# Varroa Mite



## GRIMBEE (Apr 3, 2007)

I have spotted Varroa in one of my hives thanks to screened bottom boards(IPM). 
I have a question. What kind of powdered sugar am I to use for natural control? And what are some other natural ways to defeat varroa????????


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

http://www.bushfarms.com/beespests.htm#varroa


----------



## Matt Guyrd (Nov 28, 2007)

Grimbee...did you do a mite drop count over a specific period of time, or did you just happen to notice a few mites? If you have not performed a count, you might consider doing so before treating. If the count is low, I would just keep an eye on them. Perform a count every 3-4 weeks.

I caught a swarm several weeks ago and performed a 24-hour mite count last week. The count was 39 mites. The colony is maybe around 10,000 - 12,000 bees (my guestimate based on the size of the swarm). This was too many mites for me (based on my learnings from class this Spring).

This past weekend I performed the Dowda Method, which is basically giving the bees a powdered sugar shower. Store bought powered sugar contains corn starch, which the bees cannot (or have a difficult time) digesting. I just took regular cane sugar and blended it in a blender. Worked great.

Good luck.
Matt


----------



## GRIMBEE (Apr 3, 2007)

I had just come back from New York on vacation, the screened bottom board insert was dirty and i noticed a dead varroa. I cleaned it put it back and looked an hour later there was 2 dead and 1 crawling.


----------



## GRIMBEE (Apr 3, 2007)

*Follow up*

I have olny found one varroa a day so far


----------



## jasontatro (Feb 6, 2008)

Matt Guyrd said:


> Store bought powered sugar contains corn starch, which the bees cannot (or have a difficult time) digesting.


The corn starch in powdered sugar will not be a problem.

JT


----------



## Matt Guyrd (Nov 28, 2007)

jasontatro said:


> The corn starch in powdered sugar will not be a problem.
> 
> JT


I might agree that using retail powdered sugar would not be a problem. The bees would deal with it. However, from my readings, the bees will groom themselves when dusted with the powdered sugar. They will likely ingest the sugar, which contains the corn starch. The corn starch will not be digestable and the bees will be required to evacuate themselves. I have also read that this can cause dysentery.

Again, blending cane sugar (takes all of five minutes) creates the fine dust needed to effect the Varroa's foot-hold. My personal thought is why feed unnecessary corn starch? The bees have enough to contend with.

I would be curious to hear other thoughts and opinions as my knowledge/experience is limited to my book and Internet gleanings.

Thanks.
Matt


----------



## Matt Guyrd (Nov 28, 2007)

GRIMBEE said:


> I have olny found one varroa a day so far


Grimbee...do you have any sticky substance (Pam, cooking spray, etc) on your mite board (the SBB insert)? If not, give it a coating of spray. This will trap both dead and alive mites. If you do not have anything sticky on the board, the alive mites will crawl away.

If, after you spray, you still only have one or two mites in a 24-hour period, your hive is doing quite well. I suspect you will find the count to be higher though.

Matt


----------



## Dick Allen (Sep 4, 2004)

> I would be curious to hear other thoughts and opinions as my knowledge/experience is limited to my book and Internet gleanings.


Hi Matt: I’m curious, too. I’ve heard over and over about starch and bees on these internet groups/forums. Maybe it’s bad for bees, but I’d like to see some real evidence. I started a topic earlier that didn’t seem to show a lot of interest: 

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215324


----------



## BigDaddyDS (Aug 28, 2007)

Simply:

Corn starch is bad for bees to EAT. Hence, don't feed bees syrup made with powdered doughnut sugar, as it contains 3% to 6% corn starch to prevent clumping.

But, when using the Powdered Sugar (Dowda) Method of mite control, you're DUSTING the bees. In a mechanical way, the sticky pads on the feet of the Varroa mite get covered with the powder and they can't attach themselves to the bees. They fall off and fall down through the screened bottom board, and out of the hive, where you need to collect them along with the excess sugar.

What little powdered sugar that sticks to the bees is then groomed off, with only a tiny bit that's actually consumed. Now, keep in mind, you're not doing this Dowda method in the middle of winter! The little bit of corn starch that they consume (and possibly get sick from), can be evacuated from their system because it's warm enough for the bees to take purging flights.

So, this year I'm going to use powdered doughnut sugar to DUST my bees. But, never intentionally FEED bees syrup made from that type of sugar.

(As a side note, grinding your own sugar with a blender or food processor works too, but it's too time consuming and hard on my food processor to make it worthwhile to me.)

BDDS


----------



## GRIMBEE (Apr 3, 2007)

*Update*

I found about 6 of them today. I am considering a powdered sugar treatment just to be on the safe side.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Are you joking or do you really believe in that sugar treatment? Using sugar as an effective treatment is a joke and you would be NOT on the save side. 

Sorry this is not my opinion it’s a fact.


----------



## EngineeringBeek (Mar 4, 2008)

Axtmann said:


> Are you joking or do you really believe in that sugar treatment? Using sugar as an effective treatment is a joke and you would be NOT on the save side.
> 
> Sorry this is not my opinion it’s a fact.


Sources please?
I've seen sources for both sides. It seems to be "hit and miss" meaning sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. It appears that it is very dependent on the method of application as well. Once again, your statement seems very arrogant and is meaningless unless you provide sources/studies that can be reviewed.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

That’s what I posted on 05-06-2008,

We have a member who treated last year with powder sugar once a week for two month (8x).

Here the result from one of his hives; mite drops after each dusting with sugar. Sugar was blasted with a plastic bottle separately on each side of each frame to reach most of the bees.

24, 78, 66, 107, 33, 12, 118, 54

Here the result of one treatment with Perizin (liquid chumafos) a week after the last sugar dusts.

Fist week after Perizin the mite drop was 789 the second week 2481. 

Sorry when I’m arrogant and not recommend sugar to beginner beekeepers. 
They spend much money to start a new hobby and might give up after the first or second season.


----------



## BigDaddyDS (Aug 28, 2007)

First, it's granted that an IPM of powdered sugar is NOT a method I'd recommend for beginning beekeepers. For them, a quick 21 day treatment with a Mite-Away II (Formic Acid) pad is much easier and more fail safe, in addition to being organic (if you're of that mindset).

But, that's not why I'M doing my powdered sugar method for mite treatment. I'm experimenting with different genetic strains and discovering which of my hives show a natural resistance to mites, WITHOUT the use of chemicals, and without _residual_ chemicals within the hive clouding the results of my tests. I feel that I'm helping to improve the genetic stock in my outyards, while I'm also providing a product (honey) to my customers that is chemical free, which is something that's important to them. Again, I have my reasons for not wanting to use hard chemicals, such as Coumophos like you mentioned, but I will agree that powdered sugar is not a recommended method of mite control for beginners.

Secondly, you may note that the mite drop numbers (as provided by Axtmann) show a mite drop "surge" every 21 days (3 weeks). This is confirmation that a disruption of the mite's breeding cycle is taking place! Afterall, what takes 21 days to make? Worker bees, which comprise MOST of the brood within the hive. 7 days later the drone brood hatches and "should" have a higher count than day 1 of the treatment, which it does, due to most of the Varroa being sealed within the brood cells while being treated on day 1. After the 28th day of treatment (which covers emerging drone brood), there should be a marked decline in mite drop numbers, which (again) there is. On the 35th day of treatment, the numbers are significantly lower than the intial (day 1) mite drop numbers. This shows me that the treatment works and is supported by data provided.

Of course, I'm open to suggestions. Can you tell me how YOU interpret these numbers to DISprove this method of mite control?

Cordially,
BDDS


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

BigDaddyDS said:


> First, it's granted that an IPM of powdered sugar is NOT a method I'd recommend for beginning beekeepers. For them, a quick 21 day treatment with a Mite-Away II (Formic Acid) pad is much easier and more fail safe, in addition to being organic (if you're of that mindset).


given the extensive population of microbes that live in (and are part of) a healthy beehive, it is unlikely that formic acid has as little impact on the hive as one might be led to believe. for a discussion of this, see:
http://www.BeeUntoOthers.com/NoBeeIsAnIsland.pdf



> But, that's not why I'M doing my powdered sugar method for mite treatment. I'm experimenting with different genetic strains and discovering which of my hives show a natural resistance to mites, WITHOUT the use of chemicals, and without _residual_ chemicals within the hive clouding the results of my tests.


if powdered sugar is effective, how are you going to be able to tell which hives are naturally resistant? if it isn't effective, what's the point?



> I feel that I'm helping to improve the genetic stock in my outyards, while I'm also providing a product (honey) to my customers that is chemical free, which is something that's important to them.


there is only one way to improve genetic stock, you have to select for traits you want, and cull those that do not show that trait. if you are treating (even with powdered sugar, assuming it's effective), then you really have no way to determine which lines are resistant and which are not. remember, a resistant hive that is fighting off mites will have mites dropping onto the bottom board (perhaps moreso than a hive that is not effectively fighting the mites). simple counts of natural drops (or even sugar dusting drops) will not tell you which hives will survive/be productive long term. if you are using sugar to help along those hives that are not resistant (regardless of if you are able to tell which ones are resistant), you are not improving your genetic stock.
remember, if you define the bees environment as one that is dusted with sugar every X weeks, you are selecting for bees that are adapted to being dusted with sugar every X weeks. if you want to select for bees that don't need to be treated, you need to give them that environment (and not treat at all).



> Again, I have my reasons for not wanting to use hard chemicals, such as Coumophos like you mentioned, but I will agree that powdered sugar is not a recommended method of mite control for beginners.


soft treatments will eventually lead to hard treatments...it's how we got here in the first place. not using hard chems is about 1/2 the equation. getting these chems out of the hive is important. ...the other 1/2 is getting off of the "soft treatments", as they prevent the bees from being able to take care of themselves, which is, imho, just as important.

deknow


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 1, 2005)

deknow said:


> soft treatments will eventually lead to hard treatments...it's how we got here in the first place.
> deknow


Just like a sip of beer or a toke on a doobie will lead to Crack and Meth...No not really, and thats not how we got here either. Actually hard treatments are leading to soft treatments and from there we might eventually get to no treatments. But hard treatments came directly from no treatments and crashing hives due to an introduced, invasive, extremely deadly parasite. 


Take 100 colonies, all but 10 die and you breed from them. Did you really select for Varroa tolerance? Did the hives avoid death by some other function then resistance to Varroa? There are many ways hives can avoid a pest or disease, but not really be genetically resistant to that pest or disease. Thats why science uses assays such as counting mites and tests for hygienic behavior instead of just letting hives die and selecting the ones that don't die to breed from.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

> hard treatments are leading to soft treatments and from there we might eventually get to no treatments. But hard treatments came directly from no treatments and crashing hives due to an introduced, invasive, extremely deadly parasite.


i'd be surprised if the first treatments tried for varroa was fluvalinate, and not tobacco smoke, menthol, etc. the illustrated encyclopedia of beekeeping (from the early 80's, i think) references thyme, menthol, and apistan. which came first? perhaps you have better historical information than i do. regardless, neither soft nor hard treatments will lead to no treatments. the only way to get to no treatments is, at some point, to stop treating. resistance to treatments is a well known and studied concept (ever gone through a hive with a few years worth of apistan strips all in the hive, and seen mites crawling all over the place?). no matter what we use, it will de-select for resistant bees, and select for strong/resistant mites, and will lead to needing new and more effective treatments.



> Take 100 colonies, all but 10 die and you breed from them. Did you really select for Varroa tolerance? Did the hives avoid death by some other function then resistance to Varroa?


perhaps...but 10 years, 20 years later when the offspring from those survivors are thriving while other bees in the same area are still having problems (and being treated)?



> There are many ways hives can avoid a pest or disease, but not really be genetically resistant to that pest or disease. Thats why science uses assays such as counting mites and tests for hygienic behavior instead of just letting hives die and selecting the ones that don't die to breed from.


...yet, where are the scientists with bees that are surviving with no treatments? who is selling queens that buyers are not treating? bean (or mite) counting can be productive, but when the long term goal is bees surviving and being productive, counting mites seems a waste of time. long term results are what counts here, at least to me.

my post was a response to bigdaddy. he was the one claiming that treating with powdered sugar would improve his stock, i was simply pointing out that it isn't quite that simple.

deknow


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

i don't have good info on the history of varroa treatment, but the following shows tobacco smoke being written about in 1982, and apistan being approved in the us 8 years later. this does not mean that tobacco use predates fluvalinate, but it's the best i could do quickly.

deknow


De Ruijter, A. 1982. Tobacco smoke can kill varroa mites. Bee World 63(3):138.also listed under Ruijter, A. de

and

U.S. Product Registration History for Zoecon rf-318 apistan strip

U.S. EPA Product Reg No:
2724-406 
Product Registration Status:
Active 
Approval Date:
Mar 23, 1990


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 1, 2005)

I doubt if tobacco was widely used.

It is complicated, and I'm simply pointing out that its not simple in 
any terms, even if you just decide to just let hives die, it doesn't mean you will end up with 'survivor', 'resistant' bees. Its better then no strategy, but its probably not the most effective strategy.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

> I doubt if tobacco was widely used.


...so what you are saying is that you don't really know the history of varroa treatment wrt "soft/hard" treatments.



> but its probably not the most effective strategy.


it depends on what your goals are. if your goal is to not use treatments, there is no other way to get there than to stop treating.

deknow


----------



## MichaelW (Jun 1, 2005)

deknow said:


> it depends on what your goals are. if your goal is to not use treatments, there is no other way to get there than to stop treating.
> deknow


Sure, but if your goal is to have healthy, viable, and sustainable bee
populations, you may have to treat from time to time.

No, I'm not an expert on the history of Varroa treatments in the US,
but I do know enough about it to know that there was never a widespread,
expansive use of Tobbacco against Varroa mites that would come
anywhere close to the use of Apistan.
If there where, there would be stories, memories, and other documention other then a few mentions that it was used.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

> Sure, but if your goal is to have healthy, viable, and sustainable bee
> populations, you may have to treat from time to time.


really? what evidence is there to support this? that people who treat have to keep on treating? chicken, meet egg. what is viable and/or sustainable about a population that needs artificial treatment?



> No, I'm not an expert on the history of Varroa treatments in the US,
> but I do know enough about it to know that there was never a widespread,
> expansive use of Tobbacco against Varroa mites that would come
> anywhere close to the use of Apistan.
> If there where, there would be stories, memories, and other documention other then a few mentions that it was used.


yes, but what you said is that "hard treatments came directly from no treatments". clearly, the use of tobacco smoke predates the approval of apistan in the us. do you really think that when first faced with varroa that beekeepers (who, at the time were not accustomed to putting chemicals in the hive at all) jumped right to fluvalinate without trying all manner of "natural" treatments?

of course, you've already tried to make the point that it's much better to use scientific assays and mite counts...yet what documented examples of treatment free operations, or queens that solve the mite problem do we have? are they from scientists that are counting mites?

deknow


----------



## GRIMBEE (Apr 3, 2007)

After checking today, I might just be alright. The numbers are very low but I will keep monitoring them. I see 1 varroa and because I am a new beek I freaked out. The bees were out in full force today and bringing tons of pollen. They are keeping the numbers down on their own so far.


----------



## GRIMBEE (Apr 3, 2007)

Heres an update. 

My bees are very healthy and they seem to eat varroa for breakfast. The numbers are still the same, they seem to do a very good job dealing with them. So far they don't need my help


----------



## scottsbees (Dec 19, 2007)

update Please. I would like to know how your hives are doing, Thanks


----------



## BigDaddyDS (Aug 28, 2007)

deknow said:


> my post was a response to bigdaddy. he was the one claiming that treating with powdered sugar would improve his stock, i was simply pointing out that it isn't quite that simple.



Sorry for not replying sooner! This posting must have slipped through the cracks!

I didn't mean to imply that treating with powdered sugar would genetically improve the stock in my beeyards! I hope that nobody thinks that a mechanical method of mite control would change genetic makeup any more than, say, always standing outside would eventually make you a tree! 

I'm using powdered sugar for two primary reasons: First, it's a non-residual chemical method getting a mite drop count. A 24 hour (or 72 hour, for that matter) mite drop count, using a sticky board only, proved inconclusive to me. Mites may physically be visible crawling on the comb, but 24 hour sticky board counts could still be zero. Powdered sugar, on the other hand, provides "knock-down power" and with no residual chemicals on the comb.

Secondly, powdered sugar mite control is a way to save a hive that's crashing due to mites. I'll be the first to admit that a hive that's hypersensitive to mites isn't much good, and should be culled from the apiary, but the hive can be re-queened with stock that needs further testing. Requeening gives a "jump-start" to the hive, and as soon as the unsealed brood has emerged, 28 days at most, and new stock nurse bees are able to trim brood, the mites are knocked down and I can retest brood for mite resistance. This way, I don't have to start from scratch in my testing, and I can test multiple strains in a single season.

Hope this clears things up!
DS


----------



## RayMarler (Jun 18, 2008)

I've used regular C&H powedered sugar for a couple years now and have had excellent results with no side effects to the bees. In fact, over the course of a few days to a week, you can see clumps and patties of white cake that the bees remove from the hive. I'm assuming (I know I know) that it's the cornstarch from the sugar.


----------



## paulnewbee1 (Jan 27, 2007)

how do you do it 

how many weeks do you do the treatment??good infor but do duration of treatment 
like how much per box (deep) 
how often


----------



## GRIMBEE (Apr 3, 2007)

No treatments and so far 2 hives and 1 nuc with minimum varroa mites. Zero problems, lots of honey(very tasty bright yellow) 4 mediums full, lots of pollen and brood. Hives are doing great, nuc is from a swarm cell on a frame a month ago. Queen mated and has a excellent laying pattern- 4 deep frames of brood


----------

