# Small cell bees and Survivor bees



## franktrujillo (Jan 22, 2009)

just place them with no foundation and don't treat keeping bees 9 years foundationless and treatment free.


----------



## Colobee (May 15, 2014)

I had never heard of "small cell" before BS, either. Turn's out I've been semi "treatment free" for quite some time. Maybe 20 years if Pierco's are/were small cell in the 90's. Nothing but ML PF 120's for ~10 years. I frequently throw swarms (and occasional packages) into these small cells frames (with drawn comb). I don't recall them ever rejecting it.

Edit: I just measured one of the few Pierco's I have left - it's the same as the PF 120 - just under 5 cells per inch. They build drone comb on it as they please. I've treated for varroa about twice in ~20 years (knee jerk "everybody is doing it") - not because I had verified counts. Maybe that's just coincidence.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

They are feral bees that survived at least one winter if you just caught the swarm. Bees usually will draw cells on foundationless comb that are based their genetics, and on their own body measurements. Carniolan bees are naturally larger than Italians, they would naturally draw larger cells than Italians would. The bees own body measurements play a part, their size depends on genetics, the size cell they were raised in, and how well they were fed while they were developing. The usual range of cell sizes in the brood area of European honey bees varies. The range that my bees draw on foundationless comb will be from a low of 5.1mm up to 5.5 with most of them in the 5.2/5.3mm range. The size cells your swarm will draw is anyone's guess, but it will probably be around 5.1 to 5.2 if the adults that draw the comb are healthy, well fed specimens. 

Here in Arkansas a colony of bees that is not treated for varroa mites will live until it's 2nd or 3rd winter. At least that is what happens in my area. There are exceptions, I have 4 queen lines at my home that are from 12 colonies put in a bee yard in 2006 and allowed to fend for themselves. They had no feeding or other management. They have never been treated for pests or disease. The original 12 colonies swarmed and increased to 20 or more and then started to dwindled down to the 6 I now have. They were in an area where there were few other bees. Now that I have them at my home yard with my other bees I have no idea how long they will live.

As for small cell, small cell has no benefits in fighting varroa. You have just as many, or more varroa with small cell as you do with standard foundation. What counts is the bees genetics and how well they are cared for. You can not treat and have them for 2 or 3 years, on average.


----------



## ToeOfDog (Sep 25, 2013)

AR Beekeeper said:


> As for small cell, small cell has no benefits in fighting varroa. You have just as many, or more varroa with small cell as you do with standard foundation. What counts is the bees genetics and how well they are cared for. You can not treat and have them for 2 or 3 years, on average.


I would be interested in the basis for this statement. My understanding is that the female varroa is laid every 30 hours in the capped cell and that all immature varroa die when the bee emerges. The small cell bee emerges 24 to 36 hour earlier than the LC therefore small cell has atlleast one less mite emerging per cell per generation.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Every study done here in the U.S. in recent years on small cell and varroa has found the varroa populations in small cell colonies equaled or was more than the standard cell colonies. My own experience with 20 colonies on small cell for 3 years had the same results. Researchers in Canada found that the development time of European Honey Bees workers varied from 19.1 to 24.1 days, with an average of 20.1 days, and those bees were on standard cell foundation in controlled conditions. The usual varroa reproduction rate in worker cells is an average of 1.3 mites per cell.


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

The fact that they are a swarm form a bee tree only tells you one thing:

The colony in that tree swarmed.

It won't tell you the size of the bees in the tree.

It won't tell you if they overwintered there and swarmed the next spring, or if they swarmed early in the year from someone's backyard hive and are swarming again now because they ran out of room.

It won't tell you if they are mite devastating survivors or if they are only two brood cycles out from a hive whose queen comes from a line that has been treated for mites twice a year for the the last two decades and has no mite tolerance or resistance at all.

coming form a bee tree swarm, there is a better* chance *that they are survivors than wimps that need treatment at regular intervals.

But it is only a chance.

I got lucky when I got my first bees... they came as a cutout form a wall in a building that had been continuously inhabited by bees for some years, and did well without treatment.

I've also got bees from a guy who didn't treat, and managed them as I had my cutout bees.
They did the first winter, due to mites.

And most folks who get a swarm and don't treat them experience exactly that.
bees dying in the first or second winter due to mite infestation.

You caught the swarm.
Box it up, and do mite counts.
That way, if you find that they are not doing well with mites, you can do a non persistent organic treatment like OAV to knock the mites down, and requeen.

But buy your queen form someone who is actually breeding (and not just producing) queens.
And not just from any breeder, but one actively selecting for mite tolerance/resistance.

Olybees.com and oldsolbees.com are two such breeders.

There is a difference between animal husbandry and and animal neglect and abuse.
Your bees are livestock (insect livestock, but livestock).

Manage them responsibly, preserve then population, and if the queen turns out to produce mite susceptible wimps, requeen with one that has better odds of thriving w/o drugs and poisons.

Have fun.
Enjoy your bees.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

Over the past few years I have collected hundreds of images of comb. Comb built for worker brood off foundation is often in the 4.9 - 5.3 range. The brood comb in old 5.4 foundation will often have thickened walls (or at least thickened top edge) and the interior dimension will resemble the 5.1 (mean) natural comb.

There is a substantial amount of variation, and the brood area is often surrounded by comb of enormous gauge used for honey storage and drone rearing. These images of 5.1 comb (and surrounding matrix) are from a mite-killed top-bar, I photographed these in October, 2014.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>My question if you hive a swarm that originated from a bee tree and hived them in a top bar hive, what size cell would they draw.

It depends on a lot of factors. If you can see they are noticeably smaller, then they are probably something in the range of natural sized bees. If not, they could be a swarm from a domestic hive or a swarm from a swarm from a domestic hive. Typically (but not always) the sequence goes something like this. Measuring at the core of the brood nest: 5.4mm bees build about 5.1mm comb. 5.1mm bees build about 4.9mm comb. 4.9mm bees build about 4.7mm. 4.7mm bees build about 4.6mm. But genetics also seems to play a part and some bees go down much smaller much quicker and some are much slower. So if you have the genetics that are not prone to do it quickly and they swarmed from a 5.4mm hive they may not build anything smaller than 5.3mm or 5.2mm. If those bees swarm now they might go slightly smaller. It's the number of turnovers of comb and the genetics that determine how far they will be regressed and how quickly they will continue to regress.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm#whatisregression


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Africanized bees seem to catch onto the idea very quickly; Carnies, I think, not so much!


----------



## Stlnifr (Sep 12, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> >http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm#whatisregression


Very interesting thank you for the link. The swarm that I hived appeared to be smaller than the bees I have seen in the past. I am not interested in robbing bees of honey but am interested in seeing them survive and populate the area by swarming and establishing bee trees. I think it would be good for the area an the bees. Plus I enjoy watching them go and come from the hive so far they let me get as close as I want to with out stinging me.

I also know where two long standing bee trees are, they never seem to be void of bees there in the fall and there in the spring.


----------



## Stlnifr (Sep 12, 2010)

Well I am somewhat happy they are building 4.9mm comb, I took some comb from the hive and measured it. Now all I need to do is wait them out to see if they survive year after year.


----------



## Harley Craig (Sep 18, 2012)

Do not know carnis are typically larger than Italians the ones I have on 4.9 cell seem to do just fine


----------



## Stlnifr (Sep 12, 2010)

I call these mutt bees they appear to be washed out color Italian Pattern. From 4 or 5 feet from the hive they look black but up close they Italian looking but darker and dull in color.


----------



## Hill Top (May 4, 2014)

If you just leave bee's alone let them continually draw their own foundation, will it regress to the "natural" size? Looking at the comb from my mutt bee's drawing their own, the size varies some. Some is about 4.9 and some is 5.2 but the size across each frame is uniform. I'm beginning to think this is not normal?


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

It's absolutely normal.

Brood cell size varies within every hive.

Clean, new cimb is more important than small cell comb if you want your Bees to survive.

It just happens that when your Bees draw out new small cell comb, it's clean, new comb.

I was a small cell believer until I experimented with hives from the same survivor genetic line with some on small cell comb and some large.

I found no differences between cell size, but clean comb that was never exposed to chemicals made quite a difference in my experience.

Have fun.
Enjoy your Bees.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Beregondo;
Brother Adam saw the same thing even before the varroa mite, bees on comb 4 years old or less usually "evince a zest and prosperity lacking in those on old combs."


----------



## KQ6AR (May 13, 2008)

I start everything on the Mann Lake small cell plastic frames. Haven't treated with anything stronger than powdered sugar in 8 years, & my average annual losses are under 15%.
Last winter 14 of 14 pulled through.


----------



## lemmje (Feb 23, 2015)

Experimenting with foundationless for the first time, if for no other reason than to save money going forward. Two weeks ago i took a frame of brood from my strongest hive and put it into a tiny swarm to give them a boost. Replaced the frame with foundationless and took a look today. The frame was nearly full and the whole thing was very big cells, with some capped drone brood. Not surprised really, since the rest of the brood nest is on a human-determined size and prior the bees only had what burr comb i left them to draw drone comb.

My point is that left to their selves, bees will do what bees need to do.

The little swarm i hived two weeks ago is all foundationless -- minus the two frames of brood and the one of honey i have given them -- and the comb they are making (two nearly full frames now) are typical brood size (meaning, not the large drone sized cells i see in the other hive).


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Congratulations, you have given the varroa mites the ability to double their population growth rate. Varroa mites will do what varroa mites need to do.


----------



## Hill Top (May 4, 2014)

AR Beekeeper said:


> Congratulations, you have given the varroa mites the ability to double their population growth rate. Varroa mites will do what varroa mites need to do.


I've read your previous post and this statement seems to contradict your previous statements. I feel I've missed something. Could you please clarify what you mean by this quote above? Thanks


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

AR Beekeeper said:


> Congratulations, you have given the varroa mites the ability to double their population growth rate. Varroa mites will do what varroa mites need to do.


Do you sell nucs?

Alex


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

If bees construct all drone cells in a comb, and that comb is allowed to remain in the colony after the queen lays in it and the brood emerges, the varroa in those cells will have reproduced at a rate of 2.6 mites. Varroa in worker cells reproduce at an average rate of 1.3 mites in each infested cell. 

If the comb is removed after being capped and before the brood emerges and is frozen then the mites are removed and killed. My take on the post I commented on was that the comb was going to be allowed to remain in the colony and the drones emerge in the colony which would be damaging to the colony. If that was not the intent of the poster, then I was wrong and I apologize. 

I sell a few nucs to members of the beekeeping association I belong to, usually enough to pay my sugar bill. I try to flood the area with drones where my mating nucs are placed by putting frames of drone brood in colonies I keep in the area. These frames of drone brood come from nucs with queens I like (the ones with the least varroa counts and show VSH) and that I want to mate with my queens. Those nucs have been "cleaned up" by being shook swarmed, sugar dusted, and drone comb trapping with the combs being frozen. After the nuc is relatively free of varroa, the drone frames given to it will have few varroa in the cells, so when they are given to the drone colonies they pass on few varroa. The drone comb frames that have their brood emerged in the drone colonies are removed, frozen and reused. 

I do only a few nucs for sale and for my use, usually not over 30 to 40, I am retired and my only "job" is playing with my bees. The labor involved in manipulating nucs is not great, and I enjoy it. 

I don't like to treat with chemicals, but I do if I think it necessary, and then with the "soft" ones. I have colonies that go back to 2006 with no treatment of any kind, they have high varroa populations, but they do not crash. They usually swarm, and requeen themselves and I do nothing to stop their swarming. I do swarm control with their daughter colonies, and some of those produce average honey crops or better, but not all of them.

My beekeeping skills are not good enough that I will be able to keep from losing some of these survivor lines, I know because I have had and lost some before. If I do lose them I would not be awfully worried because I know the resistance to varroa is in our commercial lines of bees. I know because that is where all of my bee came from, I catch no wild swarms, only those from my yards.


----------



## lemmje (Feb 23, 2015)

AR Beekeeper said:


> My take on the post I commented on was that the comb was going to be allowed to remain in the colony and the drones emerge in the colony which would be damaging to the colony.


You made a lot of assumptions from my simple comment. I said nothing of leaving or removing the frame, only that the bees drew an entire frame of drone cells when given a foundationless frame in the middle of a box of frames with foundation.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

Yes, I did, and for that I apologize.


----------



## lemmje (Feb 23, 2015)

No worries. I wasn't even gonna say anything but someone else brought it up. 

Happy father's day!


----------



## Hill Top (May 4, 2014)

IT seems many attribute winter loses to varroa. How does varroa affect bee's in the winter. Does the mite's life cycle not become affected by the bee's suspending their activities for long periods during the winter? I'm still learning about this. I've read several studies about the cell size debate. Some say it has merit some say it doesn't. The funding for many of these studies comes from grants from the chemical company's. I don't trust them.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

Hill Top said:


> IT seems many attribute winter loses to varroa. How does varroa affect bee's in the winter. Does the mite's life cycle not become affected by the bee's suspending their activities for long periods during the winter? I'm still learning about this. I've read several studies about the cell size debate. Some say it has merit some say it doesn't. The funding for many of these studies comes from grants from the chemical company's. I don't trust them.


It's all the nasty things that varroa vectors and brings along with it that are trouble. It can also wipe out large portions of brood that may be necessary to get your bees ready for winter causing smaller clusters of unhealthy bees.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Hill Top said:


> I don't trust them.


Crux of the matter: if the results are reproducible (which should be the case if good science was done), funding doesn't matter. You are right to be suspicious though. I regard abstracts as what the authors want you to think they found in their research. Instead I look at the data and the methodology by which the data was obtained. I am not a scientist and if the data is not presented in a way I can understand it, I don't give a great deal of weight to the findings. It involves some work on my part and I risk tossing out decent studies due to writing inadequacies. I'm ok with that.

I give much weight to the body of work someone has done, and the reputation of the institution sponsoring the research. As an example Dr Lu and the Harvard School of Public Health are heavily scrutinized. Dennis Van Englesdorp or Project Apis M not so much - not a free pass - but I'm more inclined to "trust" them.

As to your other question, viruses vectored by Varroa among many other things reduce the lifespan of the winter bees.


----------



## Hill Top (May 4, 2014)

Andrew Dewey said:


> Crux of the matter: if the results are reproducible (which should be the case if good science was done), funding doesn't matter. You are right to be suspicious though. I regard abstracts as what the authors want you to think they found in their research. Instead I look at the data and the methodology by which the data was obtained. I am not a scientist and if the data is not presented in a way I can understand it, I don't give a great deal of weight to the findings. It involves some work on my part and I risk tossing out decent studies due to writing inadequacies. I'm ok with that.
> 
> I give much weight to the body of work someone has done, and the reputation of the institution sponsoring the research. As an example Dr Lu and the Harvard School of Public Health are heavily scrutinized. Dennis Van Englesdorp or Project Apis M not so much - not a free pass - but I'm more inclined to "trust" them.
> 
> As to your other question, viruses vectored by Varroa among many other things reduce the lifespan of the winter bees.


multiple studies done with funding by the tobacco company's found cigarettes were perfectly fine for you. These studies were duplicated many times by several university's....we all know how that turned out.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Hill Top said:


> multiple studies done with funding by the tobacco company's found cigarettes were perfectly fine for you. These studies were duplicated many times by several university's....we all know how that turned out.


Come now - as I said - skip the abstracts and look at the findings for yourself. I have not looked at the studies you mentioned but believe you're reporting what the abstracts say and not the underlying data. If you want to be a skeptic of all research, that is fine with me.

If you're concerned about specific studies that you feel are tainted by money, roll up your sleeves and get to work! Maybe you'll identify tricks and techniques used to make results seem one way when what is found is really another way.


----------

