# Does small cell really work?



## peacekeeperapiaries (Jun 23, 2009)

There are several threads on this subject, and as with any other subject many different opinions. Some say it does, some say it does not.


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

SgtMaj said:


> Lately I have been pondering for the simple sake of pondering if small cell really works in the control of Varroa mites...


I have been using small-cell comb from beeswax and plastic foundation, also some foundationless frames where the bees build combs strictly to suit themselves for better than a decade. Before that I used Pierco plastic foundation and the usual commercial beeswax foundation. Curiously I never had any issues with _Varroa_ mites either before I changed to small-cell/foundationless, nor since. I switched to small-cell/foundationless simply because it sounded interesting and I wanted to see if there were any differences that I might be able to notice by doing that. I still haven't decided if there are any obvious differences, but it is fun and interesting to see the bees using comb with those tiny cells (some foundationless comb have cells as small as 4.6mm).


----------



## Dave W (Aug 3, 2002)

Current tests (performed by "professionals") demonstate that mite levels INCREASE in small cell comb. But, to date no test has been "long term". Perhaps levels do first increase and for some reason (may not be due to SC) decrease after colony is "established". Many good, honest beekeepers report having "no mites" w/ SC. They can't ALL be wrong, (or giving untrue inforamation).


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

There are plenty of people doing small cell who don't even know it. The Pierco runs (depending on size and whether it's frames) from 5.2mm to 5.3mm. The Mann Lake PF100 series is 4.95mm. Then you have the actually advertised as 4.9mm wax.

I know with no other change than the foundation size I went from losing all my bees to Varroa to the Varroa coming under control. Now eight years later with all small cell and natural cell, I can barely find any Varroa to count or show people.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm

As far as the commend on capping times, shorter capping times make all the difference in the world not to mention other issues. But if a cell is capped sooner and less Varroa infest it there will be less offspring. If it is capped a shorter period of time by even eight hours, the actual viable offspring drop in half.


----------



## TwT (Aug 5, 2004)

Michael Bush said:


> As far as the commend on capping times, shorter capping times make all the difference in the world not to mention other issues. But if a cell is capped sooner and less Varroa infest it there will be less offspring. If it is capped a shorter period of time by even eight hours, the actual viable offspring drop in half.


Not to stir up a ruckus but if this were true wouldn't it have shown up in those small cell test that Florida and UGA did with drawn out small cell, instead they showed a increase in mites with small cell, even if it would have shown equals mite population capping times still aren't slowing down mites reproducing. I have always heard capping times was the main reason small cell worked, seems through the test this can't be true or mite population would have been considerably less in the small cell hives, does this make since to anyone else, I think if someone wants to use small cell what would it hurt, nothing at all, I just have to question some of the stories when everything I read in test shows different. I know the people that preformed these test and they are Highly respectable people in the bee world. I am not saying small cell doesn't work or have benefits but saying mite levels drop considerably because of capping times when test shows this not to be true is why I posted here, just my opinion


----------



## Dave Burrup (Jul 22, 2008)

TwT
My back ground is in biology, and one of the first things I learned was that often what makes sense to us does not work in the real world that an orgnism lives in. Often the detail of why it works excapes us. Even though we like to think we have the answers we do not. I am not a proponent of small cell, but it obviously works at least for some. I am also convinced that it will not work everywhere. I also think there is a real good chance that there is another factor that has not been identified, it may well not have anything to do with cell size. There are beeks that use large cells that also claim to not have a mite problem.
Dave


----------



## TwT (Aug 5, 2004)

I can agree with that but I was just questioning the capping statement, I always live by "If it isn't broke don't fix it". I am one of those that have no problems with mites and use regular sized foundation but I also have the so called feral hives I got from removals. I got some Italians last year (08) just to steal brood from for nuc production and only one of those still around but my removal hives are still going strong. I kelp the italians in a separate yard.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Let's assume a short term study (which all of them have been) during the drone rearing time of the year (which all of them have been) and make the assumption for the moment that Dee Lusby's "psuedodrone" theory is true, meaning that with large cell the Varroa often mistake large cell workers for drone cells and therefore infest them more. The the Varroa in the large cell hives during that time would be less successful because they are in the wrong cells. The Varroa, during that time would be more successful on the small cell because they are in the drone cells. But later in the year this may shift dramatically when, first of all the small cell workers have not taken damage from the Varroa and second of all the drone rearing drops off and the mites have nowhere to go.

In the end, as Dann Purvis says, "it's not about mite counts. It's about survival". No one seems interested in measuring that. What I do know is that after a couple of years the mite counts dropped to almost nothing on small cell. But that did not take place in the first three months...


----------



## TwT (Aug 5, 2004)

Michael Bush said:


> Let's assume a short term study (which all of them have been) during the drone rearing time of the year (which all of them have been)


a 2 year study is short term using small cell and regressed bee's? I am not saying small cell doesn't work, but I believe if it works for you keep using it, all I was discussing was the statement about capping time's effecting mites



Michael Bush said:


> and make the assumption for the moment that Dee Lusby's "psuedodrone" theory is true, meaning that with large cell the Varroa often mistake large cell workers for drone cells and therefore infest them more. The the Varroa in the large cell hives during that time would be less successful because they are in the wrong cells.


and I always heard it was smell that attracted mites to drones, mites cant feel the size of cell like queens do so I wouldn't think the size of cell has anything to do with a mites choice. I do think they will choose worker cells when drone's aren't being raised. 



Michael Bush said:


> The Varroa, during that time would be more successful on the small cell because they are in the drone cells. But later in the year this may shift dramatically when, first of all the small cell workers have not taken damage from the Varroa and second of all the drone rearing drops off and the mites have nowhere to go.


I thought the test were done all during the year, still if capping time does effect mite production then this time of the year when no drones are being raised small cell would have less mites than regular cell bee's wouldn't you say? but the studies didn't show this, seems capping time has nothing to do with mite reproduction or those studies would have shown this



Michael Bush said:


> In the end, as Dann Purvis says, "it's not about mite counts. It's about survival". No one seems interested in measuring that. What I do know is that after a couple of years the mite counts dropped to almost nothing on small cell. But that did not take place in the first three months...


I agree totally with Dann's statement. on my hives I can pull drone brood at times and not find any mites and sometimes just find one mite, on some hives I may find just a few, but I never find a lot of mites on any hive kinda like what you find but I am not on small cell.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>a 2 year study is short term using small cell and regressed bee's?

I'm haven't kept up with what Jennifer Berry has published recently, but the last I heard it was only a few months.

> I am not saying small cell doesn't work, I personal don't care and believe if it works for you keep using it, all I was discussing was the statement about capping time's effecting mites

If a cell is capped a day early less Varroa enter the cell. If it emerges a with a day less time for the Varroa to reproduce, that's half as many offspring from the Varroa that did enter the cell. If the Varroa have a stronger preference for drone cells on small cell, which I believe they do, then there is less stress on the worker brood from the Varroa.

>and I always heard it was smell that attracted mites to drones, mites cant feel the size of cell like queens do so I wouldn't think the size of cell has anything to do with a mites choice. I do think they will choose worker cells when drone's aren't being raised.

If you listen to Jennifer Berry's presentation at HAS, seems like about a third of the way through, she talks about several studies on the subject. The end result is this. It's both the size, and the smell. When they put drone larvae in worker cells and worker larvae in worker cells the Varroa preferred the drones. When they put worker larvae in worker cells and worker larvae in drone cells the Varroa preferred the worker larvae in the drone cells. So, bottom line is that it is both the smell and the size.

>I thought the test were done all during the year

When her presentation was given at HAS, she had only done a several month study.

> still if capping time does effect mite production then this time of the year when no drones are being raised small cell would have less mites than regular cell bee's wouldn't you say?

Phoretic? If the Varroa were infesting the drones in preference to the workers, they may have been more successful and therefore there might be more phoretic mites. But my experience in the long term is that there were less mites. In the short term, however, it could actually result in a more Varroa at some times and less at other times.

> but the studies didn't show this, seems capping time has nothing to do with mite reproduction or those studies would have shown this

As I said if the majority of the Varroa are infesting the drone cells on the small cell then you could actually end up with more successful reproduction of the mites and less damage to the workers. Shorter capping times on the workers wouldn't have much effect on the results if they are preferring the longer capping times in the drones.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

TwT said:


> I am one of those that have no problems with mites and use regular sized foundation


Could you say the same thing back in 2002?


----------



## TwT (Aug 5, 2004)

couldn't say Barry, I started doing removals the first year I started beekeeping in 04, I missed the bad years when the mites was destroying all the hives, not all my removals or swarm catches fared well but a few hives did, that's the hives I have been expanding on, I still do removals and swarm catches but have test yards to put them in and see if they make it, if they make it 2 years I will move to a another yard and raise from them to see how their daughters do, so far my little project is working pretty good.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

That's fine, but keep in mind that when Lusby's first started SC, and then others picked it up (myself included), there was no one on LC claiming to keep bees without medicating and treating. The whole reason I moved this direction was I refused to go from Apistan onto Checkmite. So there is still something else going on that wasn't there just 8 years ago.


----------



## Dave W (Aug 3, 2002)

>>I thought the test were done all during the year . . .
I can not find ONE test that was made AFTER bees have been on SC for a year or longer. It would be difficult to make a "judgement" after bees had "survived" for a long period of time. How would you "prove" the "cause".


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>It would be difficult to make a "judgement" after bees had "survived" for a long period of time. How would you "prove" the "cause".

It seems like if I had 20 hives or so on large cell in one location and a couple of miles away I had 20 hives or so on small cell and they keep dying off in one location and not the other, that is a fair indication. Granted not a perfect one as other things can happen, but if you were watching for things like pesticide kills, etc. and they are both on similar crops etc. they should have a pretty even chance. I know from the late 1990's to the early 2000's I lost all my large cell hives to Varroa several times, so when I lost none of the small cell to Varroa, that seemed dramatic enough difference for me.


----------



## Omie (Nov 10, 2009)

Michael Bush said:


> I know from the late 1990's to the early 2000's I lost all my large cell hives to Varroa several times, so when I lost none of the small cell to Varroa, that seemed dramatic enough difference for me.


Micheal, was there another correlation at work there, like maybe around that same time period you stopped treating for varroa and your subsequent bees (which by that time you may have switched all to small cell) might have started developing mite resistance due to your cessation of miticide treatments?
I'm just wondering about it and wanted to ask you about that aspect.


----------



## Jim Koenig (Dec 18, 2009)

TwT said:


> I got some Italians last year (08) just to steal brood from for nuc production and only one of those still around but my removal hives are still going strong.


To me this is an interesting observation that genetics plays a significant role in the bees ability to manage mites.


----------



## bigbearomaha (Sep 3, 2009)

It's also worth noting that nothing truly works entirely 'alone' There is the very real possibility that it is the combination of factors at work that makes it achievable. 

no treatment on it's might not be sufficient. 

Small or natural cell alone might not be sufficient. 

combining no treatment and natural cell is possible to bring about the desired effect.

I find that focusing on only one thing is often seldom the answer because few things in the natural world act on their own. It is the coinciding of multiple events or agents, etc.. that produce various actions/results/etc...

Just my own two cent.

Big Bear


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Micheal, was there another correlation at work there, like maybe around that same time period you stopped treating for varroa and your subsequent bees (which by that time you may have switched all to small cell) might have started developing mite resistance due to your cessation of miticide treatments?

No. Breeding from local survivors came later and because I wanted bees that are acclimatized to my area.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm

>Small or natural cell alone might not be sufficient. 

I think genetics is important to things like winter survivability, but small cell was sufficient to resolve my Varroa issues. Still I do recommend people raise their own local queens or find a source of local queens that are surviving without treatments. But the only step I took before resolving the Varroa issues was the cell size.


----------



## DRUR (May 24, 2009)

Hmmm, does small cell really work? I am going to assume here.

Jennifer Barry mentions the Brazilian study by Dr. David De Jong. I will give a summary of the results of that study below, but Brazil has had destructor a lot longer than we have. Also, you might do a Google on Dr. David De Jong and put small cell and other research items and you might be surprised.

I don't know how to make this work out in chart form so please bear with me.

Results of Dr. De Jongs study in which 3 different cell sizes were place in the same colonies:
a=% of workers infested
b=# of mites per 100 bees
c=% increase in mite infestation from "1a and 1b"

1. 4.8 cell size-(a)=10.3; (b)=15.6; 

2. 5.16 cell size-(a)=13.95; (b)=17.7; (c) +35.4%, +13.5%

3. 5.27 cell size-(a)=19.2; (b)=24.4 (c) +86.4%, +56.4%

Don't keep saying there aren't any studies that show that small cell works.

I will say this, I have a completely different way of looking at things than Jennifer, not to say I am right and she is wrong. 

First, she touts GMO (genitic modification of organisms) as being successful. I don't agree at all.

Second, I have listened to her assumptions and her analysis of her results, and how the study was conducted, and I personally don't think it shows anything reliable nor useful. No disrespect to Jennifer but we simply have a different way at looking, viewing, and anylising things.

Kindest Regards


----------



## DRUR (May 24, 2009)

Below please see some interesting quotes from Dr. David De Jong related to this study. I pulled these off the Internet and will be looking for more.

"_Varroa mite infestation is also increased in colonies that are closer together, as is the potential for other diseases like American foulbrood. This is because weak colonies become reservoirs for parasites and diseases that then are easily spread to nearby hives by robbing or drifting bees. *Development of susceptible colonies is encouraged by beekeepers using both antibiotics for bacterial control and chemicals to lower mite populations.* *One of the lessons of Brazil is that a low population of mites can be tolerated by honey bees indefinitely without treatment. The Africanized honey bee is an example of how bees being left alone can and have come to terms with challenges in their environment posed by diseases and pests.* *There are many resistance mechanisms in healthy bees, but these are all too often ignored and compromised by beekeepers in search of a “quick fix.”* 
*When looking at how honey bees resist diseases and parasites, one cannot ignore the effect of cell size, Dr. De Jong concluded.* There is some anecdotal evidence that this can play a significant role in colony health, but little formal research to confirm the idea. Nevertheless, in Brazil the use of smaller cell size foundation (4.7 to 4.9 millimeter cell width) is recommended because it is considered the “normal” size of Africanized honey bee comb. *Most regular foundation has cells 5.2 to 5.4 millimeters in width and often results in higher mite infestation in the colonies. Dr. De Jong urged beekeepers and researchers not to ignore the significance of cell size in overall colony health.*_" (emphasis added)


----------



## 67630 (Jul 17, 2008)

Why is it everything has to become overcomplicated? If you want to know if small cell works, buy some small cell foundation or go foundationless and try it yourself and who cares what the scientists and college professors who dabble in bees say.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

michael-bees said:


> If you want to know if small cell works, buy some small cell foundation or go foundationless and try it yourself


I did and it didn't.


----------



## 67630 (Jul 17, 2008)

beemandan said:


> I did and it didn't.


OK so i guess its
1 for sc
1 against sc

Works in ny.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>"Varroa mite infestation is also increased in colonies that are closer together, as is the potential for other diseases..."

As we keep saying...


----------



## sg10 (Jan 1, 2010)

Hello everyone first posting. Have been reading and learning from all of you for about three years now. Began my bee experience out of concern my local commercial guy would not be able to survive the loses of ccd. We have tropical fruit trees (Miami Florida) and need pollinators. I started with 5.4 wired frames with wired foundation. My first year loses were devastating even with my mentors help ( 40 year veteran bee keeper ) Have experimented with plastic frames, the standard woodware with 5.4, frames with triangle guide on top, frames with nothing at all and currently have settled to 4.9 starter strips held in place by wedge. The strips I cut as wide as the bottom board on the frames get about ten strips from each sheet of foundation. Although I own an extractor I find that for my 50 hives the wireless frames to cut crush and strain is my preference. This way I also harvest wax. This past year I lost only 5 out of my 50 hives more than made up with swarms from my own bees. Bought some chemicals early on never used them refused to mix poison with the bees food and possibly honey I would be consuming. My biggest problem as of late is keeping these guys from swarming. Currently trying checkering and inverting brood chambers. So for what is worth my observation is 4.9 is the way to go. My opinion smaller bees more bees per box,less fuel per flight, less days in frames so more space for more bees, smaller bee more nimble in and out of flowers better pollination. Some say smaller bee fly further, easier to go through excluder, easier to locate queen in box, more wall per frame less honey but more wax, and last but not least smaller bee gets in your suit easier and will keep arthritis away ha ha.
PtL
Sg10


----------



## 11x (May 14, 2009)

the way i read it also says it has to do with the fact that the smaller size cells leave less room for the varoa/multipal varroa to grow.


----------



## Myron Denny (Sep 27, 2009)

SG10,
I would like more of the particulars about your use of small cell.

I am confussed please explain how you are attaching the starter strips. 

Are these starter strips 1" wide by full frame length nailed in at the top?

or 1" wide by frame height nailed in the middle of the frame top to bottom?

Are the starter strips you use 4.9mm or 5.4mm or some other size? 

Are you using screened bottom boards?

Are mites or SHB a problem in your area?

What variety of bees are you using?

How much honey do you average per hive?


----------



## sg10 (Jan 1, 2010)

I cut strips using a thin sharp knife using the bottom board of a frame as guide this will give you about 10 strips per sheet of foundation. I first went from 5.4 to 4.9 found some hives would draw out the smaller size and others would make a mess or even draw larger on top of the 4.9 strips. The swarms I place directly on 4.9 with very good results not only do they start well on the smaller foundation but the frames with strips keeps them in the box. I think they rather stay in a box with strips because it allows them to stay together as a swarm on a tree not in small groups behind sheets of foundation. As for the trouble makers I put in 5.1 and once they gut use to that went to 4.9. I attach the strips on top using the wedge just as if I was attaching a full sheet. I found that if its a super works better just above the brood chamber in some cases when i placed them to far up they started drawing from the bottom of the frame and then tabled over half way up. Also a single drawn frame in the middle of a fresh box is a great help to get them up and working properly. It is also important to have level hives this will aid the bees to keep the cone centered on the frames. once you have your bees on this system with no wires when you harvest each frame you cut out the cone leaving two or three rouse on top and you don't need to clean out frames to install new strips they will start drawing right below the strip of cone you left on your frames.
We do have a mite problem and a beetle problem specially beetles see my post about bottom boards and beetles at http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=236275&goto=nextoldest. 
As for the variety of bees reading some of the materials from the great old timers that pour out there experience for us new comers to benefit from thier knowledge, I learned one thing well. If you want good bees that will survive the widest gene pool will give you the best result. So I gut queens from Hawaii,texas even Russian artificially inseminated queens. I also picked up any and all swarms and hives in trees and buildings. I even picked up a hive that I later determined were africanized. They were mean when I picked them up but when i gut them home opened the box and it emptied out and all gut on me. It took a while of walking around to get them off, I waited for night fall and sealed the box and burt them that very night. 
As for the yield per box I keep good records I use a small recorder and record all info on hives as I work on them and keep a excel file with all the info but have never averaged the yield, to many irons on the fire. 
So again I say I loose very little hives have never used treatments of any kind , keep my hives in an area with Beatles and mites and occasional afb .
I credit my success firts to 4.9, then to screen bottom boards with hive beetles traps below, hives off the ground with water barriers on all four legs of the stand a good wide gene pool and burn any dead hive that I cant be sure what caused its demise.
Side note lost one last week with characteristics of ccd, emerging brood left behind no adult bees in box some stores and very litle betlle or wax moth action. Hope not an oman of things to come.


----------

