# Queen Rearing in Nucs?



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

I am certainly no expert, but Velbert seems to have done some queen rearing in smaller hives

http://s59.photobucket.com/albums/g307/vlwbee/?action=view&current=100_0726.jpg

Keith


----------



## HVH (Feb 20, 2008)

Putting the breeder in a nuc to get eggs is OK, but using a nuc as a finishing colony seems counter productive. Making a huge, on the verge of swarming, finishing colony for queen rearing is a pain, but is likely to produce better queens. In fact, making two such colonies is best if you use a swarm box as a cell starter (extra nurse bees for the swarm box). Your nuc idea might work, but unless you compare side by side with conventional methods and track your queens over time, you won't know if you made poor quality queens. Is the risk worth it? If you have a lot of extra time on your hands, and this is simply an experiment, it might be fun. A nuc is unlikely to be able to raise very many queens so I would only supply it with a few grafted cells and then compare those with queens reared in a conventional finishing colony. Did you plan on using a seperate cell starter?

Good Luck


----------



## Chef Isaac (Jul 26, 2004)

HVH:

I respectfully disagree. A nuc is a great way to start and finish queens. A few things that I have found to be very important. The population versus the denisity, pollen in theh ive, feeding, and young bees and capped brood. You can not graft a lot in a nuc. I found 20-30 works pretty well. Just my opinion. I have cells that were just capped and they look great for the first round.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

As long as there is open brood in a hive they will not develop laying workers. The queen is only relevant because she is usually the source of that open brood. You can raise queens in nucs simply by making them queenless. Make sure they are well populated and well fed so the queens will get well fed. If you want to maximize resources a bit, use wax foundation (or none) and cut queen cells out and put them in mating nucs before they emerge.


----------



## stangardener (Mar 8, 2005)

i'm doing this. i have a two high five frame hive with a queen i don't graft from. two five framers with my breeder queens in them and a starter/finisher five framer boiling over with young bees from the double high hive on a long bench right outside my back door. i've grafted twelve cups on a bar every four or five days since may 22. every ten days a bar comes out. my frame can hold three bars. instead of putting more frames in the middle of the hive like in a ten frame hive the bars get moved down the frame and out on day ten. i've been getting between four and ten finished cells per bar so far. i chose this way of doing for a few reasons. they are very easy to manipulate, observe and feed, feed, feed. it's great experiance. instead of doing one or two batches over the season i will have experianced many batches. i'm more set up to make up six or so nucs every ten days than thirty at a time.


----------



## HVH (Feb 20, 2008)

Chef Isaac said:


> HVH:
> 
> I respectfully disagree. A nuc is a great way to start and finish queens. A few things that I have found to be very important. The population versus the denisity, pollen in theh ive, feeding, and young bees and capped brood. You can not graft a lot in a nuc. I found 20-30 works pretty well. Just my opinion. I have cells that were just capped and they look great for the first round.


Chef,

I didn't say it wouldn't work, and even indicated that it may work with a limited number of queens. With that said, the only proof that it works would come from a side by side comparison of the resulting queens with conventionally reared queens. Say for example you grafted 40 larvae and placed 20 in a nuc and the other 20 were processed with a swarm box followed by a huge finishing colony as described by Marla Spivak (Modified Doolittle approach). The queens would need to be followed over time and performance compared. The potential risk here, is ending up with queens that under perform to any degree and then mutiplying that under performance by the number of queens reared by that method. 
Don't get me wrong, I am all in favor of the experiment as long as controls are provided and the outcome can be measured in some way. Its like the guy at our bee club that was so very happy when he placed his hives in mint and noticed fewer mites. I asked him how many colonies did he leave in the old location for comparison - none! Without controls, no conclusion can be made. Your nuc queens may be great - then again they may not. I would love to see a side by side comparison where egg laying capacity and longevity were compared.


----------



## BEES4U (Oct 10, 2007)

Here is a suggestion:
1.0 Go to a hive that is located at least 1 mile out from where you need the nucs for grafting.
1.0 Locate the queen.
1.1 Place at least 2 frames of sealed brood into your nuc.

1.2 Shake at least 4 pounds of bees into your nuc box that were adhering to the brood frames.
2.0 Screen the entrance of the nuc with 1/8' hardware screen/cloth and transport them to your grafting yard. (It would help the bees to have a screened hole in the nuc cover for proper ventilation. Sreen both sides of the hole.)
3.0 Place the nuc where you want to use it for cell management.
4.0 Make a 2:1 sugar syrup and put it in a wide mouth quart jar with 5 holes in the lid so that the pattern is like the 5 points on a die/dice. Invert the feeder jar and keep it full! The bees may empty the jar within 24 hours. They need to be fed for at least 3 days prior to accepting grafted cells.
Good Luck!
Regards,
Ernie Lucas Apiaries


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

HVH said:


> Chef,
> 
> I didn't say it wouldn't work, and even indicated that it may work with a limited number of queens. With that said, the only proof that it works would come from a side by side comparison of the resulting queens with conventionally reared queens. Say for example you grafted 40 larvae and placed 20 in a nuc and the other 20 were processed with a swarm box followed by a huge finishing colony as described by Marla Spivak (Modified Doolittle approach). The queens would need to be followed over time and performance compared. The potential risk here, is ending up with queens that under perform to any degree and then mutiplying that under performance by the number of queens reared by that method.
> Don't get me wrong, I am all in favor of the experiment as long as controls are provided and the outcome can be measured in some way. Its like the guy at our bee club that was so very happy when he placed his hives in mint and noticed fewer mites. I asked him how many colonies did he leave in the old location for comparison - none! Without controls, no conclusion can be made. Your nuc queens may be great - then again they may not. I would love to see a side by side comparison where egg laying capacity and longevity were compared.



Would not the same "experiment" asked of chef, be already completed? Why do we assume that Spivak or the doolittle technique is superior, without the same requirements being asked? If these are being touted as the "best" way of doing queen rearing, then should not they have done these side by side tests already? How do we know, or better yet, how do we assume that one was better from the start without such tests? Or is this just one of those "urban legend" type things that are so notorious in beekeeping, or could it be just the blind sheep once again following some published material or suggestions from a few selected few, without ever questioning it from the beginning.

But it seems like one method is openly accepted, and anything outside those parameters is questioned and asked to be verified with some side by side comparisons of proof.

I often graft into nucs and even caught swarms. I may not always get 48 cells out of the grafts, but the bees seem able to know what they can provide. I'll normally graft 32 and get 25 plus, all great looking cells. The difference in numbers I believe is from a colony strength issue, but not the quality. I know some published viewpoints may take an issue with this. But I'm sure it will not be the last time some widely accepted viewpoint would be found to be wrong in beekeeping. 

Why does one hive when deciding to supercede or swarm, build a lower number like 5 cells, while other hives build 25 or more cells? I think it's all in the numbers (population of the hive). So for me, we can debate about how to get high numbers of cell takes. But I do not agree that quality is an issue. I have raised many queens from lesser number of grafts, with cells taken from swarm colonies, and supercedure situations. I have monitored these queens as I do any other queens. And I do not see an issue. Whether it a hive that raises 5 or a hive that raises 25, the bees build cells based on their ability. (The bees ultimately tear down many cells not up to standard. Thats why you may graft 32, they build 30, and may finish 25. That's an example of the bees doing what they know. And every queen breeder has seen this happen, where the final cells are lower than what they started.)

So for me, yes there are ways of getting 48 out of 48 grafted cells (and thats where the published material leads one too). But I'm not always looking at 48 cells. You may not get 48 cells out of a nuc, but I'll debate all day long about the ability of getting a lower number of high quality cells from less than published suggestions on the matter.

To suggest how to get 48 out of 48 is one thing. But to carry that information over to suggest that quality queens can not be raised in different (smaller) situations is wrong.

So tell me.....next time a hive only raises 5 cells to swarm from, instead of 48...are you going to assume that the queens must be inferior quality due to the lower numbers raised? Will you kill all the cells and the surviving queen based on knowing they must be underfed or weak because the hive could not raise more than that?

Bees raise a certain number of cells. And it certainly is NOT normally 48! It takes a lot of manipulation, a lot of stress, and a lot of work, for a hive to produce 48 cells. Some may actually say that without the unnatural situation dictated by beekeepers, that bees would never build that many. That it may be seen as a negative. That perhaps there are other ways of doing it. But that may involve stepping on a few toes or going against the flow so to speak. Oh my, whats next.....


----------



## HVH (Feb 20, 2008)

Bjorn,

I completely agree with you regarding dogma. I don't have any empirical evidence to suggest that the Doolittle method is superior. I believe on theoretical grounds that the Doolittle method is likely to be better because all steps are optimized to provide the largest number of nurse bees possible with the most royal jelly possible, but that is only a hunch. My own apiary has provided me with several years’ worth of anecdotal evidence to support the hunch, but I don't have empirical evidence. 
If one can raise 100 queens at a time in a huge finishing colony, it stands to reason that a nuc that has 1/6 as many resources can probably raise 1/6 times 100 queens, or about 17 queens. Does that mean that the bees won't raise 30 - they probably will? Will the queens be as good - don't know. I must say, though, that after reading Doolittle's books, I have the utmost respect for him as a beekeeper extraordinaire. One of his observations over many years of deliberative study was that the quality of queens goes down when more queens are reared beyond a certain point. I raise about 50 queens each cycle which would equal 8 queens for a five frame nuc. I don't know if comparing a nuc proportionally to a three story hive is reasonable considering that such comparisons don't work for nectar gathering. Do you need a huge nurse force for queen rearing just like a huge field force is needed for nectar collection?
I am not trying to argue with anyone. I am only sharing my thoughts, which in the end, could be totally wrong.


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

HVH, 
Most of my nucs are doubles for queen rearing. Its 5 over 5. So its a tad more.

I won't argue about more bees equals more cells. That's a given. I'm strictly talking quality. And as Doolittle commented, more cells does drag down quality. That its not always as simple as adding more bees, and pumping out more queens. It is a sliding scale downward.

There are those that do believe the swarm cells and even supercedure cells, are the most superior queens raised. I won't go that far. But do agree, that bees will raise cells based on the "balance" (for a lack of a better term). With compressing large amounts of nurse bees, shaking bees, etc., I'm not so sure that in looking at the "balance" of the working hive as a unit, that it just may be out of balance when such manipulations are used. I have nothing from research to quote. But in looking at a hive as a working/living organism, in tune with what they have worked to achieve, then it seems unnatural to force them to build 48, 60, or more cells at a time. And then have people suggest that such techniques are the best, and assume that quality is at its highest.

As I said, One hive makes 5 swarm cells while the one next to it makes 25. Why? I know its in the numbers. But its in the numbers of a natural hive that is "balanced". And I'm not convinced that just shaking more nurse bees, keeps that same hive in balance to maintain the optimal situation for quality queens. I'm not suggesting that high number of queens are lower quality. I'm just disputing the point that some think that smaller grafts or queens produced by less bees are inferior. If a hive is balanced and produces 5 or 25 (as in the two swarming examples) then I see no difference in quality based on their ability to produce queens cells as comparing one number to another.


----------



## HVH (Feb 20, 2008)

Bjorn,

I cannot argue with your comments. This is why I like to rely on empirical evidence. If no empirical evidence is available then I am forced to resort to evaluating anecdotal evidence. If anecdotal evidence is in short supply, I am forced to rely on authority (in this case Doolittle and Spivak). Others that weigh in on this forum can add some extra authority or supply more anecdotal evidence, but a "good" scientific study would be better. I am even very cautious about scientific studies - I can't begin to describe how much primary literature that I read that is a bunch of garbage.
As for one hive making 5 queen cells while another makes 25; that is something many of us have seen. Brother Adams indicated that some strains make copious amounts of queen cells - I think he said Cyprians fell into that category. I've noticed also that two Buckfasts purchased at the same time made significantly different amounts of propolis. Hive to hive variation may be explained by the differences in the genetic of the workers from the different hives. Not sure. Maybe that is why bees remain fascinating for a lifetime.


----------



## stangardener (Mar 8, 2005)

bjornbee,

would you be willing to post how you set up your 5 over 5 breeding nucs?


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Stan,
I do not have a "setup" so to speak. I normally have standard size hives in my nuc yards and breeding yards for support and grafting into. I rotate them throughout the year, picking the strongest.

But from time to time, I do use my nucs for grafting. Again, I look for the strongest. Most of my nucs are set up with a five over five arrangement. In nuc building, I allow the bees to sometimes start the top boxes with drawing comb, so the main nuc below, waiting for pickup, does not start swarm cells. It is a great way to draw comb. So when I say I graft into a five over five setup, its pretty much my equipment arrangement anyways from a management viewpoint. I also overwinter many in this manner, although a good number are stand alone 5 frame nucs. 

If you click on the website posted for bjorn apiaries, and then the 'events" page, you can see a grouping of nucs for queen cells and the support hives in the same grouping. (Its the smaller picture to the right) Sometimes I rotate through the support hives and they are not ready for another graft. And I have no problem using a good nuc.


Although I do not expect to get 60 cells from such an equipment setup ( 5 over 5 nucs), I still get high quality cells. That was the point to the original comment. I am a one man show, and find pulling 25 or 30 queens, and installing 25 cells, while still doing whatever comes up that day, is about what I like to do. And for those who have less than three hives to shake bees from into one, and do perhaps "less" than the book suggestions, you can still raise high quality queens.

It still comes down to the basics of the bees wanting to make good queen cells, being fed, having balance in the hive, and all the other key points in grafting and cell building.


----------



## stangardener (Mar 8, 2005)

thank you for the info!
i got to see my first two laying queens from my grafts today.
i only had one take on my last graft so i rebuilt my nuc. i took four frames of mostly sealed brood and pollen from the ten frame hive and switched out the frames with not much but sugar water from the five framer. i then brushed all the bees from the donor hive into the breeder hive figureing foragers would leave, nurses would stay. i was impressed with how the donor hive had built up in three weeks. as i recall the original poster was concerned that the donor hive might swarm. i don't think that will be happening in my yard. i think they will be busy trying to build back up. i will be putting out cells on saturday and grafting on sunday.


----------



## Velbert (Mar 19, 2006)

*1/2 Nuc for Queen Cells*

http://s59.photobucket.com/albums/g307/vlwbee/?action=view&current=100_0950.jpg

http://s59.photobucket.com/albums/g307/vlwbee/?action=view&current=100_0726.jpg

http://s59.photobucket.com/albums/g307/vlwbee/?action=view&current=100_0717.jpg

Now as you have looked at these Queens cells that were built in a 1/2 frame nuc These Had more than enough royal jelly fed to them they were well formed and long BEAUTIFUL LARGE QUEENS CAME OUT OF THEM I was using the NICOT grid and it was in the 1/2 size nuc with the the breeder queen in it laying another round of eggs in the cups for another graft when they built and finished these 10 Queen Cells

What this show's is for you smaller operators that need 5-10 Queen cell for making up nucs or even re-queening your hive is that it does you do not need the resources of 2 or 3 full strength colonies to raise queen cells.

You can not do them real early you need to let them get lot of nurse bees.

Also Good fed and built Queen cells depends also on good quality food coming in from the field I think this is just as important as lots of nurse bees at the wright age. You can have plenty of nurse bees but not good rich pollen to eat while producing the royal jelly that is being fed will result in fewer finished cells also poor fed queens


----------



## Chef Isaac (Jul 26, 2004)

velbert: thank you for sharing those pics. You are right, it is the density of bees that counts.


----------



## stangardener (Mar 8, 2005)

thank you velbert. your insight and pictures are appreciated.
i set out ten cells today from a nuc starter/finisher. i don't know how the finished queens will be but the cells looked good.
one other advantage to doing more small batches of queens might be less pressure on the drone population. instead of sixty queens all trying to mate at once there will be ten at a time every couple weeks or so.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

hvh writes:
I don't have any empirical evidence to suggest that the Doolittle method is superior.

tecumseh replies: laidlaw I think??? suggested that the doolittle method was economically better... ie it broke down the process to crank out large numbers (with quality of product being a secondary issue).

some authorities (for example jay smith) concluded that the quality of queens produced in this manner would suffer.

finally, words like better or superior or quality are a bit diffficult to define.... they are kind of like a slippery ell which is always difficult to get a good grip upon...


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

natural resources writes:
I have done all the traditional methods but would like to try my own brain scheme.

tecumseh ask: ALL? 

just casually natural resources it sounds like you are trying to produce queens with a slight twist of a modication of a queen right hive plus cloak board (or double screen).

and yes some queen can slip thru queen excluders... plus tradional wire excluders can be damaged quite easily and this damage is almost impossible to determine.


----------



## Aram (May 9, 2006)

Much of the above posts is greek to me but I read it all... I'm about ready for a foreign language course. 
Thanks all,
Aram


----------

