# Testing Soybean Cultivars, Cited in the Literature, for Honeybee Forage.



## enjambres (Jun 30, 2013)

What did you treat them with to improve attractiveness? I'm racking my brain for a seed treament that could do that.

Also, I realize you're in the City, but isn't it really early for beans? I'm north of Albany and I'm a month away from those temps.

Enj.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

enjambres:

I'm glad you asked.

After reading about the discovery of Sweet 9, a nectar transporter protein in the flower of the soybean, I decided to see if I could make polyploid soybeans. The idea being, more copies of Sweet 9, etc. , would mean more nectar.

Colchicine has already been tried on soybeans over 50 years ago with poor results, so I used a different chemical that can make polyploid cells by a different mechanism.

I settled on camphor which can cause DNA endoreduplication (sometimes called endonuclear polyploidization or endonuclear mitosis).

I simply dipped soybean seeds in camphor spirits, allowed them to dry, and then planted them.

I've already done one preliminary test that was encouraging.

Yes, it is early to plant soybeans.

However, the beans I'm planting have four maturity groups.

Hark is group I, Corsoy is group II, Wayne is group III, and Clark is group IV. 

I understand that soybeans are short day plants, but I wanted to get them in slightly early for some practical reasons.

It will give me time to order, and replant, new soybeans if I like the results.


----------



## hilreal (Aug 16, 2005)

Biggest danger to planting this early will be frost (I am assuming these are planted outside). Corn can take a good nipping but it will wipe out dicots. You are correct soybeans flower in response to day length so the maturity group indicates what day length will trigger flowering (not all are "short day"), unlike other crops that flower after so many heat units/days. This will be modified somewhat based on temperatures also. I am guessing that you are in a group II or III maturity zone. 

"Planting a specific variety farther north than its adapted maturity range will
extend the period of vegetative growth, delay flowering and delay
maturity due to the extended summer daylength and cooler temperatures.
Likewise, planting a variety farther south than its adapted range will
shorten the vegetative growth period, cause earlier flowering and result
in an earlier maturity due to shorter summer daylength and warmer
temperatures." 

http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/plantsci/rowcrops/a1174/a1174.pdf

Please keep us posted. I've tried to encourage some of my soybean breeder coleagues to work on increasing nectar / bee attractiveness but the market for such a trait is limited. There is some interest from the groups working on hybrid soybean production.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Today, I've planted Wayne, Corsoy, Clark, and Hark soybeans, both untreated and treated, to test their attractiveness as forage for Honeybees.

Where do you find a field to plant soybeans in NYC? Central Park?


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Me Bush you silly man. They are planted in the virtual fields of Tamaguchi.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

I wonder if the other residents of the building objected to the _tractor _in the elevator? :scratch:


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

How did the planter fit down the hallway?


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Will these seed trials be reviewed and published? How will global warming change the results?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> >Today, I've planted Wayne, Corsoy, Clark, and Hark soybeans, both untreated and treated, to test their attractiveness as forage for Honeybees.
> Where do you find a field to plant soybeans in NYC? Central Park?


The cultivars came from the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection.

They'll send 50 seeds each. If you consider that the seeds don't have a 100% germination rate, a 3' x 3' x 2' planter on the rooftop garden has more than enough space to hold them all if I plant them in rows of 3 across-2" apart. 

These seeds are pre-GMO soybeans.

They're pretty much similar to soybeans an organic gardener might plant.

If I wanted to obtain enough seeds to cover a large area, I'd have to contract that out.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga said:


> Will these seed trials be reviewed and published? How will global warming change the results?


I chose these cultivars because they were already reviewed in the scientific literature (a long time ago) as being attractive to Honeybees.

As for Global warming, I'm one step ahead of that. Why do you think I'm planting cultivars from maturity groups I, II, III, and IV? 

By the way, I'm the first one to use Camphor on soybeans to obtain polyploid plants.

In fact, I can't find any citation where camphor was used in this manner on a plant.

As I've said, I've obtained encouraging results. By encouraging, I mean vigorous growth, auxillary branching from the cotyledon and unfoliate leaves by V3.

However, I'm doing it all in one large planter, using multiple cultivars, to confirm that I'm obtaining polyploid soybeans.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> >Today, I've planted Wayne, Corsoy, Clark, and Hark soybeans, both untreated and treated, to test their attractiveness as forage for Honeybees.
> 
> Where do you find a field to plant soybeans in NYC? Central Park?


Just what I wondered. Where did you plant and how big a space?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> Just what I wondered. Where did you plant and how big a space?


I already answered that.

It's a 3' by 3' planter. A large one,

On the rooftop garden.

I did some tests in an environmental chamber (indoors) over the past month.

Today, I transferred the putative polyploid soybean plant to a light rack (indoors).

I also have a small greenhouse on the roof as well. I even have drip, fog, mist, and spray irrigation capabilities.

There's no reason to mention that I have an ongoing relationship with a group that has a large organic farm in upstate New York.

Mark, I'm not resource poor in that regard.

Right now, I'm testing out cultivars from a germplasm repository, to see if they are, in fact, attractive to Honeybees (make that MY Honeybees).

It's not that big a deal. Unless, one of the cultivars is a hit with the 'girls'.

What may be a big deal is the use of camphor to make polyploid plants.

That isn't in the literature.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Yes, I saw that later, after I replied to Michael's Post. It will be interesting to see if that plot is enough to attract the bee's attention.

Isn't champhor something folks used to use as a poltice applied to the chest of a person w/ bronchitis or whooping cough?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> Yes, I saw that later, after I replied to Michael's Post. It will be interesting to see if that plot is enough to attract the bee's attention. Isn't champhor something folks used to use as a poltice applied to the chest of a person w/ bronchitis or whooping cough?


I bought the camphor spirits at a local pharmacy, so yes.

While it's a common ingredient in many over the counter products, one should still use caution when using it as camphor spirits.

For example, I dipped the seeds in camphor spirits under a chemical hood. Any fumes are pulled up by the fan and blown outside.

Just so we're clear, I'm using camphor to make polyploid soybeans specifically to see if I can increase their attractiveness to Honeybees.

I think that the polyploid soybeans might make more nectar and/or have a higher sugar content in the nectar produced.

Especially in the cultivars chosen.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Maybe WLC can publish his results with the 3-D printer that he used to be the first person to produce a beekeeping item via a 3-D printer. I'm sure that using a 3-D printer to publish results of a study would be another 'first' and a real _feather _in WLC's cap.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

:lpf:

Didn't you forget something, Graham?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Maybe WLC can publish his results with the 3-D printer that he used to be the first person to produce a beekeeping item via a 3-D printer. I'm sure that using a 3-D printer to publish results of a study would be another 'first' and a real _feather _in WLC's cap.


Let's see, Wayne, Corsoy, Clark, and Hark are being tested by me based on the work of others in the scientific literature.

That's not a first, I'm just seeing if the results reported are reproducible.

It also looks like I've been able to produce DNA endoreduplication in a soybean using camphor.

That has to be confirmed as of yet. It will also have to be reproducible by others.

However, it's a lot bigger than simply 3D printing a beekeeing item.

There are 100s of millions of acres of soybean in production worldwide.

Yet, they're still trying to break the 100 bushel per acre mark.

Who knows, maybe this could be of use to soybean seed producers?

So, Rader, what breakthroughs have you been working on lately?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> So, Rader, what breakthroughs have you been working on lately?


Funny you should ask. :lpf:

I have recently been hired:thumbsup: by the Smiley Union at Beesource to act as their '_PR person_'. They certainly appreciate your [indirect] contributions towards keeping smileys gainfully employed.

:bus :banana:

P.S. Mark, my earlier post was _serious_. Smileys were not appropriate there.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> !
> Funny you should ask.
> I have recently been hired :thumbsup: by the Smiley Union at Beesource to act a their 'PR person'. They certainly appreciate your [indirect] contributions towards keeping smileys gainfully employed.
> :bus :banana:


So you're saying you're unemployed? 

You need to get out more.

I'd tell you to get hold of some soybeans and camphor spirits for your own experiments, but you would have to be sure that they're not protected intellectual property.

Wayne, Corsoy, Clark, and Hark are so old, someone said his granddad used to plant them. No intellectual property worries there.


----------



## D Semple (Jun 18, 2010)

WLC said:


> I'm using camphor to make polyploid soybeans specifically to see if I can increase their attractiveness to Honeybees.
> 
> I think that the polyploid soybeans might make more nectar and/or have a higher sugar content in the nectar produced.
> 
> Especially in the cultivars chosen.


How will you measure for a larger volume nectar and a higher sugar concentration?

How about some pictures? I'd be curious what a polyploid soybean plant looks like.

Also, where are you going to transfer the seedlings to so they can flower and produce, 2" spacing isn't going to work for very long.

These folks might be interested in your results: http://www.thecombineforum.com/forums/

Don


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

D Semple said:


> How will you measure for a larger volume nectar and a higher sugar concentration?
> How about some pictures? I'd be curious what a polyploid soybean plant looks like.
> Also, where are you going to transfer the seedlings to so they can flower and produce, 2" spacing isn't going to work for very long.
> These folks might be interested in your results: http://www.thecombineforum.com/forums/
> Don


Typically, microcapillary pipettes are used to measure volume. A refractometer is the best I can do for sugar concentrations right now.

I think that qualitative measurements are going to be the best that I can do since I can't control the density of the plantings just yet. Their germination rates will be unpredictable at this early stage. That's what my indoor experiments showed anyhow.

I gave a basic description of my observations, including cotyledon and unifoliate shoots by V3.

My suggestion would be for anyone interested to obtain the cultivars for their own tests.

http://www.ars-grin.gov/npgs/rephomepgs.html

Wayne, Corsoy, Clark, Hark:

PI 548628, PI 548540, PI 548533, PI 548551.

Just cut and paste into your request, and be sure to indicate that you are testing them for Honeybee forage.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Just what we need, a neonic crop made specifically to lure bees onto it.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

They're non GMOs.

They're also most likely going to be used by organic growers anyway.

Why would you think that they're 'neonic' crops?


----------



## Lauri (Feb 1, 2012)

I hope Granny next door doesn't plant herbs on her window sill...Your trial will be shot all to ..well, you know


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I've already got plenty of lavender growing.

Who needs granny?


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

GMO has nothing to do with it. Commercial crops are largely treated with neonic coatings on the seeds, which then go into the pollen and nectar. Corn gets most of the focus, but soybeans get them too.

Farmers and breeders alike look for yields. If this experiment produces a soy been that is highly attractive to bees but offers poor yields, not even organic farmers will buy it. If it offers increased yields, though, then it's a trait that we'd eventually see implemented in conventional agriculture, GM and otherwise. May as well just take a gallon of insecticides, mix it with 2:1 syrup, and leave it on an open field. Intentionally luring bees onto crops that vastly use systemic insecticides is intentionally intoxicating them.


----------



## Lauri (Feb 1, 2012)

WLC said:


> I've already got plenty of lavender growing.
> 
> Who needs granny?



Errr...Dude..that's not lavender


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Lauri:

WLC says no to that.

I actually have gathered seeds from the lavender growing on the roof and spread them locally.

Just to increase the amount of forage.

So, don't Dis' my lavender.


----------



## hilreal (Aug 16, 2005)

How will you determine ploidy level? With all due respect, I am not sure 30-40 plants growing in a roof top bed in NYC is a very realistic estimate of a soybean plants potential in the real world. Yes, those are very old varieties and not competetive in todays world of agriculture, but if you could prove the concept. I am guessing that camphor is not going to be strong enough or taken up in high enough concentrations to cause a change in ploidy level. We have a hard enough time getting it done with nasty stuff like colchicine and then it is unpredictable often requiring hundreds of plants to get one success. What level of ploidy are you hoping for? Do you think you can pass along this to the next generation or will all of the seed need treating? In other polyploidy crops producing seed can be a challange.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hilreal said:


> How will you determine ploidy level? With all due respect, I am not sure 30-40 plants growing in a roof top bed in NYC is a very realistic estimate of a soybean plants potential in the real world. Yes, those are very old varieties and not competetive in todays world of agriculture, but if you could prove the concept. I am guessing that camphor is not going to be strong enough or taken up in high enough concentrations to cause a change in ploidy level. We have a hard enough time getting it done with nasty stuff like colchicine and then it is unpredictable often requiring hundreds of plants to get one success.


All I plan to do is a root tip squash. While I don't expect to get an accurate count, I might be able to say with some degrees of certainty that the plant was polyploid.

It's not a large sample. But, I hope to get enough seeds for a follow up.

Perhaps then I can at least have more options.

I wouldn't call this a definitive study. It's an exploration. I don't know if the cultivars are attractive to bees, and I haven't proven DNA endereduplication to myself as of yet.

You would be surprised how often camphor has been found to cause polyploidy in studies in other species. They've used lower concentrations than I'm using.



> What level of ploidy are you hoping for? Do you think you can pass along this to the next generation or will all of the seed need treating? In other polyploidy crops producing seed can be a challange.


4n or better. I don't know if the seeds will be viable, if any.

Right now, I'm just looking for an increase in attractiveness for foraging bees. Nothing more. I simply want to amplify genes quickly and cheaply.

But, any evidence that camphor can produce endoreduplication is non trivial.

PLEASE be my guest and try it out for yourself (on soybeans, or other seeds).

PS-Camphor work by a different mechanism than colchicine, and it's worth noting.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>It will be interesting to see if that plot is enough to attract the bee's attention.

That's what I'm thinking. They usually need an acre or so of something to get them interested in gearing up to harvest it....


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

WLC said:


> By the way, I'm the first one to use Camphor on soybeans to obtain polyploid plants. In fact, I can't find any citation where camphor was used in this manner on a plant.


It all sounds like a poorly planned hair-brained experiment to me. Here are a few questions that I can come up with off the top of my head (If I wasted another minute of my life thinking about it, I could probably come up with more, but I am not going to do that.) 




How do you know that you are the first one to use camphor? Seems like a rather grandiose claim.
How do you know your soybean plants will be polyploid?
How do you know polyploid will increase honeybee attractiveness?
What is honeybee attractiveness?
How are you going to measure honeybee attractiveness?
4 cultivars with 50 seeds each in a 3’ by 3’ area? Cramming then in there a little tight aren’t you (even at a low germination rate).
How do you have a good control group in a 3' by 3' space?
How are you going to get any statistical meaning out of such a small sample group?


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

WLC said:


> They're non GMOs.
> 
> They're also most likely going to be used by organic growers anyway.
> 
> Why would you think that they're 'neonic' crops?


Neonic pesticides can be used on any plant, whether it is GMO or not. Just because it is a GMO, it doesnt mean that it is treated with neonics. 

The supposed plants that you are growing _*will be*_ GMOs. Does that mean that you are also going to treat them with neonics?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Nabber86 said:


> It all sounds like a poorly planned hair-brained experiment to me. Here are a few questions that I can come up with off the top of my head (If I wasted another minute of my life thinking about it, I could probably come up with more, but I am not going to do that.)
> 
> How do you know that you are the first one to use camphor? Seems like a rather grandiose claim.
> How do you know your soybean plants will be polyploid?
> ...


Nabber:

Your questions/criticisms have been duty noted and filed.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Nabber86 said:


> Neonic pesticides can be used on any plant, whether it is GMO or not. Just because it is a GMO, it doesnt mean that it is treated with neonics. The supposed plants that you are growing _*will be*_ GMOs. Does that mean that you are also going to treat them with neonics?


Like I said, I'm interested in amplifying genes quickly and cheaply.

One last time, those putative polyploid plants might be more attractive to bees.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> >It will be interesting to see if that plot is enough to attract the bee's attention.
> 
> That's what I'm thinking. They usually need an acre or so of something to get them interested in gearing up to harvest it....


We won't know until they actually start flowering.

They were described as being attractive to bees.

For instance, Erickson-1975 described Hark as being high in overall attractivenees to bees.

What makes Hark interesting is that it has open flowers, unlike modern cultivars.

Mike, no one is currently testing these cultivars.

Having examined their pedigrees, most modern cultivars contain the parents involved.

Someone had to take the next step: they're in the planter, in untreated and treated groups, we'll have 2-4 inches of rain by tomorrow, temps will hit 70 degrees F, and nighttime temps will stay in the low 50s for a few days.

The test is in progress, and who knows what the results will be?


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Keep these terms in mind when you report your "research".


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Nabber, thanks for the help. 

But, the cultivars have been planted.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga said:


> Has anyone else on Tamaguchi achieved this level before?


The seeds, that are being rained on as we speak, are from the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection. (Not Tamaguchi.)

I'm not aware of anyone else who is examining them for Honeybee forage.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> One last time, those putative polyploid plants might be more attractive to bees.


And again: why? Why would we want our bees on soy? Are you going to try the same with corn, next?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Dominic said:


> And again: why? Why would we want our bees on soy? Are you going to try the same with corn, next?


We plant over 70 million acres of soy in the U.S. . Studies have shown that Honeybees can increase soybean yields in the double digit percentages. Beekeepers have reported excellent honey harvests from soybeans.

I've said it before: soybeans are the new frontier in pollination.

Perhaps something similar could apply to corn.

Dominic, I've only just planted the soybeans on Monday.

It's not the end of the world.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

WLC said:


> The seeds, that are being rained on as we speak, are from the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection. (Not Tamaguchi.)
> 
> I'm not aware of anyone else who is examining them for Honeybee forage.


But does the USDA know their seeds are missing?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga said:


> But does the USDA know their seeds are missing?


The curator, Randall Nelson, included a nice cover letter with the strains I received.

Sending seeds for my own stated goals is part of their mission.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

I don't suppose you would mind showing us a copy of that letter?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga said:


> I don't suppose you would mind showing us a copy of that letter?


Your request has been noted and filed. 

It's in the same file as your 'tamaguchi'.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

So umm, would that be a no?


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Haraga said:


> So umm, would that be a no?



Your "no" has been noted. 

You can also expect the same response for any request for the "results" of the hair-brained folly (probably best described as a one-sided circle jerk).


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

The test is running, and I'll report the results.

Nabber, as for the "one sided circle jerk" comment, a couple of you have been yanking on mine throughout the thread.

You can let go now.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> We plant over 70 million acres of soy in the U.S. . Studies have shown that Honeybees can increase soybean yields in the double digit percentages. Beekeepers have reported excellent honey harvests from soybeans.
> 
> I've said it before: soybeans are the new frontier in pollination.
> 
> ...


Until systemic insecticides's homologations are revoked, I cannot see this as anything else than a very dangerous path.

As long as the commercial crops are unattractive, I have tools at my disposal to reduce exposure, such as covering the hives at harvest, providing fresh water, and sowing/locating more interesting forage. They'll still be exposed somewhat, but in a much more limited fashion.

If you make the commercial crops attractive to bees, then how the heck do I protect my bees from their neonic pollen and nectar?

Are the bee deserts that are commercial crops good for beekeeping? Not really. But luring the bees into those deathtraps would be worse.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Very good point Dominic. 
WLC, in regards to some of your last posts, don't make statements you can't show us proof of because you will get called on it. I do like the idea of what you are doing though. It's nice to see things like this go on without some form of taxpayer grant or seed company monopoly.


----------



## Brad Bee (Apr 15, 2013)

How are you going to measure how attractive the soybeans are to the bees? I applaud your efforts but I'm pretty certain that a tub of soybeans is not going to show anything useful... YMMV


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I've always found it difficult to measure the attractiveness of any given plant because:
1) bees are loyal and will keep working a previously blooming plant until it runs out and ignore that plant I wish to measure for attractiveness
2) bees prefer large nectar crops (acres of something) in preference to small nectar crops (a handful of plants)
3) bees seem to prefer something a moderate distance away to something closer or further

About the only way to do it is to plant a least an acre of it, and don't bring the bees onto that acre until it is blooming. Then, at least, they can choose between that and other things blooming. But you about need all of those soybeans blooming at once to see which one they prefer over the others. Still unless you had some way to control everything else that was blooming at the time, it's hard to draw firm conclusions...


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga said:


> Very good point Dominic.
> WLC, in regards to some of your last posts, don't make statements you can't show us proof of because you will get called on it. I do like the idea of what you are doing though. It's nice to see things like this go on without some form of taxpayer grant or seed company monopoly.


When you consider that there are over 70 million acres of soybeans planted here in the U.S., I don't think that 9 square feet is going to be 'called' by anyone. Not really. Besides, I'm just trying to see if four cultivars are attractive to bees as claimed in the literature.

I'm testing out soybeans, Honeybees, as well as camphor/DNA endoreduplication because it could make a nice research project for students. It's also something that I'm interested in myself.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Fellas:

Let's not make any assumptions about pollinators and the plants on the rooftop garden.

I've seen plenty of pollinators, including my own bees, visit just a handful of plants.

If those soybeans are attractive, I think the bees will find them.

However, anything can happen.

Please remember that these are vintage soybean cultivars, and I doubt that anyone can simply order 50 pounds of any of the cultivars for immediate delivery.

Nobody is planting acres of Wayne, Corsoy, Hark, or Clark.

It's entirely possible that I'm the only one with a miniscule square foot of each (I'm not counting the putative polyploids). And, since it's unlikely that I'll get 100% germination, it's less than a square foot of each.

It's a small beginning.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Brad Bee said:


> How are you going to measure how attractive the soybeans are to the bees? I applaud your efforts but I'm pretty certain that a tub of soybeans is not going to show anything useful... YMMV


It's going to be mostly qualitative.

While I can report numbers of bees observed foraging, until planting density and other basics are in hand, it's just a test.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

With over 70 million acres of soybeans in the country why not hit the road this summer. Within an easy drive of NYC you can find all the fields of blooming soybeans that you would ever need to do research. Get a list of seed dealers and ask if they have planted a public field trial where you can walk the fields yourself. If you can find one in the proximity of some bee hives, you have hit the jackpot. Who knows, perhaps you will find a commercially grown variety that is attractive to honeybees. I'm not going to knock your experiment I just wouldn't read too much into seeing a bee or two sniffing around it as bees can be curious of lots of things. Hey, at the very least you will get a nice harvest of soybeans to roast.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

How about a commercial beekeeper, contracting out enough acres of the right type of delta soybeans, and putting migratory pallets on them?


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

WLC,

I have seen honey bees forage on soybeans surrounding my hives. But, I don't feel that they put up a significant amount of honey.

So, you may have bees foraging on the beans you have planted. But, that does not equate surplus honey.

You will probably have to try a larger plot to determine if they will make surplus honey. I would start with a maturity group appropriate for the area being planted. What good is a variety if you cannot harvest seed from it? You would need at least a bushel to bushel and a half to plant an acre, depending on planting method.

Here is a link to a discussion by soybean farmers about Corsoy: http://talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=327037&DisplayType=flat&setCookie=1

Here is a list of the state foundation seed or crop improvement associations: http://www.aosca.org/Page/Foundation_Seed_Agencies.aspx?nt=89

When my uncle and grandfather raised soybean seed they bought foundation stock from Illinois Foundation Seed. I checked their website and it does not look like they produce any soybean seed.

Tom


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Thanks, TWall, for the links.

While I'm not depending on the test to do anything more than shed some light on the cultivars involved, I did manage to get some information on Hark.

Hark has open flowers, and it's nectar tested at close to 40% sugar content. It may well prove to be a good forage soybean variety.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Dominic:

Here's a link to help you see a different side of the issue:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/367na1.pdf

Like I said, it's not the end of the world.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> Dominic:
> 
> Here's a link to help you see a different side of the issue:
> 
> ...


Hardly.

Soy is suffering from loss of pollinators? Well, maybe they should use systemic insecticides on it, then, which are largely blamed for pollinator decline.

If you need pollinators for your yields, but your crop is killing said pollinators, then the solution doesn't lie in making your crop more attractive to the few survivors left, but rather in no longer killing the pollinators to begin with.

If systemic insecticides like neonics get banned, then sure, bee-attractive soya would have a lot of nice qualities for it. Until then, it's just making the poison sweeter, and luring bees away from forage that might not kill them.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

The point made was that soybeans yields can be increased more sustainably by using pollinators. 

You could therefore argue that you would need less pesticide to maintain those yields.

I'm still not agreeing with you Dominic.

Your viewpoint is way too extreme IMHO.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I checked their website and it does not look like they produce any soybean seed.

I would think anyone would be paranoid to sell any kind of open pollenated seed that could get crossed with the patented stuff from Monsanto. Monsanto will sue you out of business for having any of their genetics no matter how much you don't want their genetics.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

WLC: Again, there is lots of information out there to prove or disprove your theories. There are lots of test plots all over the farm belt. The yield data is widely publicized by the seed companies to encourage sales. All someone need do is spend some time midsummer walking these test plots and document which, if any, varieties have honey bees or any other pollinators actively working them. If a comparison to the yield data showed an increase in yield it would be a good first step in proving your theory. The biggest challenge is going to be confirming that there are plenty of honey bees nearby. In addition, if beekeepers are reporting rapid declines in hive health in areas where bees are actively working soybeans it might tell us yet another story. Now there's a nice little summer project that could yield meaningful results.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC said:


> The point made was that soybeans yields can be increased more sustainably by using pollinators.


How does soy bean set seed? Does it self pollinate? Wind pollinate? Insect transfer? Is transfer of material from one flower to another w/ soy bean at all? Something I am not aware of.

Now that I am home I can look up soy beans in my USDA Pollination Book.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WLC, ain't you got nuthin' better to do? Why don't you come on up to The North Country and help me go through my hives so I can pick out the ones I want to take to the apple orchards. I'll let you run the smoker and put on protein patties. I'll even let you use the van to go to the movies Saturday evening. Might even let you drive the Bobcat.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> How does soy bean set seed? Does it self pollinate? Wind pollinate? Insect transfer? Is transfer of material from one flower to another w/ soy bean at all? Something I am not aware of. Now that I am home I can look up soy beans in my USDA Pollination Book.


Soybean pod set can be mediated by insect pollination and/or self pollination.

There are thousands of varieties of soybeans, and the big issue is identifying which ones will show the greatest increase in yield from insect pollination.

I've read that soybean flowers are well suited for insect pollination.

But, the current varieties favor self pollination.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> But, the current varieties favor self pollination.


Out in the "Field" - do any soybean producers use anything but selfpollinating varieties?

Are you hypothesizing that pollinator required soybeans might yield more than the currently used varieties?

PS - 30 min later - should have read through entire thread before I asked these silly questions. More of an exercise in pure science.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

There has been a lot of work done examining how Honeybees can improve soybeans yields. The most recent work comes from Brazil.

I'm not quite testing out my own hypothesis since I'm using varieties that the literature says are attractive to Honeybees.

Saying that polyploid soybeans of these types might be more attractive is hypothetical.

As for using camphor to make polyploidy soybeans in the first place, that was sort of hypothetical. I've known for a long time (around 30 years) that camphor can do that to other species. I think that it worked on soybeans from the resulting morphologies I've seen, but I'm repeating the test anyway.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

To answer the question about pollination of soybeans are self-fertile. One of the biggest barriers to breeding soybeans was getting to the flowers before they pollinated themselves. I was told this by one of my undergraduate advisors, a soybean breeder at the Univ. of Illinois.

WLC supposes that breeding for more nectar production will make soybeans more attractive to honeybees. If honeybees work soybeans yields may increase. I wonder what the carbon cost to the plant will?

Tom


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I bet I am wrong about this, but, aren't some plants that bees get pollen from, only pollen, attractive to bees by color, and not the attractant odor of nectar? So, maybe WLC would be more successful by breeding soy bean plants w/ flowers that are attractive to bees by their color.


----------



## Richard Cryberg (May 24, 2013)

I think this adequately summarizes the merit in this project:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLTETaWswCY


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

TWall said:


> To answer the question about pollination of soybeans are self-fertile. One of the biggest barriers to breeding soybeans was getting to the flowers before they pollinated themselves. I was told this by one of my undergraduate advisors, a soybean breeder at the Univ. of Illinois.
> WLC supposes that breeding for more nectar production will make soybeans more attractive to honeybees. If honeybees work soybeans yields may increase. I wonder what the carbon cost to the plant will?
> Tom


How self pollination vs insect mediated pollination works in soybeans is more complicated than that. That's what I'm reading in the research studies available.

As for the metabolic costs of Honeybee mediated pollination vs autopollination, I don't think that anyone can say for sure. Besides, I'm not testing for that any time soon.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> I bet I am wrong about this, but, aren't some plants that bees get pollen from, only pollen, attractive to bees by color, and not the attractant odor of nectar? So, maybe WLC would be more successful by breeding soy bean plants w/ flowers that are attractive to bees by their color.


Bees see nectar guides in UV light. So, I assume they find pollen the same way. I'm not testing for that anytime soon either. I don't have a UV camera.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Am I correct in thinking that all you are reallly testing for is "Will Camphor polyploid older diploid varieties of Soybean?" 

Everything else is just secondary.... or tertiary....


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Richard Cryberg said:


> I think this adequately summarizes the merit in this project:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLTETaWswCY


Like I said to Nabber, "You can let go now." 

Richard, try to remember that South America is not only about to overtake the U.S. in terms of soybean acreage, they're also researching soybean pollination by Honeybees in earnest.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hpm08161947 said:


> Am I correct in thinking that all you are reallly testing for is "Will Camphor polyploid older diploid varieties of Soybean?" Everything else is just secondary.... or tertiary....


It's a gene dosage test. If I can amplify genes in soybeans, will that make them more attractive to bees?

We already know that camphor causes polyploidy in other species, like fungi.

I simply took the next step.

There's an advantage to using polyploidy since it saves time, and it can indicate which cultivar I may want to keep working with.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

TWall said:


> WLC supposes that breeding for more nectar production will make soybeans more attractive to honeybees. If honeybees work soybeans yields may increase. I wonder what the carbon cost to the plant will? Tom


I just saw an image from an article on soybean hybrids that indirectly answers that question. It was right in front of me, but I was looking for something else.

There was the caption for a photo of soybean plants in the same field.

" Figure 1. Green plants have low pod set (not insect pollinator attractive) whereas mature plants with brown pods have high pod set (very insect pollinator attractive; Texas 2005)"

That's an interesting observation regarding pollinator attractiveness, pod set, and maturity in soybeans.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

WLC said:


> You could therefore argue that you would need less pesticide to maintain those yields.
> 
> .


Exactly the opposite. More value, more pesticide used


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian said:


> Exactly the opposite. More value, more pesticide used


Perhaps it's more along the lines of more value via pollinator augmented yields, more IPM.

For example, that caption I mentioned might mean that you wouldn't need to burndown leaves if 'very insect pollinator attractive' soybeans plants, with high pod set, mature early.

I do think that the folks working on pollinator attractive soybeans have made an important observation.

Increased yields via insect pollination means faster maturity and less need for burndowns before harvest.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Soybean "burndowns" before harvest? Where is this done?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

What are burndowns?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

burn downs (Roundup pre harvest applications) are typically done to even out maturity when hot weather doesnt burn down the field and help the crop come in faster... think of different soil conditions within a field, or that lush run through the center of the field. We do the same with wheat sunflowers and even canola in some years. Most years the sun or frost does it for us. lol
I see the angle WLC is tying to make but insect pollination will generally only help with increased seed set and such. All the other variables are influenced by more than just seed set.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

My assumption is it's the use of herbicides to kill any green weeds in a field and help dry the plant out so it can be harvested sooner. I have heard of it on occasion (off label I would guess) in small grain fields with weed problems. Perhaps WLC can shed some light, though.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ian: Is this common in Canada? Never seen it done down here.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

In my area it is called a burnoff. Mostly it is done on chick peas.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian:

I'd say that increased yields, faster maturity, and greater harvestibility, are some positives when discussing pollinator attractive soybean varieties.

Now if only I knew which varieties those were, I might not need to get seeds 50 at a time from a germplasm bank.

It's frustrating.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

jim lyon said:


> Ian: Is this common in Canada? Never seen it done down here.


Ya , its not off label use either. We usually call it pre harvest.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

WLC said:


> Ian:
> 
> I'd say that increased yields, faster maturity, and greater harvestibility, are some positives when discussing pollinator attractive soybean varieties.


As a farmer, looking to grow a crop, pollinator attractiveness is not even on the radar. Farmers dont even know we as beekeepers exist on the country side..lol Sunflower producers dont even consider pollination requirements, even with 10-20% increased seed set. Theya re more concerned about spraying out the midge... which will take the entire crop.

what are farmers thought on pollination? Wind, wind wind WLC, wind...


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

If you mean 'hot air', I wouldn't generalize as to what all farmers think.

By the way, the folks doing the work are agronomists, so I would say that they felt that it's important enough to study.

As for spraying for midges, Honeybees are used as test insects to set the effective dose. So, while other pollinators may be impacted by spraying, Honeybees should keep foraging. That's the theory, anyway.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

WLC said:


> If you mean 'hot air', I wouldn't generalize as to what all farmers think.


and your in a better position to? LOL

ps, agronomists are paid to do this kind of stuff...I hope future breeding efforts favour honeybees, I wouldnt hold my breath on it. The trend for the last 10 years has been away from needing pollinators in just about every crop you can mention


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Well, if it makes you feel any better, the soybean seedlings are starting to crack the surface on the 3' x 3' planter.

I got tired of holding my breath too. So, I decided to run the tests.

What's unique about my own position is that there are no intellectual property restrictions on what I do with any resulting seeds.

Unfortunately, most soybean farmers can't say that anymore.

I can just plant them year after year. Give some seeds away to like minded individuals. You know, grass roots kind of stuff.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

WLC said:


> Unfortunately, most soybean farmers can't say that anymore.


yes we "seem" to be losing control. 

but

we dont have to buy those seeds either...

somone was complaining about this issue on the radio the other day. My take on it, if farmers want old school varieties, they would grow old school varieties. 

WLC, I think the best thing to do with your test trials is to KEEP holding your breath! LOL


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

To me - WLC sounds like he is talking about "Fundamental Research". I do not think he is trying to produce a new killer variety of soybean, more like trying to find out one tiny truism. Most likely he will find nothing, but every now and then basic research turns out some pretty valuable stuff.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

In terms of my original goals of successfully testing known, pollinator attractive, soybean cultivars, I hope that my odds are better than 50:50. 

There was a recent discovery of a nectary sugar transporter protein, SWEET9, and I've already taken the preliminary steps of identifying a potential soybean version of SWEET9, and even generating primers.

Don't forget fellas, I've been known to do DNA barcoding work when I'm rubbed the right way.

hpm:

I think that I've already made at least one nontrivial finding. But, it's a technique or methodology find that isn't directly related to pollinator attractiveness in soybeans. I'll see how far I can pursue the camphor technique.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> The point made was that soybeans yields can be increased more sustainably by using pollinators.
> 
> You could therefore argue that you would need less pesticide to maintain those yields.
> 
> ...


That's a ridiculous arguments. Farmers don't want to maintain yields, they want to maximize them. They invest a lot of money and take a lot of risks, and thus understandably will take the means at their disposal to turn this into profit.

What's extreme about not wanting crops that use systemic insecticides to be more attractive to bees?



Ian said:


> Exactly the opposite. More value, more pesticide used


And more surfaces, despite the equally-ridiculous claims I think I saw in that article that was cited. The more profitable a crop is, the more it'll be grown. We aren't in some planned economy where a central authority dictates what our global needs are and distributes production quotas accordingly. Farmers are individual actors seeking to maximize profits.



WLC said:


> Perhaps it's more along the lines of more value via pollinator augmented yields, more IPM.
> 
> For example, that caption I mentioned might mean that you wouldn't need to burndown leaves if 'very insect pollinator attractive' soybeans plants, with high pod set, mature early.
> 
> ...


So you'd rather trade reduced exposure to herbicides for increased exposure to insecticides?



Ian said:


> As a farmer, looking to grow a crop, pollinator attractiveness is not even on the radar. Farmers dont even know we as beekeepers exist on the country side..lol Sunflower producers dont even consider pollination requirements, even with 10-20% increased seed set. Theya re more concerned about spraying out the midge... which will take the entire crop.
> 
> what are farmers thought on pollination? Wind, wind wind WLC, wind...


And most cultivars developed search for as much pollinator-independence as possible. Bees are insects. Insects destroy crops. Farmers generally don't want to be in a situation where they lose their crop if they don't use insecticides, and lose their crop if they do. Nobody wants to be at the mercy of things they don't control, and if they can remove a variable, like bees, then the happier they are.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Dominic:

We're on different frequencies here.

I tend to approach this issue from the sustainable agriculture point of view.

Some investigators decided to use bowl traps for insects in corn and soybean fields since sweeping with nets wasn't catching many insects.

What they found was that there were quite a few pollinators/ insects to be found out in the fields.

This is despite the fact that the crops were GMO/neonic crops.

The argument being made is since the insect pollinators seem to be there in the fields anyway, despite the use of monocultures, GMOs, neonics, etc., perhaps making the crops more pollinator friendly would increase yields.

That the frequency I'm on with these tests.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

> The argument being made is since the insect pollinators seem to be there in the fields anyway, despite the use of monocultures, GMOs, neonics, etc., perhaps making the crops more pollinator friendly would increase yields.


I don't see where monoculture or GMO has anything to do with pollinators. They are buzz words that tend to cast a negative light on agriculture.

Neonics are supposed to be the death knell of all pollinators. The fact that numbers of pollinators are found in these fields suggests otherwise. Especially since neonic crops have been grown for a number of years.

Personally, I'd love to have nectar producing soybeans grown near my hives. It would result in a lot more honey production. However, I don't see there be any pressure form farmers to be able to buy nectar producing soybean seed. Farmers want to buy the seed that puts the most money in their pocket. Traditionally, that has been the varieties that yield the highest.

If a soybean were bred that responded to pollination by increased yields the increase would have to be enough to justify pollination costs. Then you have to find enough colonies, at the right price, to pollinate millions of acres. I don't want to see soybean prices that high my self!

Tom


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I haven't heard of any large scale field trials using Honeybees to pollinate soybeans to date.

So, we don't have actual numbers to work with.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

1+2) The camphor spirits I'm using is 16% camphor in ethanol. It's probably racemic since it's synthetic. I could mix up my own batch since we do have both camphor and ethanol in stock. But, most folks have access to 'Camphor Spirits' only.

3) There's nothing random about my choice of using camphor. I dip and dry. I suspect that the camphor partitions itself into the oil fraction of the been since it dissolves well in organic solvents.

You're making an assumption about camphor's mode of action. I doubt that it's a c-mitotic agent. But. it needs verification.

4) Since when are soybeans octaploid? Monsanto does genetic recombination work with patented genes. 

5) I've already seen different morphologies induced by the treatment. It will take time to confirm that it's polyploidy.

6) I don't just handle camphor spirits in a hood, I do the same with peppermint essential oil. I have sensitive eyes. Besides, it's safer.

7) The vintage soybeans I'm using were cited in the literature as being attractive to Honeybees. They were available, and they're free. Besides, the parental genetics in their pedigree can be found in at least a quarter of all current soybean varieties.

8) I've read some comments by U.S. agronomists on the issue. I agree with them. It's a sustainability issue to me.

9) I'm running tests, not selling seeds.

10) Maybe the soybean farmer and the beekeeper are one and the same person. It's possible you know.

11) Most of the U.S. population lives in cities. It's just all part of urban agriculture.

12) Don't turn your back on the soyeros. There are serious social justice issue involved. Fortunately, U.S. farmers don't have that kind of baggage.

I'm not the only one who thinks that this kind of work needs to be done.

Try and stop me.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga:

It's pointless to 'rain on my parade'.

The seeds have germinated, and I'll take a count soon.

Anything can happen.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> I'm not the only one who thinks that this kind of work needs to be done.


When this '_work_' gets finished, the end result will simply be a '*subjective anecdote*'. 


After all ...



WLC said:


> If third parties can't do an evaluation, it's a subjective anecdote.



:gh:


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Yes Rader, If I'm the only one in the world doing this, it's just a subjective anecdote.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Here's a 'sprout' report on the four varieties planted.

Clark, MGIV; 20/25 untreated (80%), 20/25 camphor spirits treated (80%).

Wayne, MGIII; 5/25 untreated (20%), 2/25 camphor spirits treated (8%).

Hark, MGI, 3/25 untreated (12%), 2/25 camphor spirits treated (8%).

Corsoy, MG II, 3/25 untreated (12%), 1/25 camphor spirits treated (4%).

The Clark group is doing best by far with mostly spread cotyledons.

All seeds were planted on Monday, 4/28/14.

So far, I have 30 untreated and 25 treated still alive. 55/200 (27.5%).


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I think of them as preliminary tests.

I've already learned that Clark did well when planted late April during some wet, relatively cool, weather.

So, I know which variety to plant first.

As for laughing out loud about the use of the term 'fundamental research'...

I'm examining the camphor/polyploidy observations with some more tests.

While I'm not a complete slouch when it comes to cytology, and I'm not a botanist by training, I'm far from helpless.

It's going to take a lot of time before those soybeans flower, so I don't mind pushing into a frontier that was abandoned decades ago.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Those soybeans that are growing in a 3' x 3' planter, on a rooftop garden, in midtown Manhattan, are real accessions from the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection. They were also described as pollinator attractive in peer reviewed studies.

While Clark is an accession with a 1952 date, it also has 3 seminal soybean parents in its pedigree.

I can't work with modern pollinator attractive varieties, because I don't know what they are.

Yet, there are some advantages in working with these vintage soybeans.

If only I had some verified primers for soybean SWEET9.

That would play to one of my strengths.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> Dominic:
> 
> We're on different frequencies here.
> 
> ...


You seem to equate "attractive to pollinators" with "good for pollinators". It's a fundamental flaw in your logic, and undermines your premises.

Pesticides don't work by making the crop less appealing. They work by killing whatever feeds off it. There's no link to be had between safety of a crop and its attractiveness. The presence of pollinators does not mean they are healthy and that their habitat is hospitable.

Say I have a barrel full of neonics out in the field, I think we'll both agree that it would neither be friendly nor attractive to the bees. Any scout sipping from it would instantly die from acute poisoning. Then, let's say I add water to it so that the concentration is just below the lethal dose. I've just made it more attractive. Scouts will be able to survive the sip, then go back to the hive to report the location of this new water source. Did I just improve the hive's condition? Then, let's say I add sugar to this water. It becomes even more attractive, and the bees bring more of it back and stock it. Did I just improve the hive's condition yet again? By your logic, I did a favor to the bees by giving them this fresh water and sugar. By mine, I pulled them away from a safer source of forage and tricked them into bringing back poison into the hive.

The same arguments go to TWall. Finding pollinators in a field with neonics doesn't disprove that neonics harm pollinators.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Nabber86 said:


> OMG, I laughed so hard when I read that, I spit coffee on my computer screen.
> 
> :lpf::lpf::lpf:


I do not understand the humor. What else could it be? Fundamental/Basic research does not have to be practical. WLC has a hypothesis: "Does Camphor cause polyploidy in certain varieties of Soybean" - I assume he has researched the literature..... and found nothing. So that is what we call fundamental research.

I have no knowledge of the personal stuff going on between you guys.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

hpm:

What's interesting is that some members are 'resistant' to the idea that soybeans can be pollinated by insects, with beneficial results, and that I can do research and run tests.

I'm currently running some more tests on other seeds, besides soybeans, and I'm also running tests on different tissues of a soybean plant.

That being said, I have reached out and up. The growing season is still young enough for others to verify the effects of camphor on soybean seeds.

How can I put this, it was just too easy to do.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

hpm08161947 said:


> I have no knowledge of the personal stuff going on between you guys.


Oh, it's never ending.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Barry said:


> Oh, it's never ending.


Yeah, it's a forum. Thanks for the input.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

hpm08161947 said:


> I do not understand the humor. What else could it be? Fundamental/Basic research does not have to be practical. WLC has a hypothesis: "Does Camphor cause polyploidy in certain varieties of Soybean" - I assume he has researched the literature..... and found nothing. So that is what we call fundamental research.
> 
> I have no knowledge of the personal stuff going on between you guys.



Fundamental/Basic *research*? Really?



Nabber86 said:


> It all sounds like a poorly planned hair-brained experiment to me. Here are a few questions that I can come up with off the top of my head (If I wasted another minute of my life thinking about it, I could probably come up with more, but I am not going to do that.)
> 
> 
> How do you know that you are the first one to use camphor? Seems like a rather grandiose claim.
> ...


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

> It all sounds like a poorly planned hair-brained experiment to me. Here are a few questions that I can come up with off the top of my head (If I wasted another minute of my life thinking about it, I could probably come up with more, but I am not going to do that.)


I don't understand your agressive intensity. I do have one question though. Is it not possible to determine whether or not the newly germinated plants are polyploid? Or can that not be determined from somatic cells?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

One way to determine the ploidy of a plant is to do a root tip squash. You're basically staining chromosomes in mitotic cells in the apical meristem, and either taking a count (doubtful in my case), or describing the amount of staining observed, etc. .

Most instructors use an onion root tip since the chromosomes are easier to see.

As for Nabber, I've answered most of the questions one way or another.

I would have liked to have had a 4 X 2 matrix with 25 subjects in each group, but that's not in the cards this time around.

I could have come up with a statistical test for that.

For now, I'm more interested in general results.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

So what does your Soybean root tip squash reveal for you? You must be curious. Or do you have to few to sample them....


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

My first batch of soybean seeds was for the attractiveness test. So, I planted all of them.

I've another batch on order. I don't know if they'll send me a second order though.

I'll use other seeds for tests in the meantime.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

Dominic said:


> Finding pollinators in a field with neonics doesn't disprove that neonics harm pollinators.


It doesn't prove it harms them either! And, what is the alternative? Go back to spraying organophospahtes and pyrethroids?

Tom


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

TWall said:


> It doesn't prove it harms them either! And, what is the alternative? Go back to spraying organophospahtes and pyrethroids?
> 
> Tom


I think that almost anything would be preferable to the spraying that used to go on - preneonics. I suspect that most of the antineonics people prefer an organic solution, but I doubt that they fully understand the scale of corn and soybean production that goes on in this world. It would take a lot of hoeing, fertilizer, and compost to feed a world rapidly moving toward a population of 10 Billion.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Although I'm following some leads on sustainable solutions regarding modern agriculture and pollinators, I can see an organic farm using honeybees to increase soybean yields, produce honey, and also more bees.

I would also say that it's possible to pollinate over 70 million acres of soybeans to increase yields. It's not as if modern ag has been able to break 100 bushels per acre yet. Pollinators might just do the trick in combination with newer ag models.

When I refer to SWEET9 in previous posts, I'm naming a sugar transporter protein recently discovered in plant nectaries.

I've even located a likely soybean version of SWEET9 at NCBI and came up with some primer options.

So, anything is possible.

Just because modern ag uses advanced technology doesn't preclude sustainable solutions.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

A quick update on the # of seedlings in the planter since some came up late.

Clark: 21 control, 23 experimental.

Wayne: 6 control, 2 experimental.

Hark: 7 control, 5 experimental.

Corsoy: 8 control, 2 experimental.

I've also planted an additional plot in another location with 25 control and 25 experimental seeds for each variety.

I now have enough seeds to do root tip squashes to test for polyploidy.

It does take some work to get a root tip squash right however. I've had to sort through various protocols simply to understand the theory behind each step.


----------



## tank (Jun 20, 2013)

Awaiting results thanks for this test


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I'd like to encourage others to order seeds from GRIN and test these cultivars for yourselves.

I've ordered one additional variety, Raiden PI 360844.

It was reported as being very attractive to Honeybees. However, it's determinate (MGIII) whereas the other varieties I'm testing are indeterminate.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Today, I've received the Raiden soybeans and planted 25 each, control and experimental seeds in the plot.

Yesterday, I obtained 2, 32 oz. packages of food grade soybeans at a Korean grocery.

I did plant 25 each, control and experimental seeds in the plot.

I needed more seeds to do the root tip squash tests for polyploidy.

I had to change the protocol since I've since discovered that a 4 degrees C pre-treatment step can induce polyploidy and give false positives. So, I've started the tests over again.

Just a note, food grade soybeans have a 'buff' colored hilum, whereas my other soybeans have either a black or yellow hilum.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Hark and Corsoy have flowered in the planter. No pollinators were present.

I installed a drip irrigation line to the planter this past Friday, and Saturday was the solstice.

Hark is MG I with a flowering date of 6/29 and Corsoy is MG II with a flowering date of 7/3.

I think they flowered on Sunday since I checked on them Saturday. The plants are now over two feet tall.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

I was jut thinking about your trials recently. If you have pollinators pollinating these soybeans you run the risk of crosspollination and the seed produced not being true to type. Although, it is unlikely.

Tom


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Pollinator hybridization (heterosis) of soybeans is generally unlikely. It's also one of the goals of some soybean seed breeders.

While the tests aren't over, I would say that I'm not encouraged to think that Hark or Corsoy are attractive to Honeybees.

If all results turn out to be negative, at least I got a good looking stand of soybeans growing in a planter in midtown Manhattan.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I checked the rooftop planter today and Clark and Wayne had flowered.

While I did see some pollinators flying around the soybeans, I did not observe any on the flowers.

I did not see any Honeybees near the soybeans at all. They were clearly very busy elsewhere.

I still have another test plot that was planted 3 weeks later with the same varieties that haven't flowered as yet.

The temperature has only recently topped 90 degrees F.


----------



## Ross (Apr 30, 2003)

Not a very realistic test in plots that small. Bees will often ignore small plot of even attractive honey plants for large plots of less attractive producers. A thousand acres of soybeans is a real test of honey production.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I won't disagree that it would take a large number of acres of soybeans to test for honey production.

I'm looking at attractiveness to Honeybees for particular cultivars however.

I did see plants present in small numbers on the rooftop garden, in other planters, that did have Honeybees actively foraging on them.

My other plot in a community garden was planted 3 weeks later, hasn't flowered yet, and may catch warmer temperatures.

Hopefully, they'll flower after the main flow is over.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Corsoy soybeans flowered on Monday, and no pollinators were observed foraging.

There is plenty of clover in Central Park. Recently, we've also had the first few days of over 90 temps.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Hark flowered in the plot this past Saturday. I did see one unidentified pollinator visiting a corsoy flower.

For the first time, I also observed a Honeybee visiting the plot.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

WLC said:


> I won't disagree that it would take a large number of acres of soybeans to test for honey production.
> 
> I'm looking at attractiveness to Honeybees for particular cultivars however.
> 
> ...


He's not talking about testing for honey production, he's talking about the bees having opportunities to forage tens or hundreds of acres of something vs. 25 of your soybean plants. You could have the most attractive plant for a honeybee and never see a single one on it because there's no benefit to forage from such a small sample.

It'd be like putting out an eye dropper of sugar syrup 10 yards from your hive and then putting a five gallon bucket 20 yards from your hive. I wonder how many are going to hit that eye dropper...?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Those reading WLC's frequent analysis of _other _studies would do well to pay attention to his thinking in conducting this 'test' of "soybean attractiveness for honeybee forage".


:ws:


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I still have 3 cultivars of soybeans that have yet to flower in the plot.

All of the cultivars are in flower in the rooftop planter, and while I do see insects flying around the stand of soybeans, no Honeybees yet.

My Honeybees are out actively foraging elsewhere.

Hark, Corsoy, and Wayne have been described as being attractive to Honeybees in the scientific literature, but I'm not observing any significant foraging activity by any pollinator.

I'm not observing any 'attraction'.
That's what my tests are showing so far.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

WLC said:


> I'm not observing any 'attraction'.
> That's what my tests are showing so far.


Your "tests" are showing that you don't have enough plants to be attractIVE. Nothing more. Bees care about forage. You've put out a thimble of nectar when they can probably find a swimming pool of nectar within a reasonable distance. You'll magically start seeing bees on your soybeans once your flow is over (if they are still blooming) and it wouldn't matter what kind of soybean you have at that time... they've got nothing else to forage.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

JW:

I understand that.

But, I'm not seeing any significant foraging activity by any pollinators.

We can come up with all kinds of reasons why it hasn't worked to date.

What I'm not seeing is the 'attractive' part.

However, it was interesting to plant soybeans, watch them grow and flower, and now I get to watch the pods develop.

I also get to see how the four different maturity groups behave.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Ross said:


> A thousand acres of soybeans is a real test of honey production.


I've mine right next to about 40 acres, nothing ......nada. The bees would rather stay home and eat stores rather than work soy...........


----------



## Harley Craig (Sep 18, 2012)

snl said:


> I've mine right next to about 40 acres, nothing ......nada. The bees would rather stay home and eat stores rather than work soy...........



our beans are in bloom too, Not even butterflies in the beans.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

There are over 80 million acres of soybeans growing in the U.S. .

It would be terrible if it was an 80 million acre 'pollinator desert'.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

WLC said:


> There are over 80 million acres of soybeans growing in the U.S. .
> 
> It would be terrible if it was an 80 million acre 'pollinator desert'.


How many acres of pavement and gravel are there?


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

Here we are over a year later, and WLC hasn't ever come back to give us the final results of his soybean attractiveness study.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

I miss wlc. I forgot what his real name is?


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

Victor  :lookout:


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

I saw my bees in some soy beans for the first time today. The farmer who works the fields across the road from my yard has changed cultivars as the usual soy bean flowers were blue in color and they are now white. I have walked around the blue flowered soy many times and have never seen any form of insect life, but in the white flower soy have seen bumbles butterflies and a few foraging honey bees. They are not there in great numbers but jap knotweed is flowering at the moment and I am feeding light syrup.

Johno


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Maybe he died of boredom from watching 4 square feet soybeans growing on the roof?




WLC said:


> However, it was interesting to plant soybeans, watch them grow and flower, and now I get to watch the pods develop.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Perhaps its a case of a modern day version of Jack and the Beanstalk. :shhhh:

Some of those bean plants flourished exceedingly well, and he climbed the stalk up into the sky ...


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

Bump.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ha ha good ole WLC. Those were some fun times.


----------

