# "Correct" spelling of honey bee (honeybee)



## Alex Wild (May 15, 2011)

Worth noting that this seems to be an American rule, and it is adopted by professional entomologists in our country but mostly ignored by everyone else.

For example, the Bed Bug is a true bug and it should be spelled as two words. But people say bedbug all the time.

Honeybee is widely regarded as incorrect on our continent, but not in the UK. See this British report on CCD: 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1363724/Baffled-scientists-probe-honeybee-colony-collapse-save-half-worlds-crops.html

Linnean taxonomy was invented precisely so we wouldn't have to argue over these issues. When in doubt, use _Apis mellifera_.


----------



## valleyman (Nov 24, 2009)

:scratch:


Alex Wild;679219}
For example said:


> Apis mellifera[/I].


Why wouldn't bedbug be correct since bed bugs are found mostly in beds? It is splitting hairs either way and most could care less. 
And is it really correct to say apis mellifera when we may not know for sure if they might be related to apis melifera mellifera? After all both are honeybees or is it honey bees?:scratch:!


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

There is an awful lot of hairsplitting that goes on in the forums. I have learned in the short time that I have been posting that you had better have your I's dotted, your t's crossed and your facts straight, are somebody here will eat your lunch and throw your carcass to the wolves. If you are a treatment beek, you can not ever say the T.F. words. Yep, valleyman, so much to learn, so little time!! TED


----------



## pascopol (Apr 23, 2009)

Honey Bee or Honeybee ?

Who cares, as long as Google thinks it is same word (it does).

Don't we have much more important bee problems in the last few decades?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

byron, Are you in Arizona or Australia? I'm just curious, because of the way you didn't capitalize your loaction names. If you are in Arizona, I hope you have AC.

Or maybe you are in Arkansas?


----------



## sevenmmm (Mar 5, 2011)

I caught the last few minutes of such a discussion on NPR recently and the host said something like; these grammar rules help to keep the message clear. So, in my NSHO, separating _honey_ from the _bee_ would distinguish there are other types of bees.

Honey bee it is!:thumbsup:


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

*****


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

1. When posts are edited (especially by mods), the meaning often changes...which is bad if you've been careful to say what you mean in the first place. I think after a few edits, most posters would rather see their posts deleted rather than edited by a mod.

2. We gave this some thought when writing a book. Undoubtedly there is a case to be made that "honey bee" is correct. With that said, the folks that write dictionaries are followers, not leaders...they write about how people are using words. I prefer how "honeybee" looks on the page, and it is usually spoken as one word (not two). Most importantly, regardless of right or wrong, neither usage will lead to a misunderstanding.

deknow


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

deknow said:


> Most importantly, regardless of right or wrong, *neither usage will lead to a misunderstanding*.


But it has, apparently, even though we are not permitted to discuss it.


----------



## D Semple (Jun 18, 2010)

I don't care what the proper spelling is, I use "Honey Bees" on my internet place page though, because anybody who has a swarm to catch that does a computer search with word "bee" or "bees" in it, within 30 miles of my home, it pops up my name (had over 20 swarm calls this year so far).

Don


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

D Semple said:


> I don't care what the proper spelling is.


I have to stay on topic by mentioning *the spelling of honey bees * but this thread was intended to continue a previous discussion, which didn't really pertain to *the spelling of honey bees,* but was more centered on the contention by someone that "honey bees" (two words) could refer to bees from a genus other than _Apis._ 

Myself, I would think it logical to have either the scientifically correct "honey bees" or the sometimes used (even in some dictionaries) "honeybees" both refer to just the Apis Mellifera. 

My reason: In writing, if you want to say that honey bee and Honeybee are different animals, that might be somewhat workable, but imagine in a verbal discussion, if you said, "When were the first honey bees discovered in the Western Hemisphere?" and someone had to stop you and say, "Wait, do you mean Honeybee, one word capital "H"? or two words, no capitalization?" It would be like two twin brothers, one named Shawn and the other named Sean. In writing they'd know who you meant, but if you shouted it out loud, they wouldn't know who you wanted. 

If someone wants to say "all bees who make honey are honey bees," we would have to call bumblebees honey bees. If you then split more hairs and said, "Only bees who are _used by humans_ to produce honey," then someone would say that a 14 million year old fossil found in Nevada isn't technically a honey bee because no humans used that species to produce honey, since humans hadn't evolved/come here on spaceships/been created by God/whatever yet. 

So again, it's not the spelling that anyone was debating, per se, it's whether or not stingless bees, specifically, who are not in the genus Apis should be considered a true honey bee. Science and scientific naming conventions say nope, a forum member here disagrees.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I think you and WLC have made your points quite clear. Stating them over and over again, while poking each other gets us nowhere. Not that this will really be settled here anyway. The way things are said and written is a convention, much larger than those who post on beesource.com.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk:

My point is still this: those conventions are meaningless when honey bees have been kept by indigenous people for thousands of years. It's just that those honey bees are Melipona and Trigona, and not Apis. Who would you side with: beekeepers who have a long history of producing honey from bees, or a recently formed U.S. based organization?

What's really funny is that these beekeepers aren't even in the U.S., and we don't really have many Trigona or Melipona around (as far as I know). Why is a U.S. organization naming other people's bees?

I can't explain it.


----------



## valleyman (Nov 24, 2009)

I hope the mod will leave this up long enough for it to get it's point across. Most of us on here could care less about whether honeybee is one word or two. But we do enjoy a LITTLE sparring in good humor. What we don't enjoy is when two or more highly intelluctials try to outwit each other. Most of us are on here to learn to and help others keep honeybees. We enjoy doing this and will keep on, learning hopefully from the highly educated intelluctials also, about how to keep bees whether it be honey or others.
Sincerely Brent Cook


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Well, on a lighter note: the ESA has a membership of over 6,000.

Nice, huh?

However, Beesource has over 14,000 members.

So, technically, Beesource outweighs the ESA by a wide margin.

Does this mean that Beesource members get to make definitions and name species as well?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> sqkcrk:
> Who would you side with: beekeepers who have a long history of producing honey from bees, or a recently formed U.S. based organization?
> 
> I can't explain it.


Under most circumstances, when I am talking about honey bees, I am talking about bees in my hives or bees like those in my hives, not bees like mallipona or the other ones. In my mind I don't see spelling. So, it could be honeybee(s) or honey bee(s) or Honeybees. For some reason beyond reason, when I capitalize the word it contracts from two words to one. But, I don't think I am consistant about it anymore than I am about anything else.

I would say that mostly when I talk about Honeybees or honey bees in no way am I talking about Bumblebees or other honey producing bees. Were I talking about them I would name them, bumblebees or mallipona aka stingless bees.

Do mallipona keepers refer to their mallipona as abejas? Bees? Or as abejas de miel? Bees of honey? Or miel abejas? Honey bees? Do they call themselves bee keepers? Are mallipona bees? Do threy have ploumous hairs covering their bodies?

En Espanol, Miel de Abejas translates into Honey in English. In English we don't distinguish that the honey came from Bees. Where else would it have come from? Honeybee Honey is kinda redundant, in English. But, apparently it is not in Spanish, thus "Honey of Bees"/Miel de Abejas.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

...a grape looks like a "blue berry", not a blueberry (they sound different when spoken).

If you order pasta with "red sauce", are you expecting a sauce made of tomatoes, or one made of maraschino cherries?

deknow


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

WLC said:


> Does this mean that Beesource members get to make definitions and name species as well?


:banana: When we get to 15,000 members, we'll get to rename planets as well!


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Do they call themselves bee keepers? Are mallipona bees? .


The Guatemalan illiteracy rate is 35%, and much higher in the rural areas, so the majority of indigenous beekeepers there can't even spell "honey bee" in their own language, much less Spanish, English, or Latin. We don't try to control what _they_ call _anything_, and we don't much care. ESA was tasked with creating the naming convention for what we call insects in the U.S.A. Nobody is denying anyone the right to call anything anything in their own countries, and nobody is denying that beekeeping has been practiced there for a long time. 

I don't know why stingless bees weren't put in the Apis genus, but they weren't. And that means, according to science, they aren't considered true honey bees. 

To brush that away by claiming that entomologists are clueless about bees, science is racist and that we should have consulted jungle natives about which genus their bees should be placed in is just not logical, to me. That doesn't mean WLC is a bad person or dumb, it just means, in my opinion, that he is being driven to his conclusions by something other than logic.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk:

I would think that other languages, besides Spanish, would be involved.

But, that's not quite what I mean by bringing up the issue of calling other bees besides Apis species 'honey bees'.

It's as if the 'tail is wagging the dog'. Why is the ESA telling beekeepers what to call their bees?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> somebody here will eat your lunch and throw your carcass to the wolves.


Not in this thread, Ted. This is a 'fun' thread where we get to jive round!


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

Barry said:


> :banana: When we get to 15,000 members, we'll get to rename planets as well!


I think the number of people who viewed this thread in it's first 24 hours outnumbers all of the indigenous beekeepers in Central and South America combined. By WLC's logic maybe we can take a vote and rename them.

So sorry for not staying on topic, but I was responding to your post....


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

'When we get to 15,000 members, we'll get to rename planets as well!'

Could we? I'd like to get Pluto back if at all possible. Danged International Astronomical Union!

Melipona are restricted to the Americas, but Trigona are pantropical (Brand, 1988). 

I can't estimate how many honey bee colonies the Melipona and Trigona beekeepers have collectively worldwide. But, I'd guess that it's a big number. How many of those beekeepers have ever heard of the ESA?


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> There is an awful lot of hairsplitting that goes on in the forums... you had better have your I's dotted...


Nah, if we were splitting hairs, we'd point out that you don't generally need to dot the capital "I." 
I wonder if they even consulted all the little pygmies before re-classifying Pluto. Maybe that's why it took so long....the scientists had to wait to hear back from all the Eskimos and hottentots to make sure the constellations were given culturally sensitive names. 

Is that the general consensus here? That whichever scientific organization has the most popularity and members is the one with the right to name/classify things in their own country? Is there an apicultural society that considers non-_Apis_ insects to be true honey bees of any spelling? 

And can anybody find any source for the reason why Melipona were not placed in the Apis genus? I mean, besides the current theory that science is racist and has no business telling anyone what to call things. 

I will try my best to find these two answers and post what I find.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

byron said:


> The Guatemalan illiteracy rate is 35%, and much higher in the rural areas, so the majority of indigenous beekeepers there can't even spell "honey bee" in their own language, much less Spanish, English, or Latin.
> 
> they aren't considered true honey bees.


That doesn't answer my question at all. I asked what do THEY call themselves. Not whether they could write it or not.

Maybe they aren't considered true honey bees because taxonomically (isthat the right word) they don't fit. When those who classify insects decide which camp to put hymonopterous insects, the Bees Camp or the Wasps Camp, my understanding is that they look to see if the hairs on their bodies are straight or plumous, everything else being the same. So, maybe mallipona don't fit at all. I don't know. Never having even seen a photo of one.

Your last paragraph was totally unnecassary and had nothing what so ever to do w/ my questions and only servces to further agitate your opponent. Let it go. I only appreciate sparring when I am the one doing it.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> Why is the ESA telling beekeepers what to call their bees?


Who says they are? Maybe one could look on their efforts as trying to bring some order to how living critters are Ordered and Classified so they can be differenciated and discussed intelligently by the most people. There are alot more people out there who talk about Bees than there are Beekeepers.

Just a thought and maybe some more fuel for someones fire. But, why is it beekeeper and not bee keeper? Is it that butterfly as opposed to house fly thing? Or an exception to that line of thinking? Hmmm.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Apidae, which includes Apis, Melipona, and Trigona are all true bees. If they are used for gathering honey, that makes them honey bees. Apis species used for gathering honey are Honeybees (so, they fit in both groups).

'There are alot more people out there who talk about Bees than there are Beekeepers.'

Yes, and they're in many other countries, speaking a multitude of languages. But, why should the ESA be able to say to people who keep honey bees in other countries, besides the U.S. where those bees aren't even found naturally, that they're not honey bees?

Let me put it this way, a U.S. based organization can't 'name away' the purpose for which indigenous people are using bees that they own and care for.

In the Americas, there's also another reason why keeping Melipona and Trigona may be the only option for keeping honey bees. AHB. You don't have to be concerned about your bees becoming Africanized if you're working with Melipona and Trigona honey bees. You can keep your honey bees near your dwellings that way.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> Apidae, which includes Apis, Melipona, and Trigona are all true bees. If they are used for gathering honey, that makes them honey bees. Apis species used for gathering honey are Honeybees (so, they fit in both groups).


Is the amount of honey that they produce commercially significant to the Meli. and Trig. beekeeper? It seems to me that the Wax may be the main reason they keep these bees. The honey appears to be secreted between alternating spiraling bands of brood. How they get the honey out must be truly tedious. Of course it may be sold as comb.. sort of a brood honey sandwich - and I do realize many cultures love protein rich brood. So it could be these are really Wax Bees? What does TED think.... he has seen them in person.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hpm:

They're generally small scale operations anyhow. I can't comment on the main uses of their honey (sweetener/medicine/ritual?). They may use their wax for a variety of purposes, including as an adhesive. Perhaps coffee pollination is also the main reason for keeping them (more beans per bush).

How indigenous people use natural products is something for cultural geographers and the like to explore.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> Apidae, which includes Apis, Melipona, and Trigona are all true bees. If they are used for gathering honey, that makes them honey bees. Apis species used for gathering honey are Honeybees (so, they fit in both groups).
> 
> But, why should the ESA be able to say to people who keep honey bees in other countries, besides the U.S. where those bees aren't even found naturally, that they're not honey bees?
> 
> In the Americas, there's also another reason why keeping Melipona and Trigona may be the only option for keeping honey bees. AHB. You don't have to be concerned about your bees becoming Africanized if you're working with Melipona and Trigon.


One of you says they are true bees and the other says they aren't? Is that right? So, you disagree on that too?

Who says the ESA does tell people in other countries what to call their bees? Did the ESA put out an Edict or something? I'm sure other people can ignore them if they wish. After all, even tho it ain't in the Constitution, we have an Inheirent Right to Ignore. Our Freedom to Ignore cannot be taken away.

So, you maintain that AHB will not displace Melipone in the same way it does Apis mellifera? You sure about that? Or, maybe, the climate is not suitible for AHB? Are Melipone (which appears to be a Latin word) kept at higher elevations?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Taxonomy is one thing. That is the ESA's gig. I disagree on the ESA definition of 'honey bee'. It's flawed in many ways as I've described before.

I ignore the ESA definition because it's also telling us here in the U.S. what other people are doing with their bees around the world. That is definitely NOT their gig.

Melipona do have an elevation limit because they reportedly can't survive below 10 degrees C. .

It's one of the reasons why Brand concluded that EHBs were present in Mexico in the 16th century. You can only get white wax and clear honey from EHBs at higher elevations in Mexico. Wax and honey from Melipona is darker, and they can't survive at 1,860 meters.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

So, if elevation has no effect of keeping AHB from displacing a colony of Melipona, what would? Not that this has anything to do w/ spelling Honeybee correctly or properly.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I wouldn't say that AHB displaces Melipona. AHB queens don't take over Melipona colonies (unless you've heard otherwise).

If you want honey bees in AHB country, and you're in the tropics, then Melipona/Trigona might be a viable alternative to EHB. You can avoid 'africanization' issues.

In the highlands, you might be stuck with EHB/AHB since Melipona might not be viable. I don't know about Trigona.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> If you want honey bees in AHB country, and you're in the tropics, then Melipona/Trigona might be a viable alternative to EHB. You can avoid 'africanization' issues.
> 
> .


I would not think that africanized bees could interbreed with Melipona or Trigona... as they are different species. But then again... bee genetics is so weird that I could be wrong.


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> That doesn't answer my question at all.


Sorry. Just because I quote you and respond doesn't mean every sentence after that is also a response to anything you may have said. 



sqkcrk said:


> I only appreciate sparring when I am the one doing it.


Yep, and I only enjoy sparring when I am lucky enough to have an opponent that actually says, repeatedly, that he wants everyone to follow his own particular naming convention because *science is racist and entomologists shouldn't be naming insects. * I mean, what a gift. That's like a pork chop to a pit bull to someone who likes to be right anyway. I just have to remember to add smiley faces and dancing bananas to everything so it can pass as lighthearted banter between old chums and not an actual adult conversation where someone might have to be wrong about something. None of that! Move along!  :banana:


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> One of you says they are true bees and the other says they aren't? Is that right? So, you disagree on that too?


Come on, man, when did you stop paying attention? Stop criticizing me for "saying the same thing" when you aren't even following any of the information. NOBODY in any scientific field I am aware of calls Melipona honey bees, because they aren't in genus _Apis._ No apiculturists, no entomologists, no biologists. WLC is saying that, correct me if I'm wrong WLC, if a stingless bee produces honey for humans, then science is wrong and we all have to call them true honey bees. I have asked him for any source for* his* definition of what a honey bee is, but, if you recall, first he refused to even acknowledge my question, then he finally tells us that he thinks science is racist and entomologists have no business naming insects in other countries without asking the jungle peoples' permission, and they have no right to tell beekeepers what to call bees.
:banana:


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> I would not think that africanized bees could interbreed with Melipona or Trigona... as they are different species.


Not just different species, different genus completely. They (stingless bees) aren't _Apis_ which makes them not honey bees, which is what this thread was originally about.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

:banana:I would say that science can be biased in some rather unexpected ways. It's the norm and not the exception. Those of us who keep current with the literature, with advanced degrees in science, with research experience, and university level teaching experience know this already. 

We also know how to use that bias to our own advantage.

I'd also say that the ESA's definitions only apply to their own membership under certain circumstances, and perhaps to certain scientific publications that follow their guidelines.

Otherwise, they really don't apply to beekeepers. Sorry, but they ain't the boss of me now.

(where's that danged dancing banana?)

:banana: 

:wiener:


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

WLC said:


> I wouldn't say that AHB displaces Melipona. AHB queens don't take over Melipona colonies (unless you've heard otherwise).


AHB physically attack stingless bees, and they out compete them. But stingless bees have been seen to change their foraging patterns to avoid contact with AHB.

There doesn't seem to be hard evidence of AHB alone displacing stingless bees (either the wild ones or the domesticated ones) but anecdotal observations from the natives support AHB as a contributing factor. The main thing displacing the stingless bees is the native people themselves. Stingless queens can't fly, so the natives' slash and burn practices condemn entire colonies to death, whereas, as we all know, AHB, as opposed to other honey bees, will leave brood in a heartbeat. That makes Africans notoriously bad parents, but when you live in a rough neighborhood, you can travel faster without the kids.

Also, stingless bees need nice big hollow branches to nest in, and with the natives logging every big tree they can find, it gives an edge to honey bees that are more versatile in their choice of habitat.

Of course, I only get this information from scientists who don't call non-Apis insects _honey bees_, so feel free to ignore it. I'm also not sure if the indigenous peoples signed off on the study. 


http://www2.fiu.edu/~kopturs/pubs/CairnsetalBiotropica05.pdf


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

I have no Dog in this fight, but this article was rather interesting and perhaps some would like to comment.

http://www.saber.ula.ve/bitstream/123456789/16266/1/quality.pdf



Seems there are some other large organizations (Codex Ailenmentares(sp)) that do not call what is produced by stingless bees, Honey. They go on to say that Honey is produced by Apis and stingless bees produce "Divine Elixor". Something to do with medicinal qualities and seemingly a different chemistry.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hpm:

That would make them 'divine elixor bees'!

:doh:

Here I am trying to tell them what to call their bees, and they can come up with something way cooler than 'honey bees'.

:doh: :doh:


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> hpm:
> 
> That would make them 'divine elixor bees'!
> 
> :


Yea.. "Divine Elixir" is way cooler than just honey, isn't it. Seems to have something to do with their belief that it is primarily a medicinal substance. At least that is the way I read it.

So is this debate over? Divine Elixir Bees and Honey bees?


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> I have no Dog in this fight, but this article was rather interesting and perhaps some would like to comment.


 I hadn't seen that article before. But think about it: If your honey bee puts sugar syrup in your super, most people here would say that's not even true honey, even though it can be hard to detect and it was made by a true honey bee. So yeah, whoever said that what stingless bees produce was technically even honey? The natives don't call it honey. We came along and called it honey. But science says it's not honey, therefore the bees that make it aren't honey bees. Besides, stingless bees aren't genus Apis, so they aren't defined as honey bees. No matter how it's spelled. 

Plus, for anyone fussing about a tiny American entomological society that was tasked with creating the naming convention we use, were you aware that every single INTERNATIONAL organization I can find agrees that "if it isn't Apis, it isn't a honey bee."? I'm waiting to hear back from a few Central/South American beekeeping organizations and entomological groups, and when they confirm that they, too, agree that stingless bees are not honey bees, I will let everybody know. I'll even tell you whom I contacted and what their contact info is so you can verify it. Is that culturally sensitive enough for you? If not, by god I'll find a genuine bush doctor with a scientific degree AND a bone in his nose and we'll see what he has to say. If _that_ won't satisfy you......
:banana:


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Not meaning to muddy the waters, but I keep thinking that Honey is nothing more than evaporated Nectar. It's nature is a function of what plants it is gathered from. Therefore this "Divine Elixir", must be the product of the Flora that the stingless bees gather nectar from? Or do the the stingless bees do something chemical... to the Nectar? Does Apis in the same environment produce "Divine Elixir"?


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> So is this debate over? Divine Elixir Bees and Honey bees?


Like Michael Bush says, "It depends." Let's look at what we know, look at what we have learned, and see if WLC admits his mistake or not:

I had stated on another thread that Native Americans did not have honey bees until Europeans brought them to America. 

WLC said that the Mayans were Native Americans and they had kept honey bees for thousands of years, so I was wrong. 

I stated that neither the Mayans nor current residents in that geographic location refer to themselves as Native Americans, and that science does not consider non-_Apis_ insects to be honey bees. We also learned that what Melipona produces is not even honey.

I repeated that every domestic and international scientific organization or association or society that I could find that had any opinion on the matter agreed with me: *"If it's in family Apidae, it's a bee, but if it's not in genus Apis, it's not a honey bee."*
WLC says science is racist and he can use his own naming scheme. 

WLC also has instructed us that it must be spelled Honeybee (one word, capital H) because it is a proper name for a livestock breed. I can find no society, association or organization that will confirm this, and WLC has refused my many requests for any factual reason to agree with this. 

Do we all agree that this is a fair and accurate summary of our collective intellectual pursuit here?

I have enjoyed everybody's contribution in these threads and I've learned a lot. This should not have been a debate, since all I did was state scientific facts, but we are human, so there we go.

I guess whether we need to keep defending the facts depends on WLC's willingness to continue denying them.

And no, I see no reason to rename stingless bees "Divine Elixir Bees." But I can check with the natives down there and see what they want us to do.


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> Does Apis in the same environment produce "Divine Elixir"?


I have to leave the house and can't look anything up now, but I'd find out the chemical definition of honey. If the AHB can get nectar from some of the same plants as stingless bees but still produce true honey, then the difference must be in what the different types of bees do with the nectar internally. We know that the stingless bee "honey" ferments faster and more easily than true honey, but is this because of the bee or the plants?
AHB and stingless bees do work plants that the other will not work, but there must be an overlap, or else the AHB wouldn't physically attack the stingless bees, unless they are just racist. 
Otherwise animals, unlike people, for the most part, aren't designed to waste energy fighting unless shared resources are at stake. Certain humans are capable of developing a surplus economy rendering them completely able to engage in wars for no good reason at all. Animals are more thrifty with their energy.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hpm:

I think that you're definition of honey as evaporated nectar is close, however I know that Honeybees add other substances from their digestive tract to nectar to form honey.

I have no idea what substances Melipona, Trigona, and the other species in the article you've mentioned might add to nectar to form their 'divine elixor'.

I would take the 'divine elixor' appelation as a clue. We know that the Mayans had bee gods. Could this be what we are seeing? A cultural resurgence where indigenous people are creating a direct link between their cultural heritage and beekeeping/honey production? (oops, I meant 'divine elixor' production).

And now, we see yet another organization, a food board, tell them that their honey isn't honey at all.

It's not just the ESA and byron that are kicking indigenous beekeepers around anymore.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hpm, let me keep your link close at hand for a few comments here.

http://www.saber.ula.ve/bitstream/123456789/16266/1/quality.pdf

It looks like the ESA has found a way to bone themselves yet again.

We already know that the indigenous people of the Americas were agriculturally vastly more advanced than the Europeans who conquered them. They still are in many ways, particularly in the great diversity of species that they use in their agriculture.

Even in terms of their Apiculture, we can see that they are using a great diversity of species for honey production (I'm tired of writing 'divine elixor'/'divine elixir' since it's not really cogent.).

So using the ESA's own taxonomic identification for the bee species involved, I count 46 different species are involved. Although I only took a quick head count.

*THAT'S FORTY-SIX DIFFERENT SPECIES OF 'BEES' USED BY INDIGENOUS BEEKEEPERS FOR HONEY PRODUCTION!*

That's pretty danged impressive. How many species does the rest of the Apis mellifera world use for honey production?


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> That's pretty danged impressive. How many species does the rest of the Apis mellifera world use for honey production?


I too noted the number of species of stingless bees. Between Mexico and Guatemala there were approximately 46 species. Given that they are not too far from the equator an increased diversity is not too surprising. If I remember correctly - the further from the equator the less the diversity in a particular biome. If you are suggesting that the indigenous people of Guatemala are fascinating, I will hardily agree. I have visited there and would love to return... if nothing else just to see some of these stingless bees and how they are cultivated.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I stand corrected, 46 it is. For now.

I've also noticed that the local names for their bees were not only in Spanish, but weren't capitalized. Tsk, tsk. Breeds are still proper names and should always be capitalized. Philistines!

Secondly, I wonder what they're called in their own native tongue?

We may never know.

I'm getting the feeleing that we're asking the wrong folks how to spell Honeybee/honey bee.

Those indigenous groups are very likely world class, master beekeepers.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

byron said:


> Come on, man, when did you stop paying attention? Stop criticizing me for "saying the same thing" when you aren't even following any of the information.


Well, excuse me for being retarded, but both of you guys look alike from here and I am having a hard time telling you apart, especially because you both have the same tone.

Besides, I didn't say you both called them honeybees. You both appeared to say that Malipona are "true bees". Did I misunderstand one or both of you? Are Malipona bees or not? Honeybees I'm not asking about. Just bees. Do they have all of the necassary characteristcs to be called Bees?

When you call them stingless bees, apparently they are bees, right? I don't have a problem not calling them Honeybees, 'cause my bees are honey bees and, as far as I know, Melipona don't look much like my bees.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

hpm08161947 said:


> Yea.. "Divine Elixir" is way cooler than just honey, isn't it.


Isn't Ambrosia another word for Honey. It may not be Devine, but it is pretty cool.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> hpm:
> 
> I think that you're definition of honey as evaporated nectar is close, however I know that Honeybees add other substances from their digestive tract to nectar to form honey.


I guess if you consider the mandibular glands part of the digestive tract, then you are correct. Otherwise what you think you know is wrong. I tend to think of mouth parts as being seperate from the digestive TRACT, even though in Humans digestion (the breaking down of food) may start in the mouth from saliva. I consider the Digestive Tract to be the stomach on down threw the intestines.

Honeybees gather nectar from flowers and carry that nectar in their honey stomaches, which is a stomach before their digestive stomach. When a bee gets back to the hive, the nectar is regurgitrated, passed from one bee to another and all the while secretions from the mandibular glands are added to the nectar and along w/ evapoaration of moisture changes the nectar into Honey.

That's the way I understand it. Smarter people than I can now set me straight. I'm ready to learn what I didn't know before.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

sqkcrk said:


> Isn't Ambrosia another word for Honey. It may not be Devine, but it is pretty cool.


Anbrosia bees and Honey bees.... yup... that settles it!


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk:

Yes, I know about the glands.

Since the Apidae: Apis, Melipona, and Trigona make honey that is gathered by humans...

Why don't we call Apis species 'stinging bees' (they're still Honeybees)? 

It seems unfair to knock Melipona and Trigona by calling them 'stingless bees' while refusing to call them 'honey bees'.

Sooo...

...to be perfectly fair, Apis species would be called 'stinging bees' while the Melipona and Trigona species would be still be called 'stingless bees'.

They all still make honey. It's just that someone decided to knock Melipona and Trigona by making them seem whimpy by calling them 'stingless'. 

So, let's make Apis species seem mean by calling them 'stinging'.

There's a type of conceit going on when we let one group of people name another group's bees for them.

Invariably, the group that isn't being represented gets the short end of the stick.

Think of this as a social justice issue.

Just admit that they're all honey bees. That's fair.


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Well, excuse me for being retarded,


You are not retarded, I'm sorry for getting impatient.



sqkcrk said:


> Besides, I didn't say you both called them honeybees. You both appeared to say that Malipona are "true bees". Did I misunderstand one or both of you?


Yes. Melipona are _Apidae_, which makes them bees, but not genus _Apis_, which makes them not honey bees.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> There's a type of conceit going on when we let one group of people name another group's bees for them.


It would be interesting to hear just what they call them. And I am willing to bet it would be equally confusing. I suspect you know how many different Quiche (sp) dialects they use in Guatemala. Bet my Babelfish won't translate even into 1 dialect of Quiche.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hpm:

It's likely alot more confusing than that.

These bees are being kept by locals throughout various parts of central and south america.

No one really knows how many different species of bees are involved, let alone all of of the possible names in the various local dialects.


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

WLC said:


> I would take the 'divine elixor' appelation as a clue. We know that the Mayans had bee gods. Could this be what we are seeing? A cultural resurgence...


A resurgence? Read the literature. Stingless beekeeping will be completely extinct in a few years, apparently. In fact, a survey of a once-popular area of the Mayan lowlands shows the rapid decline of beekeepers, down to around 70 in 2004.





WLC said:


> Secondly, I wonder what they're called in their own native tongue?
> We may never know.


The traditional Mayan name for this bee is Xunan kab, literally meaning "royal lady".
The Mayans regard honey (cab) as a gift of the bee gods (ah muzen cab), a food from the heavens (Tozzer and Allen 1910, 298 ff.).
The Mayan word for "honey" was also the same as the word for "world," so the honey god Ah Mucen Cab was also involved with the creation of the world.
http://atheism.about.com/od/mayangodsgoddesses
/p/AhMucenCab.htm


WLC said:


> And now, we see yet another organization, a food board, tell them that their honey isn't honey at all.
> It's not just the ESA and byron that are kicking indigenous beekeepers around anymore.


Since their word for that is "world," who was it that called it honey in the first place? Mean white people that didn't ask the natives. Now you think it's unfair that scientists determine it isn't honey. Find out what to be indignant about. And did you ask the natives if they wanted you to be indignant on their behalf? Seems a little condescending for you to assume.


WLC said:


> Those indigenous groups are very likely world class, master beekeepers.


They'd have to be, to get anything out of that stingless junk. It's easy to get a ton of honey from the superior _Apis_ genus, how long would it take to get the same amount from Melipona? It's like trying to milk a chicken. Don't ask.....


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

byron said:


> A resurgence? Read the literature. Stingless beekeeping will be completely extinct in a few years, apparently. In fact, a survey of a once-popular area of the Mayan lowlands shows the rapid decline of beekeepers, down to around 70 in 2004.


Yes... and this will lead to a significant impact on local flora (or already has). I believe there is already a movement to prop up this dying group of beekeepers. If they just did not bury the hives with the beekeeper when he died, it might help


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Stingless bees are kept for honey production worldwide.

While Trigona is pantropical, I don't know if anyone has imported Melipona to other tropical regions of the world.

We may never know for sure because it's a sustainable form of subsistence agriculture. It's very local, and probably doesn't get reported. Let's put it this way, you don't call up Dadant's or Beeweaver to get things going. You find everything that you need locally.

Watch out, here they come into the greenhouse:

'The stingless bee, M. quadrifasciata, was significantly more efficient than honey bees in pollinating greenhouse tomatoes.'

http://www.mendeley.com/research/po...-honey-bee-apis-mellifera-hymenoptera-apidae/


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> I believe there is already a movement to prop up this dying group of beekeepers.


Yes, mostly it's racist mean Europeans that don't consult natives that are down there trying to keep them from destroying their quaint little hobby.
I suppose if the natives extinct their bees we'll step in and figure out how to pollinate their vanilla beans for them. White Man's Burden. 



hpm08161947 said:


> If they just did not bury the hives with the beekeeper when he died, it might help


I know, right? Duh. Not that it matters too much, apparently there are not many young folks who want to mess with it, so the old people might as well take it to the grave.



WLC said:


> It's very local, and probably doesn't get reported.


There may be underground beekeepers, but all we have to by is the documentation. You know, the facts. Unless math is racist, too?


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

byron said:


> I know, right? Duh. Not that it matters too much, apparently there are not many young folks who want to mess with it, so the old people might as well take it to the grave.
> 
> 
> ?


I just hate to see "Diversity" disappear from the face of the earth. One can see the handwriting on the wall. In my lifetime it seems that so many things have become so homogenized.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

It isn't math, it's socio-economics. Frankly, they have a way of life that's incomprehensible to many of us. But, it's every bit as valid as my own way of life here in midtown Manhattan, New York City.

I'm not going to define their honey bees, or their honey, 'away' from them.


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

WLC said:


> Think of this as a social justice issue. That's fair.


Your a social activist? I thought you were a scientist? In fact, I thought it was interesting that in your first response on this thread you announced that you were a scientist, but within minutes you had edited your post and deleted that claim. Why?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I'm both scientist and social activist (and more).

Let's put it this way, I had the pleasure of showing the rooftop garden apiary to some visiting Russian and American scientists recently. One was the head of a major Russian research institute, and another won the most prestigious environmental award in the world. I'm consulting on an environmental project that they're working on.

And yes, I've represented the poor and elderly as part of my elected office (past tense). 

However, I would be just as honored to spend my time with even one of those Melipona/Trigona 'honey bee' keepers in that photoessay that I linked to in the other thread. I'm sure that my distinguished guests would feel the same way.

byron, please try to be a little more open minded. The world is already an unfair place, let's not make it any worse.

Let them have their honey and their honey bees. Hmmm?

(almost forgot)

:banana:


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

WLC said:


> I'm both scientist and social activist (and more).


I asked why you deleted it from your post.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

It didn't contribute to the thought (like some of the other stuff I write).

byron, why don't you like indigenous people? Is this 'blowback' from that caucasian thing?

Try to think more objectively about what's happening: first their bees aren't defined as honey bees, and now their honey isn't even honey any more.

That's why definitions can be a dangerous thing depending on who's doing the defining. The ESA and others haven't done those Melipona and Trigona beekeepers any favors.


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> I just hate to see "Diversity" disappear from the face of the earth.


I couldn't agree more. I wish we had done more to preserve the plant and animal populations of the third world instead of using our food and medicine to artificially swell the human population there. We get infinitely more use from the fauna and flora. The natives there have few (if any) environmental restrictions and they are trashing their surroundings in a futile effort to ape our way of life. 

Speaking of the natives being consulted about the *spelling of honey bees*, isn't it funny how it's goofy white yuppie suburban types who want to romanticize various and sundry "indigenous" ways of life, while those very third worlders are tripping over themselves to grasp at anything and everything Western? They are basically voting with their feet, sometimes literally, by copying everything they can about us, to the best of their limited ability, and in millions of cases, breaking into our country illegally. I think they are telling you where you can stick your appreciation of their indigenous lifestyle. 

Who were we to tell them their _cab_ was to be called honey in the first place? In fact, who consulted the bees? Don't be so humanist, the critters get a vote too. And there are more of them, so by WLC's criteria, they get to decide.


----------



## frostygoat (Jun 3, 2008)

ESA rules, like them or not, are based on the consensus of experts in the field. You don't have to like their names but to publish in one of their journals you must use them. Common names for insects are very problematic and a headache for entomologists, and frankly they matter very little to scientists. I guarantee they could care less what you call the bees in your hives WLC. On a side note, as a member of ESA, I don't appreciate you slandering a great organization. 

Would you also call bumble bees Honeybees? They also make honey.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Why, thanks for that advertisement.

Yes, I know how their rules affect publishing guidlines.

I think that the definition for Apis species as 'Honeybees' is just fine.

Apidae (bees) from which honey is collected (who collects honey from bumble bees?) should be be called honey bees.

Why, you might ask? Because they're true bees, and you get honey from them. :doh:

frostygoat here's the real rub:

Melipona and Trigona beekeepers can't sell their honey as 'honey' because someone decided that their bees weren't 'honey bees' since entomologists (like the ESA) called them 'stingless bees' even though they've been gathering honey from them for thousands of years.

Maybe the ESA will rectify their error by calling Honeybees 'stinging bees' so that nobody can sell their honey as 'honey' anymore.

That's a social injustice caused by a lack of forsight and a cultural bias.

Hey, I didn't do it. Your organization did.

:banana:


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

WLC said:


> I am a scientist.



How do you define "scientist"? I've seen how and why you define other things the way you do, and it's never really quite the same way as everybody else. 

But as far as consulting the natives about what they call things, according to Thomas Jefferson and others, we asked the Amerinds what they called honey bees, and they said they had never seen them before and called them White Man's Flies:
Thomas Jefferson:
_The honey-bee is not a native of our continent. Marcgrave indeed mentions a species of honey-bee in Brasil. But this has no sting, and is therefore different from the one we have, which resembles perfectly that of Europe. The Indians concur with us in the tradition that it was brought from Europe; but 
when, and by whom, we know not. The bees have generally extended themselves into the country, a little in advance of the white settlers. The Indians therefore call them the white man's fly.
_
http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/insects

But on the White Man's Flies thread, you insisted that, again, everybody was wrong, and that it was all made up by white people.

So, when we _do_ consult the "natives," you still aren't happy. I'm seeing an unscientific pattern here. 

And obviously we didn't consult the Native Americans about how they spelled honey bees, because they hadn't seen them before, and they found it hard to spell anything until we taught them their ABC's.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

We're working on the definition of 'Honeybee' and 'honey bee' (although some of you are still at 'honeybee', which is the same as 'honey bee' to me).

I've jsut presented you with a scathing example (thanks to a link from hpm) that demonstrated how a definition created by an organization can disqualify indigenous beekeepers from selling their Melipona/Trigona honey as 'honey'. 

It's gotten so ridiculous, that someone has proposed calling it 'divine elixir' instead of 'honey'.

You can't make this stuff up.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

byron said:


> You are not retarded, I'm sorry for getting impatient.
> 
> Yes. Melipona are _Apidae_, which makes them bees, but not genus _Apis_, which makes them not honey bees.


Thank you and Understood. We are on the same page on this part at least and probably more. Looks like WLC is not giving up though.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

hpm08161947 said:


> It would be interesting to hear just what they call them.


What do you want to bet that when what the Indigenous peoples call Melipona is translated into Spanish and then English we will end up w/ stingless bee?


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> What do you want to bet that when what the Indigenous peoples call Melipona is translated into Spanish and then English we will end up w/ stingless bee?


There have been so many posts, you might not have noticed this from a few pages ago:

The traditional Mayan name for this bee is Xunan kab, literally meaning "royal lady".

http://atheism.about.com/od/mayangodsgoddesses
/p/AhMucenCab.htm


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> You can't make this stuff up.


But you are making this stuff up. No keeper of Melipona will ever sell his honey in a manner to which it will be subjected to standards as expressed by hpm. They won't be selling their honey in FL, will they?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

You don't think that 'definitions' can have a real impact?

When you limit definitions to a point where there's no incentive for people to keep native pollinators in tropical and subtropical rainforests, many of which are being cleared away as we speak, there's very little hope that even the largest rainforest fragments will remain viable.

AHB/EHB can't pollinate as effectively as native pollinators, like Mellipona and Trigona, because they aren't as physiologically well adapted to the local forest as those native pollinators are.

It's strange how definitions can impact a rainforest. If they aren't 'honey bees', and they don't make 'honey', then there's no reason to keep them around since you can't sell your honey.

This isn't about the quality of the honey. It's about closed markets and the definitions that make that possible.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> AHB/EHB can't pollinate as effectively as native pollinators, like Mellipona and Trigona, because they aren't as physiologically well adapted to the local forest as those native pollinators are.


Why not? Are they physically so different that the EHBs can't get into the flowers as easily as the Melipone? The same is said of bumblebees, that they are better suited to pollinate blueberries. And yet colonies of honeybees by the thousands go to Maine each year just to do what they are not suited as well to do.

I wonder if the same is true in South and Central America? That honeybees prove more effective because of their vastly greater numbers and portability.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Tropical rainforest contain the greatest biodiversity of any environment around. They aren't 'blueberries'.

Also, hpm counted 46 different Melipona and Trigona species. Honeybees aren't from tropical rainforests. Melipona and Trigona are. Of course they are exquisitely adapted to the rainforest.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Melapona and Trigona are being out competed by AHBs for food resources. Thus the stingless bee numbers are decreasing within their habitats. WLC kind of hit on the question I was going to ask He and Byron...What do you consider Bumble bees??? They produce honey and wax. I have even tasted Bumble honey- a bit strong but still was honey. TED


----------



## byron (May 26, 2011)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> Melapona and Trigona are being out competed by AHBs for food resources. Thus the stingless bee numbers are decreasing within their habitats. What do you consider Bumble bees???


WLC doesn't consider them honey bees because humans don't harvest their honey. I don't consider them honey bees because they are not in the genus Apis, which is the scientific definition of a honey bee. (family Apidae makes them bees, but genus Bombus makes them not honey bees.)

I posted on this a few pages ago, but apparently stingless bees do pollinate things AHB don't care for much, like vanilla beans. There are plants they compete for, but AHB will also physically attack stingless bees. It's really the combination of AHB and logging that is teaming up on the stingless. They need big hollow branches to nest in, and big trees get logged.

Plus, stingless queens can't fly, so the slash and burn practices down there means death for lots of colonies, whereas AHB can and will abandon their brood, so they make bad parents but can escape forest fires to establish new colonies.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ted:

They're Apidae, or true bees. If some group of people has been harvesting honey from bumble bees for millenia, as is the case for Mellipona and Trigona, then I'd say yes, they're honey bees.


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

WLC said:


> If some group of people has been harvesting honey from bumble bees for millenia, as is the case for Mellipona and Trigona, then I'd say yes, they're honey bees.


Is the substance produced by bumblebees able to be sold on store shelves as honey? What does it read on a refractometer?
I am not aware if "length of time in use by humans" determines what something actually is.

Native Americans have been making honey from saw palmetto plants for a long time. 
http://www.eustisflorida.com/saw1.htm

Does that make a palm tree a honey bee?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

byron? Is that you? :banana: Nya'Ha.

It has to come from Apidae, or true bees. We know that miel de cana and miel de maguey come from plants also.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

To the best of my knowledge, the honey from the stingless bee is different from typical Apis honey. For one, it's water content is higher... it ferments easily, two, it's pH is different - it is higher. I also believe it's primary use is medicinal and secondary use is "booze". Sounds like sweetening is a minor use.

ps... you think that is Byron? yea me too.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Well, that certainly makes sense. The quality of the honey I mean. It's of tropical origin. I've tested some other tropical honeys (for virus), and they are 'runny' as well.

They might also use it for rituals. But, if it comes from a bee, it's still honey. However, I wouldn't necessarily put some on my baklava.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

I suppose we could just put an adjective in front of honey. Maybe just Tropical Honey, I mean, we say Sourwood Honey, Tupelo Honey, Wild Flower Honey. But whatever the adjective maybe, it does appear to have a limited commercial appeal. And this compounded with other social factors seems to be leading to it's ultimate demise.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Personally, 

I would love for the Melipona and Trigona beekeepers to be able to sell their honey locally. It would provide an incentive for others to take up Melipona and Trigona beekeeping. It would also help to conserve a number of native bee species and even tropical plants as well.

I agree, that Melipona/Trigona honey would have a limited market, but I would also like to see indigenous beekeepers, who live way off of the beaten track, have an incentive for keeping them as well.


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

But I think the African honeybee working tropical plants still produces a different substance than those Mayan bees, right? 

What do the natives down there call the honey from AHB? I'm sure it's not the same word that they use for stingless honey (cab) right? Didn't a poster here say he raised Mayan bees in Panama? And you can get three times the price for their honey? So the natives down there obviously realize that it's different substances, and must call it different names than apis honey, right?


----------



## dehavik (Jun 5, 2010)

Has anyone on this forum tried the stingless/melipona/trigona honey/elixir/medicinal sweet stuff? I've been fascinated (if exhausted) by these long threads and would love to try some of these other bees' products. I doubt there's a stateside marketer of these foodstuffs, but has anyone purchased it from abroad?


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

dehavik said:


> Has anyone on this forum tried the stingless/melipona/trigona honey/elixir/medicinal sweet stuff? I've been fascinated (if exhausted) by these long threads


The only one on here that I am aware of that has actually laid eyes on these colonies is Ted Kretchman. I should not be too hard to go ask him, or maybe he is still reading this thread, but I doubt it.


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

I guess some of you won't like this, but Byron had encouraged a few of us in his group to research this a few days ago, for mine, I e-mailed this expert about why stingless bees aren't considered honey bees and why they are not in the Apis genus:*


Denis Brothers is Professor of Entomology at the University of KwaZulu-Natal [link to http://www.ukzn.ac.za], South Africa. He has served as Head of School and Deputy Dean at UKZN, as well as in other administrative and advisory capacities. His interests involve the systematics of various groups of aculeate Hymenoptera, specially the families Mutillidae, Bradynobaenidae, Plumariidae and Scolebythidae, both modern and fossil. He has been the President of the International Society of Hymenopterists and of the International Palaeoentomological Society, and a Commissioner since 1996. He is also a member of the Council of the Natal Museum and on the editorial boards of African Invertebrates and Durban Museum Novitates.*

Here is his response to me: (If you want to verify that he sent this to me, his e-mail address is: [email protected])

Dear Emily,

Apis is a genus (not a family), which means it comprises a group of bees with particular characteristics, both morphological and biological/behavioural. One of those relates to the sort of comb used for storing honey and rearing larvae - sheets of hexagonal cells. There are relatively few species in the genus Apis, mostly Asian.

Melipona, as you obviously know, also produce honey, but their colonies are much smaller than those of Apis species and the honey is stored in separate pots or less-organised combs, and there are various morphological differences, so that the various species of Melipona form a group distinct from the species of Apis. Nevertheless, both genera are quite closely related and are placed in the subfamily Apinae within the very large family Apidae, which includes many non-social bees too. 

The term "true honey bees" is just a common name for the bees in the genus Apis, as opposed to other honey bees like bumble bees (genus Bombus) and Melipona and its close relatives such as Trigona.

As far as differentiating Melipona from other bees goes, that is a bit more tricky. There is a recent book which provides keys and illustrations to the genera. It is Volume 7 of Abc Taxa, by Eardley, Kuhlmann and Pauly, 2010, and is available free on request from Dr Yves Samyn ([email protected]). You can find more information about it at www.biodiv.be.

I hope that has been useful.
All the best.
Denis Brothers

------------------------------


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

dehavik said:


> ....but has anyone purchased it from abroad?


You can learn more about stingless bee honey and buy it at:
http://www.melipona.org/

It's interesting, even these folks differentiate between honey bees and stingless bees. Another difference between cab and honey is that the cab is pasteurized to prevent fermentation due to the chemical difference between cab and honey. So if you like the benefits of raw, unpasteurized honey, stingless bee honey (cab) may not be your thing.

It's also not extracted like true honey, but has to be sucked out with a medical aspirator (AspiraMax MA-520).


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

'The term "true honey bees" is just a common name for the bees in the genus Apis, as opposed to other honey bees like bumble bees (genus Bombus) and Melipona and its close relatives such as Trigona.'

So, I didn't go far afield when insisting that 'Honeybees' are apis species from which honey is gathered, and 'honey bees' are Apidae (he brings it down to Apinae) that are used to gather honey.

Let me post this link so that you can take a phylogenetic view of how these honey bees are related:

http://nature.berkeley.edu/~sramirez/Publications_files/Melipona DOI.pdf

It's interesting to note that many Melipona bees are more recently evolved species of honey bees.

I'm still stewed that the ESA's definition of 'honey bee' is arbitrary and harmful to indigenous Melipona/Trigona beekeepers. It's the 'ivory tower' syndrome.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> It's the 'ivory tower' syndrome.


Sorry. Couldn't resist. You left yourself wide open.

 Yours or theirs?  pa, dump, dump.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk:

'WLC' stands for wildlife conservation.
I've paid my 'dues' in the field.

This thread came about because indigenous beekeepers are very important to the conservation of native pollinators. Despite the fact that they've kept 'honey bees', and gathered their 'honey' for thousands of years, 'definitions' created by various organizations have found a way to say that their bees aren't 'honey bees' and their honey isn't 'honey'.

It's no surprise that major honey producing contries like Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina have closed honey markets to indigenous Melipona and Trigona beekeepers. But, what's also surprising is that an organization with a stated mission of the conservation of native insects, like the ESA, would contribute to the closing of those markets via an arbitrary definition and remove major incentives for indigenous beekeepers to conserve Melipona and Trigona honey bee species.

Of course, there's the usual 'equality' message on the bottom of your posts. But, this 'definition' topic goes beyond equality. It's also a conservation of native pollinators issue.


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

WLC:
No, you weren't far afield at all with your definition of honey and honeybee. What you boys have been butting heads on a message board about is the fact that it's not far afield to disagree with your definitions.

According to that Melipona site I provided, the rainforests do not depend on stingless bees as you suggested, but rather the bees depend on the rain forest for survival. Hopefully we can preserve both, as both are important.

There isn't much of a market for cab in the very countries where it is produced. Whose fault is that? What observations have you made that lead you to believe that the indigenous people have the ability to supply a global market for cab, and that they are not being allowed to? 

If I was marketing their cab, I would design my whole campaign to stress that cab is not honey, it's completely different, and I'd charge triple the price of regular honey, like Ted said it fetches. 

Also, By---er, I mean the man whose name we shall not say, posted earlier (it's gone now, sadly) that stingless bee propolis is very big on the world market. If anyone was shutting them out of something unfairly, why do we let them export propolis?

WLC, please let us know a few quick thoughts on each question?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Those bees are exquisitely adapted to their native tropical rain forests. If you want to preserve many of the species of plants in the remaining rainforest fragments, you'll need indigenous beekeepers to help get the job done. Did you think that Melipona/Trigona was only good for pollinating coffee beans?



> There isn't much of a market for cab in the very countries where it is produced. Whose fault is that?


Why are we going with one organization's definition for Melipona/Trigona honey? Aren't they in Peru? By the way, I wouldn't expect that many indigenous beekeepers would have an internet site (with Paypal) or use an aspirator machine to gather honey.

Melipona/Trigona beekeepers measure their harvest in units much less than tons as commercial beekeepers are used to. It's the local markets that they're being excluded from that are a cause for concern.



> What observations have you made that lead you to believe that the indigenous people have the ability to supply a global market for cab, and that they are not being allowed to?


The evidence was provided in links earlier on in the thread. I've said that they are being excluded from local honey markets. Also, you may have missed the ridiculous situation (in Mexico) whereby they had to call their honey 'divine elixir' because their bees aren't considered honey bees and therefore they aren't producing honey. Furthermore, moisture content standards, which are market barriers to Melipona/Trigona honey produced in the tropics, are being applied.



> If anyone was shutting them out of something unfairly, why do we let them export propolis?


Because they're being shut out of the honey markets of Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina. I doubt that the propolis market is a threat to any of the major honey producers.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> sqkcrk:
> 
> 'WLC' stands for wildlife conservation.
> I've paid my 'dues' in the field.
> ...


WLC, I always wondered. Just figured it was your initials. I'd love to hear more about your dues. I'm sure I would learn something and come to a better understanding and respect for you.

Like I said, could resist. Trying to be funny. That's why the smily faces. They're supposed to indicate joking.

I have no problem w/ what native Guatemalans call their bee or how they refer to them generally. I call mine honeybees. Or Honeybees, if at the beginning of a sentence. Just like Queens and queens. I'm not real disciplined a guy, so I am not consistent about it.

Are you familiar w/ www.pfspbees.org? If not, check them out. They are all about Bee Friendly Farming.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

If cab, produced by Malipona, isn't anything like honey, why are they called bees at all? For the same reason we called Native Americans Indians when they aren't from India, but because, supposedly, Columbus thought he was in India?

Milk and cheese from animals other than cows isn't just called cheese, but is called goat cheese or sheep cheese, as is true of their milk too. Are they all considered bovinus bovinea? I don't think so. Or does this just muddy the waters? And let's not forget Sea Cows, they produce milk too.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sckqrk:

You keep going off topic. 

Even though the topic is 'the spelling' of honeybee/honey bees (as usual, it wasn't the main point of the original debate), we know that we're talking about how something as trivial as the definition for honey bee and honey can have unanticipated consequences.

I'd expect that commercial beekeepers/honey producers would do everything possible to protect their own business interests. However, I don't think that they would have expected a 'chain of unintended consequences' that stretches all the way to the rainforest.

It's outside of their normal experience.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

One never really knows what consequences ones' actions may produce.

"In Nature there are neither rewards nor punishments, there are consequences." Robert Ingersoll


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> The evidence was provided in links earlier on in the thread. I've said that they are being excluded from local honey markets. Also, you may have missed the ridiculous situation (in Mexico) whereby they had to call their honey 'divine elixir' because their bees aren't considered honey bees and therefore they aren't producing honey. Furthermore, moisture content standards, which are market barriers to Melipona/Trigona honey produced in the tropics, are being applied.


So I gather you are suggesting that there is an organized effort to exclude Mayan beekeepers from the market place? If so, you probably are correct. At least in Guatemala, if you are Mayan, then you are poor... very poor.I am sure most Guatemalans of Spanish descent would strongly disagree with me. To my eyes, they remind me of the black man of the early part of the 20th century in this country.They are the most subjugated people I have had the opportunity of visiting with. So to conclude that it is an organized effort to keep their honey off the market might not be too wild a conclusion.


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> ...if you are Mayan, then you are poor... very poor. So to conclude that it is an organized effort to keep their honey off the market might not be too wild a conclusion.


Hmmm, perhaps. I have found in my studies that there is often no need to organize a conspiracy to exclude poor illiterate peasants with few resources from the global marketplace. Life in general seems to have conspired against them sufficiently. 

There are dwindling numbers of people keeping dwindling numbers of stingless bees that produce between 2-4 pounds of honey per hive per year. Please read that sentence again and tell me what beekeepers would bother trying to exclude such an insignificant amount of _cab _from any market. Especially when the AHB down there are producing hundreds of pounds per hive per year. I think the conspiracy against Mayan stingless bees and their human keepers is greatly exaggerated, if not completely fictional.


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

WLC said:


> If you want to preserve many of the species of plants in the remaining rainforest fragments, you'll need indigenous beekeepers to help get the job done.


I hate to disagree, but let me do it nicely. It could be argued that beekeepers are necessary in the U.S.A., because of the huge amount of acreage of non-native crops we depend on here. But the rain forests do not depend on beekeepers to stay alive, because the rain forests have existed for millions of years before humans inhabited the region. Native insects pollinate native plants there, with no help needed from humans at all. Melipona make up a tiny fraction of native pollinators, and domesticated stingless bees kept by humans for cab production are not only a tiny fraction of Melipona species, but the actual number of native beekeepers is only a handful of people. No, if the rain forests depended on domesticated stingless beekeeping for their survival, they would have vanished years ago.

With that said, Melipona are fascinating and valuable, and I hope we can save them.


----------



## CharlieN (Feb 23, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Are you familiar w/ www.pfspbees.org? If not, check them out. They are all about Bee Friendly Farming.


Ran across this org early 2010 and joined up. Think they're doing a bang up job.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

CharlieN said:


> Ran across this org early 2010 and joined up. Think they're doing a bang up job.


Me too.


----------



## mellivore (Jun 27, 2011)

WLC said:


> The topic was, and is, honeybee/honey bee.


Oh, that is correct, for a minute I thought the topic was about empowering indigenous entrepreneurs, saving the rain forests, exclusionary definitions, oppressive naming conventions and the other off topic subjects that we've tolerated so far.

But yes, honeybee/honey bee. Nobody seems to mind whether it is spelled with one word or two. Nobody seems to think it needs to be spelled "Honeybee" except WLC. We all agree that cab could never be marketed as "Honey," without specific qualifications, and it does appear that the professional consensus in the appropriate fields is that to be a honey bee, an insect must be in the Apis genus. 

Very intelligent and very stubborn people on both sides of this issue, but I do have to admit that science, logic, facts and reason only appear to be favoring one side. I have enjoyed this thread, but I have said all I can say in it, without repeating myself or those more informed than myself. 

I'll let you boys have it.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I thought that whole point was this: telling indigenous beekeepers, who have kept honey bees and harvested their honey for thousands of years, that their bees weren't 'honey bees', and they weren't harvesting 'honey', was and is the height of arrogance. 

Goodbye.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

And who is doing that? If they want to call them honeybees I'm not going to know it and they won't hear from me. This is a nonissue.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Here's a piece from the NYTimes that shows how many are reconnecting to their heritage by rejecting the 'hispanic' label:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/04/n...ling-themselves-indian.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion

I told you that there was a resurgence. Perhaps it's more apparent in major cities rather than out in the 'sticks'.

This is very much related to the issue of how labels and definitions can often be culturally biased.

So, to add insult to injury, not only aren't they keeping honey bees, and making honey, they aren't even a 'real' ethnicity. I'm glad to see that they are pushing back.

Like I said, you can't make this stuff up.

There's at least a glimmer of hope that they will be able to conserve their native honey bees, and the honey that they produce, as well as their cultural identity.


----------

