# Varroah resistance as it pertains to cell size, frame foundation



## ankklackning (Dec 10, 2020)

So I've been listening to a Youtube video on the internet entitled, _'Michael Bush at the Organically Managed Beekeeping Conference 2016'_. (Took place in AZ I believe.)

At any rate there's this one line where he says something along the lines of (forgive me if I don't quote it perfectly): 'all the large cell foundation died of varroah...and that it reached a tipping point when he went to large cells (as compared to smaller cells).

I wanted to bring this up.

*So does this mean if you concentrate on only small cell foundation will you not have hardly any varroa problems?

And how much of the large cell problems surging from varroa, are actually also because the large cell foundation in frames tends to mean its also got plastic in there, rather than the cell size itself? *(I ask this also because many people in healthcare fields claim that plastic has a tendency to have more bacteria growth than other materials used in other fields like cooking and food (not bees).)

Thanks for your thoughts and for anyone helping beekeepers try to be educated, survive, and have a better life also!


----------



## massbee (May 11, 2020)

If you do a search on small cell here you will find several older threads.


I believe Michael's success is more due to “natural sized” cells, meaning he lets the bees build their own comb instead of using any foundation of any size.

perhaps @Michael Bush can clarify but you can also read his site here www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm

I also recommend reading scientific beekeeping dot com where Randy Oliver tests various theories and methods using scientific methods of control groups and publishes his results. He did do testing of HSC awhile back and has some other researchers results of using small cell in there that you might find interesting. Trial of HoneySuperCell® Small Cell Combs - Scientific Beekeeping

I think overall, there is better success with a combination of naturally built comb instead of foundation and selecting for survivor traits .


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Cell size has nothing to do with the bee's ability to control varroa, there are equal numbers of varroa raised in 4.9 mm cells as there are in 5.3 mm cells constructed on foundation. Genetics are the controlling factors in varroa resistance. Natural cell size in the brood area is 5.2 mm for Carniolan and Russian, the Italian strains usually make 5.1 to 5.2 mm cells in the center of the brood area.

There are no "large cell problems" other than those in the minds of some beekeepers. Plastic foundations coated with beeswax make good brood comb and storage combs.

Ank, in what part of the world are you located?


----------



## Akademee (Apr 5, 2020)

The evidence for small cell seems anecdotal at best, the controlled studies simply don't seem to support small cell varroa control. The bees have to literally "regress" genetically before they can even use the small cell and that transition appears to select against varroa mites initially, but the varroa eventually adapt to it to and nothing is gained.


----------



## psm1212 (Feb 9, 2016)

Ank: Many continue to tout small cell and/or "natural comb" as an effective varroa mite control. The Honey Bee Health Coalition's Guide to Varroa Management lists among its *ineffective* varroa mite control strategies "small cell, 'natural' comb for the rearing of smaller bees." Page 14.

However, many beekeepers on this board that I respect attribute small and/or natural cell beekeeping to their success in controlling mites. Personally, for me to invest the time and energy to attempt such a strategy, I would first require a significant consensus of researchers and studies illustrating that this strategy (or any strategy) has proven highly effective. I have not found this with small/natural cell. 

I am not a pioneer. I am an adopter.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

At this point in time I would mostly ignore what Michael Bush says (about small cell).
Partially why I have been doing this TF experiment for, like, 6 seasons now?
And honestly reporting on it too.

Here is a good read:








Cell size survey.


Watching this video gave me an idea. A fellow in Tatarstan, Russia is trying foundation-less approach in his Dadants. (Feel free to ignore or quickly click through - nothing special outside of him realizing that foundation is not necessary and iron wires maybe bad; nothing to see here....)...




www.beesource.com





If you have a good location (meaning pre-existing resistant population OR where you can yourself safely create such a population) then you maybe can do it.
Otherwise, meh.
To be sure, there plenty of examples where the conditions, indeed, allow for the TF management. The examples are available right on this board.


----------



## pjigar (Sep 13, 2016)

The jury is still out on small/natural cell for varroa control. I used to think that based on the reading in my early days. The following quote from Micheal Oliver's page actually makes more sense to me:

"Skeptics point out that some small cell proponents keep bees in areas with a strong Africanized bee presence, and that the vigorous hygienic behavior of those bees is the true reason for their success."

I am in the affricanized country and treating for varroa is optional for my colonies. In fact, I have never used mitecide, formic acid, hops, etc EVER. I used to do 3 rounds of OA fogging spaced a week apart after honey harvest in July. I never did OA treatment of my out apiary which has 4 colonies.

But last July, my OA fogger died only after I treated half of the colonies (6 out of 13) on the 1st round. I was building a house at the time had no time fixing OA fogger and hence didn't bother to treat any further for the year. I accidentally created an experiment: Treated with only 1 round of OA and a control group! One colony in the control group looks weaker but all other 12 are doing fine. They are still in the danger zone until pear bloom for our region but all 12 looked healthy with more than enough bees in the middle of January. We will see how they progress into the spring.

1 out of 4 colony in the out apiary has perished so far.

I will update how they do in spring later.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Some years ago I spent the money, bought a bunch of small cell foundation, and made 27 small cell hives. They all died of mites.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

I, too started a treatment free small cell yard in the heyday of small cell mania. Within two seasons all had collapsed due to varroa. This was at a time when dwv was less prevalent. I don’t expect they would survive for more than a single season today.
Internet myths persist.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

pjigar said:


> The jury is still out on small/natural cell for varroa control.


only the jury of internet opinion... 
there is one study that suggests it may work, a half dozen+ or so that say it doesnt, one that says it increases mites...

the latest unde way tested small cell, they even went so far as to use sister queens forma long standing TF line, cemical free wax form lusby, etc


> The second bee-year of the COMB project was a time of splitting, swarming, and honey production. After winter losses of 62.3% in the chemical free (CF) management system, 13.0% in the conventional (CON) management system, and 14.7% in the organic (ORG) management system, we set out to recover our numbers.
> If a colony had at least 8 frames of brood in the spring, it was split to make a second colony. The split colony was left to requeen itself. Subsequently, if a colony had initiated swarming by making queen cells, the colony was split. Again, the split colony was left to requeen itself. The overwintering losses in CON and ORG colonies were easily made up by splitting. Some CF colonies were able to be split, but there were not enough colonies made to completely make up for losses.


they took large losses and many of the remaining hives were too weak to split and they were unable to get the numbers back up
COMB Update November 2019


----------



## Tigger19687 (Dec 27, 2014)

Let Bees be Bees, foundationless frames


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

ankklackning said:


> So I've been listening to a Youtube video on the internet entitled, _'Michael Bush at the Organically Managed Beekeeping Conference 2016'_. (Took place in AZ I believe.)
> 
> At any rate there's this one line where he says something along the lines of (forgive me if I don't quote it perfectly): 'all the large cell foundation died of varroah...and that it reached a tipping point when he went to large cells (as compared to smaller cells).
> 
> ...


I re entered beekeeping about fifteen years ago or so and the small cell theory sounded like it was worth a try. It wasn't. It had no affect on my mite levels. I tried that and drone culling and all the fads except Screened Bottom Boards. That was and is just too scary! I tried essential oils for mite control and when I got tired of producing no honey and losing too many colonies. I started treating for Mites alternating Apiguard and Apivar. Apivar is now ineffective in my area as the mites probably use it for ketchup. I would recommend oxalic acid vaporization. I think it will take the mites a while to grow acid proof feet. 

Now I do like the small cell foundation I have in my cold country brood nests! I believe my small bees are able to cover more cells and thereby build up faster in the spring. I no longer chase the small cell myth but I do try to keep them in the center of my brood boxes.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

Like others here I too cautiously drank the small cell Kool aid in 2003. I built small cells hives, had a segregated small cell apiary, and tried Housel Positioning which immediately proved impossible to maintain. It all failed and was a waste of time and money. I came to the concluson the small cell priestess was a hoax, and am sorry to see you know who still promoting it. I melted the small cell comb down and laugh every time I come across a Housel positioning marked frame. I think I still have some SC foundation and will maybe make some candles with it one day. Or wood preservative.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

I am melting mine and dipping queen cups. I find it interesting that Housel himself never claimed any benefit from what became known as Housel Positioning, as with so much other BS of the small cell craze it came from Lusby.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I haven't tried these links in a while, but last I tried them they worked:
Try these:

o  Reproduction of Varroa destructor in South African honey bees: does cell space influence Varroa male survivorship, Stephen J. MARTIN, Per KRYGER

o The influence of brood comb cell size on the reproductive behavior of the ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor in Africanized honey bee colonies Giancarlo A. Piccirillo1 and D. De Jong

o Survival of a Commercial Beekeeper in Norway, Hans Otto Johnsen

o Trial of HoneySuperCell® Small Cell Combs, Randy Oliver

o Effects of Comb Cell Diameter on Parasitic Mite Infestations in Honey Bee Colonies, Eric Erickson Jr.

o On small cell bee longevity: Life span of worker honeybees reared in colonies kept on small-cell combs, Krzysztof Olszewski, Grzegorz Borsuk, Jerzy Paleolog, Aneta Strache

o  On Shortened Pupation: A model of the mite parasite, Varroa destructor, on honeybees (Apis mellifera) to investigate parameters important to mite population growth, D Wilkinson, G.C Smith

o Cell size and Varroa destructor mite infestations in susceptible and naturally-surviving honeybee (Apis mellifera) colonies


Discussions on small cell studies:
o Bee Unto Others

o Analysis of small cell test designs, Erik Österlund


----------



## Outdoor N8 (Aug 7, 2015)

Been there done it... no thank you

The only benefit of a small cell queen-- she will not recognize/lay standard foundation cells and Queen Excluders are not needed.


----------



## Paul Sheppard (Jun 25, 2014)

ankklackning said:


> So I've been listening to a Youtube video on the internet entitled, _'Michael Bush at the Organically Managed Beekeeping Conference 2016'_. (Took place in AZ I believe.)
> 
> At any rate there's this one line where he says something along the lines of (forgive me if I don't quote it perfectly): 'all the large cell foundation died of varroah...and that it reached a tipping point when he went to large cells (as compared to smaller cells).
> 
> ...


To be honest small cell,large cell and any prefabricated cell size on foundation for bees to build up on are just different sides of the same coin Bees of different races and in different situations build comb with cell sizes specific for their needs. While I do think reduced gestation periods help reduce mite reproduction rates it is not the only thing that the bees develop to help them control mite populations. 
When we allow our bees to build their own comb they do what is best for them. We know so little et we are constantly trying to improve hive design to improve production 
Bees have been around for millions of years through multiple climate changes and yet have survived 
The biggest threat to honey bees and beekeeping in general is that we think we know so much more what the bees need. The survival rates of feral colonies is a sure indication that the bees know how to solve their problems 
I live in France right now have friends who recently discovered a feral colony resident in the window of a farm building that has been there for over 25 years. The farmer say persistent occupation. Funny thing is this huge colony lives side by side in the same cavity with a nest of the hornets( not sure if it is Asian or European)
We need to learn from the bees rather than constantly trying to adjust their situations to suit our needs and knowledge 
I keep bees without inputs like varroa control .that’s the bee’s work. Foundationless,feed honey, allow swarming, allow drones and blah blah blah. I follow most of the principles of Seeley’s Darwinian Beekeeping style and I am having better results


----------



## pjigar (Sep 13, 2016)

Michael Bush said:


> o  Reproduction of Varroa destructor in South African honey bees: does cell space influence Varroa male survivorship, Stephen J. MARTIN, Per KRYGER


An interesting quote from the conclusion section:
"Although reproduction of Varroa sp. is affected by the space between the developing bee and cell wall, reducing cell sizes as a mite control method will probably fail to be effective since the bees are likely to respond by rearing correspondingly smaller bees which explains the close correlation between cell and bee size"


----------



## Tigger19687 (Dec 27, 2014)

Speaking of bee size, I wonder if smaller bees have a harder time fighting off the Varroa?
My nuc I got last Spring had small bees. I wondered if they were on SC foundation. And when I added my Foundationless frames they became bigger, average size. I do like the bees doing what They would like to do. But take that with grain of salt as I am 1st year, long studying since 2014, beekeep.


----------



## ankklackning (Dec 10, 2020)

Michael Bush said:


> I haven't tried these links in a while, but last I tried them they worked:
> Try these:
> 
> o  Reproduction of Varroa destructor in South African honey bees: does cell space influence Varroa male survivorship, Stephen J. MARTIN, Per KRYGER
> ...


Thank you very much.


----------



## ankklackning (Dec 10, 2020)

I wanted to say I hope I didn't cause any trouble in this thread. I didn't realize there would be so many opinions that were sometimes opposed to each other. And hope the spirit of friendliness among beeks is increased and not decreased. Thanks for all the comments to study about. 

I hadn't heard that the natural cell size for Carniolans and Russians was slightly larger than other bees before, this was interesting to hear. 

There are many many things here to investigate and too many comments to reply to. I'm grateful.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

ankklackning said:


> I didn't realize there would be so many opinions that were sometimes opposed to each other.


LOL. Welcome to the world of bees and beekeepers 😀.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

ankklackning said:


> I hadn't heard that the natural cell size for Carniolans and Russians was slightly larger than other bees before, this was interesting to hear.


The Russians are naturally larger than the Africanized bees.
Some of the AMM populations are even larger yet naturally - like up to 5.4mm cells.
The documentation has been provided.

This is in line with most all animals where different populations have different average sizes (e.g. Siberian Tiger is by far larger than Sumatran Tiger).


----------



## jnqpblk (Apr 7, 2015)

Been doing beekeeping 20+ years. 10 frame Langs straight through.
But did the foundationless stint about a 3rd of the way through my beekeeping when small cell was touted, as the wonderful small cell solution to varroa, that simply just did not pan out. ie. Small cell beekeeping is not by any means all it "was" cracked up to be, nor did it/does it control varroa.
And yeah, there's "enough" old literature out there to get newbies excited about small cell beekeeping all over again.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Why focus on the varroa when you talk about small cell foundation. If the bees are truly a half millimeter smaller. (Someone needs to get some mics on sc bees) then the advantages are.
#1. 1000 more cells per frame in the brood chamber.
#2. That is 10,000 or 20,000 more cells for a queen to claim as a brood chamber. It's like adding 2 or 3 more frames.
#3. The urge to swarm due to egg laying room would greatly reduce.
#4. Do you like queen excluders?(wait....is it honey excluders?) But if the bees truly are smaller they would much more easily pass through.
#5. Is it the size of a bee or the number of eyes that police a hive for wax moth and SHB. I say eyes.
#6. The time to emergance is 19 days rather than 21. The number of bees would also increase because of a 3 day life extension.
#7. So with numbers of bees increasing due to both ,more cells in the brood chamber. And 3 day extension to a bees life. Your prolly talking over 20% more bees in a hive. 

Will a varroa count go up if you test them using an alcohol wash?
Are the bees smaller? Then if you fill the test kit to the fill line in the cup. Your sample has more bees.
Can you weigh them?
No, same deal, your looking for a per bee average.
Whoever does the testing has to hand count the bees or get a small weight sample to see the difference in weight per bee.
Almost everybody is treating for varroa. If strong hives are a good natural defense to everything else then what is everybody knocking small cell for? Varroa and small cell shouldnt even be mentioned together to be honest.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Struttinbuck said:


> #1. 1000 more cells per frame in the brood chamber.
> #2. That is 10,000 or 20,000 more cells for a queen to claim as a brood chamber. It's like adding 2 or 3 more frames


More cells to wear out the queens egg laying, to achieve the same biomass of bees. IE, no advantage. Small bees carry small loads.



Struttinbuck said:


> #3. The urge to swarm due to egg laying room would greatly reduce.


You think?



Struttinbuck said:


> #4. Do you like queen excluders?(wait....is it honey excluders?) But if the bees truly are smaller they would much more easily pass through.


Probably true



Struttinbuck said:


> #5. Is it the size of a bee or the number of eyes that police a hive for wax moth and SHB. I say eyes.


Highly speculative, however the converted would probably believe it.



Struttinbuck said:


> #6. The time to emergance is 19 days rather than 21


Time to emergence is mostly 21 days, but can sometimes be less in cells of either size. No evidence has ever been presented that small cell bees hatch sooner on average. It is just something small cell believers choose to believe.



Struttinbuck said:


> #6. The number of bees would also increase because of a 3 day life extension.


No evidence for that whatsoever.



Struttinbuck said:


> #7. So with numbers of bees increasing due to both ,more cells in the brood chamber. And 3 day extension to a bees life. Your prolly talking over 20% more bees in a hive.


My own small cell bees showed what appeared to be larger numbers of bees earlier in spring, then tapering off to about the same. Although this was judged by eye, I didn't actually count them. 
But did they get more work done, ie, make me more honey? No. Small bees ='s small payloads.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

ankklackning said:


> I wanted to say I hope I didn't cause any trouble in this thread. I didn't realize there would be so many opinions that were sometimes opposed to each other. And hope the spirit of friendliness among beeks is increased and not decreased. Thanks for all the comments to study about.
> 
> I hadn't heard that the natural cell size for Carniolans and Russians was slightly larger than other bees before, this was interesting to hear.
> 
> There are many many things here to investigate and too many comments to reply to. I'm grateful.





Oldtimer said:


> More cells to wear out the queens egg laying, to achieve the same biomass of bees. IE, no advantage. Small bees carry small loads.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Common sense always supercedes evidence until a study proves common sense is wrong. Always. And the only point i might grant you in your reply is the amount a bee can carry. And I would say the only way to find that out is to set 2 hives side by side. same race of bees. same number to start. Do a real study, not a corporate funded one.
If you say that the number of bees appeared to be the same, chances are you were going by frame coverage. If thats the case then there were definately more bees. And the smaller the cells the less bees it takes to cover brood.
Im saying small cell bee keeping needs more attention. We need to find out these things that you say are unproven. Because the common sense sees the benefit. But I know alot of stuff that looked good on paper , even an engineer can just engineer a peice of carp from time to time on paper. If everybody waits on a study or nowadays blindly believes studies, we arent going to get anywhere. These new students and professors on the average truly and seriously do not take this stuff at all serious. There might be a few good ones ,but the ones i talked to. ??? lots more questions than answers.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Struttinbuck said:


> We need to find out these things that you say are unproven. Because the common sense sees the benefit. But I know alot of stuff that looked good on paper , even an engineer can just engineer a peice of carp from time to time on paper. If everybody waits on a study or nowadays blindly believes studies, we arent going to get anywhere.


I would counter by saying that if everyone just blindly believes something posted by somebody on the internet, because it sounded good but with no actual proof, _then_ we aren't going to get anywhere.

Because in fact, we have already been down that road. A decade ago people were flocking to the small cell doctrine and applying it to their bees, because they read it on the net, and thought it sounded good. The majority of the claims where unproven, and are still unproven, but still get repeated.

Most of those people have now given small cells up, or no longer have bees. A few are still around, but wether that is due to their small bees, is unknown.

I was one of those people who tried it. Let's just say that if it had any value, I would still be doing it.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> I would counter by saying that if everyone just blindly believes something posted by somebody on the internet, because it sounded good but with no actual proof, _then_ we aren't going to get anywhere.
> 
> Because in fact, we have already been down that road. A decade ago people were flocking to the small cell doctrine and applying it to their bees, because they read it on the net, and thought it sounded good. The majority of the claims where unproven, and are still unproven, but still get repeated.
> 
> ...


Understood. I swear Im just going to have to put together a well documented and on video study myself because to me its just one of those things that make too much sense. And I do agree with you on evidence. Totally unbiased evidence.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Fair enough. If you can prove it works, you will no doubt attract people to it.

Not sure how you can prove that in a video though. If your plan is to show a successfully running hive, doesn't really prove anything, because people can show videos of large cell successfully running hives.

Both can work. Question is, can advantage be proven for small cell hives. I would say the number of people who tried it, then voted with their feet, would indicate they did not find any advantage worth keeping.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

Old-timer and I and others here at Beesource tried it.
As I said earlier, I starting in 2003. I participated in Dee Lusby's Yahoo group and followed all their advice for several years. And I am ashamed for allowing myself to be hoodwinked. It was impossible to get the bees to draw small cell foundation decently, it all was drawn ****awocka drone cell funky. Then they wanted one to throw it all out to "regress" the bees. Then they required dedicated small cell apiaries. The first winter of the dedicated SC apiary, ten of ten hives died. I never had a SC colony thrive like some of my LC colonies did. I melted them down over the years and never looked back.


----------



## Murdock (Jun 16, 2013)

Part of the fun of beekeeping is experimentation...trying new things & methods. I have gone foundationless because it's cheaper,,,and I can prove that. I just like natural cell frames, if they make a bunch of drones I pick out a few to check for mites. Lemons to lemonade as the saying goes.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

If foundationless is cheaper, why do commercials, who are all about maximising their dollars, use foundation?


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

One of the problems with the whole SC idea is that left to draw natural cells on foundationless frames, the bees do not draw out small cells. But you do get a lot more drone comb. I am foundationless and will continue to be for the time being.

OT, because foundationless comb does not travel well?


----------



## joebeewhisperer (May 13, 2020)

Will anyone else be glad when it's 80F (27C) outside and we can spend our early evenings pulling out frames and playing with our bug collection?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

JWPalmer said:


> OT, because foundationless comb does not travel well?


Exactly.

And that would be a cost, right?

Arguing foundationless is cheaper is based purely that you pay for foundation, and if you don't use it you don't get a bill for it.

But ignores the costs. Some of which are -

Travels badly
Breaks easy in a honey extractor
More manipulation (and therefore time) needed when assisting bees to draw it by the box
Honey used to produce the wax to make it.
More drones, therefore less producing workers, who also have to provide for those drones.

All this makes it more profitable for a commercial beekeeper to use foundation. Some of those things don't apply to some hobbyists because for example they may never move a hive, and may never use a honey extractor, and they do not factor in their time because it is a hobby they enjoy spending their time on.
But even for a hobbyist, if all is factored in, it would be hard to argue that foundationless is cheaper overall. However doing it as a hobby is all about the enjoyment, and when I ran some foundationless hives as an experiment, I certainly enjoyed the experience, and finding out how best to make it work.


----------



## Murdock (Jun 16, 2013)

All the expenses the commercial people have...I don't. I'm retired, working my bees gives me pleasure and satisfaction, I string the frames so I can extract them and heat doesn't collapse them. Nothing travels very far and I'm not in a hurry. Yes, my time is valuable, but if that figured in to the price of honey it would be $20 a pound. Old people don't travel well either and I can get wherever I'm going faster on the interstate but sometimes it's just good to get out in the countryside, smell the cow manure, and stop at a roadside orchard / vegetable stand. It's a beautiful world we are caretakers for.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> Fair enough. If you can prove it works, you will no doubt attract people to it.
> 
> Not sure how you can prove that in a video though. If your plan is to show a successfully running hive, doesn't really prove anything, because people can show videos of large cell successfully running hives.
> 
> Both can work. Question is, can advantage be proven for small cell hives. I would say the number of people who tried it, then voted with their feet, would indicate they did not find any advantage worth keeping.


If I had the time to do it. LOL. I would get 2 hives, prolly splits off the same queen or at least 2 queens that are of purest strain to each other as possible. Start them both off on undrawn foundation. And all brand new fresh equipment. One 5.4 other 4.9. Once established then start feeding some pollen. then every 2 weeks check for SHB using one of the many traps, prolly like swiffer sheets, also check for swarm and supercedure cells. Wax moths truly shouldnt be an issue but if they appear??? Then I heard tracheal mites cannot infect s.c. bees. so test for Tracheal mites on a schedule. Actually measure the bees with calipers, install queen excluders. Weigh a sample of 50 to 100 bees and see if there is a difference in weight.
And just document it all on video so people know. Also measure out the bees in an alcohol wash kit, then see what difference in number of bees there are.
So if I get rich this spring and dont have to do my what I pay my house payment with job, thats what I would do.
lol.
Im guessing documenting it in an orderly way would be tough too. But between photos, video and just written documentation, there would more evidence proving which way is better for the bees in that area.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Relatively speaking, how can small bees cover more small cells than large bees cover large cells? Add to that, Drones cells are not smaller in the small cell colony relative the bees, so wouldn't it take more small bees to cover the Drone brood?

Alex


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Oldtimer said:


> More drones, therefore less producing workers, who also have to provide for those drones.


Seely found a natural level of drone comb cut hives honey production in 1/2, drones are expensive.


----------



## Cloverdale (Mar 26, 2012)

ankklackning said:


> So I've been listening to a Youtube video on the internet entitled, _'Michael Bush at the Organically Managed Beekeeping Conference 2016'_. (Took place in AZ I believe.)
> 
> At any rate there's this one line where he says something along the lines of (forgive me if I don't quote it perfectly): 'all the large cell foundation died of varroah...and that it reached a tipping point when he went to large cells (as compared to smaller cells).
> 
> ...


No. That has been tried and studied and found not to matter what size the cell is. Cell size doesn’t matter. It’s the drone cells they like before other cells.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

AHudd said:


> Relatively speaking, how can small bees cover more small cells than large bees cover large cells? Add to that, Drones cells are not smaller in the small cell colony relative the bees, so wouldn't it take more small bees to cover the Drone brood?
> 
> Alex


Its theory. Its numbers. Theres no evidence yet exceptfor math. But the brood chamber cells jump by 18%. The sc bees are suppose to have a 19 day emerge cycle. That adds 3 days to the life of a bee. Which also increases the population leaving more bees to forage.
Right now it's all numbers though and through marking frames and patches of brood you can figure out how long small cell bees take to emerge. There are very very old studies making the 19 day claims and only 1 or 2 very credible modern people claiming the same. But until someone gets an extreme documented test done. And it wouldnt matter who as long as they have integrity and a thoughtful very well documented study. Then they might find something that would truly help the bees.
If not then it's not. The studies being done now are either too vague or looking to prove a different point. How small cell flares against varroa. And that's not the point of small cell.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Cloverdale said:


> No. That has been tried and studied and found not to matter what size the cell is. Cell size doesn’t matter. It’s the drone cells they like before other cells.


Why tie small cell to varroa. We already know small cell has no effect on varroa. Small cell is for improving the numbers and strength in a hive.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Struttinbuck said:


> Small cell is for improving the numbers and strength in a hive.


The simple answer is it seems that hasn't proven to be...
If it indeed had a significant impact on hive strength or early season build-up, commercial operators would be rotating it into their operation.

Like foundationless, its main selling point is its alternative/aint big ag management.. and that sells well with many hobbiests, regardless of the facts and reality


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

msl said:


> The simple answer is it seems that hasn't proven to be...
> If it indeed had a significant impact on hive strength or early season build-up, commercial operators would be rotating it into their operation.
> 
> Like foundationless, its main selling point is its alternative/aint big ag management.. and that sells well with many hobbiests, regardless of the facts and reality


Commercial guys pretty much use plastic foundation. You cannot find one company that manufactures s.c. plastic foundation. They cell plastic comb but not foundation. Plastic comb runs close to $10 a frame.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

msl said:


> If it indeed had a significant impact on hive strength or early season build-up, *commercial operators would be rotating it into their operation.*


I would not use the commercial operators as a no-brainer, fool-proof litmus test that confirms everything.

While being very much interested in the financial margins and cost/benefit for everything, they also have the *biggest inertia* to overcome (unlike most little guys).

The commercial operators are like Titanic - takes a while to turn.
No matter how hard you want to avoid that iceberg - it takes a while to turn.
You really, really, really want to turn, end yet....

So what they do and don't do (at the moment) - not exactly what they *want *to do.

PS: this is just a general observation, not particularly about the SC.


----------



## John Davis (Apr 29, 2014)

Struttinbuck 
Do some searching for studies performed comparing SC to regular or Natural cell and you will find that some real data is available. 
Brood time is not reduced to 19 days, that number comes from Apis Cerana, studies on the European honey bee regressed to small size only shortened the brood cycle by about 12 hours which did not have a significant impact on varroa. 
Not all studies that do not support your opinions are biased due to "manufacturing influence".
Again look at the Honeybee health coalition information, they don't have a dog in the fight.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Struttinbuck said:


> You cannot find one company that manufactures s.c. plastic foundation they cell plastic comb but not foundation. Plastic comb runs close to $10 a frame.











9 1/8" (23.18 cm) Waxed Standard Plastic Frame - Black - Case of 10


Check out the deal on 9 1/8" (23.18 cm) Waxed Standard Plastic Frame - Black - Case of 10 at Mann Lake Bee & Ag Supply




www.mannlakeltd.com


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> Brood time is not reduced to 19 days


That's what I'm measuring. That's what Huber measured on natural comb. On the first day no time has elapsed and on the 20th day 19 days have elapsed. That's what Dzierzon measured on natural comb.





__





Natural Cell Size and it's effect on Varroa, Michael Bush


Natural Cell Size and it's effect on Varroa, Michael Bush. A contraversial subject for reasons I can't comprehend. Letting bees make their own comb without foundation has been crucial to getting off of Varroa treatments for me. Here is a discussion of that.




www.bushfarms.com


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

msl said:


> 9 1/8" (23.18 cm) Waxed Standard Plastic Frame - Black - Case of 10
> 
> 
> Check out the deal on 9 1/8" (23.18 cm) Waxed Standard Plastic Frame - Black - Case of 10 at Mann Lake Bee & Ag Supply
> ...


Thank you. I wasnt looking in the plastic frames too. Thank you sincerely. I was getting ready to order a mess of wax foundation and heat the wires up . With this plastic being black I can see eggs better.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

GregV said:


> I would not use the commercial operators as a no-brainer, fool-proof litmus test that confirms everything.


That I would agree with.

But -



GregV said:


> While being very much interested in the financial margins and cost/benefit for everything, they also have the *biggest inertia* to overcome (unlike most little guys).
> 
> The commercial operators are like Titanic - takes a while to turn.


I can see how this statement would appear to make sense. However, commercial operators are similar to non commercial operators, in that there are a range of types, in both.

The belief that commercial operators are nothing but stuck in the mud, unthinking "box shifters", is common among hobbyists even over here where I am. However when hobbyists come out with me for a day, and I do take a lot of them out I enjoy the company, that perception usually changes 180 degrees.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Oldtimer said:


> But -


OK, I will concede - this is always about shades of gray.

I can see case where $100 investment into plastic foundation for some hobbyist is already large enough so that he/she will never change from using the plastic - $100 has been invested to just toss it away! 
In your case, this could be $1000 invested in the plastic foundation.
But common idea is that the hobbyist does not depend on his/her bees for the bread and milk (but you do).

So anyway neither the hobbyists nor the commercials are the ultimate litmus test for most anything that going on.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

GregV said:


> In your case, this could be $1000 invested in the plastic foundation.


but here, many commercials pull nucs for sale at the end of almonds and have to replace those frames, at one nuc a year per hive they could easily convert everything they own over to SC in 4 years at no additional costs (they are buying new frames anyway)


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Bush said:


> That's what I'm measuring. That's what Huber measured on natural comb. On the first day no time has elapsed and on the 20th day 19 days have elapsed. That's what Dzierzon measured on natural comb.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thats good to know. That kind of info can so easily be misinterpreted. Im already sold on small cell just from the numbers issue.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Struttinbuck said:


> Im already sold on small cell just from the numbers issue.


what numbers issue?


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

msl said:


> what numbers issue?


That like a snowball effect. Having over a thousand more cells on each frame in a brood chamber in a beehive can benefit the beehive in many many ways. And I do not dare mention anything about Voldemort because everybody always reverts to a study that says S.C. is not effective against Voldemort.(For non Harry Potter fans its the V word) Lol.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Struttinbuck said:


> Having over a thousand more cells on each frame in a brood chamber in a beehive can benefit the beehive in many many ways


such as? I haven't seen any research to that effect

I have drifted towards double nucs (4 frames each) and singles for honey production.. cutting the cells in my brood chambers by 1/2 or more


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

msl said:


> such as? I haven't seen any research to that effect
> 
> I have drifted towards double nucs (4 frames each) and singles for honey production.. cutting the cells in my brood chambers by 1/2 or more


You get it.


----------



## massbee (May 11, 2020)

Just an FYI I had a devil of a time getting acceptance of those Mann lake 4.9 frames a decade ago. They also warp if stored flat. I’ve gotten rid of most of them now. If you use them wax them heavily and bee prepared to scrape off wonk comb built on top. Not with the hassle in my opinion


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

massbee said:


> Just an FYI I had a devil of a time getting acceptance of those Mann lake 4.9 frames a decade ago. They also warp if stored flat. I’ve gotten rid of most of them now. If you use them wax them heavily and bee prepared to scrape off wonk comb built on top. Not with the hassle in my opinion


That was my experience too. Many ridges of wild cells plugged with wax and drone cells. No more! Maybe different bees in different climates can make it work, but it didnt for me.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

I guess since I was a brand new bee keeper and started from my very first package of bees, with all new hives, new frames, new small cell foundations. That they took off and ran with it. Went from 3 hives to 12 and I havent even been at it a year yet. April 21 will mark my 1 year.
Although I did lose a hive due to my ignorance of when bees quit making wax. 
And also another incident i had just 5 days ago. I had a wooden plank get blown over, fell into a bee hive, it was very cold and snow got into the hive, but I'm hoping an electric blanket has saved that hive. The bees are alive and in there but im not sure if the queen survived the crash.
If you want to see what happened ,check it out. 




I dont usually post any of my youtube links because i show aint no youtube pro. But I do try to just be informative. lol. Dont laugh! lol!


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

crofter said:


> That was my experience too. Many ridges of wild cells plugged with wax and drone cell


Its worth noting that that was the* US experience as a whole *when A.I.root produced the 1st foundation at 5 per inch (5.08mm), he had measured natural comb as the bees had never seen foundation because it didn't exist yet and found









He found it was a mistake going with a nice round 5 per inch. It was "very nearly" what the bees wanted, but it wasn't!!!....This foundation had poor acceptance with italian bees and after $$ experimentation (hand stamping rollers was expensive ) while aquard number in imperial measurements he found 4.83 per inch (5.26mm) to give the best acceptance of the foundation.





> If the average beekeeper were asked how many cells, worker and drone comb, there were to the inch, he would undoubtedly answer five and four, respectively. Indeed some text books on bees carry that ratio. Approximately it is correct, enough for the bees, particularly the queen. The dimensions must be exact or there is a protest. 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 measurement, or 4.83 cells to one inch.


 ABC & XYZ of Bee Culture 38th Edition Copyright 1980 page 134

No magic lusby math, no rhombus or decimeter.. a simple count of cells per inch.
We know what the cell size was of natural comb before foundation
We know why the foundation most sold today is the size it is (most plastic 5.2,)
And we know bees have rejected unnaturally small foundation since the 1st foundation was made on this continent!!

in the modern era we see wild bees haven't changed much at all
Seeley and Morse (1976) found the average cells of the NY forest ferals 5.2mm
Taber and Owens (1970) found 5.2mm ± .457
Spivak and Erickson (1992) found 5.2 – 5.4mm


----------



## Amibusiness (Oct 3, 2016)

1st, I have not tried small cell (I do have a few sc combs mixed in there but i tend to ignore them. If I notice and its convenient i would put them in the center of the brood nest....)
2nd, I dont want to disagree w Oldtimer but wanted to bring a couple points to the discussion.
Regarding expense of foundationless


Oldtimer said:


> More manipulation (and therefore time) needed when assisting bees to draw it by the box
> Honey used to produce the wax to make it.
> More drones, therefore less producing workers, who also have to provide for those drones.


1. I take it as my choice how I introduce new frames to the bees. Based on hive and flow conditions I put foundationless frames where I want them and I don't think it is extra work on my part. I just organize it differently and don't expect them to draw a whole box of foundationless (which would indeed be more work on my part).
2. In my experience the amount of honey to make wax is negligable. I know people often say a certain ratio of honey to wax. This is purely speculation, I can't imagine a study that could actually isolate it. I find that the bees just work harder (and seem to enjoy it) if they need to draw some combs. When I have them draw all their comb new (rare) then they produce less honey because of timing not because they used it all for comb. Ie a small colony building up on the flow, flow stops before they produce any for me. Having them draw comb during the flow does not reduce honey production compared to similar colonies in the yard that are not drawing. So the argument could be made that having them produce comb and honey means I am getting more for less 
3. The same applies to drones. Not a significant cost in honey. And the cost benefit of having more control of my genetics is also a cost factor (though most of my yards are not isolated enough yet so I need more drones....). (I do limit drones in colonies marked for requeening this year if they are too hot or otherwise undesireable.)
Extracting foundationless deeps does take some more care to avoid breaking. And more time, no doubt. Sometimes we send nice full honey combs back out for fall feed because they would not hold up in the extractor. And we don't spin as fast as foundation would allow so our wets are a bit wetter. And this would be unacceptable for a commercial.
I am not opposed to anyone wanting to try small cell and believe the folks who say it works for them. Most things in life we do not know the mechanism for but have a near religious belief of what the cause and effects are. But that does not make me want to go spend $ and effort to see if someone else's religion is going to work for me 
And most studies now are conducted too narrowly with too short timeframe to get reliable data anyway. Ie in an issolated lab looking at one thing we can get data that suggests x but does not hold up in the complex environment called the real world over time. So as always, and with beekeeping, the answer will be more complex than just russians, or sc, or isolation, or.... Though for some that may be the tipping point they attribute the silver bullet to. Good luck!


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

Struttinbuck said:


> Why focus on the varroa when you talk about small cell foundation. If the bees are truly a half millimeter smaller. (Someone needs to get some mics on sc bees) then the advantages are.
> #1. 1000 more cells per frame in the brood chamber.
> #2. That is 10,000 or 20,000 more cells for a queen to claim as a brood chamber. It's like adding 2 or 3 more frames.
> #3. The urge to swarm due to egg laying room would greatly reduce.
> ...


I do not "knock" small cell but having tried it, I found it did not curtail mite populations as most other unbiased experimenters also learned. The more brood you have, the more mites will be raised, you forgot that axiom.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Vance G said:


> I do not "knock" small cell but having tried it, I found it did not curtail mite populations as most other unbiased experimenters also learned. The more brood you have, the more mites will be raised, you forgot that axiom.


The smaller the bee the bigger the number of specimens in the alcohol wash test. Because even a scientist fills the alcohol test kit by directions. 
I truly believe mites effect small bees the same as big bees. But its the benefits of having the number of cells in a brood chamber and the bees being smaller that benefits the hive.
But I cannot prove it.
If I become a millionaire this year, then I will do a real study. It will be documented with notes available to anyone, video, audio and witnesses. Credibility will be questioned even less than a study being done by the USDA.
Now I need to make that million. Seriously working on it. LOL. Long time. ! 
I just want to know too.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Struttinbuck said:


> But its the benefits of having the number of cells in a brood chamber and the bees being smaller that benefits the hive.


In what way does it benefit the hive. Productivity? What?


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> In what way does it benefit the hive. Productivity? What?


More bees per hive . Doesnt sound like anybody else can get small cell to work. But maybe since thats how I started out the gate is why I'm having so much luck with it. Its all I got. So I dont know any other way. ??? Maybe.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

So IF there are more bees per hive, what is the benefit? Productivity? What?

Have you done a comparative study between a number of hives to see if there are more bees per hive or is it just an assumption?


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> So IF there are more bees per hive, what is the benefit? Productivity? What?
> 
> Have you done a comparative study between a number of hives to see if there are more bees per hive or is it just an assumption?


More bees per hive helps with pests. 
More cells per brood chamber help with swarming.
Smaller bees help with queen excluders.
Let the bee keeper treat for varroa. Let the bees police for wax moth, SHB, lay eggs, pass through a queen excluder with ease.
No studies done. Just a calculator and a tape measure. Pure speculation on all of it.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

The first statements are made as facts.

Then at the end you say it is pure speculation?

Not a Trump supporter perchance? 😀


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> The first statements are made as facts.
> 
> Then at the end you say it is pure speculation?
> 
> Not a Trump supporter perchance? 😀


The reason they are stated as facts is because we are dealing with sizes and numbers. Its the effect of the sizes and numbers that are speculative.
I mean, will more bees keep wax moths away? Maybe? Typically yes. Same with SHB.
Will smaller bees be able or capable of passing through a queen excluder? Yes for certain they will be capable, but WILL they pass through just as willingly as no queen excluder? Is the question.
So yes the numbers and sizes are all fact. What the bees will do with numbers and sizes are sensible, but still unproven.
Talk about drillin down now Old Timer. Lol.
And Im not going to mention politics. LOL. I would get kicked off the website! Lol.
I believe in God and wave my American flag.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Taking a while but the thing I'm trying to get at here, is you have not done any real life comparisons. So you don't have any proper way to know, about any of it. Even what you call numbers and maths, whatever that may mean.

Most of the folks on the thread have run their own comparisons, and did not reach the same conclusions, having actually tried it.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> The first statements are made as facts.
> 
> Then at the end you say it is pure speculation?
> 
> Not a Trump supporter perchance? 😀


Im starting to wonder if years ago, when alot of people were trying small cell for the first time if they treated for mites back then? If not then no wonder people are swearing off of it. But with me, I have nothing but small cell brood chambers . And I also treat with oxalic acid often. So??? Mine are bangin. So far the only failures have been newb mistakes.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> Taking a while but the thing I'm trying to get at here, is you have not done any real life comparisons. So you don't have any proper way to know, about any of it. Even what you call numbers and maths, whatever that may mean.
> 
> Most of the folks on the thread have run their own comparisons, and did not reach the same conclusions, having actually tried it.


I agree with you. I dont even have a year under my belt yet. So its just the math stuff talkin right now. I know the bees are not machines and is why I cant prove any of it.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Struttinbuck said:


> Im starting to wonder if years ago, when alot of people were trying small cell for the first time if they treated for mites back then? If not then no wonder people are swearing off of it.


Something like that.

Small cell was promoted as a panacea for everything, from mites, to AFB, to pretty much everything.

The narrative went that bees used to be naturally small cell, then 100 years ago we made comb foundation bigger than natural, bees got artificially too big, and since then many bee diseases have appeared. It is therefore obvious to believers, that every evil that has happened to bees in the last century is caused by them being too big.

So as mites were the main issue, people went small cell primarily to solve mites, cos they were being told it would work, by the internet.

Since then a more careful reading of the old literature and measurements given, has shown that European honeybees never were small cell (4.9), the argument is moot.

After that, it was found that the huge majority of people who went small cell to fix their mite problems, found it did not actually fix their mite problems. These beekeepers mostly gave up and returned to a cell size the bees were more happy with. Seeing the drop in popularity, the small cell believers tried to counter by saying that small cells are better in other ways. Exactly what? Various theories have been thought up, although cynics may point out that none of them have been shown to yeild any benefit in the real world rather than the internet. But hey, they sure sound good on the internet.

And how is small cell better? Well, it just is. You have to believe it.


----------



## Amibusiness (Oct 3, 2016)

I am sure some of you know the answers: was small cell promoted mainly by Lusbys in the beginning? Are they in an africanized area? Aren't africanized naturally smaller cell and more mite resistant (not sure that is connected....)
I watched one video of her bees years ago and the microphone was getting so buzzed I could not understand much talking. I think things may be a bit different with africanized hb....


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> Something like that.
> 
> Small cell was promoted as a panacea for everything, from mites, to AFB, to pretty much everything.
> 
> ...





Oldtimer said:


> Something like that.
> 
> Small cell was promoted as a panacea for everything, from mites, to AFB, to pretty much everything.
> 
> ...


Just with my experience.  lol. Only months but nonetheless. Using small cell and treating for mites with O.A. brought me from starting off with 3 packages of bees to 12 hives.
And just for shnicks and giggles. Was anybody treating for mites while using small cell back then?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

No. The idea of small cell was to "go natural", as they thought, and "let bees be bees".

Don't treat, let the bees "take care of it". "Bees know best".

Instead of "forcing them onto large foundation".


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> No. The idea of small cell was to "go natural", as they thought, and "let bees be bees".
> 
> Don't treat, let the bees "take care of it". "Bees know best".
> 
> Instead of "forcing them onto large foundation".


Well I considered not treating for varroa, but seen everybodies results. I didnt want to start off losing 15-25 percent of my hives the first year. And I think the combination of small cell foundation, caucasion bees(less likely to swarm) I havent used any excluders yet. Has been a super combination to keep ultra strong bee hives. Lots of bees and very few swarm cells. It was easier for me to keep ahead of the queens making swarm cells. Ive maybe seen 3 hive beetles. But are the low numbers of hive beetles due to all new equipment and combs?
Theres so much to figure out and learn.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> Doesnt sound like anybody else can get small cell to work.


Actually there are thousands of us who are using it and having good luck. We just get tired of all the arguments.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> Commercial guys pretty much use plastic foundation. You cannot find one company that manufactures s.c. plastic foundation. They cell plastic comb but not foundation. Plastic comb runs close to $10 a frame.


Not even close to true. Mann Lake makes their CHEAP plastic frames with foundation in small cell. PF100s or PF120s and others in the PF10x or PF12x series. I don't know the current price but it is cheaper than their PF500 series.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Bush said:


> Actually there are thousands of us who are using it and having good luck. We just get tired of all the arguments.


The most famous ones are.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Bush said:


> Not even close to true. Mann Lake makes their CHEAP plastic frames with foundation in small cell. PF100s or PF120s and others in the PF10x or PF12x series. I don't know the current price but it is cheaper than their PF500 series.


I'm glad yall pointed that out to me. But I'm going with wax foundation anyways. I'm wiring them up right and decided if I really want to find something true out, I better leave any chance certain bees dont like drawing on plastic foundation out of the equation.


----------



## Gray Goose (Sep 4, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> More cells to wear out the queens egg laying, to achieve the same biomass of bees. IE, no advantage. Small bees carry small loads.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


While we do not always agree Oldtimer here your answers were almost the same as I would have offered.
great reply

GG


----------



## Gray Goose (Sep 4, 2018)

Struttinbuck said:


> Thank you. I wasnt looking in the plastic frames too. Thank you sincerely. I was getting ready to order a mess of wax foundation and heat the wires up . With this plastic being black I can see eggs better.


Dadant caries 4.9 and 5.1 wired foundation, if you wish to regress in 2 steps instead of 1








Small Cell 4.9 mm Deep 8 1/2" X 16 3/4" Crimp Wired Long Hook - 10 Pack


Cell size is 4.9mm (8 1/2 inch wired foundation). Suggested for use by experienced beekeepers only. Varroa Mite have a hard time reproducing on worker brood raised in small cell comb. So, if you are an experienced beekeeper who likes to experiment and want to move ahead of the chemical control...




www.dadant.com




not sure where you are deriving the 10$ a frame from
the wood is 1.07 (100 pck) and the wax 1.80 (10 pack, 25 lb is cheaper)so 2.87 for a wood frame with 4.9 crimp wire foundation.
so shop around more the 10/a frame seems a bit steep to me.

BTW I have some collecting dust in the shop. My Northern bees like big cells and I can't not lie........

GG


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Gray Goose said:


> Dadant caries 4.9 and 5.1 wired foundation, if you wish to regress in 2 steps instead of 1
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I already knew the wood and wax pricing. I was hoping to find S.C. plastic foundation and was having a hard time. If you want a thriving hive go small cell. Think of it as an immune system. I started off fresh on 4.9 mm. My first package of bees came from small cell. And not sure who came up with the name of regression, but I do know they were anti small cell. I call my bees Nano Bees. They are much more productive and healthy as a whole. I even had a hive crash about 2 weeks ago on a 12* night. I opened them yesterday and they are just B.A.
The queen lived and everything.
Heres a video. Small cell caucasians. The queen is not a pure caucasion but they still have many of the caucasion traits.


----------



## Lburou (May 13, 2012)

ankklackning said:


> I wanted to say I hope I didn't cause any trouble in this thread. I didn't realize there would be so many opinions that were sometimes opposed to each other. And hope the spirit of friendliness among beeks is increased and not decreased. Thanks for all the comments to study about.


"Treatment Free" & "Small Cell" Beekeeping have been the source for heated discussion in beekeeping circles for years. These subjects come up as new beekeepers sift through information online and in writings outside mainstream and time proven practices. 

Beesource and other beekeeping forums have lost participating members because of the schism between factions loyal to one philosophy or another. It reminds me of the way a church congregation splits because of some picayune doctrinal disagreement. The exchanges have been confrontational & personal on beekeeping forums. 

My advice: Stick to mainstream, modern beekeeping practices until you have mastered them and you know how to raise bees in your area with its unique blend of weather and forage available. Join a group of local beekeepers, get a local mentor, learn how to keep bees in your area. 

Then, you can try the latest "new" beekeeping practice in vogue at the time. In my view, treatment free and small cell beekeeping are not in the mainstream today. Scientificbeekeeping.com is a good source for a beginning beekeeper. HTH


----------



## Cloverdale (Mar 26, 2012)

Struttinbuck said:


> Why tie small cell to varroa. We already know small cell has no effect on varroa. Small cell is for improving the numbers and strength in a hive.


My bad, the name of this post must have thrown me off Varroa Resistance As It Pertains to Cell Size...


----------



## Gray Goose (Sep 4, 2018)

Struttinbuck said:


> More bees per hive . Doesnt sound like anybody else can get small cell to work. But maybe since thats how I started out the gate is why I'm having so much luck with it. Its all I got. So I dont know any other way. ??? Maybe.


SBuck "ALL" keeping is local.
If this works for you then by all means keep with it.
Do not worry much about what others say as their experience is for "THEIR" local environment.

this is the reason the answers vary from person to person as their experience is different due to the location being different.

If it is, luck , then beware, the gods at times change the good luck receivers.. 

GG


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Gray Goose said:


> SBuck "ALL" keeping is local.
> If this works for you then by all means keep with it.
> Do not worry much about what others say as their experience is for "THEIR" local environment.
> 
> ...


I'm just looking at small cell as another tool. Its a way to fit more bees into the same hive. So when I use northern breeds of bees. Small Cell foundation. Treat with oxalic acid, feed them not to build their population but to maintain, I use better comb as emergency feeders. I winter in 5 frame nucs so the bees dont have to break cluster to find their food, maintain heat better. Reflective insulation to help keep the bees asleep when its cold out.
Those fractors along with luck (I will take luck over experience or skill anyday) is why Im such a huge fan of small cell. 
Its not how big your bees are, its how big your population of bees are.
The higher the numbers, not the size is what maintains a hives strength.
Stated as fact, but its still pure theory until a non partisan corporate or college funded study shows every detail of the study. You will never see the details of the study. Especially video details. Why wont they show video details of a study on small cell? It doesnt matter, you cannot question anything a study says. I mean, its a study.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

Struttinbuck said:


> I'm just looking at small cell as another tool. Its a way to fit more bees into the same hive.


More bees? Some folks run single deeps and keep bees very well, and make honey and money. It is true that the more bees you have, in excess of the number of workers required to maintain brood, the more bees you will have dedicated to foraging and honey production. However, the smaller bees have a smaller carrying capacity which demands that more bees are required to do the same amount of work as larger bees, which negates any [perceived] advantage.



> Reflective insulation to help keep the bees asleep when its cold out.


What? D'ya think that bees hibernate or something? I think you need to learn some more things about bees.



> I will take luck over experience or skill any day


That's a recipe for failure. It's a good thing that you don't defuse bombs for a living (says the guy who was the Company EOD man in the Army). So, what you are really saying is, that you have your own opinion from crap you have read on the 'net and that you intend to completely ignore the many years of experience and wisdom available from the folks on here who have been keeping bees for a long time, some of them very long indeed.

'Small cell' was done to death years ago. Many of the experienced folks on this forum are more than willing to experiment with different ways of doing things to see if there might be a better way. If 'small cell' had any advantage, we would all be doing it. It doesn't do any good...but you've already told us that you have no intention of learning from the skill, experience and wisdom of those who have gone before.

When I wanted to learn about keeping bees, I sought out a man who had been keeping bees for a long time and had a great deal of experience and skill, and made it a point to learn as much as possible of what he knew. That knowledge served me well right from the start. Of course, sometimes I have my own ideas and I like to experiment, but in most cases I found that he was correct and when I chose to go against what he taught me my success declined.



> Its not how big your bees are, its how big your population of bees are.


Wrong, it is _both_ how big your bees are, and how big a population you have in excess of the number of bees required to care for brood. If you have smaller bees, it will take more bees to care for the increased brood, and more bees still to obtain the necessary nectar and pollen to feed the brood due to their lower payload capacity.

Your higher number of smaller bees are also going to consume more resources in all areas of activity, another hit against reduced payload capacity, reducing your overall harvest.

Of course, if you don't intend to harvest honey then it's a moot point and I'm wasting my time...which I probably am anyway, given your already stated predilection for ignoring the skill, wisdom and advice of others who have gone before and 'been there, done that'.



> The higher the numbers, not the size is what maintains a hives strength.
> *Stated as fact, but its still pure theory*...


In other words, you don't have a clue and you're just talking through your hat.



> ...until a non partisan corporate or college funded study shows every detail of the study. You will never see the details of the study. Especially video details. Why wont they show video details of a study on small cell? It doesnt matter, you cannot question anything a study says. I mean, its a study.


And now you're just going into the same thought mode as the bunko conspiracy theory/anti-vaxxer/anti-pharma/evolution denier crowd.

Oh well, go ahead, stick to your guns and do what you want.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

BadBeeKeeper said:


> More bees? Some folks run single deeps and keep bees very well, and make honey and money. It is true that the more bees you have, in excess of the number of workers required to maintain brood, the more bees you will have dedicated to foraging and honey production. However, the smaller bees have a smaller carrying capacity which demands that more bees are required to do the same amount of work as larger bees, which negates any [perceived] advantage.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If the air temp is 30 degrees outside. You wrap your hives in black felt paper, The hive is a strong colony. What will the bees do if the inside of the hive hits 50 degrees? They will eat and not leave the hive. What happens if they eat and not leave the hive?

You go get your polio shot, Fauci wants that third mask on asap. And if you ever research a vaccine , youll never get another. Plumbing is what got rid of polio. Not a shot.

I actually work in pharmacies and yes I stay away from as many pills as possible. 

When you say small cell was done to death, how many of them were treating for mites while using small cell?

When you learned from a beekeeper years ago, was he dealing with varroa? Im sure he was as cleless as the rest of the beekeepers. Are you aware of the next mite?

You obviously misunderstood the number of bees is what determines how thriving a colony is. Because there is no denying it. There is no argument at all whatsoever, and if you need a study to tell you that then??? Yes your bee master failed you those many years ago.

If you test a small cell colony of bees with an alcohol wash, then you test a standard cell colony with the same test. How would you go about it?


----------



## Cloverdale (Mar 26, 2012)

Struttinbuck said:


> If the air temp is 30 degrees outside. You wrap your hives in black felt paper, The hive is a strong colony. What will the bees do if the inside of the hive hits 50 degrees? They will eat and not leave the hive. What happens if they eat and not leave the hive?
> 
> You go get your polio shot, Fauci wants that third mask on asap. And if you ever research a vaccine , youll never get another. Plumbing is what got rid of polio. Not a shot.
> 
> ...


Just out of curiosity how long have you been trying to raise honey bees? And where are you located?


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Cloverdale said:


> Just out of curiosity how long have you been trying to raise honey bees? And where are you located?


I havent kept bees a year yet, but it doesnt take a study to tell you the sun beating on a beehive wrapped in black felt paper isnt going to generate heat. Then the colony is generating its heat. Why would anyone want the bees to break cluster if its not warm enough for them outside the hive.Their consumption of food stays low. Their attempt at a cleansing flight doesnt happen if they are in cluster.
And yes again. No study to prove it.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Struttinbuck said:


> Plumbing is what got rid of polio. Not a shot.


That's a new one on me.

Alex


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Struttinbuck said:


> If the air temp is 30 degrees outside. You wrap your hives in black felt paper, The hive is a strong colony. What will the bees do if the inside of the hive hits 50 degrees? They will eat and not leave the hive. What happens if they eat and not leave the hive?





Struttinbuck said:


> Why would anyone want the bees to break cluster if its not warm enough for them outside the hive


The whole point of the black wrap is they will leave the have earlier do to the warm microclimate and get a cleansing flight they would otherwise miss, much the same as with the dark bark of a tree... the white box is the unnatural thing...



Struttinbuck said:


> You obviously misunderstood the number of bees is what determines how thriving a colony is. Because there is no denying it. There is no argument at all whatsoever, and if you need a study to tell you that then??? Yes your bee master failed you those many years ago.


come on... you haven't even gotten bees threw one winter yet, and you want to lecture others?

Many of us keep big thriving hives in single deep brood chambers.. so yes we are looking at you a little funny when you start talking about small cell in a dubble deep meaning more cells= more brood... many of us feel we don't need or want those extra cells, if we did we would run double deeps.

you have failed to present a case as to why more cells in a double deep brood chamber is an advantage

Mostly the limiting factor on bee population is the queens laying rate, small cell doesn't change that. Yes there are a few studies that show a bee increases on small cell...Those are the same studys that show small cell increases the mite levels... like wize most of the few studies that show small cells decrease in mite loads aslo show a decrease in brood...

No surprise there... more brood more mites, less brood less mites.

Either way we have no studies showing small cell increases honey production, and a few that say it reduces it.. IE by 35% in this trial Trial of HoneySuperCell® Small Cell Combs - Scientific Beekeeping
and arguably honey production is a good metric of pop size

you have no personal experience to back what your saying, you have presented no study data to back what your saying... plenty of people have presented both contrary to your ideas.


look if you like the idea of artificial downsizing your bees using what is AHB foundation, go for it
but its not natural, and we can prove that
It doesn't' seem to have any significant benefits, and we can prove that. Not discounting an insignificant effect
but don't go preaching form the soap box till you have some sort of experience and or education on the subject..

DONT take this personally, Its just The most dangerous thing you can do on a forum is leave chaff unchanged so that the next generation finds it( in another mouth or so the "fogger" threads will start again lol ) they will use your unbacked words to justfie unsound management theories (hypothesis actually ), just as you are doing now. The new forum features here digging up old threads whill add to the issues...

Beekeepers self assessment of their skills and knowledge peaks around their 2 or 3rd year.. and for many this is when they are most active on the internet making videos (youtubers in clean white bee suits cause a massive amount of death and carnage) and talking in forums telling the experienced keepers how it is.....much like a teenager..." Hey teenagers, move out and make your millions while you still know it all" as the saying goes










In psychology its called the dunning kruger effect if you want to dig in to it










If you were to ask me on a good year, I would say I am 1/3 to 1/2 way up the slope of enlightenment..... and then the bees teach be a lesson.
I finally got my numbers up enuf to..Poof try some EFB
My queen rearing is good enuff to sell some queens.. Poof try some BCQV
I finally have my mite protocols right... Poof the neighbors 20 hives colapace form mites in early oct causing the yard I had there to go "poof" (thank my stars I had diversified in to 5 yards)

I am quite aware my curve looks more like this


----------



## Cloverdale (Mar 26, 2012)

How apropos there is no timeline on your last graph....


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

When I first started, I was a fogger advocate. Had not even had bees for a year and never treated for mites, but I had ALL the answers (got them from a Ytube video). Even got into a heated discussion with Dr. Richard Cryberg and made a total *** of myself. Not my finest hour to be sure. Gradually common sense managed to work it's way in and the fogger idea was discarded. One of the reasons I still have bees.


----------



## Cloverdale (Mar 26, 2012)

JWPalmer said:


> When I first started, I was a fogger advocate. Had not even had bees for a year and never treated for mites, but I had ALL the answers (got them from a Ytube video). Even got into a heated discussion with Dr. Richard Cryberg and made a total *** of myself. Not my finest hour to be sure. Gradually common sense managed to work it's way in and the fogger idea was discarded. One of the reasons I still have bees.


You have my sympathy on that one (Dick Cryberg? Yikes) as for me sometimes I still take 2 steps back before one forward.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

It could be just as easily pointed out that the polio out break was due to better sewage and babies no longer getting it while still on the mother milk. Why would I believe you over doctor fauci. Your credentials?
cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Struttinbuck said:


> Plumbing is what got rid of polio. Not a shot.





AHudd said:


> That's a new one on me.
> Alex


It's a popular myth among anti vaxxers Alex, I've seen it before.

The theory goes, that Polio was spread by bad plumbing. Then at the time everybody got vaccinated, all of a sudden the whole plumbing system of the entire country was re done and re vamped, and it was that eliminated Polio, not the vaccine.

Of course the whole plumbing sytem of the entire country was not re done and re vamped at that time, however to believers, the theory looks great when read on the internet, or spoken by earnest faced serious looking people on youtube.

But to Struttinbuck. I don't think there is any need to bash the guy into submission about cell size. Small cells are his happy space, it may or may not work for him, in due course he will find out. At this time he is just the same as all those hoards of 6 month in small cell beekeepers that used to be all over Beesource years ago, that had been convinced of the rightness of their beliefs by a YouTube video, and because it "seemed to make sense". Despite that they knew everything, almost none of them survived. But a few did.

StruttinBuck will have to make his own journey and his own discoveries.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

AHudd said:


> That's a new one on me.
> 
> Alex


Uhhhh. There was little to no plumbing man. And did you research any of it. How does polio transmit, through the ingestion of human fesces. Not cat, not dog, cow, chicken. The main way for the old(REPEAT OLD) polio virus could transmit was through getting human fesces into the gut of another human.
Now the main way polio gets transmitted is through the vaccine of the genetically modified virus. Its all on WHO website. Good read.
If you can read legalese then every word in this previous paragraph is correct to the exact definition of each and every word chosen.
Yes anywhere there is modern plumbing the old polio is dead. There might be 5 countries in North Africa and the Middle East with the wild strain of polio left but thats it. Everybody else with polio outside that region has gotten it from the vaccine.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

I'm just into doing stuff people say you cant do more than anything. And Ive already learnt the small cell stuff, now I'm working on a new vaporizer. Oh and if your interested in a new vaporizer, dont use small cell foundation. 
JK


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

All I know about Polio was that it was quite often the subject of many conversations when the adults got together, the fear was palpable.
When the vaccine came out we were lined up in the hallway for our sugar cube. No one complained, there were no parents there making sure no one got their feelings hurt or that they got their proper place in line. It just got done.
That was in a small town in the Panhandle region of Texas and everyone had indoor plumbing for as long as I can remember. 
But none of that has anything to do with small cell beekeeping, so that's all I will say on the subject.

Alex


----------



## Robert L. Gifford (Feb 27, 2021)

ankklackning said:


> So I've been listening to a Youtube video on the internet entitled, _'Michael Bush at the Organically Managed Beekeeping Conference 2016'_. (Took place in AZ I believe.)
> 
> At any rate there's this one line where he says something along the lines of (forgive me if I don't quote it perfectly): 'all the large cell foundation died of varroah...and that it reached a tipping point when he went to large cells (as compared to smaller cells).
> 
> ...


Hey, that is a natural instinctive reaction to cell size. Varroa go to the large cells first because they think that they are entering "drone" cells. They have done this for several million years. No surprise there. I only put drone frames in the most outside position in box. When the nurse quit raising larva for worker bees and drones they will use the larger cells to store nectar. Shouldn't mix two different cell sizes, other then a single drone frame in the brood box. Good Luck


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Robert L. Gifford said:


> Varroa go to the large cells first because they think that they are entering "drone" cells. They have done this for several million years. No surprise there


How does a blind mite judge cell size?


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Robert L. Gifford said:


> Hey, that is a natural instinctive reaction to cell size. Varroa go to the large cells first because they think that they are entering "drone" cells. ..........


Varroa have no eyesight and have no idea whatsoever of the cell size.
What about orientation by smell?


----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

GregV said:


> Varroa have no eyesight and have no idea whatsoever of the cell size.
> What about orientation by smell?


Well, I guess someone needs to develop their smellometer and check this out. For sure, the mites are able to find the drone cells.

I've just read this this thread in reverse order, and I'm very sorry that I did not find it sooner.

I do have lots of opinions on the issues discussed.

For one, it's always the 'newby' who thinks they know it all. I remember when Jesus hit the young people in my 'neighborhod'. With them, I couldn't be right if I wasn't doing exactly as they were. To clarify, I have nothing against Jesus. Reminds me of an old cartoon, where all the folks were going to church while Rick O"Shay headed out to the 'mountains' to get his dose of God. Call me Rick.

I don't remember the date, but I started experimenting with small cell at least 15 years ago. My bees didn't have trouble drawing out the foundation, but I quickly evolved to natural cell (Michael Bush?) as I figured that the bees would know what was best for them. Yes, I still had mite issues. In fact they have been and continue to be the major problem in my beekeeping. It's true that the treatments used to control the mites have become less toxic and have improved due to the work of certain individuals.

And while I'm there, I should mention that my cell size, when measured, always seems to come out at 5.2mm for the brood comb. I remember Lusby stating that bees were larger depending on latitude with smaller bees closer to the equator and so on. There may be something to that.

As to the issue of natural cell aka foundationless. Reality is that to do it successfully, IMO, one needs to do more manipulation of the hive to keep it organized, and to reduce the number of drones produced by the bees. IOW, there is more time and labor involved manipulating than is necessary if using either wax or plastic foundation. This is probably why commercial beekeepers switched to using foundation in the first place.

I have personal experience which demonstrates that bees are into it for survival rather than to maximize honey production. In so doing they will produce far more drones than are needed, and thus fewer worker bees. Workers produce honey and pollen while drones consume honey and pollen. The end result with natural cell unmanaged is less honey production, though I will admit that natural cell bees reduce their drone production after the major annual buildup.

Ah, polio. I got my sugar cube long ago and I do not see anybody out there with polio, which no longer seems to be around.

I hope I didn't forget anything. I will say that I enjoyed reading what has been said prior to my post.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Gino45 said:


> And while I'm there, I should mention that my cell size, when measured, always seems to come out at 5.2mm for the brood comb.


LOL. I can remember back in the day posting on Beesource that I had measured my natural comb and it came out overwhelmingly at 5.2 or 5.3. I was outright disbelieved, not possible I was told. (wasn't the dogma of the day). So I questioned my detractors about their natural cell size and was told it was 4.9. "But did you measure it" I asked. "No" was the reply. "Then how do you know for sure that it is 4.9" I asked. "Because it is natural comb, so it must be 4.9" I was told.

I asked these people to get a ruler, actually measure, and post a photo to prove it. None did. Interesting..



Gino45 said:


> I have personal experience which demonstrates that bees are into it for survival rather than to maximize honey production.


Agreed. And this is where the "bees know best" argument falls over at least if running bees for profit. Because our aim (maximum honey production) is different to the bees aim (reproduction). Like all living creatures, bees want to reproduce and as much as possible, which for them is swarming. Having a huge honey surplus is not something they need, just enough for winter is all. So to get a honey crop, we have to mess with their natural urges, by preventing swarming, curbing drone production, and a few other tweaks. Profitable beekeeping is not about allowing them to do what comes naturally, but encouraging them to do what we want them to.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> How does a blind mite judge cell size?


I don't know, but they have done studies. It's clear from studies that Varroa prefer larger cells over smaller cells if they both have worker or they both have drone. It's also clear that given both worker and drone larvae in the same size cell they prefer the drones. So it seems to be partly the cell size and partly the pheromones from the larvae that cause the preferences.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Michael Bush said:


> It's clear from studies that Varroa prefer larger cells over smaller cells


I haven't see that in studies.. ie 4.9 and 5.2 in the same hive with the mites showing a invasion preference.. not sure how I missed it, what studies showed this ?


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Does a Queen measure cell size with her legs, or is that something I dreamed?

Alex


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

AHudd said:


> Does a Queen measure cell size with her legs, or is that something I dreamed?
> 
> Alex


I will guarantee a fertilized egg will have a different pheremone or smell than a drone egg. And the difference in size to a bee would prolly compare a canteloupe to a watermelon. I speculate the only reason mites dont make it to all drone cells is because to them, 8 frames away is like from here to Florida.
As far as studies go, does anybody know where to find some to read?


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

That's probably true, but I was wondering if this is how a Queen knows to lay a drone egg.

Alex


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Struttinbuck said:


> 8 frames away is like from here to Florida.


Not fair comparison.
More like 5K run - which I can do close to 20mins (when in shape).
OK, make it 30 mins (half-walking).
OK, make it a half-day - still plenty fast.
In short - insignificant distance away (not to Florida).

The real deal is - the mites are blind and driven by other senses in the general desired direction.
Place single brood comb into a very large brood-less hive and soon enough the brood will be like this (takes much quicker than walking to Florida):


----------



## Cloverdale (Mar 26, 2012)

Struttinbuck said:


> I will guarantee a fertilized egg will have a different pheremone or smell than a drone egg. And the difference in size to a bee would prolly compare a canteloupe to a watermelon. I speculate the only reason mites dont make it to all drone cells is because to them, 8 frames away is like from here to Florida.
> As far as studies go, does anybody know where to find some to read?







__





Internal Development of Honey Bee Eggs, Within the Queen up to laying






www.dave-cushman.net




...measures the cell diameter with her front legs....

Im sure if you look in The Hive and the Honey Bee or ABC & XYZ of Beekeeping will tell you.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

AHudd said:


> All I know about Polio was that it was quite often the subject of many conversations when the adults got together, the fear was palpable.
> When the vaccine came out we were lined up in the hallway for our sugar cube. No one complained, there were no parents there making sure no one got their feelings hurt or that they got their proper place in line. It just got done.
> That was in a small town in the Panhandle region of Texas and everyone had indoor plumbing for as long as I can remember.
> But none of that has anything to do with small cell beekeeping, so that's all I will say on the subject.
> ...


Lol. Hey, heres what polio was the equivelant to. RONA. Yea maybe 100 percent of people catch it but less than 1% die from it. Thats why the WHO, CDC, any healthcare organization will absolutely not tell anyone what the death rate is.
With polio it was 1 percent of the population catching it.8 percent out of the 1 percent of people catching it showing fever or any signs of it and 3 percent of those 1 percent actually having any severe reaction to it. They had everybody scared to death.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Cloverdale said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Woops. Sorry and thank you.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

GregV said:


> Not fair comparison.
> More like 5K run - which I can do close to 20mins (when in shape).
> OK, make it 30 mins (half-walking).
> OK, make it a half-day - still plenty fast.
> ...


WOW. They are ate up.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Struttinbuck said:


> WOW. They are ate up.


By blind, almost brainless mites - right in those beatiful natural sized cells.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

*___*


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Struttinbuck said:


> Lol. Hey, heres what polio was the equivelant to. RONA. Yea maybe 100 percent of people catch it but less than 1% die from it. Thats why the WHO, CDC, any healthcare organization will absolutely not tell anyone what the death rate is.
> With polio it was 1 percent of the population catching it.8 percent out of the 1 percent of people catching it showing fever or any signs of it and 3 percent of those 1 percent actually having any severe reaction to it. They had everybody scared to death.


I don't know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember seeing crippled kids at school that were suffering the effects of Polio. Seeing is believing and fearing what is before your eyes. It takes a special kind of willful ignorance mixed with the hubris of youth to talk with such authority on a long ago subject.
The success for defeating Polio can be attributed to Jonas Salk and another researcher whose name I cannot recall. It was also because the mores of the times which are unlike the ones we find ourselves living. People were willing to put aside their fear for their individual safety in order to ensure the benefit of the majority. 
I also don't think you have any kids, because if you did you would understand that a one percent chance of having your child suffer the effects of Polio or Small Pox would be too much. Scared to death, **** right.
I remember a few years ago some animal rights activists broke into a Lab conducting research on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome to set the lab animals free, setting back the research by years. Cats, I believe. I don't know about you, but I would kill a bunch of cats if only to save someone else's kid.
I realize this is an extreme example, but therein lies the danger of misguided people spreading false information. It endangers others. It endangers the greater good.

Please don't quote this post again. I don't want to put you on ignore, but I may have to, because I find it impossible to not respond and I would like to hear what you have to say on the *topic* at hand. Who knows you may be the one to conquer mites with small cells and lead us all into the promised land free from mite treatments.
Dig up a few of the threads in which Mike Bispham participated. You may enjoy the debate.

Alex


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Alex I agree on all your points;
I had at least 5 classmates crippled badly by polio. Many others were too badly crippled to make it to school. I have personally had work partners who lived with their childhood crippling.
The kind of ignorance that belittles the seriousness of such issues certainly is not admired by me.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

GregV said:


> By blind, almost brainless mites - right in those beatiful natural sized cells.


I never claimed small cell does a thing against Varroa. My claim is small cell makes a stronger hive in numbers. But thats 50 posts back.
I say you should never ever even mention those two words together because that is where the study people jump in. And I have yet to see anyone supply a study. Or even a link to one. So???


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

AHudd said:


> I don't know how old you are, but I am old enough to remember seeing crippled kids at school that were suffering the effects of Polio. Seeing is believing and fearing what is before your eyes. It takes a special kind of willful ignorance mixed with the hubris of youth to talk with such authority on a long ago subject.
> The success for defeating Polio can be attributed to Jonas Salk and another researcher whose name I cannot recall. It was also because the mores of the times which are unlike the ones we find ourselves living. People were willing to put aside their fear for their individual safety in order to ensure the benefit of the majority.
> I also don't think you have any kids, because if you did you would understand that a one percent chance of having your child suffer the effects of Polio or Small Pox would be too much. Scared to death, **** right.
> I remember a few years ago some animal rights activists broke into a Lab conducting research on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome to set the lab animals free, setting back the research by years. Cats, I believe. I don't know about you, but I would kill a bunch of cats if only to save someone else's kid.
> ...


Its not me saying it. Its these guys.





__





Poliomyelitis


WHO fact sheet on poliomyelitis, a highly infectious disease caused by a virus. The fact sheet includes key facts, global caseload, Global Eradication Initiative, progress, WHO response.




www.who.int


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Struttinbuck said:


> My claim is small cell makes a stronger hive in numbers.


I hear your claim because I never, ever use any foundation - 100% natural.

That being said, I have not many bees left this year (again!!), because no amount of natural cels (i.e. almost small cells (TM) ) and no amount of small bees makes up for the other, much more significant, factors.

Totally, IF any other factors is going into your favor already, the SC (TM) could be that extra little push that will help you to sustain.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

Every number Ive posted in this thread noone can contest. Every number ive posted has erred on the side of caution if it is an inaccurate number. So ??? And trust me , I never said small cell gets rid of varroa. Small cell keeps a strong ,vibrant healthy hive. And it gets people all worked up. ???


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Struttinbuck said:


> Small cell keeps a strong ,vibrant healthy hive


As opposed to what?
What are the other alternatives?

Anyway.


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

GregV said:


> As opposed to what?
> What are the other alternatives?
> 
> Anyway.


Raising a hive of bumblebees. LOL


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Struttinbuck said:


> Its not me saying it. Its these guys.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok, it wasn't clear to me that you were quoting someone else. I guess the "LOL" set me off.
I am one of the worst offenders when it comes to derailing threads, I'm trying to stop.

Alex


----------



## Struttinbuck (Mar 8, 2020)

AHudd said:


> Ok, it wasn't clear to me that you were quoting someone else. I guess the "LOL" set me off.
> I am one of the worst offenders when it comes to derailing threads, I'm trying to stop.
> 
> Alex


So am I.


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

Most of my frames are the ML 4.9 plastic frames because I got them cheap! There are a percentage that are garbage but I cull them out. I bought a pile of used equipment and the colonies I put on it all got AFB. I shook them onto the said small cell in August and fed heavily. It was not the best drawn comb but I think that it downsized my bees and they have drawn it well since. The 4.9 is not good surplus comb! It does not extract as clean as larger comb. BTW I medicated with tylan and only two of those colonies later showed infection. That was over ten years ago and I haven't seen AFB since in my colonies.


----------



## HaplozygousNut (Dec 30, 2015)

Robert L. Gifford said:


> Hey, that is a natural instinctive reaction to cell size. Varroa go to the large cells first because they think that they are entering "drone" cells. They have done this for several million years. No surprise there. I only put drone frames in the most outside position in box. When the nurse quit raising larva for worker bees and drones they will use the larger cells to store nectar. Shouldn't mix two different cell sizes, other then a single drone frame in the brood box. Good Luck


I thought it was that the bees hatch a day earlier with the smaller natural cell size than they do on the larger foundation cell size? That would give the Varroa less time to breed in cells. I think I have noticed that our queens hatch out a day or so earlier than the normal time said in the books. I have been using a mixture of foundation and foundationless in our colonies. This means I have to take queen cells out a day earlier, otherwise the queens that hatch will be destroying the other queen cells that I could use.


----------

