my two cents.


----------



## RayMarler (Jun 18, 2008)

marshmasterpat said:


> A second method would be to regularly introduce excess drone foundation to the VSH hive. I could then pull and replace it weekly and keep spreading that foundation among all the surrounding hives to try to more quickly saturate the local apiary/population with VSH drones. That would increase the chances of the operator's F1 of being successful in mating with a VSH drone and would increase the VSH gene in the surrounding areas.
> 
> Are these lame duck attempts or would they work? Any other ideas that would work.


Bingo!
That's how I do it, or do my breeding some years. 
I don't want to start a sideways discussion, but I believe queens only fly as far as needed to get the job done. I've experienced enough in my own queen matings in the past to be sure of my belief in this. Keep a drone comb colony going to spread your VSH drones in the area, from a purchased VSH queen or one you've tested. Then raise you daughters from a different VSH queen.


----------



## beekuk (Dec 31, 2008)

Specialkayme said:


> You've seen virgin queens mate over your apiaries. You do not know if they were _*your*_ virgin queens mating over your apiary with *your* drones.


Cannot speak for Jonathan, but i am sure, well 99.9% and a bit more sure, it is the whole reason i take them there.


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

Specialkayme said:


> You've seen virgin queens mate over your apiaries. You do not know if they were _*your*_ virgin queens mating over your apiary with *your* drones.


I use Apideas (mini nucs with a few hundred bees and a virgin queen)
I have seen a virgin leave the Apidea accompanied by the bees which I presume is a mating swarm.
The first time I saw this I assumed the virgin was flying to a DCA but instead the mini swarm circled about 20 feet away for around 10-15 minutes. This was at a height only 8-10 feet off the ground. When I walked over over to it I could see it was packed with hundreds of drones as well as the bees from the apidea.
Often the queen lands and the workers cluster around her for a while. Not sure why but I have seen this several times.
In this video clip you can see the queen landed on the roof of a nuc box and she climbs into a tube I use for marking queens.Must have a good pheromone smell.




If you check the mini nuc 48 hours later you would usually see eggs which lets you know this is a mating flight as opposed to some other phenomenon. I have seen this about 20 times at 4 different apiaries so I suspect it is quite general. I think some queens fly to DCAs and some mate locally but have no idea what determines this. When I have seen this happen it has always been perfect mating weather so unlikely to be a mechanism for mating in poor weather as some have speculated.
I am absolutely sure the virgin queens are mine but can't prove 100% that every single drone comes from my own apiary. However, I work with dark bees and the queens which mate like this always produce dark offspring with no yellow banding. There are yellow banded bees in the area and I do see some queens which show hybridisation in the workers. These ones maybe fly further afield.


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

You can see the virgin leave and fly back to the apidea in this video.
This was a brief orientation flight rather than a mating flight.






You can see her running around at the entrance then around 55 seconds she runs up the right hand side of the box and takes off.
She returns shortly afterwards.
She lands and goes back in at 1.39


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

beekuk said:


> Cannot speak for Jonathan, but i am sure, well 99.9% and a bit more sure, it is the whole reason i take them there.


Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree on what you know as opposed to speculate.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

In a study of bee mating in semi-isolated valleys that was done in G.B., in the most isolated Edale Valley apiary, the researchers found that 60% of the matings were with drones from the same apiary as the virgin queens.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

Cite?

Keep in mind the OP isn't in an isolated area of England.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Google honey bee mating is semi-isolated valleys. Just showing that it does happen. There are reports of virgins being seen to mate close their own apiary in literature going back to the mid to late 1800s. Queens only fly far enough to find enough drones to mate with, and if there is a DCA next to the apiary, that is as far as they need to go. I also keep dark bees those around me have yellow ones, and I see a mix of color in the workers. Some queens will have a majority of dark workers, and I believe they mate with drones from my stock. I have watched queens leave and return in 8 to 10 minutes, they can't go very far in that time.


----------



## beekuk (Dec 31, 2008)

AR Beekeeper said:


> In a study of bee mating in semi-isolated valleys that was done in G.B., in the most isolated Edale Valley apiary, the researchers found that 60% of the matings were with drones from the same apiary as the virgin queens.


 We use very isolated mating stations, out in the middle of the open moors, one on Dartmoor set up back in the 1920,s by Brother Adam, and another on Exmoor, virgin queens in these apairies will not mate at all unless drone provider colonies are supplied, they just turn drone layer after a while, as there are no other drones for the virgins to mate with.
The drones are kept included until emergence, and any other drones excluded until the drone providers are moved, often a group of sister queens.

Often many virgins are out mating at the same time, each one being pursued by anything from 20 to around 120 drones, they are very fast, often crashing into shrubs, willow branches, the ground, etc, and taking off again quite fast, i have even had them crash into me while watching, this is usually between one and four thirty, often goes all quiet for ten minutes, then they are all off again, then all quiet before the next round, and so it goes.

The aerial acrobatics they perform are quite a spectacular thing to see.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

AR Beekeeper said:


> I have watched queens leave and return in 8 to 10 minutes, they can't go very far in that time.


You're missing the point. The point is that queens and drones from the same yards don't visit the same DCAs. I'm not saying virgins have to fly far. Maybe they go 10 feet. But the drones and the queens are genetically programed _NOT_ to go to the same DCAs when exiting the same hive. So while a virgin may go 10 feet away to mate, the drones from the same hive are programmed not to. So maybe you see a virgin mate overhead of your apiary. Odds are, she isn't mating with drones from the same apiary.

Saying you see matings occur overhead doesn't mean you are seeing _your_ virgins mate with _your_ drones that both exited from _your_ apiary.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

There is a study that showed that drones from a colony will be in every DCA within flying distance of that colony. If there are 20 colonies within flying distance, then a queen has the opportunity to mate with 19 unrelated drones as well as 1 drone from her colony. Mating with several related drones does not damage a colony because the large number of drones create many sub-families. Another study showed workers in a colony become inbred at a rate of .06% per year, so related matings do occur.

Not seeing matings occur overhead doesn't mean that virgins are not mating with related drones. If they are, or are not, does it really matter? 

A small scale beekeeper will have limited affect on the genetics in the bees of his area. Drones from his yard will mate with his virgins, as well as strange drones from another yard. This is why large producers have many drone colonies around their mating yards. They select drone mothers with the same care they give queen mothers. 

A beekeeper wanting VSH in his bees should buy VSH stock and have 2 drone combs in every colony. If he has non-VSH colonies, they should be given combs of VSH drones to care for, and the non-VSH drones destroyed. If you have 20 to 40 colonies to work with, even if they are in the same yard, within 3 years you will see a change in the bee's ability to handle varroa.


----------

