# Feral bees no different from managed bees



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

This report is just out on PLoS. It suggests that feral bees are not different from managed bees



> Nosemosis C is an emerging disease in Europe caused
> by N. ceranae, yet is found to be well established in feral
> colonies. This result could suggest a degree of parasite perturbation
> between feral and managed populations.
> ...


Thompson CE, Biesmeijer JC, Allnutt TR, Pietravalle S, Budge GE (2014) Parasite Pressures on Feral Honey Bees (Apis mellifera sp.). PLoS ONE 9(8):


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

lets see how this sits with the modern fantasy beekeepers. should be fun.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

_an increasing proportion of viruliferous Varroa mites has been
linked to reduced colony survival
_
Are you now buying into the prospect of more/less virulent mites? It seems like in a past post you thought it was a legend. Just curious.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

Beemandan, Who is the "You" that your post is directed to? I don't think the writer of this report is engaged in this conversation.

Is viruliferous a condition of being more or less susceptible to viruses or more o less infested with them?

A quick search of it's definition shows this.

containing, producing, or conveying an agent of infection and especially a virus <viruliferous insects>

A carrier of a virus is not necessary susceptible to it. In fact the most efficient carrier would not be.

I am not sure how an organism not susceptible to a virus would then be more or lees likely to be a carrier of that virus. The only thing I can think of is it's likelihood of being exposed to it. I don't think organisms develop resistance to viruses they are not susceptible to. Sort of like thinking an animal develops resistance to dirt. It is a neutral issue for the infested organism. Such a virus could actually be beneficial to the mite although it is harmful to the bee. There is much discussion here concerning the micro ecology of an organism. Perhaps teh DWV is a beneficial virus to the mite wile being lethal to the bee.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Daniel Y said:


> Beemandan, Who is the "You" that your post is directed to?


 I thought it was obvious that I was referring to the original poster.




Daniel Y said:


> I don't think the writer of this report is engaged in this conversation.


No kidding......


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

My bees are just fine, thank you - 5th season and going strong. Haters gonna' hate.


----------



## stan.vick (Dec 19, 2010)

I am curious how they found any feral bee colonies surviving, since they have proven how sickly they are. How many generations have they been feral,? In my area which is almost completely void of managed bees the ferals have been surviving for at least eight years that I know of, maybe these were only one generation removed from managed colonies that had been treated for many generations, which would account for their poor survival abilities.
I echo Paul McCarty's statement, mine are doing just fine. I admit they do have mites but my untreated hives are surviving regardless of the mites and do better each year.


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

Yep - better every year, and they do have mites - they seem to just live with them. My only losses to mites have been to bees I bought. I am holding at 28 hives at this point beacuse I don't want to work myself to death as a side job.


----------



## Beeonefarms (Nov 22, 2013)

Gotta love that New mexican spirit... Land of enchantment... Thats where im from and that same attitude towards working with bees has kept them alive. so far so good mites and all..


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

Yes, pretty darn hardy. My bees are NM bees too. All based from either feral recoveries bred for workability, or NM Zia queens open mated for my area. No matter how you slice it they are all basically regional NM bees. Never had any issues with them.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

beemandan said:


> I thought it was obvious that I was referring to the original poster.
> 
> 
> 
> No kidding......


It woudl make since to me that the 'You" you directed the question to would be the person that wrote it.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Daniel Y said:


> It woudl make since to me that the 'You" you directed the question to would be the person that wrote it.


In my opinion....that might be likely if you (DanielY for clarification) only half read my (beemandan for clarification) original post. 
In it I (beemandan for clarification) also wrote:


beemandan said:


> It seems like in a past post you thought it was a legend.


I (beemandan for clarification) am unaware of any posts from the following:
Thompson CE, Biesmeijer JC, Allnutt TR, Pietravalle S, Budge GE
On the other hand the op (peterloringborst for clarification) has many.
I (beemandan for clarification) hope this clears it up for you (DanielY for clarification)


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

Why would you think that Peter posting someone elses opinion has changed his? I don't' find anything in the OP that indicates what Peter thinks of it. I find it strange that you would come to such a conclusion. So I am merely exploring what I find to be an oddity.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

> Why would you think that Peter posting someone elses opinion has changed his? I don't' find anything in the OP that indicates what Peter thinks of it._ I find it strange that you would come to such a conclusion._


Good gravy, me too. I don't filter everything I read and report simply what fits with what I already think. I don't have any idea what the whole picture is in any case. 

I try to see as many viewpoints as possible, hoping to get the _big picture_, but it may be that the picture is just too big for one person to_ get it._ Fault me for trying. 

I am not promoting any ideology; I regard ideologies as the refuge of the fearful and/or the lazy.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

> My bees are just fine, thank you - 5th season and going strong. Haters gonna' hate.


Do you honestly think this adds one cent to the discussion? Nobody asked you how your bees were. The topic is about whether feral bees represent a distinct population from managed bees. If this doesn't interest you, don't get involved.


----------



## Mbeck (Apr 27, 2011)

"Interestingly managed colonies not treated for Varroa".
Is this statement just a different way of saying feral bees in a box?

What are "feral" bees?
I don't think I believe there is such a thing.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Daniel Y said:


> Why would you think that Peter posting someone elses opinion has changed his?


I have no idea why you are obsessed with this. Evidently you still failed to read my entire initial post.



beemandan said:


> Just curious.


I was simply wondering if he had changed his mind on the subject.....just asking. 
Sheesh!


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

> What are "feral" bees? I don't think I believe there is such a thing.


Generally, it refers to bees living in the wild. Whether the bees are different or not from hive bees is the issue. This paper suggests not.


----------

