# Super DFM - Honeybees



## Ian

_"*Description*
SuperDFM – HoneyBee contains a combination of LAB’s as well as beneficial 
Bacillus spp., and yeast used to diminish disease in bees and brood.
Feed both Spring and Fall for Healthier Hives - 10 grams (one table spoon) per hive.

Establish Beneficial Microflora
✔ Helps Increase Bee Colony Health
✔ May help inhibit chalkbrood (Ascophera apis)
✔ Microflora have a positive effect on Vitellogenin (fat body) formation
(The health of honey bee colony is dependent upon
vitellogenin reserves of the nurse bees)
✔ Yeasts help synthesize B-vitamins needed for bee health
✔ Quick and easy to use
✔ Sold in heat sealed and moisture proof pack

Lactic Acid Bacteria (LAB)
LAB’s ferment sugars to lactic acid, aid in honey production, fight pathogens by
lactic acid production, restore necessary microflora after antibiotic treatment
and maintain healthy immunity; aid in vitellogenin formation

Enzymes
Amylase breaks down starches to glucose; Protease breaks down protein peptide bonds to
free up amino acids; Beta glucanase breaks down glucans (parts of cell wall) to usable sugars; Cellulase breaks down cellulose to usable sugars

Yeast culture
Increase fiber digestion, reduce oxygen and provide necessary growth factors to
LAB’s; synthesize B-vitamins to aid bees health; mannan oligosaccharide prevents
pathogen adhesion to intestinal wall

Spore Forming Bacilli
Consume oxygen and create a positive environment for LAB’s, fight pathogenic
yeasts and molds, and reduce effects of stress caused by heat or cold"_


Is boosting the Micro Flora in a honeybee hive as simple as dusting over the top frames? We inoculate our silage pile simply by incorporating the bacteria in while we harvest which helps convert the pile quicker and uniformly.


----------



## camero7

no real studies on it... this is the only "study" I could find. It doesn't really tell you much. They need to do a controlled study, until then I say snake oil.

http://strongmicrobials.weebly.com/uploads/4/2/3/2/42323477/super_dfm_honeybee_blind_study.pdf


----------



## ehoffma2

In Michigan we have use Super DFM Honeybee for over two years.

There are over one thousand hives under trial as I write this.

The evidence in Michigan shows efficacy in reducing Winter loss.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXbB_a18x84


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Ian;1194315 boosting the Micro Flora in a honeybee .[/QUOTE said:


> We don't use DFM, but we have been adding a Micro Flora additive to our Nura Bee sub for years.


----------



## camero7

ehoffma2 said:


> In Michigan we have use Super DFM Honeybee for over two years.
> 
> There are over one thousand hives under trial as I write this.
> 
> The evidence in Michigan shows efficacy in reducing Winter loss.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXbB_a18x84


this is just a slick ad... nothing about controlled studies. How about a controlled study of actual hives done by an independent scientist. I added some probiotics to some of my sugar blocks this winter to see if they actually help. But I am not sure there is anything to it.


----------



## Ian

Kieth, what kind of shelf life does your micro flora additive have after mixing into your patties? 
The product we use in the cattle operation on our silage come with an expire date. It's administered through the chopper and goes to work immediately. 
This DFM honeybee product is dusted on with sugar so ingestion would be immediate. Patties would be mixed stored fed all over a period of a few weeks. 
Any thought on this would be appreciated. 
I think I'm going to buy a bag and run a trial myself. This is what I've been looking for. Dusting or patties?


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Ian said:


> Any thought on this


Noop.


----------



## ehoffma2

Looks like super DFM Honey bee has a competing product in Europe ?

http://symbeeotic.apicellae.se/history/

SymBeeotic is a probiotic for honeybees, to increase the health (and therefore production) of the bee population. When Symbeeotic is added to the colony, the bees ingest the solution with the probiotic bacteria. There is also a trickle down effect, as the bees will feed their larvae with bacteria, providing a long term protection. Increasing health without antibiotics is essential, since residues can be found in the honey and contribute to antibiotic resistance. Symbeeotic is the only product that targets and increases the bees´ own resistance, which is crucial when the hives are fighting of multi factorial diseases.

http://symbeeotic.apicellae.se/

The lactic acid bacteria (LAB) in Symbeeotic discovered in the honey stomach of honey bees are beeing described as novel species by us and given proper latin names. The description of the lactobacilli is done http://ijs.sgmjournals.org/content/64/Pt_9/3109.full.pdf

The role of the LAB for honey bee health seems very promising http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033188

1.We have shown that the lactic acid bacteria in Symbeeotic clearly inhibit AFB in laboratory tests with infected larva. 


http://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/full_html/2010/01/m09040/m09040.html


■EFB (European Foulbrood Disease)


1.We have shown that the LAB in Symbeeotic clearly inhibit EFB in laboratory tests with infected larva.http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033188

1.Initial field studies with Symbeeotic applied to colonies heavily infected with both Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae are terminated. They were performed together with the Hellenic Institute of Apiculture (NAGREF), the University of Thessaloniki and Vita limited (UK). The results were very promising but more studies have to be performed to find out more about when and how often Symbeeotic needs to be fed to the bees.


----------



## Ian

Keith Jarrett said:


> Noop.


Just adding something to the mix because it sounds good?
Even with inoculants, shelf life and storage conditions of the product is important for its efficacy


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Ian said:


> Just adding something to the mix because it sounds good?
> Even with inoculants, shelf life and storage conditions of the product is important for its efficacy


With all due respect, Not a sound good thing here Ian.


----------



## JRG13

If you ever talk to Keith personally, you would know he just doesn't do stuff cuz it sounds good....


----------



## davidsbees

I've read some real questions but not any real answers, I guess it's just snake oil.


----------



## Ian

JRG13 said:


> If you ever talk to Keith personally, you would know he just doesn't do stuff cuz it sounds good....


From what I read on this forum I would Also be one of those Beekeepers holding the Jarrett family high.

My question is anywhere from implying dis respect. If there is no answer to the question let's not pretend there is. Shelf life of this organism and conditions to how its applied is critical to other type inoculants. How does it apply in this case?


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> There are over one thousand hives under trial as I write this ]


Ehoffma2, are you part of the trial or involved with the company ?


----------



## JRG13

Ian, it depends what state the probiotics are in or the composition, it could just be enzymes or bacteria in dormant phases which wouldn't affect shelf life.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Ian said:


> My question is anywhere from implying dis respect. If there is no answer to the question let's not pretend there is.


Non taken here Ian, just debating some topics right.
Your last statement, there is an answer, but your train of thoughts & mine are miles apart.


----------



## Ian

Keith Jarrett said:


> but your train of thoughts & mine are miles apart.


lol, Keith... care to elaborate? Help me walk closer to you. 

All I am asking, this DFM-honeybee "inoculant" suggest dusting the hive. Others like yourself has mixed pro biotics into the patty mix. I know from my own experience with silage inoculation that handling of this product is specific. 

Is there a reason why they suggest their product to be applied in a way to encourage immediate ingestion, as opposed to other applications where as the ingestion is over a period of a few weeks? or does anyone actually know?


----------



## davidsbees

A few years back decided to go with enzymes instead of prebiotics, probiotics or "micro flora additive" as the feed already countians the substrate for micorobes to grow on and the bees already have the proper microbes. Enzymes blends are very common in animal and human supplemental diets. Enzymes don't live or die


----------



## Ian

davidsbees said:


> Enzymes don't live or die


What kind of enzymes are you adding? And how do you feel the enzyme supplements contribute to the overall health of the hive?


----------



## Honey-4-All

hoffman2 said:


> In Michigan we have use Super DFM Honeybee for over two years.
> 
> There are over one thousand hives under trial as I write this.
> 
> The evidence in Michigan shows efficacy in reducing Winter loss.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXbB_a18x84




Just for the record! Would you like to confirm or deny the rumor that any of the fingerprints on the envelope containing the flyer and sales "prospectus" touting this product which I happen to have received a few weeks back might at all be directly related to anyone at hoffman2..............??????


----------



## davidsbees

Keith, when is "noop" considered debating things right? I know you think " we've all been watching "I Love Lucy" while you done all the work" your quote. Let's have a real debate


----------



## davidsbees

Enzymes are the end result yeast and bacterial action along with lowering the PH. Proteins are like a zipper and all the teeth are individual amino acids, enzymes are the unzippers freeing the amino acids. There enzymes for fats, sugars, cellulose and many other things. I use about a half dozen of them. Don't have them in front of me.


----------



## Ian

Interesting David. I have not heard of anyone talk about supplementing enzymes to the feed mix. Maybe everyone already has been and its already provided in readily avaliable bee feeds? Are these enzymes that the bees are not already providing? I'm assuming the assumption is that by adding the enzymes the feed mix will be properly or more adequately digested. Do you see response from this supplement? and if so how are you measuring it?


----------



## davidsbees

I have not heard of any one else adding enzymes but it is very common in animal feed just google it. The best measure is brood but is a double edge sword with brood comes mites. Well the crew just came back to the shop to muddy


----------



## Ian

davidsbees said:


> The best measure is brood but is a double edge sword with brood comes mites.


Have you done any in op trials to see if you can notice response? 

You mentioned adding Pro Biotics as snake oil, how can you ensure enzyme supplement is no different? 

We add an inoculant to our silage pile, and there are studdies showing how it increases feed efficiency with digestion and so on. This measurement is extremely hard to measure as the pile of variable cloud results. We are not adding the inoculant to improve feed efficiency. $8-15,000 investment of the innoculant has to show clear payback before we use it for that purpose. We use the innoculant to help preserve summer/fall fed piles. The reduction of waste during summer feeding shows us the payback. 

SOO...is adding these supplements more so to satisfy the beekeeper that strives to help make a better feed? a the supplement used in the bee feed typically isnt going to bankrupt the farm. Im interested in the measure of efficacy.


----------



## davidsbees

Probiotics are not necessarily snake oil they work well in the lactic acid fermentation process as in putting up silage or making bee bread. Half the dairyman in my area let silage ferment naturally the other half add inoculatent. Protein supplement is not pollen so the nutrition people I've talked with thought enzymes would be a better fit to make a long story short. Going by other animal study's I feel the cost (penny's a pound) is made up in the added nutritional value.


----------



## camero7

David where do you get your enzymes? I looked around but didn't find any small suppliers.


----------



## davidsbees

I was getting it out of Canada, Canadian Bio but now the feedmill I use has their own supplier.


----------



## Ian

Do you dabble some of it to the mix or do you have a formula? or a certain target your trying to achieve?

I have bought into the Pro biotics theory aswell. When we start talking about nosema and fungicides and and and, its not hard to buy into the theory that ensuring the proper gut bugs in the bees will help make the bees healthier. 
...though I have not fed any or done any comparisons...

I plan on incorporating it into my bee feeding program. Your enzyme supplement sounds interesting.


----------



## davidsbees

Like all ingredients there is a optimal level or it does not do any good I let the nutritionist crunch the numbers I just tell him what I want to achieve. I think dry feeding the probiotic may be more beneficial then in a pattie.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

davidsbees said:


> Keith, when is "noop" considered debating things right? I know you think " we've all been watching "I Love Lucy" while you done all the work"


Wow.

David, I used the term "Noop" to describe my opionions on DFM product to Ian, never used the stuff nor have I ever heard good or bad about it. How do you debate something you know nothing about.

Hey, go see Santa Claus & cheer up.


----------



## davidsbees

That's what I thought


----------



## camero7

davidsbees said:


> I was getting it out of Canada, Canadian Bio but now the feedmill I use has their own supplier.


Which one were you using from Canadian Bio? Thanks.


----------



## JSL

In my opinion, the mircoflora found in bee bread act more as a preservative mechanism by increasing the acidity of stored pollen. Good or bad it helps to preserve stored nutrients. 

Pollen patties are basically processed food for the bees. Beekeepers add their own preservatives, such as essential oils, and acidifiers.


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> Ehoffma2, are you part of the trial or involved with the company ?


Reply - Yes and Yes. - we were part of the trial and yes I have been a technical support contact for the company.

I do not work for the company, nor am I an employee. Yes, I am involved with Strong Microbials Inc.

I have used bacteria in our hives and others for over two years. Every one I work with and sell Nucs to, I tell them

to use bacteria in the hives. I have seen a difference in our hives Winter Survival. Michigan %20 loss last year.

It was our Michigan Bees that were part of the blind Study. 

They are now running data trials on samples of pollen and they will run more samples of bees next year.

The negative control group hives were missing Key microbes.

The Super DFM Honey Bee product has over thirteen active agents. It's not just bacteria.

Since September 2014, our team in Michigan has been coaching the Strong Microbial Inc. Microbiologists.

At this point in time I would best describe my relationship with the company as an agent.

They are looking for distributors. email - [email protected] for further information.

I hope this answers your questions.


----------



## Honey-4-All

E2 Thanks for the forthright answer. Interested in clarifying with more info?? 

A lot of folks tout products here and then try to hide in the "anonymity" of the web. Keep us posted!!!!!!!!!!!! Better bees are the goal of 99.999999% of us who live here!!!


----------



## ehoffma2

Honey-4-All said:


> Just for the record! Would you like to confirm or deny the rumor that any of the fingerprints on the envelope containing the flyer and sales "prospectus" touting this product which I happen to have received a few weeks back might at all be directly related to anyone at hoffman2..............??????


What I can do is repeat what I placed in the other reply today. I have been a technical support
person for the microbiologists in Milwaukee WI. since September. I let them sample our Michigan bees.
I have been sending them pollen and other items to test. I will send them more frozen bees next year.
I will collaborate with them more next year. They are not beekeepers, they are scientist.


----------



## Ian

David, I notice DFM-honeybees also incorporates enzymes into its treatment. 

ehoffma2, the treatment is directed as a dusting twice a year (as I understand, please correct me if thats wrong). Have they done any work incorporating this treatment into a patty? 

Also why is the only measure of efficacy being winter survival. An increase of colony winter survival is our main objective but its a terrible measure of efficacy. To many variable involved in this equation (many being beekeeper variables) to make this a tangible measurement. By using winter survival as the measure of efficacy it makes the product sound like snake oil, as "better winter survival" is merely a buzz word or catch phrasing. And maybe that's what they want as thats all they have right now, with substantial test results in the future...?

As a beekeeper using a product like this, I would be using it to achieve a certain objective. My objective would be to create a healthier digestive tract to help fight off Nosema, to aid in the digestion and utilization of bee food which would help create a healthier broodnest. 
These objectives are measurable. Nosema counts between treated and non treated colonies is extremely easy. And if the product works there should be a measurable difference between the two groups, right? Examining the brood nest and comparing the brood condition would be difficult to gauge but if conditions improve in the treated colonies to the point where the study finds winter losses are noticeably decreasing, they should be able to find differences in the broodnest and in the bee's fat reserves themselves. 

I often wonder if the difference beekeepers find with fall feeding colonies is exactly the fact that they are paying attention to the hives disease needs and actually providing the bees with food as compared not handling disease and leaving the bees to mal nourished...
HOw much of these variable is exactly that and nothing to do with adding ProBiotics and enzymes and yeasts and and and...

Just thinking out loud again. This forum is a great place for that. 
What do you think?


----------



## Ian

on my farm we have available pollen from April right though September. Supplemental feeding has not been a focus. But I think the issue we are starting to face up here is the amount of nutrition bees are actually able to extract from all this available pollen. A substantial part of this diet has been treated with fungicide and that is what the bees are using to build the winter populations. This is the point of time prairie beekeepers, who make a living on the yellow country side, need to focus our attention.

I know there are MB beekeepes who satellite this site, who just read that and said, yup yup yup... how? 
How? by putting more focus on the nest during the middle of the honey flow.


----------



## apis maximus

Ian said:


> Supplemental feeding has not been a focus. But I think the issue we are starting to face up here is *the amount of nutrition bees are actually able to extract from all this available pollen*. A substantial part of this diet has been treated with fungicide and that is what the bees are using to build the winter populations.


Ian,

I think you've got something "cooking" here.

This issue will eventually get more attention, but it will be a long, arduous road to sort things out. Even if we do not enter the fungicides into the equation, we already know that different pollens have different nutritional values. Also, same pollens in the same areas have slightly different chemical compositions from season to season or from one year to the next. Slight or marked difference in chemical composition might not translate much in different nutritional values, but we do not know for sure.
Then, we have the dynamic of raw pollen being transformed into bee bread. The microflora present, absent or altered in the raw pollen...the bee gut microbiota present or absent or altered for whatever reason. We are barely scratching the surface on this one.

Throw in the external factors...such as fungicides, and things get really complicated.

So, how does one find a practical, consistent way of sorting things out when it comes to actual nutritional value? At the apiary level that is. Not only at the commercial level, but also at the sideliner and hobby level. You big boys, most of you anyways, have realized that supplementing has to take place. Not a 100% consensus on what is the best. 

Both ends of the spectrum are easy...On one end, healthy colonies that thrive on abundant, diverse pollen sources available in a certain geographic area or microclimate, and on the other end, colonies that for whatever reason starve for pollen. 
The in between hive populations are the ones that are not so easy. 
And this is the space where you see all kinds of recipes being tried out, promoted or put down, adjusted, "improved", or what have you.

Dr. Latshaw just started another thread on pollen subs...hope more good questions will come out.


----------



## grozzie2

Ian said:


> Examining the brood nest and comparing the brood condition would be difficult to gauge but if conditions improve in the treated colonies to the point where the study finds winter losses are noticeably decreasing, they should be able to find differences in the broodnest and in the bee's fat reserves themselves.


How does one measure fat reserves ? Counting nosema is easy, almost as easy as counting varroa. I'm really interested in finding practical ways to make more measurements, but not sure where to start on some of them. Is it even possible to measure some of these esoteric things without building a very expensive laboratory full of million dollar gadgets ?

After reading some of the links on this stuff you posted a while back, I've got the microsope and electronic eyepiece coming. We are going to make counting nosema a matter of course here, just like counting varroa. After doing an alchohol roll for the varroa, we already have the dead bees, just a mortar and pezel with a little distilled water away from making a slide to do the nosema count.

So now you've got my interest peaked, if one goes this far, do you know of an affordable way to start doing more analysis on the samples ?


----------



## Ian

grozzie2 said:


> After reading some of the links on this stuff you posted a while back, I've got the microsope and electronic eyepiece coming. We are going to make counting nosema a matter of course here, ....
> So now you've got my interest peaked, if one goes this far, do you know of an affordable way to start doing more analysis on the samples ?


Thats a good plan of action. I truely feel nosema is the crutch of most our problems. Understanding our disease issues helps us better react with treatments or helps us better track pro active measure taken to counter these disease issues, like probiotics for example. 

How do we measure the health of a honeybee? :scratch: Generally we look for healthy indicators coming from the nest itself. But would it not be interesting to take a few bees and measure their fat stores? Good well fall fed fat bees, as opposed to fall dearth starved bees. Yes the food provided has gotten these beesinto winter with adequate fat stores, or no the feed avaliable or provided was in adequate and the bees went in slim... 
If there were such a fat/slim test being done, I wonder how many beekeepers would actually of blamed "the other factors" in their unexpected colony losses? k:


----------



## JSL

Ian said:


> If there were such a fat/slim test being done,


Great point. A quick dissection of the abdomen would expose fat bodies, which would give you a relative perspective. A bit more work would be involved to quantify it. How many beekeepers look at worker abdomens when they inspect a hive? While far from exact, comparing relative abdomen width and length provides some insight into the workings of the hive. Relatively large abdomens are a good thing, unless it is a sign of dysentery and they are full of feces.

I don't hear the term "condition" used much in beekeeping circles, but it is common for larger animals.


----------



## grozzie2

JSL said:


> Great point. A quick dissection of the abdomen would expose fat bodies, which would give you a relative perspective.


I've never started cutting the bees apart to look inside. Is the fat layered, ie something that could be measured in high resolution photos ? Is there some other measurement one could take, that gives us a measurable metric for comparison ?



JSL said:


> While far from exact, comparing relative abdomen width and length provides some insight into the workings of the hive.


Are you suggesting the ratio of width to length as the comparison, or, comparing absolute values between hives ? As a measurable metric, this one I find very interesting, because it's relatively easy to do. Just take a picture of a frame, then look at the picture later on the computer screen. If there is really some value to the metric, would be fairly strait forward to whip up some software that'll analyze a frame photo, and give measured metrics back from the photo.

This is one of the reasons I keep coming back here, ideas like this from various discussions do peak my interest. If there is a metric that can be measured in a repeatable fashion, and that metric correlates somehow to bee health, it's worth figuring out a way to do the measurement.


----------



## JSL

grozzie,

Scroll down the page for this link, http://scientificbeekeeping.com/fat-bees-part-1/, there is a nice comparison photo of winter vs forager and fat bodies.

I have not taken the visual comparison of abdomens any further than that. It is usually pretty obvious once you start looking, but I have not tried to measure it and correlate it with anything else. Perhaps it is a winter project?


----------



## Ian

JSL said:


> I don't hear the term "condition" used much in beekeeping circles, but it is common for larger animals.


I know there are many differences between livestock and bee's but in my mind "conditioning" should follow suit in both cases. With our cattle, one of our dietary signals we use to mix our ration is by gauging the condition of the cattle in terms of fat cover. If they aint getting enough cattle slim down by loosing their fat stores. The same when they get too fat, we cut the energy in the feed. Not only is it wasteful but negative health implication result from too fat of animals ( not applicable to bees where as their life span is weeks as compared to years)

Measuring fat on the bees and so on sounds like a lot of work when one could simply JUST FEED THE BEES. But the point is knowing if the feeding is providing the benefit and if all these variations of feed are actually increasing the individual bees health, and in turn a healthier colony. 
Probiotics, yeasts, enzymes, yup. How about just plain old protein and some sugar, also yup. Which one shows up on a healthier bee?


----------



## JBJ

JSL said:


> Great point. A quick dissection of the abdomen would expose fat bodies, which would give you a relative perspective. A bit more work would be involved to quantify it. How many beekeepers look at worker abdomens when they inspect a hive? While far from exact, comparing relative abdomen width and length provides some insight into the workings of the hive. Relatively large abdomens are a good thing, unless it is a sign of dysentery and they are full of feces.
> 
> I don't hear the term "condition" used much in beekeeping circles, but it is common for larger animals.


What about weighing freshly emerged workers to assess fatbodies and overall health?


----------



## Ian

forager bee on the left, nurse bee or winter bee on the right


----------



## ehoffma2

*Thank you for asking about adding Super DFM ( direct fed microbial ) HoneyBee in patties.*


We have added this product DRY to Mega Bee DRY feeding in PVC tubes. (barrel feeding)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nntkTnTI4I8


We have added this product to Wet Patties. We have added the product to open "bee feed" barrel feeding.

After microbial analysis completed by the Strong Microbial Inc. team, we found the Microbe

data indicates that you want the bacteria / yeast dry, so that when the honeybee consumes

the microbials, They start to replicate inside the bee. you do not want the microbes to wake up

and not find a place to replicate. Bacteria either is sleeping or growing or dying (starving).

Based on the technical discussions with the microbiologists at Strong Microbials Inc. They would not want 

the bacteria to be wet before the honeybee consumes it.



Concentration of viable bacteria in Honeybee DFM was determined using plating method on MRS agar.
Bacteria were cultured semi-aerobically at 37 degrees Celsius for two days. Serial dilutions in peptone
water were prepared to yield a dilution containing 25 to 250 colony forming units (CFUs).
Honeybee DFM is expected to contain 250 000 000 CFU per gram of Lactic Acid Bacteria. All control
samples met this level.

Honeybee DFM dissolved in Sugar Syrup had considerably more bacteria than expected. This is attributed
to germination and growth of bacteria in sugar syrup during sample preparation time. Dissolving bacteria
in sugar syrup may be not optimal since germination will end up in bacteria using the nutrients, starvation,
and susceptibility to antimicrobial compounds.

Accordingly, mixing DFM with pollen substitute powder MegaBee did not cause loss of viability. This trial
was also performed in Sugar Syrup with the same results (not shown). Therefore, MegaBee has no effect
on DFM viability.







Ian said:


> David, I notice DFM-honeybees also incorporates enzymes into its treatment.
> 
> ehoffma2, the treatment is directed as a dusting twice a year (as I understand, please correct me if thats wrong). Have they done any work incorporating this treatment into a patty?
> 
> Also why is the only measure of efficacy being winter survival. An increase of colony winter survival is our main objective but its a terrible measure of efficacy. To many variable involved in this equation (many being beekeeper variables) to make this a tangible measurement. By using winter survival as the measure of efficacy it makes the product sound like snake oil, as "better winter survival" is merely a buzz word or catch phrasing. And maybe that's what they want as thats all they have right now, with substantial test results in the future...?
> 
> As a beekeeper using a product like this, I would be using it to achieve a certain objective. My objective would be to create a healthier digestive tract to help fight off Nosema, to aid in the digestion and utilization of bee food which would help create a healthier broodnest.
> These objectives are measurable. Nosema counts between treated and non treated colonies is extremely easy. And if the product works there should be a measurable difference between the two groups, right? Examining the brood nest and comparing the brood condition would be difficult to gauge but if conditions improve in the treated colonies to the point where the study finds winter losses are noticeably decreasing, they should be able to find differences in the broodnest and in the bee's fat reserves themselves.
> 
> I often wonder if the difference beekeepers find with fall feeding colonies is exactly the fact that they are paying attention to the hives disease needs and actually providing the bees with food as compared not handling disease and leaving the bees to mal nourished...
> HOw much of these variable is exactly that and nothing to do with adding ProBiotics and enzymes and yeasts and and and...
> 
> Just thinking out loud again. This forum is a great place for that.
> What do you think?


----------



## JSL

JBJ said:


> What about weighing freshly emerged workers to assess fatbodies and overall health?


It is a good thought. Worker body size can be related to overall colony health and nutrition, but is also influenced by cell size.

Abdomen size is just a rough indicator. I still remember the first time I walked into a cell builder yard with a queen producer and said they should be producing some nice cells right now as it looks like the flow is on. He looked at me and asked how can you tell that you just got here? I said at the size of the abdomens on those returning foragers. The thorax does not change in size, but the abdomen does, so it is relative to the time of year and colony conditions.


----------



## JSL

Ian said:


> JUST FEED THE BEES.


I think it really is that simple. If beekeepers want honey bees to perform and produce like livestock, why not treat them as such? I like to think of colony stores and reserves as their "fat layer". Honey is after all a high energy reserve. Make sure it is in the hive and you should have fat in the bees. Run out of reserves in the hive and bees will metabolize the remaining energy in the body. When that is gone, your hive is dead.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

JBJ said:


> weighing freshly emerged workers to assess fatbodies and overall health?


Key word here "freshly emerged".


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> *Thank you for asking about adding Super DFM ( direct fed microbial ) HoneyBee in patties.*


well, your welcome 



ehoffma2 said:


> We have added this product to Wet Patties. We have added the product to open "bee feed" barrel feeding.
> 
> After microbial analysis completed by the Strong Microbial Inc. team, we found the Microbe
> 
> data indicates that you want the bacteria / yeast dry, so that when the honeybee consumes
> 
> the microbials, They start to replicate inside the bee. you do not want the microbes to wake up
> 
> and not find a place to replicate. Bacteria either is sleeping or growing or dying (starving).
> 
> Based on the technical discussions with the microbiologists at Strong Microbials Inc. They would not want
> 
> the bacteria to be wet before the honeybee consumes it.


Thank you for that response ehoffma2. 

So according to the Microbiologists at Strong Microbials Inc, microbials are best left dormant until immediate consumption by the bees. This practice will preserve the bacteria's viability.

That runs along the same lines as what has been suggested with our silage inoculant.


----------



## ehoffma2

This is the URL link to the "Establishment of Characteristic Gut Bacteria during Development of the Honeybee Worker" - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3318792/ 

The A. mellifera gut bacteria encounter a physically and nutritionally variable environment due to the complex development and social behavior of this insect. Furthermore, the adult gut is divided into four major organs (crop, midgut, ileum, and rectum), providing different functions in the catabolism and absorption of food and different environments for bacterial symbionts (5, 51). Adult workers perform a succession of tasks as they age, which may expose them to different microorganisms: young bees nurse larvae within the hive, whereas older bees forage pollen and nectar from flowers outside the hive (1, 17, 49). In contrast to adults, larval A. mellifera have a discontinuous gut in which the foregut (crop and midgut) is not connected to the hindgut (ileum and rectum) until just before pupation, when they excrete dietary waste for the first time (51). Larvae reside within a single brood cell where nurse workers feed them a highly nutritional glandular secretion with small amounts of pollen and honey (62).

In this study, we use culture-independent methods to enumerate and visualize the microbiota of different gut organs and of bees of different ages. We focus on three abundant phylotypes within the A. mellifera gut microbiota.

*It is my understanding that Fat Body creation is linked to microbial activity*


----------



## Ian

JSL said:


> and reserves as their "fat layer". Honey is after all a high energy reserve.


I like the line of thinking here. The practicality of measuring the fat in the bee is not there, other than somehow helping determine the efficacy of differing feed treatments. It is that measurement of fat content is what beekeepers are targeting while slapping feed onto the hive. 
cool to talk about though,


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> *It is my understanding that Fat Body creation is linked to microbial activity*


I always relate things back to the cattle operation because that is what I'm familiar with. I also talk through things to help better understand it. 

The reason we add bacteria to the silage pile is not because it not there already, it because there may not be enough of the certain kind we want or spread through out evenly enough to achieve uniform efficacy during the ensilage process. Same thing when we inoculate alfalfa, soybeans and peas. We are ensuring populations are adequate. 

The same theory applies to feeding bacteria to bees. NOt because its not there, its becasue we need to ensure there is enough of it there. And knowing the bees are living in an environment stressing their ability to keep healthy, perhaps the reason many infections take hold is because of the lack of inadequate bacteria in their hind gut. 

Just thinking outloud. I buy into the whole theory behind it. we need real performance indicators to help prove its efficacy.


----------



## ehoffma2

Maybe heater bees need something more than just carbohydrates.
Can a Heater Bee be a skinny bee ? or must a Heater Bee be a Fat bee ?

Fat Bodies (VITELLOGENIN) are a cross between fat and protein.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitellogenin

The gene vitellogenin affects microRNA regulation in honey bee

(Apis mellifera) fat body and brain.

URL Link to - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23788711

In honey bees, vitellogenin (Vg) is hypothesized to be a major factor affecting hormone signaling, food-related behavior, immunity, stress resistance and lifespan.

This is also what is in the book "the buzz about bees"

http://www.amazon.com/The-Buzz-about-Bees-Superorganism/dp/3540787275


----------



## ehoffma2

Honey bee colony vitality

URL Link to PDF file - http://www.bijenhouders.nl/files/Bi...2 BGC Ento nutritionsept 12 BUokt sept 12.pdf


----------



## JSL

ehoffma2,

Very interesting presentation, thanks for sharing!


----------



## apis maximus

ehoffma2 said:


> Maybe heater bees need something more than just carbohydrates.
> Can a Heater Bee be a skinny bee ? or must a Heater Bee be a Fat bee ?


You are right...Heater bees, just like all bees in the hive need more than just carbohydrates. But for heating purposes, they only need and use honey.
Can a heater bee be a skinny bee? I would say yes, as long as she has honey available as fuel. Heater bees are present in a normal hive all the time, in every season. They warm up the brood nest not only in the winter. Carbohydrates are the fuel for warming.

Remember the concept of temporal polyethism in honey bees...look it up. 
Have you ever noticed some cold days in the spring and even in the summer, when bees don't fly, but just sit in the hive? If needed, and the temperature drop requires more heat generation, to maintain the nest at 35 C, even the adult foragers can and do join in the process of warming up the nest. 

The adult foragers have lost all or most of the vitellogenin by the time they become foragers. But, that does not mean they cannot become heater bees if and as needed. Skinny or not...Well, skinnier than they were when they were nurse bees.

Vitellogenin plays many critical functions indeed and it plays into a lot of feed back loops that take place in a "super organism" that a bee colony is. 
Nurse bees are loaded with it, and here I quote from Randy Oliver's site:

"*The quality of the jelly is dependent upon the vitellogenin levels of those nurses. Even just a few days of rain results in an almost total loss of pollen stores, forcing the nurse bees to dig into their vitellogenin reserves. When protein levels drop, nurse bees neglect young larvae, and preferentially feed those close to being capped. When protein levels drop lower, nurses cannibalize eggs and middle aged larvae. The protein in this cannibalized brood is recycled back into jelly. Nurses will also perform early capping of larvae resulting in low body weight bees emerging later*."

Role in the bee "immunity" ? Absolutely yes.
But here is an interesting twist that again points to that concept of temporal polyethism...
From Randy again:

"*What’s happening is that the honeybee has figured out ways to keep most of the precious protein stores within the hive, and since vitellogenin is necessary for immune function (Amdam 2005a), the colony delegates the risky task of foraging to the oldest bees, who have depleted their vitellogenin levels. Indeed, if older bees are forced to revert to nurse behavior, and build up their protein reserves, their immune level also increases again!"
*

Onto the "fat" bees of winter...
Back to Randy:

"*When broodrearing is curtailed in fall, the emerging workers tank up on pollen, and since they have no brood to feed, they store all that good food in their bodies, thus preparing themselves for a long life through the winter. These well-nourished, long-lived bees have been called “fat” bees (Sommerville 2005; Mussen 2007). Fat bees are chock-full of vitellogenin. Understanding the concept of fat bees is key to colony health, successful wintering, spring buildup, and honey production.*"



> Fat Bodies (VITELLOGENIN) are a cross between fat and protein.


One more thing in that "cross". Vitellogenin is classed as a “glycolipoprotein,” meaning that is has properties of sugar (glyco, 2%), fat (lipo, 7%), and protein (91%)



> In honey bees, vitellogenin (Vg) is hypothesized to be a major factor affecting hormone signaling, food-related behavior, immunity, stress resistance and lifespan.
> This is also what is in the book "the buzz about bees"
> http://www.amazon.com/The-Buzz-about-Bees-Superorganism/dp/3540787275


The Buzz about Bees...Great book indeed. But you know what? In the whole book, the word vitellogenin does not appear once. Not in the book I have. Nor does bee bread or fat bodies for that matter. 
But, the book, amongst other things, does a great job describing heater bees and how they keep that nest of theirs warm and toasty using honey for fuel. See page 216.( Sweet Kisses for Hot Bees).

Not to be off topic in the end...I think DFM as a concept, is great and I think soon, it will become something very common in the beekeping vocabulary.

I apologize if this was too long.


----------



## Ian

Heck no, feel free to contribute like that anytime!


----------



## ehoffma2

apis maximus said:


> You are right...Heater bees, just like all bees in the hive need more than just carbohydrates. But for heating purposes, they only need and use honey.
> Can a heater bee be a skinny bee? I would say yes, as long as she has honey available as fuel. Heater bees are present in a normal hive all the time, in every season. They warm up the brood nest not only in the winter. Carbohydrates are the fuel for warming.
> 
> Remember the concept of temporal polyethism in honey bees...look it up.
> Have you ever noticed some cold days in the spring and even in the summer, when bees don't fly, but just sit in the hive? If needed, and the temperature drop requires more heat generation, to maintain the nest at 35 C, even the adult foragers can and do join in the process of warming up the nest.
> 
> The adult foragers have lost all or most of the vitellogenin by the time they become foragers. But, that does not mean they cannot become heater bees if and as needed. Skinny or not...Well, skinnier than they were when they were nurse bees.
> 
> Vitellogenin plays many critical functions indeed and it plays into a lot of feed back loops that take place in a "super organism" that a bee colony is.
> Nurse bees are loaded with it, and here I quote from Randy Oliver's site:
> 
> "*The quality of the jelly is dependent upon the vitellogenin levels of those nurses. Even just a few days of rain results in an almost total loss of pollen stores, forcing the nurse bees to dig into their vitellogenin reserves. When protein levels drop, nurse bees neglect young larvae, and preferentially feed those close to being capped. When protein levels drop lower, nurses cannibalize eggs and middle aged larvae. The protein in this cannibalized brood is recycled back into jelly. Nurses will also perform early capping of larvae resulting in low body weight bees emerging later*."
> 
> Role in the bee "immunity" ? Absolutely yes.
> But here is an interesting twist that again points to that concept of temporal polyethism...
> From Randy again:
> 
> "*What’s happening is that the honeybee has figured out ways to keep most of the precious protein stores within the hive, and since vitellogenin is necessary for immune function (Amdam 2005a), the colony delegates the risky task of foraging to the oldest bees, who have depleted their vitellogenin levels. Indeed, if older bees are forced to revert to nurse behavior, and build up their protein reserves, their immune level also increases again!"
> *
> 
> Onto the "fat" bees of winter...
> Back to Randy:
> 
> "*When broodrearing is curtailed in fall, the emerging workers tank up on pollen, and since they have no brood to feed, they store all that good food in their bodies, thus preparing themselves for a long life through the winter. These well-nourished, long-lived bees have been called “fat” bees (Sommerville 2005; Mussen 2007). Fat bees are chock-full of vitellogenin. Understanding the concept of fat bees is key to colony health, successful wintering, spring buildup, and honey production.*"
> 
> 
> 
> One more thing in that "cross". Vitellogenin is classed as a “glycolipoprotein,” meaning that is has properties of sugar (glyco, 2%), fat (lipo, 7%), and protein (91%)
> 
> 
> 
> The Buzz about Bees...Great book indeed. But you know what? In the whole book, the word vitellogenin does not appear once. Not in the book I have. Nor does bee bread or fat bodies for that matter.
> But, the book, amongst other things, does a great job describing heater bees and how they keep that nest of theirs warm and toasty using honey for fuel. See page 216.( Sweet Kisses for Hot Bees).
> 
> Not to be off topic in the end...I think DFM as a concept, is great and I think soon, it will become something very common in the beekeping vocabulary.
> 
> I apologize if this was too long.



*Yes, fat body creation is Key to the success of the hive*

Below is some of the evidence of the blind study data

Super DFM HoneyBee – Blind Study – 2014

Goal: investigate impact of direct-fed microbial product, Super DFM Honeybee, on honeybee gut
microflora.

Summary: Supplementation with direct-fed microbial product, Super DFM Honeybee, significantly
increases Lactobacillus and Bacillus populations in honeybee gut. Terramycin treatment decreases
Lactobacillus populations in honeybee gut.
Objective 1. Lactobacillus are a natural constituent of commensal microflora of honeybees, Apis
mellifera. However, pathological and drug-induced changes in microflora lead to a decrease in natural
prevalence of the Lactobacillus. Supplementation with direct-fed microbial product, Super DFM
Honeybee, is expected to result in significant increase in Lactobacillus population in honeybee gut. Gut
Lactobacillus and other commensal bacterial play a role in inhibiting honeybee pathogens and therefore
play a critical role in honeybee health.
Result. We are able to demonstrate a significant increase in Lactobacillus population in the guts of
honeybees fed Super DFM Honeybee. Compared to untreated honeybee control group, honeybees fed
SuperDFM showed 9-fold increase in Lactobacillus population in the gut (p-value = 0.03).

URL link to Blind Study Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_6edG6-Y6E

URL link to Blind Study PDF file - http://strongmicrobials.weebly.com/uploads/4/2/3/2/42323477/super_dfm_honeybee_blind_study.pdf


----------



## squarepeg

what do the initials 'dfm' stand for?


----------



## apis maximus

Direct Fed Microbials. DFM


----------



## Ian

This is probably a piece of information I missed, but I'll ask anyway.

How much DFM is mixed into the sugar dusting treatment? And you mentioned adding it to dry feed in an open feeding situation. How do you guage how much DFM goes into the open feeder? Open feeding is extremely variable. 

I notice in some advertisements that MannLake is also adding Probiotics to their patty mix. ehoffma2, according to what the microbiologist from Strong Microbials are telling you, that bacteria will not be viable by the time the bees ingest it?
Can you elaborate on this point?


----------



## squarepeg

apis maximus said:


> Direct Fed Microbials. DFM


thanks am.


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> This is probably a piece of information I missed, but I'll ask anyway.
> 
> How much DFM is mixed into the sugar dusting treatment? And you mentioned adding it to dry feed in an open feeding situation. How do you guage how much DFM goes into the open feeder? Open feeding is extremely variable.
> 
> I notice in some advertisements that MannLake is also adding Probiotics to their patty mix. ehoffma2, according to what the microbiologist from Strong Microbials are telling you, that bacteria will not be viable by the time the bees ingest it?
> Can you elaborate on this point?


Reply to question - how much per hive ?

The Scientists listed 10 grams. I determined that is close to "one table spoon".

you mix one table spoon with one cup of powder sugar and place in the brood area on the top bars.

For the open feeder Question, I used one cup of Super DFM Honeybee to three pounds of Mega Bee.

We had about fifty (50) hives hitting the open Mega Bee feeders.

Question 2 - reply How long ?

Viable time is what ? At room temperature, in the hive, out of sun light and water, bacteria and yeast will stay viable (sleeping) dormant for months.

That is why Strong Microbials Inc. ships the Super DFM honeybee product in a Mylar vapor proof bag. If you keep the Super DFM Honeybee in the bag, at room temperature it will keep for two (2) years.
If you place the bag in cold storage, the expiration date is Five (5) years. 

*Hope this answers the Questions*


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> *Hope this answers the Questions*


Yup thanks. But not the patty question. How long with the bacterial and yeast live after mixed into the patty?


----------



## babybee

Not to offend anyone, but why on earth would the maker of this product run trials with a beekeeper with 50 hives rather than a larger beekeeper that is digging in bees on a daily basis??? If I were trying to create a product to get large sales in this industry I would want it in the hands of commercial guys for a variety of reasons. At least a larger guy could state the difference between treated and untreated colonies. If you lose 20 percent of hives treated with this product then I won't get too excited but maybe before you were losing 50 percent.


----------



## mathesonequip

babybee has an important point. bees are so variable that a 50 hive study is too small a sample to be statisticaly significant. early in this thread the term snake oil came up, this could well be the case.


----------



## justin

check post #3 for # of hives in trials or studies.


----------



## grozzie2

mathesonequip said:


> babybee has an important point. bees are so variable that a 50 hive study is too small a sample to be statisticaly significant.


It would be, if you are measuring the results in a 'by guess or by golly' methodology, ie, counting frames of brood etc. But my reading here seems to suggest the results are being measured by a lab analysis for specifc gut contents of the bees, in a side by side fashion. N=50 is more than adaquate to get a statistically significant result if you are measuring one variable precisely.


----------



## apis maximus

I just realized we are on the commercial forum. A place where bees are, by in large, considered livestock. I am not commercial and I hope I did offend any of you that are. Not here to throw stones or to criticize.
However, we are talking about a very complex topic that involves honey bees and our passion for this endeavor we call beekeeping. So I will plow along, because it is a fascinating topic. Bee nutrition that is.

Ian, you mention the parallel you draw with your cattle operation. By the way, them Charolais cattle you have are just beautiful. Clearly, you take great care of them. Beautiful country too around there for your bees and your cattle. You mention adding microbials/cultures to enhance your silaging process. Although you do agree that silage as a substrate comes with its microflora that will get the lactic fermentation going, you are looking for better ways to do things and you have adopted the adding of inoculants in your silage/haylage to speed up the fermentation and to improve the resulting silage. You're after improving that feed efficiency, right? Can't blame you, feed costs have just about tripled in the last 5-7 years...not only in Canada but in US also. Your feed is more than likely your largest variable expense...good thing for these high cattle prices.

Bear with me here...we'll get back to bees shortly. 

So, are you using any growth promotants in your cattle? 
In no particular order, I am referring to 1. Antimicrobials (ionophores are the ones used by the beef cattle industry), 2. Hormonal implants (estrogen and/or testosterone) and 3. Beta-agonists.

They are tools, legally available in the cattle industry, and believe me they are used. I am not saying that because I googled it...but because at one point or another in this chain, I am involved. 

I'll just refocus on the antimicrobials from here. Notice, I am not using the word antibiotics...All antibiotics are antimicrobials but not all the antimicrobials are antibiotics. For example, bleach and alcohol are antimicrobials but they are not antibiotics. Tetracycline, Tylosin(Tylan), Lyncomix are antibiotics.

We are talking about DFM (Direct Fed Microbials) right? We are talking under the hypothesis that these are the good guys we need, because, a lot of the existent good guys were wiped out or diminished by different insults. Or, they were not eliminated, but more of them will get the "eficiency" up and going.

I am not saying you, Ian,are using these tools in your cattle operation. But if I was you, and if I was to guess, I would say you are. And so, if you are, than you might as well add those inoculants to enhance those beneficial bacterial populations. You better.

Ionophores, the antimicrobials used by the beef cattle operations are presented to the farmer somewhere along these lines:

"*Ionophores improve feed efficiency* by *acting on the rumen microbes*. Most rumen microbes convert the complex fiber and starch in forage and grain into simple molecules that can be absorbed into the bloodstream to provide energy and protein to the animal. Some rumen bacteria (known as methanogens) convert the dietary fiber and starch into methane gas. Methane contains energy, but it cannot be absorbed by the animal, so it is belched out and wasted. *Ionophores improve feed efficiency and weight gain by selectively inhibiting methanogenic bacteria*, and allow the beneficial rumen bacteria to make more feed energy available to the animal."

Think for a moment on that concept of "selectively inhibiting"...Cattle are marvelous creatures. Their digestive system can do miracles. For real. But its the work of their digestive microbiota. The unseen things...The bugs inside...So, we have manipulated livestock diets since we knew how to raise animals. We have manipulated and influenced these bacterial populations for a long time. With the right enzymes, additives, bacterial inoculants, formulations, we can get these cattle to eat chicken ****...I mean litter... or turkey litter or other materials that one would never dream of. For every substrate that exists in nature, there is a microbe that will find it as food.

Back to the bees now. Back to the DFM.
Is the raw pollen, corbicular pollen brought into the hives the same as bee bread? Nutritionally speaking...
Well depends on what you use a measuring stick. In 1978, Shimanuki and Herbert at the Beltville lab set out a trial to look at this issue. Here is the full article:
http://www.apidologie.org/articles/...03/Apidologie_0044-8435_1978_9_1_ART0003.html

In their trial by using area of brood produced, they said they could not see significant differences between the pollen fed and bee bread fed bees. In their words: "*There was no difference in the nutritive value of bee bread and pollen when based on the number of bees reared to the sealed stage. Bees fed either the pollen or the bee bread patties reared 7,195.50 + 243.75 C 2M and 7,046.00 + 152.93 2M larvae,respectively, to the capped stage.*"

But now, that was in 1978. How many papers can you find from that time that talk about fungicides, pesticides, antibiotics, varoacides, etc., and their interaction with the bee bread microbiota? Yeah, we knew about the microbiota present in the bee bread, or in the bee's guts. Martha Gillian was beautifully describing these things in 1979. More and more work on this issues have popped out lately. The awareness that something is going on with these beneficial bugs is picking up. But in the mean time, some folks are saying, hey we kind of know what these bugs are, we can culture them, we can add them, they are not going to hurt. Not only we know these "beneficials" so we can culture most of them, but we know what enzymes they can produce. So, for a good measure we can add those too. We are doing it with humans all the time. Get on antibiotic (antimicrobial) treatment and you better get some yogurt...right? Or probiotics...heck, get on probiotics regardless. Go into any pharmacy and go to the aisles carrying probiotics. Do you think they carry them on the shelf for decorations? No, they sell the crap out of them.

Going to the presentation posted by *ehoffma2*, on this thread, one of the papers that shows up on page 21 of the presentation in a table format, is:Cremonez, T.M., De Jong, D., Bitondi, M.M. 1998. Quantification of hemolymph proteins as a fast method for testing protein diets for honey bees. J. Econ. Entomol. 91: 1284-1289.

Look at the level of protein and vitellogenin % found in the bee hemolymph of bees fed bee bread vs. raw pollen. Almost 2 times as much protein and 3 times as much vitellogenin for the bees that had bee bread vs. fresh pollen. And what's even more interesting...look at the the bees that had no protein available in their diets.

I'm gonna stop for now...way toooo long:scratch:


----------



## babybee

Ok so the study is on 1000 plus hives!! Umm so maybe 20 guys with around 50 hives each. Most of those guys have to buy bees every year to own any bees at all. I am joking I hope! If a scientist tests a higher level of good bacteria in the intestinal tract that's great, but it matters not if the hive is dead by spring.


----------



## mathesonequip

appis.. last time I checked bees and cattle were a lot different types of animals.


----------



## JSL

Apis and Ian bring up some interesting points with regard to ruminants and silage. Innoculants used in silage are primarily used as "preservatives" to acidify the feed which inhibits breakdown by competing molds and fungi. Cattle are ruminants, which means they are unable to directly break down cellulose plant materials, but the microbes in their stomachs can. This then makes the nutrients available to the cow. Bees do contain microbes in their digestive tracts, just like the rest of us, but do not appear to be "ruminants". Freshly collected pollen comes in contact with the microbes in the colony and begins a type of fermentation process which helps remove the covering on pollen grains and acidify the pollen which inhibits breakdown by competing molds and fungi. 

Thinking out loud... Are all fungicides bad? They are used more than most of us realize in our daily food supply. They help protect our food from molds and yeasts. Which is worse food poisoning by "bad" bacteria, or a little acidified food from antimicrobials?

ehoffma2, I think this is a good concept, but delivery and stability is key. It needs to work into an existing system, ie syrup or patties and then what does that mean in terms of antibiotic and fumagillin use. Could it be used as a "natural" preservative for patties?


----------



## Ian

Wow this forum has some thinkers mixed into the bunch!

What do I bring to the table in regards to this conversation? I'm the down right average speaking farmer looking for solutions. So I will ask the questions before I hand over the cheque book. There is a lot that is being tip toed around in this conversation. Never the less, as more attention is directed this way by beekeepers more of this is going to become common knowledge. As that has happened in the livestock industry.

Our cattle farm used no steroid or growth hormone. We breed our stock so that those treatments are not needed and thus the reason our business is thriving. Not to say our producers don't though. 
We are ontop of the latest vaccination programs with our stock and we will treat sick stock as needed.


----------



## apis maximus

mathesonequip said:


> appis.. last time I checked bees and cattle were a lot different types of animals.


Thanks for stating the obvious. 

But since this is Ian's topic, and for good reason he brought in this discussion, his cattle nutrition as a parallel, I personally thought to be relevant to the discussion at hand regarding Direct Fed Microbials. 

Yes, bees are not ruminants. But bees have a microbiota that synergistically works in their gut and also, bees do inoculate the pollen that they end up storing as bee bread with these bacteria. There is a fine balance at work in these processes. It's not me discovering this or nothing like that...but the work of people in this field is out there for anyone interested, or curious enough to look.
If you follow the thoughts of JSL aka Dr. Latshaw, he subscribes to the thought that those LAB bacteria, the fungi and their end products, are there just to store and preserve the nutrients. I am sure they do. 

LAB fermentation has been used to store and preserve food long time...way before Cheetos and Nachos came along. 

Yet, if you follow and look in the literature, a lot of enhancement takes place while these bacteria do their work. We are talking about nutrient availability and nutrient value.

Here is a relatively recent paper that has some nice insights on the issue:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0032962

An interesting point for those not interested in reading the whole thing:

"*Honey bees are one of the few insects known to have genes that
encode cellulases [32], but their persistent difficulty with pollen
digestion is evidenced by the substantial proportion of pollen grains that are not fully broken down in the guts of workers [33].
Furthermore, most pollen sources do not provide a complete
complement of the nutrients that honey bees require or may
contain only trace amounts of some essential amino acids [34–
36], which means that bees must collect a mix of pollen types
when they can.
To alleviate some of these nutritional challenges, honey bees
typically do not consume raw pollen. Instead, workers process
pollen that they collect by packing it into honeycomb, adding
glandular secretions to it, and sealing it with a drop of honey [37].
Pollen processed in this way is matured into bee bread after several
weeks, presumably due to the activity of microorganisms that are
found in bee bread, but are absent in unprocessed pollen [38]. Bee
bread is chemically different from pollen: it has a higher vitamin
content [39], lower amounts of complex polysaccharides, a shift in
amino acid profile [40], and lower pH [41,42]. It is routinely
suggested that these changes in nutritional composition are a result
of the metabolic activity of the microflora that is present in stored
pollen..."
*

Not trying to convince you, nor especially needing you to be convinced. Do you see? Conviction is where you stop learning...and start preaching or burning unbelievers. Refining the search with others is much more fun. And useful. My suggestion: remain unconvinced and never stop learning.

Peace.


----------



## grozzie2

Ian said:


> Our cattle farm used no steroid or growth hormone.


To me, that suggests you are on top of the marketing curve. Every day we see new adverts on TV in this respect. A month ago, it was the binge of A&W adds promoting the concept of 'no steroids or hormones in our beef'. The month before that, it was Presidents Choice saying the same about the pork. And the latest one that really caught my attention, a recent tv advert from Presidents Choice. As of _now_, no artificial flavours, or colors allowed in any product with the Presidents Choice label on it. It's a very well done forceful add the way they present it, 'As of today, NONE, we will let our food speak for itself with color and flavour'.

I think this speaks volumes for what is happening in the industry as a whole, we wouldn't see nation wide marketing campaigns along those lines, if they didn't fare extremely well in test markets. The add I saw numerous times, is forceful, and a veiled challenge to all other brand names to 'beat that' when competeing for the trendy consumer's purchase dollar.

But, that strays from the original topic, so, to drag this back on topic, we are talking about bee feed. On this same vein, I have a question. Looking at various supplements out there, another jumps out at me, for both the adds, and availability reasons (Sorry Kieth, cant seem to buy your stuff here, so, gotta look at what we can buy). BeePro from Mann Lake has all the 'right stuff' according to the adds, but, they also have UltraBee, and the catalog page for that one has the big blue star saying 'Now with Probiotics', and it runs about $15 more for the 50lb bag. So this leads to my dumb question.

The big 'Now with Probiotics' flash makes me wonder. Is this tested amongst bee hives for efficacy, or, is it 'market tested' to see if an extra $15 in premium can be had per bag, selling to a less price sensative, and more buzzword sensative market ? Reading the fine print farther, it also has the 'no soy' bullet item, which hit's another big buzzword for a lot of folks, it implies, but doesn't state, less gmo.

Inquiring minds would like to know....


----------



## JSL

Apis,

Perhaps I didn't state my thoughts clearly. I think the primary benefit of pollen fermentation is food preservation. I agree the composition changes too, but what I am not clear on is what came first, and which is more beneficial to the bees? If the change in nutrient composition a result of necessity or simply a side effect. More theoretical than absolute I guess.

Grozzie2,

On the feedstuffs open market, most bulk ingredients are priced by their protein content and availability. Then there are premiums for such items as non-GMO, organic, probiotics, etc. Generally there is a higher cost of production for such items, but your question spot on. What is the real cost of production vs the perceived value by the customer? I tend to look to what the larger producers employ as they crunch every last number, but there is a market for most things, you just have to find it.


----------



## Ian

grozzie2 said:


> The big 'Now with Probiotics' flash makes me wonder.


Makes for a great sales pitch, doen't it... lol who knows
ehoffma2, thanks for your contribution to this topic. The information you shared is what we are all screaming for.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Grozzie2 post #79 Very well said.


----------



## JSL

Keith,

I think you wrote you use probiotics... Would you share the reasoning behind them in your supplement?


----------



## JRG13

Didn't Keith mention his reasoning already in another thread, if I recall correctly....


----------



## Keith Jarrett

JSL said:


> Keith,
> 
> I think you wrote you use probiotics... Would you share the reasoning behind them in your supplement?


No, I never said I use probiotics , I did say however we use a micro flora builder in our sub.


----------



## apis maximus

Keith Jarrett said:


> I did say however we use a micro flora builder in our sub.


Would you share the reasoning behind using a micro flora builder in your sub?


----------



## Ian

JRG13 said:


> Didn't Keith mention his reasoning already in another thread, if I recall correctly....


Can someone tell me the difference between probiotics and microflora? and why there is a huge hush hush around it?
If it's in there, then there will be a good reason for it being there... right?
ehoffma2 makes no bones about it, information coming from Stong Microbial, but that cant be trusted right, because its in house study??? At least it's something to work on!


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Ole Chef would be proud.


----------



## Ian

Keith Jarrett said:


> Your last statement, there is an answer, but your train of thoughts & mine are miles apart.


Cheers to that!


----------



## apis maximus

Ian said:


> Can someone tell me the difference between probiotics and microflora? and why there is a huge hush hush around it?
> If it's in there, then there will be a good reason for it being there... right?


I'll give it a shot...

Probiotics and microflora...they are both microorganisms. Bacteria. Other terms such as microbiota are also used, sometimes interchangeably.

Probiotics, as the name implies is...pro & bio..or pro life. They were bunched under this name because they are considered beneficial. They break down certain substrates (food stuffs for them) and by doing so, they "help" with lets say digestion, or further digestion in this case. 
So, all probiotics are microorganisms, but not all microorganisms are probiotics. 

Going back to your cattle...a lot of the microrganisms present in your cow's digestive tracts are pathogenic in nature, yet in a fine equilibrium they just don't get to create a clinical picture( ie. diarrhea, bloat).


----------



## JRG13

apis touched on it well. Microflora boosters help establish, maintain, or achieve ideal conditions in the host organism for it's natural microflora to survive (the beneficial ones). I don't think this necessarily means live cultures, enzymes etc... It could be something as simple as maintaining a certain PH where beneficial organisms survive better so they out compete less desirable ones.

Pro-biotics kind of take it to the next level, actually innoculating, using enzymes, or introducing new organisms which might be more efficient at breaking down whatever the host organism is ingesting.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

apis maximus said:


> Would you share the reasoning behind using a micro flora builder in your sub?


A.M., I am a beekeeper with thousands of hives, But, I'm also a pollen sub maker, been doing it for about 30 years, first generation. So when I set out to make sub, it's not about telling everybody in a full page ad that I have the most protein pollen sub of anybody, but rather I try to look at the most cost/benefit for the pound of product fed to the hive. Nutra Bee sub has around 20% protein & 10% fats. Now to your question, how can we make sure that all or most of all that 30% is utilize. A micro Flora builder promotes a healthy digestive track, a healthy digestive track absorbs more nutrients. So, as a sub producer that sells sub, I want the beekeeper, that buys my sub to absorb as much nutrients as possible for the money spent.

Most of our immune system is in our gut.


----------



## Ian

So does Probiotics pertain to this conversation at all? Is Strong Microbial introducing bacteria into the bees digestive system to provide a better environment to promote or "boosting" micro flora in the bees gut?

so Keith, your not even adding bacteria into your mix ...


----------



## apis maximus

JRG13 said:


> It could be something as simple as maintaining a certain PH where beneficial organisms survive better so they out compete less desirable ones.


:thumbsup: Yes indeed!
It is done a lot in a lot of applications. 
Like I said before, anything that exist in nature can become food substrate for something else. I am talking bacteria here, as in doing the eating and breaking down whatever the substrate is. Heck, there is bacteria that eats oil(as in crude, petroleum) for lunch when one provides the right conditions.

One can manipulate the pH, which in turn will "favor" a particular bacteria and "disfavor" another. There are applications in the chicken industry/turkey industry/beef industry/hog industry, that take advantage of this. Breaking up chicken litter, or bedding used in industrial housing of livestock uses many times low pH solutions to "encourage" certain types of bacteria to multiply and grow, that in turn, will break down whatever one need to have broken down.
Yes, one can add extra bacterial populations into the mix...or even enzymes...or just tilt the pH in favor of those already existing bacteria, that can thrive in this condition, and they'll do the rest.

Back to the bee subs...there is a reason why all the subs out there have a low pH. Bee bread has a lower pH than fresh pollen...an acidic environment pretty much rules in a healthy, thriving hive.


----------



## apis maximus

Thanks for the reply Keith.


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> Yup thanks. But not the patty question. How long with the bacterial and yeast live after mixed into the patty?


*Ok, Sorry I missed the patty question. - here is my best answer*

I'm all about data data data. I have no interest in anecdotal evidence nor beekeeper opinion.

I want the data to talk, that is why we ran a blind study and did not tell Strong Microbials Inc.

what we sent them until after the analysis. That said, I have No data on microbes in wet patties.

Per our technical discussions on wet vs dry, I suggest to you that it is Not long. In a wet condition

the microbes will Not be in a sleeping state. If they are exposed to oxygen, they will not do well.

Most or many of the bacteria and yeast need an anaerobic environment. They need to be in an 

environment that does not have oxygen. Think hydrogen per oxide H2O2. it kills lots of stuff.

One of the active agents in Super DFM honeybee is designed to consume Oxygen. Intellectual Property.

*Ok, there you have an answer on Wet patties - do not do it.*


----------



## ehoffma2

*I could not agree more, Well said. we need micro flora builders for healthy bees*



Keith Jarrett said:


> A.M., I am a beekeeper with thousands of hives, But, I'm also a pollen sub maker, been doing it for about 30 years, first generation. So when I set out to make sub, it's not about telling everybody in a full page ad that I have the most protein pollen sub of anybody, but rather I try to look at the most cost/benefit for the pound of product fed to the hive. Nutra Bee sub has around 20% protein & 10% fats. Now to your question, how can we make sure that all or most of all that 30% is utilize. A micro Flora builder promotes a healthy digestive track, a healthy digestive track absorbs more nutrients. So, as a sub producer that sells sub, I want the beekeeper, that buys my sub to absorb as much nutrients as possible for the money spent.
> 
> Most of our immune system is in our gut.


----------



## JSL

Keith Jarrett said:


> So, as a sub producer that sells sub, I want the beekeeper, that buys my sub to absorb as much nutrients as possible for the money spent.


I understand this. With probiotics it seems implied that they "predigest" nutrients as in the case of silage. That is beneficial when talking about forage diets with a cellulose base. However formulated grain diets have a much higher digestibility. Combine that with non-ruminant animals and why would you want to feed the microbes a valuable feed? Again, just thinking out loud...


----------



## JSL

So why the difference in opinion here? ehoffma2 says no to patty usage and Keith says yes.


----------



## ehoffma2

*It is my understanding that Mann Lake Ltd will have Super DFM Honeybee in their catalog in February 2015. * That said, If you buy animal probiotics and place it in bee feed, is it going to work ? I suggest to you that you need to work with a real microbiologist.

http://www.strongmicrobials.com/about#us




grozzie2 said:


> To me, that suggests you are on top of the marketing curve. Every day we see new adverts on TV in this respect. A month ago, it was the binge of A&W adds promoting the concept of 'no steroids or hormones in our beef'. The month before that, it was Presidents Choice saying the same about the pork. And the latest one that really caught my attention, a recent tv advert from Presidents Choice. As of _now_, no artificial flavours, or colors allowed in any product with the Presidents Choice label on it. It's a very well done forceful add the way they present it, 'As of today, NONE, we will let our food speak for itself with color and flavour'.
> 
> I think this speaks volumes for what is happening in the industry as a whole, we wouldn't see nation wide marketing campaigns along those lines, if they didn't fare extremely well in test markets. The add I saw numerous times, is forceful, and a veiled challenge to all other brand names to 'beat that' when competeing for the trendy consumer's purchase dollar.
> 
> But, that strays from the original topic, so, to drag this back on topic, we are talking about bee feed. On this same vein, I have a question. Looking at various supplements out there, another jumps out at me, for both the adds, and availability reasons (Sorry Kieth, cant seem to buy your stuff here, so, gotta look at what we can buy). BeePro from Mann Lake has all the 'right stuff' according to the adds, but, they also have UltraBee, and the catalog page for that one has the big blue star saying 'Now with Probiotics', and it runs about $15 more for the 50lb bag. So this leads to my dumb question.
> 
> The big 'Now with Probiotics' flash makes me wonder. Is this tested amongst bee hives for efficacy, or, is it 'market tested' to see if an extra $15 in premium can be had per bag, selling to a less price sensative, and more buzzword sensative market ? Reading the fine print farther, it also has the 'no soy' bullet item, which hit's another big buzzword for a lot of folks, it implies, but doesn't state, less gmo.
> 
> Inquiring minds would like to know....


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> *Ok, there you have an answer on Wet patties - do not do it.*


Thanks for that input ehoffma2. Keep us posted on your work. Very interesting indeed!


----------



## Ian

JSL said:


> So why the difference in opinion here? ehoffma2 says no to patty usage and Keith says yes.


I am starting to think Keith does not use microbes in his patties. I had always been lead the assumption that he does, but he actually never ever says that directly, and always walking around the questions towards it...
"A micro Flora builder promotes a healthy digestive track"
Although it may "appear" to be a difference in opinion. They are not even talking about the same thing. Not that Keith leads that opinion, just lets the assumption hang...


----------



## JSL

Ian,

You may very well be correct. Perhaps it is a poor assumption on my part to think mirco flora builder is somewhat synonymous with a probiotic or prebiotic.

There are not that many registered microbes for feed supplements, so again, it may be a poor assumption on my part that they would be handled in a similar manner.


----------



## squarepeg

randy oliver talks about a 'factor x', something that the bees obtain from natural forage that resulted in his positive control group (which was fed natural pollen) doing slightly better than any of the supplements he compared against in his trial. it is reasonable to assume that that microbes present in natural forage could be the 'factor x'.


----------



## Ian

A few years back I sat in on a convention topic of irradiating bee equipment. They showed studdy results of irradiated equipment eliminating AFB from the infected equipment. But later on irradiated equipment formed higher infections of viral diseases. (Don't ask me to find the studdy, I just sat in on the presentation)
The presenters pointed to that X factor contributing to the results. They theorized possibly a symbiotic relationship of some beneficial organisms contribute to the colony function, where as the irradiation killed them off.


----------



## Ian

JSL said:


> Ian,
> 
> You may very well be correct. Perhaps it is a poor assumption on my part to think mirco flora builder is somewhat synonymous with a probiotic or prebioticr.


Not a poor assumption on anyone's part. If the obvious assumption is wrong, it would be easy easy easy to simply correct it


----------



## Mbeck

JSL said:


> So why the difference in opinion here? ehoffma2 says no to patty usage and Keith says yes.


Maybe Keith uses stuff that promotes peak performance and healthy development of the bees natural digestive process? 

Think Green.


----------



## JSL

squarepeg said:


> randy oliver talks about a 'factor x', something that the bees obtain from natural forage that resulted in his positive control group (which was fed natural pollen) doing slightly better than any of the supplements he compared against in his trial. it is reasonable to assume that that microbes present in natural forage could be the 'factor x'.


I don't thing there is such a thing as the "factor x". It is more involved than a single ingredient. From what I can see so far, bee diets lack the formulation and testing seen in most other animal diets. Combine that with free choice in foraging honey bees and they much prefer natural pollen. We can make an artificial diet, but it is hard to make them eat it. Here is an example. I raise a small flock of chickens for eggs. If I let them free range, but provide a balanced ration for them, egg production drops, as does consumption of their balanced ration. If I confine them to their chicken house, feed consumption increases, and so does egg production. However, I enjoy watching them foraging in the yard.


----------



## B&E

Keith Jarrett said:


> A.M., I am a beekeeper with thousands of hives, But, I'm also a pollen sub maker, been doing it for about 30 years, first generation. So when I set out to make sub, it's not about telling everybody in a full page ad that I have the most protein pollen sub of anybody, but rather I try to look at the most cost/benefit for the pound of product fed to the hive. Nutra Bee sub has around 20% protein & 10% fats. Now to your question, how can we make sure that all or most of all that 30% is utilize. A micro Flora builder promotes a healthy digestive track, a healthy digestive track absorbs more nutrients. So, as a sub producer that sells sub, I want the beekeeper, that buys my sub to absorb as much nutrients as possible for the money spent.


You've probably been asked this, but would it be possible to try some "secret brew" in Canada? How to?


----------



## squarepeg

JSL said:


> I don't think there is such a thing as the "factor x". It is more involved than a single ingredient... We can make an artificial diet, but it is hard to make them eat it.


ok then, 'factor*s* x'

isn't it possible that what 'it' is that makes natural pollen more palatable to the bees has a microbial substrate?


----------



## ehoffma2

squarepeg said:


> ok then, 'factor*s* x'
> 
> isn't it possible that what 'it' is that makes natural pollen more palatable to the bees has a microbial substrate?


*The honey bees bring back to the hive microbes when they forage for both nectar and pollen. * If you remember AFB and EFB, they seem to express them selves AFTER the honey flow, not during. That said, a nectar dearth is a stress time for the hive.
Most of the data I have seen, is that hive microbial populations are like a sine wave.
We will freeze bees every three weeks next year and send them to the microbiologist
for testing. When I have this data available, I will publish it.


----------



## Ian

How often is this treatment administered?


----------



## squarepeg

interesting. i was thinking more in terms of naturally occurring yeasts and/or their biproducts. i assume that those of you who are making this your life's work are looking carefully at pollen microbiota, and i wouldn't be surprised if it is very difficult to quantify.


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> How often is this treatment administered?


*Question - how often should you treat with Super DFM Honeybee ?*

Based on our early data, The spring treatments were key during the time you make splits.
Each split should receive a treatment. The other data point we have, based on our early data,
is that during the creation of Winter Bees, (August in Michigan) a treatment should be applied.
You need to treat the hives with Super DFM honeybee before all of the winter bees are created.

The data we are still working on is What about the Summer time ? What about the stress time after the main Summer Nectar flow is over. What about JUNE / JULY ?

The answer to that question is: We do Not have the Summer data yet. we are working on it.
That said, we have no data to analyze, to determine if a Summer treatment is needed.

*So, The short answer is - at this point in time - Two treatments are required.*


----------



## JSL

ehoffma2 said:


> *The honey bees bring back to the hive microbes when they forage for both nectar and pollen. * If you remember AFB and EFB, they seem to express them selves AFTER the honey flow, not during. That said, a nectar dearth is a stress time for the hive.


I am not certain your pathology characterization of AFB and EFB are accurate. L. Bailey wrote a nice book on honey bee diseases.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0095056 - Recent study showing the interaction between gut specific microbes and environmental microbes.


----------



## squarepeg

thanks for the link jsl, that's a new one to me.


----------



## Ian

squarepeg said:


> ok then, 'factor*s* x'
> 
> isn't it possible that what 'it' is that makes natural pollen more palatable to the bees has a microbial substrate?


would this not be an easy thing to find out, with a good microscope and a microbiologist looking through it?


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> *So, The short answer is - at this point in time - Two treatments are required.*


Do you know what kind of costs are involved with administering this treatment? Per hive per one treatment.


----------



## squarepeg

Ian said:


> would this not be an easy thing to find out, with a good microscope and a microbiologist looking through it?


my understanding is that culturing fungi is tricky, but it's not my area of expertise. 

since fermentation is a big part of turning field forage into beebread, it makes some sense that the bees would find certain pollens more 'palatable' if they should also happen to contain yeasts favorable for the efficient conversion of raw product into usable feed. 

bees have an incredible sense of smell, perhaps they are sniffing for just the right toe jam?


----------



## camero7

Ian said:


> Do you know what kind of costs are involved with administering this treatment? Per hive per one treatment.


 According to the Hoffmans it's about $1.00 per hive per treatment - 1 kilo bag = $100.00. I assume they will discount for larger amounts.


----------



## davidsbees

The biggest concern I have with DFM is the cost. You can buy 50 lbs of enzyme blend for less than 100 dollars a few ounces will treat 2000 lbs of feed. It's not packaged for larger operations. I do like the concept I tried it a few years ago but enzymes were a better fit for the patties.


----------



## Ian

Ya $1 per hive per treatment sounds expensive. But I spent more than that on a fumagillin treatment without thinking twice on the cost. I was however able to measure the efficacy of that treatment to justify the cost. I dont know how a beekeeper would go about measuring the efficacy of applying this treatment. A control group would be needed to help compare colony condition I suppose.


----------



## Ian

You see even with the silage innoculant we apply, we can not see a difference looking at in yard performance. There are far too many variable at play to make any kind of measurement. (same can be said with bees) Unlike studdies where as everything is tracked and documented, then compared. We typically only use products that we can tangibly measure, otherwise how does someone cut through all the crap?? The reason we use the silage innoculant is to help preserve the pile while the face is open. We see a dramatic reduction in rot waste. Many conclusion can be drawn from that in regards to feed quality but simply put, less waste, more feed.

To use DFM, id have to buy into the philosophy of inoculating the hives with microbes to aid in digestion. I need a bit of proof the treatments is working.


----------



## davidsbees

Is there a chance that the microbes could over populate and compete for nutrition?


----------



## ehoffma2

davidsbees said:


> The biggest concern I have with DFM is the cost. You can buy 50 lbs of enzyme blend for less than 100 dollars a few ounces will treat 2000 lbs of feed. It's not packaged for larger operations. I do like the concept I tried it a few years ago but enzymes were a better fit for the patties.


*Reply back to Davidsbees*

one - If you buy the product at the wholesale price, it is much less than one dollar per treatment.

two - If you need the product in a 10 kilo size, Strong microbials Inc. can do that !

Three - I'm not sure what is in that enzyme blend. Are you getting your moneys worth ?


----------



## ehoffma2

JSL said:


> I am not certain your pathology characterization of AFB and EFB are accurate. L. Bailey wrote a nice book on honey bee diseases.
> 
> http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0095056 - Recent study showing the interaction between gut specific microbes and environmental microbes.


*Agree - Maybe I miss communicated my thoughts on environmental microbes *

Discussion

Food storage is a critical fitness component of perennial social insects [62]. As a step towards understanding the microbial succession that occurs during pollen storage in the honey bee, we sought to differentiate between bee-mediated microbial inoculations occurring at the flower and microbes introduced as a consequence of environmental exposure. We captured inbound pollen foragers and sequenced the bacterial DNA from individual guts and pooled foreguts (crops), and from the associated corbicular pollen on their hind legs using high throughput sequencing. Our results do not support the presence of 13 core crop “LAB” bacteria and associated beebread preservation proposed by previous culture dependent studies [18]–[24]. Similar to acidic and sugar rich environments of fermented food and silage, the crops of foragers were dominated by Lactobacillus and Alpha 2.2 (Acetobacteraceae), but also contained a small number of sporadically abundant Enterobacteriaceae that likely have their origins in the pollination environment. We found that bacteria considered core to the midgut and hindgut can be found in the crops of pollen foragers, but on average, less than 4% of the bacteria identified from corbicular pollen can be considered core gut bacteria. Similarly, 12 of 13 putative crop-specific LAB strains [18]–[24] are simply a subset of the core gut bacteria, occur at low frequency in the crop and gut, and are not placed on corbicular pollen at the flower. The majority of bacteria found in corbicular pollen does not originate with the crop or gut, but appears to originate from the pollination environment.


----------



## ehoffma2

davidsbees said:


> Is there a chance that the microbes could over populate and compete for nutrition?


*Is there a chance that the microbes could over populate and compete for nutrition? *

Langstroth in his writings, called bacteria "micro fungi" because the word bacteria did not exist.

I would best use the analogy of weeds in a field. There are limiting factors for the population.

The bacteria and yeasts do not consume nutrition. The by-products of microbes create 

nutrition that the honeybee can consume. If you look at the Blind study data,

The trial gave a hive a 100 X exposure of microbes. We blasted the hive with bacteria and

yeast. I called it an LD 50 test, The team, called it an optimal dosage test.

The end result is, that there is a saturation level that is reached in the honeybees.

Right, now that is my best hive for over wintering. it has a nice size winter cluster.

I would not suggest that one should apply more product than recommended.

Ten grams ( one table spoon) is enough for one hive treatment.


----------



## apis maximus

Very funny how a potentially, interesting, informative and challenging topic has turned basically into a sales pitch. But hey, what's new with that?

A very complex and fascinating topic, can't really be discussed and debated with one liners, bumper sticker, superficial type talk...where it becomes hard to see and understand who's got what dogs in this virtual "fight".

It is not the first time I noticed...and it's not prevalent on this forum only...folks would post links to interesting materials indeed, to either support a point or make a point...and the participants would either ignore or ridicule, but then shoot from the hip and muddy the waters even more. 

What's even worse, sometimes the link/source providers themselves fail to read and ultimately understand the material to the extent that an intelligent conversation can take place. Dr. Latshaw, I am not referring to you with this statement.

Y'all keep on trucking...


----------



## deknow

There is a very interesting slide in a presentation made by olofson/vasquez from sweden. In recent years they have gone into commercial production and marketing of Bee derived microbes, and my own experience and also what I hear from others is that they are not very communicitive.

I've posted the slide before..it shows an analysis of the atmosphere in the hive....with and without winter feeding. The winter feeding chart shows hugely elevated levels of formic acid in the hive atmosphere.

I would tend to assume that this is due to the feeding stimulating some subset of the flora that produce formic acid as a metabolite of whatever feed component they have in overabundance.

It would be hard to imagine that such a deviation from the norm isn't indicindicative (and causative, and response) of a profound change in all the microflora (intestinal bacteria, bee bread related fungi and yeasts, honey crop inhabitants)....not simply one metric that is out of whack.


----------



## ehoffma2

apis maximus said:


> Very funny how a potentially, interesting, informative and challenging topic has turned basically into a sales pitch. But hey, what's new with that?
> 
> A very complex and fascinating topic, can't really be discussed and debated with one liners, bumper sticker, superficial type talk...where it becomes hard to see and understand who's got what dogs in this virtual "fight".
> 
> It is not the first time I noticed...and it's not prevalent on this forum only...folks would post links to interesting materials indeed, to either support a point or make a point...and the participants would either ignore or ridicule, but then shoot from the hip and muddy the waters even more.
> 
> What's even worse, sometimes the link/source providers themselves fail to read and ultimately understand the material to the extent that an intelligent conversation can take place. Dr. Latshaw, I am not referring to you with this statement.
> 
> Y'all keep on trucking...


*I have been doing my best to only reply back to questions that have been posted*

I too want the topic to be informative and interesting and yes challenging! - ehoffma2


----------



## JSL

ehoffma2 said:


> The bacteria and yeasts do not consume nutrition.


They actually do, but we try to emphasize and propagate those that do the least amount of damage to our precious food. Some of the by products produced are beneficial, so we "trade" them nutrients, or let them eat a little in exchange for preserving the rest. 

Apis,

Thanks, but I am just as guilty. There is so much information out there. It is hard to keep track of even a small fraction of it. I think that is what makes discussions like this so interesting. That and often times, I stop an wonder how we can read the same piece and have entirely different interpretations.


----------



## camero7

> A very complex and fascinating topic, can't really be discussed and debated with one liners, bumper sticker, superficial type talk...where it becomes hard to see and understand who's got what dogs in this virtual "fight".


couldn't agree more. It seems there might be something to the idea... not sure it's snake oil but there might be better and cheaper ways to achieve the same results. I hope the discussion continues. I'm spending lots of time looking up terms I never knew existed and learning a lot. Should have paid attention in chemistry and biology years ago.


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> There is a very interesting slide in a presentation made by olofson/vasquez from sweden. In recent years they have gone into commercial production and marketing of Bee derived microbes, and my own experience and also what I hear from others is that they are not very communicitive.
> 
> I've posted the slide before..it shows an analysis of the atmosphere in the hive....with and without winter feeding. The winter feeding chart shows hugely elevated levels of formic acid in the hive atmosphere.
> 
> I would tend to assume that this is due to the feeding stimulating some subset of the flora that produce formic acid as a metabolite of whatever feed component they have in overabundance.
> 
> It would be hard to imagine that such a deviation from the norm isn't indicindicative (and causative, and response) of a profound change in all the microflora (intestinal bacteria, bee bread related fungi and yeasts, honey crop inhabitants)....not simply one metric that is out of whack.


*Could you PLEASE re-post the link or URL to the slide*

The Sweden team has some very interesting data published. 

I try to read as much of it as I can. Please post where the material is - thanks much!


----------



## deknow

http://www.apimondia.com/congresses... survive without them - OLOFSSON Tobias C.pdf


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> http://www.apimondia.com/congresses... survive without them - OLOFSSON Tobias C.pdf


*I like slide nine (9) that talks about what the bacteria produce*

Lactic acid, acetic acid, formic acid and hydrogen peroxide, antibiotics ( bacteriocins ) etc.

Bacteriocins are proteinaceous toxins produced by bacteria to inhibit the growth of similar or closely related bacterial strain(s). They are typically considered to be narrow spectrum antibiotics, though this has been debated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteriocin


----------



## deknow

Well, a wolf pees all over everything to repel other (male) wolves (and probably to attract female wolves) from their territory. 

Although there is a very important function for the pee....and probably an excess of pee is produced in order to mark territory more effectively, it remains that pee is pee, and is produced as a function of our biological inputs and processees, not because something is required to mark territory.

Likewise, I think simple products like organic acids are more likely to be the simple metabolites of what that organism eats.

More sophisticated toxins (like antibiotics) are more likely weaponry.


----------



## grozzie2

JSL said:


> That and often times, I stop an wonder how we can read the same piece and have entirely different interpretations.


That's a common problem with an online forum, strangers discussing issues with other strangers, and no real understanding of each background.

I haven't viewed anything here in this thread as a sales pitch, but more about folks getting to the nitty gritty of complex questions, in the best manner available. This particular thread is interesting / fascinating, because we are seeing some direct answers to difficult questions. As far as who has what interest where, it's a learned skill over the years, to differentiate between a sales pitch, and information sharing. I've seen a lot of information in this thread, and some of that information goes directly to cost, because that's the question being asked. I haven't seen any hard sell pitches that I recognize as such, and even if I had, I've learned a LOT. Is it surprising that the folks that know the most about a product we haven't heard much about, are those directly involved with it's development ? Nope, not a surprise at all. Is it refreshing to see them posting answers to questions, that include pointers to hard data in test results ? Ya, I find that very informative. I like hard numbers, because as the old saying goes, facts dont lie, that doesn't happen till you start interpreting the facts.

I'm still puzzling on one detail tho, and that is how we as beekeepers can get measurable metrics on some of these things. It's bucketing down rain and high winds, so I haven't gone out to harvest a few bees yet, but I'm going to soon. they are going under the knife, and I'm going to take some high resolution photos. Photos posted earlier in the thread regarding the fat content and such, there has got to be a way we can get a repeatable and measureable metric on it, without expensive lab equipment. I'm thinking, the same microscope we use to count nosema, can possibly give that answer too. When I set up the scale hive, I didn't know where it would lead, but, eventually it led to a totally unexpected set of answers to some questions. If I start taking high resolution photographs of bee cross sections, I dunno where it's going to lead, but, I suspect it's going to play right into this discussion, but it'll take a year or two before I've figured out what is the measurable metric.

It's not the 60's anymore folks, technology to do stuff 'at home' is available, and cheap today. Ideas that have already come out of this thread, that are fairly strait forward to look into in detail.

a) A photo posted earlier, showing fat content in bee abdomens suggesting it's an important thing. Should be fairly strait forward to figure out a way to do a measureable metric by taking hi res photos of abdomen cross sections at appropriate times. Will take a little more time to figure out what it means.
b) JSL suggested abdomen size is an interesting thing, and if you have been doing it long enough, you 'just know' by looking at the bees coming and going. I dont 'just know' by looking at them, but, it's not hard to take photos, then do quantifiable measurements over time. I'd be thrilled if I can walk out to the bee yard, open a few hives, take pictures of the bees on the frames, then feed those photos into some sort of analysis, which spits out measureable results, that give me a repeatable year over year measure on how the hive health is progressing. And that's the key, a repeatable number that I can use for comparative purposes.

If we want to do detailed analysis on things, it's very important to get all subjective thoughts out of the data stream, and boil it all down to repeatable measurements. Reference Randy's study on various feeds, he went to considerable effort to try minimize subjectivity when it came to doing the actual counts. The same person doing the counts, in the manner used for almond grading, and bouncing around the yard in a random fashion to ensure objectivity. Could it have been done better, maybe, my own personal thoughts are, it would have been more objective if it was done thru photographs and programmed computer analysis of the photos, but that's WAY outside of his realm. It happens to be dead center in the middle of my realm, so I'm more than a little bit interested in figuring out 'what exactly am I trying to measure' ?


----------



## Flyer Jim

davidsbees said:


> You can buy 50 lbs of enzyme blend for less than 100 dollars


Do you have a link to this?

Thanks, Jim


----------



## davidsbees

Canadian Bio but the shipping was more then the product and lasted a few years but has a long shelf life. Canadianbio.com is the web site.


----------



## squarepeg

JSL said:


> http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0095056 - Recent study showing the interaction between gut specific microbes and environmental microbes.


i tried taking a look at it joe, but in all honesty most of it was over my head.

from that paper:

"The majority of bacteria found in corbicular pollen does not originate with the crop or gut, but appears to originate from the pollination environment.... we find that corbicular pollen is a microbially diverse environment and likely the source of several plant associated bacteria commonly found in hive food stores."

the authors seem to be making the point that special communities of microbes are being brought in along with and as part of field forage. the inference is that some of them may have necessary and beneficial roles to play:

"Actinobacteria are renowned for their vast arsenal of metabolic weaponry used to inhibit fungal growth, a common cause of pollen spoilage..."

do you think these exogenous microbes could be a significant part of those 'factors x' that have our supplements coming up a little short when compared to natural forage?

are the additives to feed being discussed in this thread attempting to make up for this potential shortfall?

are bacteria more important than yeast with respect to the fermentation of bee bread?

was there some other point you were trying to make by providing the link?

many thanks.


----------



## davidsbees

I used Canadian bio because they were the only ones that would talk to me and help work out what I wanted to accomplish. It's my understanding that prebiotics and micro flora builder are the same or similar product the ones I've seen are just yeast cell wall (Brewers yeast with all the good stuff removed).


----------



## JSL

Squarepeg,

I think the majority of the acidification of pollen is carried out by lactobacillus species. What I found interesting about the article was how specific the bacteria were depending on the region of the gut and even the floral source. For me, it was kind along the lines that deknow was pointing out in that just because something is there doesn't always imply a causation.  It was also interesting to read in the article how variable the bacterial populations were between individual bees. The authors noted that the target samples were collected from basically "wild" hives. Perhaps there is no clear answer, but which came first the colonization of bacteria or the bees. Is one dependent upon the other, or do they simply coexist. I think research suggests there is a benefit...


----------



## Ian

apis maximus said:


> Very funny how a potentially, interesting, informative and challenging topic has turned basically into a sales pitch. But hey, what's new with that?...


Please note the title of the thread; Super DFM Honeybees. I'm inquiring about this product and I have received a truck load of feedback, including open forth giving feedback from a beekeeper involved with the trials himself. This has been an interesting thread and I appreciate the time put into the conversation.

Muddy waters... It was muddy to begin with!


----------



## deknow

There are two separate sets of microbes to consider.

1. Microbes brought in from the environment...they have roles in the hive, but vary in composition based upon what microbes are being brought in. These are more than incidental.

2. Microbes who are part of a heritable culture that is intetdependent with the bees. We know the most about the gut bacteria in this area. In the case of the gut bacteria the relative composition of the culture varies with inputs and conditions...as.well as position in the alimentary canal. What is worth noting is that many of these are novel (only exist in the bee gut) and are not easily displaced. The Moran study showed the effects of antibiotic use 20+ years ago in the populations in the guts of Dee Lusby ' s bees.


----------



## Ian

JSL said:


> . It was also interesting to read in the article how variable the bacterial populations were between individual bees.


We always think of bees, the collective unit as being one organism. The health of all individuals derteine the overall health of that one super organism.
That's where Inoculation of the hive with microbs to decrease that variability of bacteria populations between bees. And for a buck a hive and 5 min of our time. Cheap and easy.


----------



## squarepeg

understood joe, (sort of  ), thanks again. the hive ecosystem is a fascinating and complex one indeed, and my layman's take is that science is just scratching the surface with respect to understanding it.

ian, you would have to trust that the inoculation is achieving a more desirable balance that you would have otherwise. there are medical conditions in humans in which beneficial organisms can become problematic if their populations are allowed to rise out of balance.

as has been mentioned, field trials with controls performed by objective third parties would be helpful.


----------



## ehoffma2

davidsbees said:


> I used Canadian bio because they were the only ones that would talk to me and help work out what I wanted to accomplish. It's my understanding that prebiotics and micro flora builder are the same or similar product the ones I've seen are just yeast cell wall (Brewers yeast with all the good stuff removed).


*Question to Davidsbees - with the Canadian Bio product.

What type of data were you able to collect ?*

For your information, I have pushed back hard, on the microbiologists to not make claims that could

not be backed up with real DATA. The Empirical evidence that I did see after a microbial 

treatment, was several hives that had bad cases of chalkbrood,

cleaned up in a few days. I myself have never seen bad cases of chalkbrood

go away so fast. 

PLEASE SEE THE URL LINK - https://rirdc.infoservices.com.au/downloads/09-120 PDF FILE FROM AU

Innovation for rural Australia. Biological Control of Chalkbrood by. Anti-fungal Bacterial Symbionts of Bees. RIRDC Publication No. 09/120

Impact of Chalkbrood disease and hygienic behaviour on bee gut
microflora In this study it was found that nurse bees from colonies with Chalkbrood symptoms had significantly less bacteria in their gut than bees from healthy colonies. The large number of colonies screened around Australia confirmed that this was consistent and a statistically significant result. An experiment was set up to track recovering Chalkbrood-infected hives (after 21 weeks – no Chalkbrood symptoms observed in the colony) in Goulburn (New South Wales). Comparisons of total gut bacteria of bees taken from the colony samples during periods of Chalkbrood infection and periods of recovery showed a significant increase in the total gut bacterial population (p<0.001) when the colonies no longer displayed the clinical symptoms of the disease. However, the bacterial numbers were still slightly less than observed in healthy bee colonies. This strongly suggests that the total viable bacterial count in the bee gut is correlated with Chalkbrood disease. Chalkbrood-inhibiting bacteria were detected in guts of bees from colonies with Chalkbrood, and also when the colony was recovering from Chalkbrood. This experiment also showed that that feeding Chalkbrood-infected
hives with sugar solution led to faster recovery of hives from Chalkbrood disease, as evidenced by a significant reduction in hive symptoms (Somerville, 2005). It also showed that bees had the ability to feed on sugar solution supplemented with pure gluconic acid.


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> bad cases of chalkbrood go away so fast.


If you can bring a product to the market for a buck just to deal with that problem I will buy it


----------



## Ian

Mr. Hoffman, what kind effect does treating the hive with fumagillin have on the bees microbial gut population? For a beekeeper to be fall winter prep treating with fumagillin to control the nosema levels in the hives, how does that affect the viability of the bacteria inoculated with this DFM treatment?


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Ian said:


> Mr. Hoffman, what kind effect does treating the hive with fumagillin have on the bees microbial gut population? ?


It nucs the Microbial.


----------



## Ian

Keith Jarrett said:


> It nucs the Microbial.


That's a huge problem. Kind of one of those things that gains short term gain, but extends long term consequences.


----------



## Ian

I tested 2.6M spore counts in my hives last fall, with a treatment the counts dropped down to under .6M after three weeks. I will be testing my hives late during the second half of winter to observe what kind of rebound I will be experiencing. Killing off the microbial populations in my hives gut is not my objective.


----------



## camero7

I found this very interesting...

Display Settings:

Abstract
Send to:




Vet Microbiol. 2013 Dec 27;167(3-4):474-83. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2013.07.030. Epub 2013 Aug 9.
Effects of the organic acids produced by a lactic acid bacterium in Apis mellifera colony development, Nosema ceranae control and fumagillin efficiency.Maggi M[SUP]1[/SUP], Negri P, Plischuk S, Szawarski N, De Piano F, De Feudis L, Eguaras M, Audisio C.
Author information
AbstractThe European honey bee Apis mellifera is known to be affected by many parasites and pathogens that have great impact over the insect development. Among parasites affecting bee health, Nosema ceranae is one of the main biotic factors affecting colony populations. As honey bee populations decline, interest in pathogenic and mutualistic relationships between bees and microorganisms has increased. The main goal of the current study was to assess the effect of the oral administration of the metabolites produced by Lactobacillus johnsonii CRL1647 (mainly organic acids) supplemented in syrup, on: (I) N. ceranae sporulation dynamics before and after fumagillin application, and (II) performance of A. mellifera colonies. Different experiments were conducted to evaluate the effects of these bacterial metabolites on bees: in vitro administration revealed no toxic effects against bees. Colonies fed with the lactic acids incremented their beehive population and also the amount of fat bodies per bee. Finally, the organic acids reduced the intensity of the pathogen after the second application of treatment as well as enhanced the fumagillin efficiency. This study provides important information for the development of new control substances against nosemosis. 
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.


KEYWORDS:Apis mellifera; Bacterial metabolites; Fumagillin; Nosema ceranae control; Organic acids


----------



## camero7

And another study that makes me think there is something to this stuff:

Benef Microbes. 2011 Mar;2(1):29-34. doi: 10.3920/BM2010.0024.
Lactobacillus johnsonii CRL1647, isolated from Apis mellifera L. bee-gut, exhibited a beneficial effect on honeybee colonies.Audisio MC[SUP]1[/SUP], Benítez-Ahrendts MR.
Author information
AbstractLactobacillus johnsonii CRL1647, isolated from the intestinal tract of a honeybee and selected due to its high lactic acid production, was assayed as a monoculture on bee colony performance. It was delivered to the bees on a one litre of 125 g/l sugar-cane syrup with a final concentration of 105 cfu/ml lactobacilli. The bees accepted the new nourishment, which was consumed within 24-48 h and was administered in two independent trials (every 14-15 days for 3 consecutive months in one case, and once a month for 13 consecutive months in the other). From late spring - early summer (2008) the photo-records and statistical analyses revealed significant differences in the open and the operculated brood areas in the treated group compared with the control. This stimulation was observed after the first administration of the lactobacilli and maintained throughout. Also, a higher number of bees were measured in the treated group (54%) and the control (18%) with respect to the initial bees' number. Furthermore, honey storage was higher, 40% and 19%, for the treated and control groups, respectively. From December 2008 to December 2009, a similar situation was observed even though, in this trial, the lactobacilli cells were administered once a month. The in vivo results of this study are promising and indicate that a L. johnsonii CRL1647 supplement to beehives favours mainly open and operculated brood areas, demonstrating a stronger stimulation of egg-laying and will become a natural product which will assist the beekeeper both in colony management and the creation of late nuclei and/or bee packages due to its beneficial effects in the beehive colony.


PMID:21831787 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> Mr. Hoffman, what kind effect does treating the hive with fumagillin have on the bees microbial gut population? For a beekeeper to be fall winter prep treating with fumagillin to control the nosema levels in the hives, how does that affect the viability of the bacteria inoculated with this DFM treatment?


*YES, we ran a few trails with the Fumagillin product, we have data on several samples*

I must strongly agree with Mr. Keith Jarrett, ALL of the microbials are negatively impacted.

The data we analyzed, showed a ten fold drop in good bacteria after the application of Fumagillin.

Fumagillin not only is expensive, but is it very rough on the bees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fumagillin

PLEASE let me know if this answers your Question.

Respectfully - ehoffma2


----------



## apis maximus

deknow said:


> What is worth noting is that many of these are novel (only exist in the bee gut) and are not easily displaced. The Moran study showed the effects of antibiotic use 20+ years ago in the populations in the guts of Dee Lusby ' s bees.


I am glad Dean, aka *deknow* decided to participate in this thread. 
Glad he mentions the Moran study...I think it is a crucial piece of information. Mind boggling implications...but which are very hard to face and address in an easy, silver bullet, pragmatical way. I.e. how does one, involved in intensive, industrial way of keeping bees does not use antibiotics, antimicrobials, additives, miticides, pesticides...you name it, and still be able to operate PROFITABLY? 
( oh, by the way this also applies to a T...in all the livestock industries we currently have...and need, some would say, to "feed the world" :gh
For those that have not read the Moran study, Dean is referring to, here it is:
http://mbio.asm.org/content/3/6/e00377-12.full

I am reminding myself...again...that we are on the commercial forum, where bees are handled as livestock. Intensive, focused livestock production. Not an easy thing to do, lots of challenges but I am sure a lot of satisfactions.

I don't think anybody here disputes the fact that these "beneficial" microorganisms exist and are at play. We might not know which came first and in what order. We're barelly scratching the surface on understanding these little "bugs". But, they are there, they play a fascinating role and their populations can be, and are influenced by beekeepers all the time.

The good folk at Strong Microbials realized this, and as *ehoffma2* points out, the Swedes were at it already and so they have a competing product. 

I say, great, bring them on...bring the awareness up...the more the better. I really mean that.
Notice, one of the claims Super DFM has on their label is, and I quote: "*May well Help Inhibit Pathogens such as Nosema and American Foulbrood Disease*". Of course, they use the word "may" , but still...

Also, on their label, in their own words:
"*This results in a reduction of pathogens, as well as inhibiting some of the dormant pathogenic spores from germinating. Modern agriculture uses many different pesticides, antibiotics and other chemicals that cause the honeybee's natural defenses to be severely weakened. This also occurs during Fall winterization when bees are fed sugar water, or if bee hives are prophylactically treated with various treatments or antibiotics*. "

Now, I am not suggesting folks on this commercial forum use antibiotics or other chemicals. But I am sure these products are heavily used. If the folks working at all the bee keeping supplies stores/outfits, veterinary medicine suppliers, would provide a $$$ figure on Tylan, Oxytet and soon to be Lyncomix sales, one would soon realize these products are great revenue for a lot of folks. ( don't hold your breath on that...unless the North Correans will somehow hack their system....:lookout

So yes, one way or another these DFM may/could help. But now that I said this, I will suggest going back to the Moran study and the implications it brings out. Look at it in that context.


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> *YES, we ran a few trails with the Fumagillin product, we have data on senveral samples*
> 
> I must strongly agree with Mr. Keith Jarrett, ALL of the microbials are negatively impacted.
> 
> The data we analyzed, showed a ten fold drop in good bacteria after the application of Fumagillin.
> 
> Fumagillin not only is expensive, but is it very rough on the bees.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fumagillin
> 
> PLEASE let me know if this answers your Question.
> 
> Respectfully - ehoffma2


Yes, thank you Mr. Hoffman.

So can you give me your opinion on this;
If I were to use a dusting treatment of 
Fumagillin to manage heavy loads of nosema, would a follow up treatment of DFM a few weeks afterwards renew the microbial populations in the bees gut ? 
Could this product be looked as simply as a cause and effect product. What I mean is treat to kill nosema, and treat to renew the bees microbial gut population?

I appreciate that many viewing this topic do not follow commercial standpoint of managing livestock. Perspectives on issues change when livelihoods balance the bottom line.


----------



## apis maximus

Ian said:


> Fumagillin to manage heavy loads of nosema, the bees microbial gut population?


Ian, I know you mentioned before that you are counting and monitoring Nosema spores. Have you identified which Nosema you are dealing with? N. apis or N. ceranae? Or both?


----------



## Ian

apis maximus said:


> Ian, I know you mentioned before that you are counting and monitoring Nosema spores. Have you identified which Nosema you are dealing with? N. apis or N. ceranae? Or both?


Nosema Ceranae. Treatment brought the spore counts from 2.6m down to under .6m entering winter


----------



## apis maximus

Ian said:


> Nosema Ceranae. Treatment brought the spore counts from 2.6m down to under .6m entering winter


Thanks for the reply Ian. 

Tough spot to be in.

I am sure you are familiar with published trials on the issue of N. ceranae being suppressed by Fumagillin...yet around 6 months later you're back to where you started, or maybe worse. I truly hope the trend will not be validated by your situation.

Clearly, a faster recovery rate for N. ceranae than its cousin N. apis. Some suggest that by this Fumagillin induced/supported mechanism, we are "helping" N.ceranae eliminating N.apis. Not to mention what other "bug" populations "get" in the process...

So what is one supposed to do? Let the bees die? 

Would be no different than you coming home one day, and see all those beautiful Charolais calves of yours, after a particular bad weather event, or whatever else insult, breaking up with Coccidia and starting to become wasted under your own eyes.

" *Perspectives on issues change when livelihoods balance the bottom line*"...couldn't agree more Ian.


----------



## deknow

At WAS, Eric Mussen remarked about the n cecrane bounce back after fumidil..but also said it was more complicated as the ones that were treated and bounced back had very good survival despite the counts.


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> Yes, thank you Mr. Hoffman.
> 
> So can you give me your opinion on this;
> If I were to use a dusting treatment of
> Fumagillin to manage heavy loads of nosema, would a follow up treatment of DFM a few weeks afterwards renew the microbial populations in the bees gut ?
> Could this product be looked as simply as a cause and effect product. What I mean is treat to kill nosema, and treat to renew the bees microbial gut population?
> 
> I appreciate that many viewing this topic do not follow commercial standpoint of managing livestock. Perspectives on issues change when livelihoods balance the bottom line.


*Question - could a treatment of DFM renew the microbial populations after a chemical treatment ? *

YES, we have that data, but it is NOT in the blind study we published. Sorry.

http://strongmicrobials.weebly.com/uploads/4/2/3/2/42323477/super_dfm_honeybee_blind_study.pdf

We were able to apply terramycin, three times, a week apart, per the directions. 

The DATA indicated a significant reduction in microbial activity. A ten fold reduction.

We then applied Super DFM Honeybee microbials to the terramycin hive. After several weeks,

We measured the microbial activity in the hive (we sampled more bees) again.

The data indicated that an increase of good microbes was achieved when using Super DFM Honeybee.

*Therefore - the answer is YES, if you apply microbes after an antibiotic, you

can recover to a more normal state.*

We did not perform this test (trial) with Fumagillin.

The microbiologist are concerned about anti-microbial agents stored in the (combs) hive. I am too.

Thank you for asking Good Questions. - I hope that this helps answer the question.


----------



## Ian

Yes it does, thank you Mr. Hoffman!

You guys have to understand that most of you can talk circles around me with technical jargon, interpenetrating studies, comprehending it all and focus that all into a meaningful conversation. I dont pretend to be something Im not. Your contribution to these kind of conversations as you decipher all these studies into layman terms helps me understand what the heck is going on. That is especially why I praise Randy Oliver and his work as he is doing exactly what you guys are doing here, bringing your expertise of knowledge and sharing it among the "joe six pack" beekeepers. A million thanks to you all and keep that conversation sharp and interesting! 



deknow said:


> At WAS, Eric Mussen remarked about the n cecrane bounce back after fumidil..but also said it was more complicated as the ones that were treated and bounced back had very good survival despite the counts.


I am passing on exactly the experience I am seeing, and I plan on further testing my bees to see if indeed that bounce back occurs. I get so many conflicting bits of information on exactly this point of topic that I have no idea what to think, so I figured its time to find out whats going on in my hives for myself. 
Our chief provincial apiarist suggested for me to go with my gut on handling the noseama levels because this falls in uncharted waters. Nobody really knows the full extent nosema is having on our bees health and nobody really knows how fumagillin is working to counter it. There is lots of antidotal information out there influencing beekeepers perception of what is actually happening in our hives. I truly believe these beekeepers point fingers are miss interpreting what is actually going on in their hives. *We got to stop pointing fingers and start collaborating to figure this thing out!!!*



ehoffma2 said:


> We did not perform this test (trial) with Fumagillin.
> 
> The microbiologist are concerned about anti-microbial agents stored in the (combs) hive.


I target the nosema immediately and extending that treatment as the bees consume the stored syrup during winter. My thinking would be to stop medicating the hive through syrup, focus on an immediate dusting or drench treatment and follow up with a microbe inoculation to replenish the hives digestive bugs. I understand beekeeper's who suggest that by simply improving the bee's gut bugs will counter the nosema. EXCEPT many of those beekeepers operate in an environment suitable for regular flight. Where as my hives are confined for up to five plus months. 

or perhaps a prolonged winter fumagillin treatment is necessary, where as I would follow up in the spring with a microbe inoculant to ensure the bees have the gut bugs needed when they start to reproduce and grow. 

Just more thinking out loud, take it as you will


----------



## ehoffma2

apis maximus said:


> I am glad Dean, aka *deknow* decided to participate in this thread.
> Glad he mentions the Moran study...I think it is a crucial piece of information. Mind boggling implications...but which are very hard to face and address in an easy, silver bullet, pragmatical way. I.e. how does one, involved in intensive, industrial way of keeping bees does not use antibiotics, antimicrobials, additives, miticides, pesticides...you name it, and still be able to operate PROFITABLY?
> ( oh, by the way this also applies to a T...in all the livestock industries we currently have...and need, some would say, to "feed the world" :gh
> For those that have not read the Moran study, Dean is referring to, here it is:
> http://mbio.asm.org/content/3/6/e00377-12.full
> 
> I am reminding myself...again...that we are on the commercial forum, where bees are handled as livestock. Intensive, focused livestock production. Not an easy thing to do, lots of challenges but I am sure a lot of satisfactions.
> 
> I don't think anybody here disputes the fact that these "beneficial" microorganisms exist and are at play. We might not know which came first and in what order. We're barelly scratching the surface on understanding these little "bugs". But, they are there, they play a fascinating role and their populations can be, and are influenced by beekeepers all the time.
> 
> The good folk at Strong Microbials realized this, and as *ehoffma2* points out, the Swedes were at it already and so they have a competing product.
> 
> I say, great, bring them on...bring the awareness up...the more the better. I really mean that.
> Notice, one of the claims Super DFM has on their label is, and I quote: "*May well Help Inhibit Pathogens such as Nosema and American Foulbrood Disease*". Of course, they use the word "may" , but still...
> 
> Also, on their label, in their own words:
> "*This results in a reduction of pathogens, as well as inhibiting some of the dormant pathogenic spores from germinating. Modern agriculture uses many different pesticides, antibiotics and other chemicals that cause the honeybee's natural defenses to be severely weakened. This also occurs during Fall winterization when bees are fed sugar water, or if bee hives are prophylactically treated with various treatments or antibiotics*. "
> 
> Now, I am not suggesting folks on this commercial forum use antibiotics or other chemicals. But I am sure these products are heavily used. If the folks working at all the bee keeping supplies stores/outfits, veterinary medicine suppliers, would provide a $$$ figure on Tylan, Oxytet and soon to be Lyncomix sales, one would soon realize these products are great revenue for a lot of folks. ( don't hold your breath on that...unless the North Correans will somehow hack their system....:lookout
> 
> So yes, one way or another these DFM may/could help. But now that I said this, I will suggest going back to the Moran study and the implications it brings out. Look at it in that context.


*Below is a small sample from the link
- http://mbio.asm.org/content/3/6/e00377-12.full *

Prolonged exposure to a single broad-spectrum antibiotic imposes strong selective pressure on a microbial community that is expected to result in loss of strain diversity. It is possible that antibiotic perturbation may shift the gut microbiota to an alternative state that is broadly similar but different in critical aspects (4, 23). These shifts could affect host health: in the case of the distinctive gut bacteria of honeybees and bumblebees, metagenomic and experimental studies suggest beneficial roles in neutralization of dietary toxins, nutrition, and in defense against pathogens (13, 18).

Following the emergence of resistance to oxytetracycline in P. larvae in 1996, alternative antibiotics were tested for its control (19, 26). In October 2005, Tylosin was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in beekeeping and was marketed to beekeepers. In 2007, accelerated losses of colonies occurred throughout the United States: the causes of these losses are not clear but appear not to be attributable to spread of a particular pathogen (27, 28). Speculatively, disruption of the gut microbiota by a novel antibiotic might contribute to the decline of colonies of bees, with such effects potentially becoming less pronounced as members of the microbiota acquire resistance capabilities.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Ian said:


> My thinking would be to stop medicating the hive through syrup, focus on an immediate dusting or drench treatment and follow up with a microbe inoculation to replenish the hives digestive bugs


Ian in this link you might find some clues. My poor English and lack of expertise in this area do not allow me to be sure. Take a look: http://www.google.com/patents/EP2427180A1?cl=en


----------



## apis maximus

Eduardo,

The folks holding that patent, work under the name of Beeologics. They were acquired by Monsanto.
http://www.beeologics.com/products/

Very interesting technology indeed...but now, when JSL aka Dr. Latshaw, mentioned the concept of "information overload" on this very thread, and he was not kidding...wait until the general beekeeping community tries to wrap their heads around this one.
One day at the time...very, very steep learning curves ahead.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Apis maximus
Yes also seemed very complex to me. I pointed out the link in the hope that they already had in the product production. For your words I gather that not yet . So I agree that is an excess of information. So it is only as a curiosity of the rigor with which it works to a certain level.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

apis maximus said:


> I don't think anybody here disputes the fact that these "beneficial" microorganisms exist and are at play. We might not know which came first and in what order. We're barelly scratching the surface on understanding these little "bugs". But, they are there, they play a fascinating role and their populations can be, and are influenced by beekeepers all the time.
> .


Well said.


----------



## davidsbees

In talks with Eric Mussen bees have been exposed to antibiotics for decades and did not think the microbes were severely impacted and were replaced quickly, as with fumagillin, treating has a better outcome then not treating if needed.


----------



## davidsbees

Ehoffma2,
Yes I am getting my money's worth ,8 enzymes are included in my mix and listed on the label on the DFM label I see no enzymes listed. I don't know if feeding live yeast is a good idea. I sent a picture to Eric Mussen to identify and his response was yeast and not a good thing. As far as info from Canadian Bio it would be best if you contact them directly. But wait you are allready working with a bio company they should have the answers.


----------



## deknow

I think here is where the shark jump occurs (good luck Fonzi). 
The "digestive bugs" are highly specialized, and are not simply replaced (or are replaceable) with standard strains that are used for human food production in feed. The routes of inoculation of newly emerged bees (which emerge sterile) is the result of some very specific behaviors and doesn't simply happen or change because you've spiked the food.

The impact by antibiotics is well documented and demonstrated by researchers doing very good work.




davidsbees said:


> In talks with Eric Mussen bees have been exposed to antibiotics for decades and did not think the microbes were severely impacted and were replaced quickly, as with fumagillin, treating has a better outcome then not treating if needed.


----------



## ehoffma2

davidsbees said:


> Ehoffma2,
> Yes I am getting my money's worth ,8 enzymes are included in my mix and listed on the label on the DFM label I see no enzymes listed. I don't know if feeding live yeast is a good idea. I sent a picture to Eric Mussen to identify and his response was yeast and not a good thing. As far as info from Canadian Bio it would be best if you contact them directly. But wait you are allready working with a bio company they should have the answers.


David, I'm grateful for the reply. Please see below more information on enzymes. 

*PLEASE See URL link - http://www.natureclean.com/bacteria-enzymes.htm*

Bacteria or Enzymes?

1. What are Bacteria..

Bacteria are single-celled organisms that do not have well-defined organelles such as a nucleus. The cells are typically enclosed in a rigid cell wall and a plasma membrane. Bacteria contain all of the genetic material necessary to reproduce, and they reproduce by simple cellular division. Bacteria show a wide range of nutrient requirements and energy-related metabolism. Some bacteria require only minerals and a carbon source such as sugar for growth, while others require more complex growth media. Bacteria play an extremely important role in recycling nutrients in the environment. Bacteria break down organic matter into simple compounds like carbon dioxide and water, and they cycle important nutrients such as nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorus. Bacteria can migrate to areas that are rich in specific nutrients that they require for growth. Bacteria can also attach themselves to surfaces and form communities known as biofilms.

2. What are Enzymes...Production of enzymes begins as soon as the bacteria begin to grow. The cells must obtain nutrients from their surroundings, so they secrete enzymes to degrade the available food. The quantities of enzymes produced vary depending on the bacterial species and the culture conditions (e.g., nutrients, temperature, and pH) and growth rate. Hydrolytic enzymes such as
proteases, amylases, and cellulases, etc. are produced in the range of milligrams per liter to grams per liter.

An enzyme is a protein that acts as a catalyst. The enzyme is responsible for accelerating the rate of a reaction in which various substrates are converted to products through the formation of an enzyme-substrate complex. In general, each type of enzyme catalyzes only one type of reaction and will operate on only one type of substrate. This is often referred to as a "lock and key" mechanism. As a consequence, enzymes are highly specific and are able to discriminate between slightly different substrate molecules. In addition, enzymes exhibit optimal catalytic activity over a narrow range of temperature, ionic strength and pH.

*enzymes are created when bacteria grows*


----------



## Ian

A beekeeper PM'ed me, which totally applies to me; "catch my morning beekeeping discussion over the wake-up coffee before the eyes are fully focussed "


----------



## Ian

deknow said:


> is the result of some very specific behaviors and doesn't simply happen or change because you've spiked the food.


Though that is exactly the case with other inoculation practices such as with our silage treatments and alfalfa, soybean and pea inoculations. Why would bees be any different?


----------



## deknow

Ian, thank you for sharing your thoughts.

A couple of things come to mind...

1. A post today on bee-l by Peter Bort quoting some work by Richard Fell showing n cerane in California in 1975. ...this is new data as far as I know, and predates the Maine samples by a decade.

2. Of all the things used in a bee hive, fumidil is by far the most mysterious. It is a fungal toxin with a wide variety of effects. One might even make the analogy:
Fumidil : Terramycen
-as- 
Psychedelic Mushrooms : A Glass of Wine

...that might be a tad dramatic, but I think one that leads to an accurate image.

Fumidil is classified as an antibiotic, but it is used to kill a microsporidian (perhaps better described as a type of fungus), was developed (for human use) because it drastically effects the production of blood vessels in tumors...but was never approved for human use because of the severe risk of birth defects. It is, I believe, only approved for use in bees in North America and in the UK, and has very little veterinary use beyond that.

If anything we use in the hive is going to have "unexpected effects" it is fumidil.

I'm not saying you shouldn't use it or judging you for doing so...I'm just saying that I'd expect all kinds of things to be affected by doing so...both in the microbial populations and in the bees themselves.


----------



## deknow

Because they are (different). The gut bacterial culture is somewhat of a closed system....some of the bacteria in the Illium can hardly be distinguished from those of the bees gut and are not culturable.

More to the point, I don't get the impression that these inoculants contain the strains that are specific and novel to the bee.

Saying you are innoculating with LAB is like saying you are getting a new roommate...and it is a person. A little more specificity is needed.


Ian said:


> Though that is exactly the case with other inoculation practices such as with our silage treatments and alfalfa, soybean and pea inoculations. Why would bees be any different?


----------



## Ian

deknow said:


> might even make the analogy:
> Fumidil : Terramycen
> -as-
> Psychedelic Mushrooms : A Glass of Wine


lol, I love the colour in the conversation!


----------



## davidsbees

gut microbes mostly bee specific and adding off the shelf may not be long lived so reapplication is needed(not a bad thing). When newly emerged bees are feed they are inoculated with the bugs that are common to the colony and local region. Enzymes are isolated from fungi,yeast and bacteria's then can be add where needed and no need for microbial action. (Short answer)


----------



## ehoffma2

davidsbees said:


> gut microbes mostly bee specific and adding off the shelf may not be long lived so reapplication is needed(not a bad thing). When newly emerged bees are feed they are inoculated with the bugs that are common to the colony and local region. Enzymes are isolated from fungi,yeast and bacteria's then can be add where needed and no need for microbial action. (Short answer)


*Exactly - I could not agree with you more. *

The other data point that I stated earlier was that the microbial populations are not constant.

I would best describe them as a Sine wave. During some periods of time, the populations are low

and during other times they are back to a higher value. During 2015, one of the new data trials will

be to sample bees from ten hives every three weeks (brood cycle) and plot out the sine wave.

*Question PLEASE - If you were to design a new experiment for 2015 year, what would it be ?*

We currently have samples of collected pollen under analysis, and I will publish that data soon.

Respectfully - ehoffma2


----------



## deknow

2 things......

1. Don't eat the brown apistan.

2. Listen to the color of your queens.....


----------



## apis maximus

Two very critical and important things that *deknow* is trying, very hard, to bring to the discussion. And yet, we still fail to grasp the context and the concepts presented. 

These two concepts are, and I'll just quote Dean:

*1. The "digestive bugs" are highly specialized, and are not simply replaced (or are replaceable) with standard strains that are used for human food production in feed. The routes of inoculation of newly emerged bees (which emerge sterile) is the result of some very specific behaviors and doesn't simply happen or change because you've spiked the food....Because they are (different). The gut bacterial culture is somewhat of a closed system....some of the bacteria in the Illium can hardly be distinguished from those of the bees gut and are not culturable."*

*2. More to the point, I don't get the impression that these inoculants contain the strains that are specific and novel to the bee.*

I am repeating myself...again...but with no intention of preaching. Go back to the Moran study, and truly try to understand what this lady is saying. Michael Bush has also said it many times, but for some reason, the concepts just don't seem to stick... 

I think somewhere on Dean's web site Dean himself is summarizing, distilling and focusing very well on the critical points of this paper by Dr. Moran. I can't find Dean's web page that does that right now, but maybe Dean will help with that.

I am still learning and I have way more questions than answers. And the more I dig for answers, the deeper the rabbit hole goes...muddy waters is an understatement. 
But still, a lot of this stuff is very well explained by folks that have done a lot of work in this area.


----------



## ehoffma2

apis maximus said:


> Two very critical and important things that *deknow* is trying, very hard, to bring to the discussion. And yet, we still fail to grasp the context and the concepts presented.
> 
> These two concepts are, and I'll just quote Dean:
> 
> *1. The "digestive bugs" are highly specialized, and are not simply replaced (or are replaceable) with standard strains that are used for human food production in feed. The routes of inoculation of newly emerged bees (which emerge sterile) is the result of some very specific behaviors and doesn't simply happen or change because you've spiked the food....Because they are (different). The gut bacterial culture is somewhat of a closed system....some of the bacteria in the Illium can hardly be distinguished from those of the bees gut and are not culturable."*
> 
> *2. More to the point, I don't get the impression that these inoculants contain the strains that are specific and novel to the bee.*
> 
> I am repeating myself...again...but with no intention of preaching. Go back to the Moran study, and truly try to understand what this lady is saying. Michael Bush has also said it many times, but for some reason, the concepts just don't seem to stick...
> 
> I think somewhere on Dean's web site Dean himself is summarizing, distilling and focusing very well on the critical points of this paper by Dr. Moran. I can't find Dean's web page that does that right now, but maybe Dean will help with that.
> 
> I am still learning and I have way more questions than answers. And the more I dig for answers, the deeper the rabbit hole goes...muddy waters is an understatement.
> But still, a lot of this stuff is very well explained by folks that have done a lot of work in this area.


*These two concepts are, and I'll just quote Dean:

1. The "digestive bugs" are highly specialized, and are not simply replaced (or are replaceable) with standard strains that are used for human food production in feed. The routes of inoculation of newly emerged bees (which emerge sterile) is the result of some very specific behaviors and doesn't simply happen or change because you've spiked the food....Because they are (different). The gut bacterial culture is somewhat of a closed system....some of the bacteria in the Illium can hardly be distinguished from those of the bees gut and are not culturable."

2. More to the point, I don't get the impression that these inoculants contain the strains that are specific and novel to the bee.*

Please let me see what the microbiologists say about this question - I think it is a GREAT QUESTION !

Respectfully - EHOFFMA2


----------



## ehoffma2

*PLEASE let me repeat my earlier Question - If you were to design an experiment with a microbial product - What would it look like ?* What tests should be run in 2015 ? - EHOFFMA2


----------



## ehoffma2

ehoffma2 said:


> *Below is a small sample from the link
> - http://mbio.asm.org/content/3/6/e00377-12.full *
> 
> Prolonged exposure to a single broad-spectrum antibiotic imposes strong selective pressure on a microbial community that is expected to result in loss of strain diversity. It is possible that antibiotic perturbation may shift the gut microbiota to an alternative state that is broadly similar but different in critical aspects (4, 23). These shifts could affect host health: in the case of the distinctive gut bacteria of honeybees and bumblebees, metagenomic and experimental studies suggest beneficial roles in neutralization of dietary toxins, nutrition, and in defense against pathogens (13, 18).
> 
> Following the emergence of resistance to oxytetracycline in P. larvae in 1996, alternative antibiotics were tested for its control (19, 26). In October 2005, Tylosin was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in beekeeping and was marketed to beekeepers. In 2007, accelerated losses of colonies occurred throughout the United States: the causes of these losses are not clear but appear not to be attributable to spread of a particular pathogen (27, 28). Speculatively, disruption of the gut microbiota by a novel antibiotic might contribute to the decline of colonies of bees, with such effects potentially becoming less pronounced as members of the microbiota acquire resistance capabilities.


*HERE IS THE URL link to the other study - http://mbio.asm.org/content/5/5/e01697-14.full.pdf+html?sid=1fb22769-3638-4502-8844-d7bf23251c26*

ABSTRACT Obligate symbioses with bacteria allow insects to feed on otherwise unsuitable diets. Some symbionts have extremely
reduced genomes and have lost many genes considered to be essential in other bacteria. To understand how symbiont genome
degeneration proceeds, we compared the genomes of symbionts in two leafhopper species, Homalodisca vitripennis (glassywinged
sharpshooter [GWSS]) and Graphocephala atropunctata (blue-green sharpshooter [BGSS]) (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae).
Each host species is associated with the anciently acquired “Candidatus Sulcia muelleri” (Bacteroidetes) and the more recently
acquired “Candidatus Baumannia cicadellinicola” (Gammaproteobacteria). BGSS “Ca. Baumannia” retains 89 genes that are
absent from GWSS “Ca. Baumannia”; these underlie central cellular functions, including cell envelope biogenesis, cellular replication,
and stress response. In contrast, “Ca. Sulcia” strains differ by only a few genes. Although GWSS “Ca. Baumannia” cells
are spherical or pleomorphic (a convergent trait of obligate symbionts), electron microscopy reveals that BGSS “Ca. Baumannia”
maintains a rod shape, possibly due to its retention of genes involved in cell envelope biogenesis and integrity. Phylogenomic
results suggest that “Ca. Baumannia” is derived from the clade consisting of Sodalis and relatives, a group that has
evolved symbiotic associations with numerous insect hosts. Finally, the rates of synonymous and nonsynonymous substitutions
are higher in “Ca. Baumannia” than in “Ca. Sulcia,” which may be due to a lower mutation rate in the latter. Taken together, our
results suggest that the two “Ca. Baumannia” genomes represent different stages of genome reduction in which many essential
functions are being lost and likely compensated by hosts. “Ca. Sulcia” exhibits much greater genome stability and slower sequence
evolution, although the mechanisms underlying these differences are poorly understood.

IMPORTANCE In obligate animal-bacterial symbioses, bacteria experience extreme patterns of genome evolution, including massive
gene loss and rapid evolution. However, little is known about this process, particularly in systems with complementary bacterial
partners. To understand whether genome evolution impacts symbiont types equally and whether lineages follow the same
evolutionary path, we sequenced the genomes of two coresident symbiotic bacteria from a plant sap-feeding insect and compared
them to the symbionts from a related host species. We found that the older symbiont has a highly reduced genome with
low rates of mutation and gene loss. In contrast, the younger symbiont has a larger genome that exhibits higher mutation rates
and varies dramatically in the retention of genes related to cell wall biogenesis, cellular replication, and stress response. We conclude
that while symbiotic bacteria evolve toward tiny genomes, this process is shaped by different selection intensities that may
reflect the different ages and metabolic roles of symbiont types.

*After I read this, I understood that these are symbiotic bacteria and that yes there is an evolution that happens to the bacteria.*


----------



## ehoffma2

ehoffma2 said:


> *These two concepts are, and I'll just quote Dean:
> 
> 1. The "digestive bugs" are highly specialized, and are not simply replaced (or are replaceable) with standard strains that are used for human food production in feed. The routes of inoculation of newly emerged bees (which emerge sterile) is the result of some very specific behaviors and doesn't simply happen or change because you've spiked the food....Because they are (different). The gut bacterial culture is somewhat of a closed system....some of the bacteria in the Illium can hardly be distinguished from those of the bees gut and are not culturable."
> 
> 2. More to the point, I don't get the impression that these inoculants contain the strains that are specific and novel to the bee.*
> 
> Please let me see what the microbiologists say about this question - I think it is a GREAT QUESTION !
> 
> Respectfully - EHOFFMA2


*I mailed the question to - Nancy A. Moran, [email protected]. * I can not find this text in any of her papers ?


----------



## squarepeg

ehoffma2 said:


> *PLEASE let me repeat my earlier Question - If you were to design an experiment with a microbial product - What would it look like ?* What tests should be run in 2015 ? - EHOFFMA2


if i were trying to get this question answered i would send a personal email to randy oliver (address available on his website). he has been very generous with his expertise and would likely be able to make some good suggestions to you.


----------



## camero7

I believe she's moved to Texas. Her new email is [email protected]


----------



## ehoffma2

squarepeg said:


> if i were trying to get this question answered i would send a personal email to randy oliver (address available on his website). he has been very generous with his expertise and would likely be able to make some good suggestions to you.


*Thank you for the suggestion - I did the today! I know Randy is Generous with his expertise.*

Thank you again for the help!


----------



## ehoffma2

camero7 said:


> I believe she's moved to Texas. Her new email is [email protected]


GOT IT, the old email bounce to the new one. Here is her reply. PLEASE SEE BELOW.

Dear Earl, 

Well, it mostly is correct, but I am not sure of the whole context. The main point, that these are specific bacteria that live only in bee guts, is right. Here is a summary — 

The ileum is part of the bee gut, just the first part of the hind gut. Most of the bacteria in the bee gut are in the hind gut, about 98%. There are relatively few bacteria in the foregut (=honey stomach) or midgut, but something like 10 million in the hind gut, which is quite a lot for an insect this size. 
We have found that the bacteria in the gut of honey bees mostly (>95%) belong to about 8 “species” or major related clusters. Most of these 8, especially the ones that are really abundant in the bee gut, are essentially only found in the gut, and appear to be transferred directly between workers in the hive. The newly emerged adult worker has an empty gut but by about Day 3, it has been colonized with the typical members. The profile differs between the ileum and rectum (the 2 parts of the hind gut). Possibly the bacteria can survive for a little while on hive surfaces, or even on flowers, but this would be a matter of hours, not days. So the bees could pick up bacteria from a surface, but only if feces were placed there very recently by another bee. 

We did a large experiment on transmission of the typical bee bacteria, by exposing workers in the lab to different possible sources. I attached the paper, which might be somewhat difficult to digest as there are a lot of statistics that are specialized. Basic summary: The most ‘typical’ communities were picked up by exposure to nurse bees from normal hives, or by exposure to ground up hind guts of bees from normal hives. Bees could not acquire typical communities from frame material alone, though they did acquire a few of the bacteria that way. They also did not acquire typical communities when exposed only to the front end of nurse bees, engaging in oral trophallaxis only. So some of the bacteria seem to require a fecal route, but of course it doesn’t take very much material, so it’s not necessary that bees are defecating all over the place. It could be anal grooming. 

Two of the typical species are called Snodgrassella alvi and Gilliamella apicola, these are the ones we have studied most in my lab group. Also Frischella perrara, which is related to Gilliamella. 
Two other typical species are in the genus Lactobacillus. This is a huge and diverse genus (older and probably with more species than mammals for example). The 2 clusters in the bee guts are distinctive species, and different from some other Lactobacillus that grow in the environment and sometimes in the hive or the ones used in cheese making. Therefore giving some food-related Lactobacillus to bees will not result in colonization of their guts. Pretty much the only normal colonizers of bee guts are bacteria that only live there. The one exception is the genus Acetobacter. These live in nectar, dilute honey, and are in the bee gut. Probably these come and go depending on what the bee eats. 

IT turns out that the bee gut bacteria CAN be cultured, which we didn't know at first. But they only grow under specialized conditions, involving lower oxygen concentrations. The bee gut interior has lower oxygen than the atmosphere (though it is not completely anaerobic as is true of human guts). This is why they were not previously cultured. Now that culture conditions are known, more researchers are starting to study these bacteria. This requirement also is consistent with the observation that they do not grow on hive surfaces. 

Also we have not been able to detect them in honey at all. 

The paper you linked is on bacteria that are highly highly specialized, living within cells of leafhoppers… these really cannot be cultured. They are more like organelles. The bee gut bacteria are still regular bacteria in most ways, just living in a specialized location, which is similar to the situation for human gut bacteria. 

Ok, I hope this is helpful. I need to write up a summary of these things that is accessible for beekeepers. 

Best wishes, 
Nancy


----------



## ehoffma2

*some of the bacteria in the Illium can hardly be distinguished from those of the bees gut and are not culturable.* 

Per Dr. Nancy Moran, you CAN culture the bacteria.


----------



## Ian

Can someone sum up what Nancy said in that text and Earl, how does her work relate to what the microbiologist of Strong Microbial are finding?


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> Can someone sum up what Nancy said in that text and Earl, how does her work relate to what the microbiologist of Strong Microbial are finding?


Ok, I paraphrase What Dr. Moran listed in her note:

There is a lot of bacteria in the honeybee for it's size
Almost all of the bacteria is in the gut.
There are about eight species of bacteria in the honeybee.
The bacteria are shared by the other bees.
Baby bees have no bacteria in their gut.
After three days a new bee has gut bacteria
Bee bacteria can only survive for hours out side of the gut
Bee poop can spread bacteria
Nurse bees spread the bacteria to other bees.
Human Food bacteria can not live in the gut of the honeybee
Honeybee bacteria does not grow on hive surfaces
Only bee gut bacteria can live in the honeybee gut
There is a nectar bacteria that can also live in the honeybee gut.
You can culture honeybee gut bacteria, it is in low oxygen
You do not find honeybee gut bacteria in honey
Bee gut bacteria is regular bacteria that lives in a specialized location.
The team at Strong Microbials Inc. agrees with Dr. Moran


----------



## JSL

ehoffma2 said:


> Therefore giving some food-related Lactobacillus to bees will not result in colonization of their guts. Pretty much the only normal colonizers of bee guts are bacteria that only live there. The one exception is the genus Acetobacter. These live in nectar, dilute honey, and are in the bee gut. Probably these come and go depending on what the bee eats.


Deknow,

Is this the point you were making in earlier posts?

ehoffma2,

Are the bacteria in DFM specifically cultured from honey bees?


----------



## Ian

Thanks Earl. I appreciate all the time put into this thread and forth giving information. It will be interesting to see how these studies progress.


----------



## Roland

In the summary post #192, I can concur with everything except:

Bee gut bacteria is regular bacteria that lives in a specialized location.

Could Ehoffma2 kindly verify this statement? Thank you.

Crazy Roland


----------



## ehoffma2

Roland said:


> In the summary post #192, I can concur with everything except:
> 
> Bee gut bacteria is regular bacteria that lives in a specialized location.
> 
> Could Ehoffma2 kindly verify this statement? Thank you.
> 
> Crazy Roland


*Hi, PLEASE find below the words from Dr. Moran.*

"The bee gut bacteria are still regular bacteria in most ways, just living in a specialized location, which is similar to the situation for human gut bacteria"

ehoffma2


----------



## ehoffma2

JSL said:


> Deknow,
> 
> Is this the point you were making in earlier posts?
> 
> ehoffma2,
> 
> Are the bacteria in DFM specifically cultured from honey bees?


*Reply - back to JSL*

YES, based on the evidence of the blind study. Please look at the increase of good bacteria.

If they were the wrong species of bacteria, the local environment (gut) would inhibit the growth in the low oxygen.

The short answer is, there are thirteen active agents working to create the correct environment.

ehoffma2


----------



## deknow

Ian said:


> Can someone sum up what Nancy said in that text and Earl, how does her work relate to what the microbiologist of Strong Microbial are finding?


Ian, I will take a stab at interpreting her note...but to my reading it is pretty clear as is. As a first step, Ramona has given me permission to post one of her slides from her Family Values talk (which touches on the microbial aspect of things). Sometimes, a picture is worth a thousand words....


> So some of the bacteria seem to require a fecal route, but of course it doesn’t take very much material, so it’s not necessary that bees are defecating all over the place. It could be anal grooming.


----------



## deknow

You will have to be much much more specific.



ehoffma2 said:


> *Reply - back to JSL*
> 
> YES, based on the evidence of the blind study. Please look at the increase of good bacteria.


I see nothing in the paper linked on page one of this thread that gives me any idea of how long after the bees were fed the supliment they were euthanized.

I can eat rocks for breakfast and if you xray or dissect me at lunch you will find rocks in my gut...it doesn't mean they are going to be there tomorrow, and it definitely doesn't mean they are a growing colony of rocks.

If you feed bees sugar syrup of some kind with live cultures, those live cultures will be found in the gut...but it doesn't mean they are growing there.


> If they were the wrong species of bacteria, the local environment (gut) would inhibit the growth in the low oxygen.
> 
> The short answer is, there are thirteen active agents working to create the correct environment.


I think it is clear that they are the "wrong" species of bacteria. It is possible that you are able to (through feeding) change the gut environment of the bee to foster these introduced bacteria...but then the environment probably wouldn't be ideal for the "right" species of bacteria. The 13 "active agents", if they are doing something to make the environment "ideal" for the introduced bacteria, they are doing something to make the enviornment less than ideal for the bacteria we actually want.


I'm pasting some of the procedures from your paper below (the formatting is lousy...I'm not going to take the time to fix it). Of note is that somehow (and perhaps i'm ignorant in the proper procedures here) you homogonize 1g of honeybees (3 bees)...which I take to mean they are ground up with a mortor and pestle or something similar?
..._and_ 10 fold diluttions of gut contents are made.

How the heck do you isolate gut contents from homogonized bees?

But mostly, I see nothing that indicates to me that anything was growing in the hive or in the bees...certainly nothing that makes me think you've done what you say you've done (innoculted the bee gut in the hive). Now, if these populations are still in the gut 6 months later, then you have something to talk about.

deknow


> Honeybee microbial analysis. Live honeybees were shipped to the laboratory
> (Figure 1)
> and euthanized
> by placing them
> into
> -
> 20 degrees Celsius freezer. 1 gram of honeybees (approximately 3 honeybees)
> were homogenized in 1 milliliter of 1% peptone water, and 10 fold dilutions of gut contents in peptone
> were made
> (Figure 2)
> . Dilutions were plated on MRS media for
> Lactobacillus
> quantification and TSA
> medium for
> Bacillus
> quantification.


----------



## Roland

Ehoff..... from half way down you post 189;

Pretty much the only normal colonizers of bee guts are bacteria that only live there.

I may be crazy, but to me, that does not square with your clip,"Bee gut bacteria is regular bacteria that lives in a specialized location"

Please enlighten me.

Crazy Roland


----------



## beepro

There are certain types of beneficial bacteria that can only live in a concentrated
area/location in the host. In this case it is the bee's hind gut area that has the most.
Now I remember the liquid beneficial bacteria sold at the local supermarket that is 
supposed to be good for my digestion and intestinal health. Yes those live in my gut area too. But I don't know
how they isolate those bacteria, hopefully not like how the bees do it, jk. Eewwl!!! 


Store bought beneficial 'gut' bacteria:


----------



## ehoffma2

*Here is the results we got from Frozen Pollen Sent to the Microbiologists*

Pollen samples we analyzed are low in bacteria. We looked for Lactic acid and spore forming bacteria and found none. Do you think this is normal or did you expect to find microbes in the pollen? 
On one hand, if this pollen is fermented, that is achieved by the microorganisms, but on another hand, the microorganisms are likely to perish (die) after they complete the fermentation. This is based on the description of fermented nectar for example: the osmotic conditions.

*Based on What Dr. Nancy Moran stated the other day, I would agree that this is NORMAL*

But Now I am wondering WHY USDA has started a project this year to test the same thing ?

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/projects/projects.htm?ACCN_NO=426268

Research Project: Understanding Honey Bee Microbiota to Improve Bee Nutrition and Colony Health

Location: Honey Bee Research

Project Number: 2022-21000-017-00
Project Type: Appropriated

Start Date: Feb 07, 2014
End Date: Feb 06, 2019

Objective:
Increasing evidence points to a core honey bee gut microbiota, however the distribution and function of peripheral bacterial and fungal communities in honeybees and their food stores are relatively unknown. Our work will focus on beebread to define the contribution of unknown and seemingly benign microbes to colony health and nutrition. Beebread provides the bulk of proteins, vitamins and lipids that bees consume. We will determine the microbial succession in beebread to understand the distribution of these beebread-associated microbial communities and whether these communities contribute to the nutritive value of pollen, its digestion and storage, and the potential for disease transmission and amplification. We will examine factors associated with beekeeping and agricultural practices that may affect the microbial balance of the honey bee and its stored food, including colony origin, supplemental feeding, nectar source, pollen type, and exposure to biocides. These data will inform our perspective on how microbial communities contribute to colony health. OBJECTIVES Our overall goal is to provide beekeepers and growers with practical advice for the maintenance of transitory commercial honey bee populations. Using a combination of laboratory and field approaches we will develop an understanding of the diversity, abundance, persistence and functional capacities of the microorganisms that occur in bees, stored food, the hive, and the general pollination environment. This information will be applied to the management of disease, nutrition, overwintering and biocides in the context of commercial beekeeping. Objective 1: Determine the core fungal microbiota in bee bread and determine relationships with bacterial communities. Sub-objective 1A: Enumerate, identify, and characterize the core fungal and bacterial microbiota of beebread. Objective 2: Characterize microbial succession in bee bread, including core and non-core microbes and their persistence during overwinter pollen storage. Sub-objective 2A: Identify the microbial communities involved in the conversion of corbicular pollen to beebread. Sub-objective 2B: Determine the impact of overwintering on the microbes in beebread. Objective 3: Identify factors affecting a colony's microbial diversity, including plant monocultures, exposure to biocides, and supplemental feeding. Sub-objective 3A: Determine the effect of supplemental feeding on microbial communities. Sub-objective 3B: Determine the effect of monoculture nectar and pollen source on microbial communities. Sub-objective 3C: Determine the effect of fungicides on microbes during beebread formation. 






JSL said:


> Deknow,
> 
> Is this the point you were making in earlier posts?
> 
> ehoffma2,
> 
> Are the bacteria in DFM specifically cultured from honey bees?


----------



## apis maximus

Here is a link to a similar topic that was discussed before on this very platform we know as Bee Source:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...ma&highlight=microbes+microbiota+gut+microbes

I only bring it up again, because some interesting points were made and some very good questions were raised. Sure, in the end the waters get muddy, information overload can and does kick in and the attention span withers away. 
But still, I think, that in the overall scheme of things, some people do become more aware of things that probably before, never even crossed their minds.

I will stop now and just close with a quote from Michael Bush that he kindly shared on that thread:

"*It seems to me that the first step is to not kill off the beneficial bacteria and fungi. The next is to maintain the normal pH of the hive to favor those bacteria and fungi. I'm not convinced that I know enough to innoculate them with microbes and know that I have improved anything. If you feed honey (correct pH etc.) and you don't use essential oils (anti microbial) or organic acids (dramatic shift in pH which kills most all microbes) or antibiotics (Fumidil will kill the fungi and Tylosin and TM will kill the bacteria) then you will get the things that should be living in a bee hive and in the bee gut and in the bee bread. The best way to innoculate a hive that is not doing well is to put a frame of bee bread and a frame of bees from a hive that is doing well. This should innoculate the hive that is not with the correct microbes*."

Merry Christmas to all of you!


----------



## deknow

The funding for the work the Moran Lab is doing is NSF. This is pure research. The USDA proposal you cite and quote is designed to look at practical applications.


----------



## davidsbees

If I'm not mistaken fumagillin does not kill nosema spores it just keeps it from germinating. And as I undrestand the fermentation process the bees inoculate the pollen as they collect it then pack it in the cell where the fermentation process begins going through a progression of molds, yeast and bacteria until the ph is low enough to kill off the remaining microbes and then preserved also freeing nutrients adding some vitamins. I think I read that gut microbes are regional. So I wonder how much good a outside inoculant would do. ???


----------



## Matt Beekman

Best question so far!


----------



## ehoffma2

Matt Beekman said:


> Best question so far!


*Wow - I think that a lot of good questions have been asked on this thread.*

PLEASE - see below some text that was sent to me by the Milwaukee Microbiologist team.

View attachment why DFM 2014.pdf


Why live bacteria (probiotics) instead of prebiotics or enzymes?

Live bacteria have the capacity to make the necessary enzymes fresh on demand and keep them under the right conditions

Live bacteria live for many generations in the gut

Probiotics establish interactions with the nonculturable bacteira in the gut 

Enzymes that were extracted from bacteria work optimally at optimal conditions: pH, temperature, other factors can destroy the enzymes

Enzymes have a life and don’t regenerate

Enzymes do what they are intended to do and have no added benefit

Honeybee microbial community

Strong Microbials DFM Honeybee supplements are the major classes of Lactic Acid Bacteria (LAB) found in US honeybees

The honeybees are protected by the LAB from harmful microorganisms

I tried to attache the pdf file, but I'm not sure if it worked.

EHOFFMA2


----------



## deknow

I've given the benefit of the doubt that you are looking for a real conversation...what I hear from you (evasions and pretending to answer questions) makes me believe me less and less.

This morning I looked at the video you linked to on the first page of the thread (mostly text on slides in the video)...and boy did some of the language seem familiar on some of the slides. For instance, at 1:28 the slide reads as follows:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXbB_a18x84



> As observers of the hive, we share in a vision that an individual honey bee is not quite an entity in itself, and conversely, the whole of the hive is more than just the sum of its individual bees. Easy to overlook are the multitudes of yeasts, bacteria, and other microorganisms that also inhabit, interact with, and contribute to the health and functions of the hive super-organism


That struck me as something so good that I could have written it...and in thinking about it, I did! ...in May 2008:
http://www.beeuntoothers.com/NoBeeIsAnIsland.pdf



> As students of the hive, we share in the understand
> ing that an individual bee is not quite
> an entity itself, and conversely, the whole of the
> hive is more than just the sum of its
> individual bees. Easy to overlook are the multitud
> es of yeasts, bacteria, and other
> microorganisms that also inhabit, interact with, an
> d contribute to the health and functions
> of the hive super-organism.


The next slide reads:


> "The microbial ecosystem that exists in the honeybees and within the honeybee hives includes some 8,000 microbes including hundreds of strains of yeasts in both pollen and nectar foraging bee intestines, and at least 107 molds, 81 yeasts and 29 bacteria in beebread.


Conincidentally, the next paragraph in "No Bee is an Island" reads:


> The microbial ecosystem that exists in honeybees an
> d within honeybee hives includes
> some 8,000 microbes
> 1
> including hundreds of strains of yeasts in both po
> llen and nectar
> foraging bee intestines
> 2
> , and at least 107 molds, 81 yeasts and 29 bacteria
> in beebread
> 3
> .


...and it goes on from there....I can't be bothered.

I don't mind being quoted (or even plagerized to some extent) if it helps beekeepers understand things they didn't understand.

I do mind blatant copyright infringement when it seeks to misinform, confuse, and sell your product.

Write your own copy to sell your own product.....and please remove my copy from all advertising materials. It is worth noting that the copy you lifted is completely unattributed.

My impression of "strong microbials"? I don't think they have a clue...I think they are tossing some readily available bacteria into bee feed and pretending they are 'helping' the bees by doing so. Worst of all, they don't appear to understand the systems they claim to be improving. The lifting of my copy is simply icing on the cake.

deknow


----------



## deknow

...the best one though is this one:



> "Fermentation of pollen is necessary to open the outer shells of pollen granules so that the encased proteins and nutrients are released and accessible for the honeybees to digest. The emerging adult bees acquire intestinal micro-flora through food exchange with other bees in the colony and through consumption of yeast containing pollen.


From No Bee is an Island:


> Martha Gilliam posited that fermentation of pollen
> is necessary to open the outer shells of
> pollen granules so that the encased proteins and nu
> trients are released and accessible for
> the bees to digest
> 4
> . Emerging adult bees acquire intestinal micro-flor
> a through food
> exchange with other bees in the colony and through
> consumption of yeast containing
> pollen
> 5
> .


In November of 2008, I posted the following to Bee-l...acknowledging the fact that the above was not quite right....but it seems that Strong Microbials hasn't been reading the updates for the last 6 years or so....



> we see where we got things wrong in "No Bee Is An Island". it isn't that the
> pollen grain needs to ferment in order to just "pop open"...it is the
> progression of many fermentation processes, each setting the stage for the next, that
> produces necessary substances for the other microbes, and for the bees. think of the
> fermentation of pollen as a tree rotting in the forest...there is a progression of bugs
> living underneath it, a few tunneling inside, molds and fungi, sow bugs, centipedes.....
> 
> the exact makeup of this culture of microorganisms is a heritable thing...perhaps more so
> than the genetics of the bees, and perhaps more important. antibiotics, pesticides, and
> other treatments that disrupt the microbial balance (which seems to include sugar as a
> winter feed) will, over time, erode the diversity and functionality of this culture.
> 
> the key (regardless of cell size) is not so much to breed a varroa (or nosema) resistant
> bee, but to allow the bees to build up their microbial culture without interference.
> keeping the bees alive long enough for this to happen is the trick....and perhaps that's
> what sc has to offer...perhaps it's a red herring, but we are both convinced that the
> microbes are the key. we think that sc might well give a head start (our experience
> suggests this).
> 
> it may be that in some areas, some of the essential microbes have become extinct and/or
> rare due to the impacts of varroa, tracheal mite, and beekeeper practices...perhaps this
> points to why some have success and other failure. it's more than likely that these
> microbial cultures have some things in common, and some are localized.


----------



## ehoffma2

JSL said:


> Here is what I found of the other thread, it looks worth repeating. Merry Christmas!
> 
> APICULTURE AND SOCIAL INSECTS
> Bacterial Probiotics Induce an Immune Response in the Honey Bee
> (Hymenoptera: Apidae)
> JAY D. EVANS
> AND
> DAWN L. LOPEZ
> USDAÐARS Bee Research Laboratory, BARC-East Building 476, Beltsville, MD 20705
> 
> http://www.habeetat.eu/Images/Evans...nduce an immune respinse in the honey bee.pdf


----------



## camero7

> I don't mind being quoted (or even plagerized to some extent) if it helps beekeepers understand things they didn't understand.
> 
> I do mind blatant copyright infringement when it seeks to misinform, confuse, and sell your product.
> 
> Write your own copy to sell your own product.....and please remove my copy from all advertising materials. It is worth noting that the copy you lifted is completely unattributed.
> 
> My impression of "strong microbials"? I don't think they have a clue...I think they are tossing some readily available bacteria into bee feed and pretending they are 'helping' the bees by doing so. Worst of all, they don't appear to understand the systems they claim to be improving. The lifting of my copy is simply icing on the cake.


All I can say is "wow" thanks Dean for sharing... I hope you sue


----------



## deknow

An honest apology and a promised date by which my copy will no longer be available in their advertising material (youtube or otherwise) is what any smart person/business would do. It is what any lawyer would advise....and doing so publicly here would be more than appropriate.

Failing that, suing in small claims is a good option for me...it costs me almost nothing...they have used my copy in adverstising a commercail product (which makes it hard to argue that my work has no commercial value...it does for them)...and as I will file local (to me) in Massachusetts, simply showing up to court in MA (if you live in MI) is going to cost something and take time away from important things (like selling snake oil).

I'm not really interested in thinking about law suits today (or any day...what a hassle). I would expect that the "spirit of the holiday season" (and the prospect of dealing with me in small claims after the holiday wears off) would encourage Strong Microbials to do the right thing ASAP.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

deknow said:


> An honest apology and a promised date by which my copy will no longer be available in their advertising material (YouTube or otherwise) is what any smart person/business would do.
> I'm not really interested in thinking about law suits today (or any day


DeKnow, very very well said. 

Very similar thing happen to me, got a phone call from Joe Grahm of ABJ one day, there was a competing sub maker trying to use pictures in there ads, of my bees, with my Nutra Bee sub fed hives, When Joe asked me about it, I said no, that is total misrepresentation to the tilt.

Very nice to see this get handle without lawsuits ( hopefully), the other party should be thankful. 

Deknow..... your a class act.


----------



## ehoffma2

ehoffma2 said:


> JSL said:
> 
> 
> 
> *PLEASE - see below - the information I received from Randy Oliver regarding a treatment trial
> View attachment BEE RESEARCH M&M TIPS.doc
> *
> 
> Tips for Designing bee research projects
> Randy Oliver ScientificBeekeeping.com
> Revised November 22, 2014
> Beekeepers are known for being of curious and experimental minds. Since factors affecting beekeeping are continually changing, new unanswered questions are bound to arise; the beekeeper “citizen scientist” can often answer them himself by performing a well-designed experiment, and then share those results to the benefit of everyone. But for the results of any experiment to be meaningful, it is important that the experiment follow certain scientific principles. Following are some tips for running a successful experiment.
> Research Objective
> You can perform a “trial” to test the hypothesis that this “treatment” (e.g., some sort of management technique or application of a medication) will result in a certain effect (e.g., lower mite level, greater honey production). Or, you could perform a “study” to learn something about bees or beekeeping (e.g., whether feral colonies have a higher incidence of X than do managed colonies).
> #1 point—what is the single specific question that you are trying to answer with this experiment? Write that question on the wall, and eliminate anything from your experimental design on that doesn’t have to do with specifically answering that question (and make sure that your experimental design will unambiguously answer the question). Fill in the following blanks before you go further (take some time to think them through):
> Your question ______________________________________________________________________
> Your hypothesis ____________________________________________________________________
> The treatment to be tested _____________________________________________________________
> The predicted effect _________________________________________________________________
> Background Research
> Perform an internet (e.g. Google Scholar) literature search of previous research, and read any previous studies that are applicable to this treatment. Such studies should also give you a model for your write up. Speak to researchers familiar with this topic.
> 
> Respectfully - EHOFFMA2
Click to expand...


----------



## ehoffma2

*based on the information Randy Oliver has given on running a trial, see below my description of a 2015 experiment*

We will create the NULL Hypothesis that DFM treatment creates no difference.
We hope to collect data that indicates that the populations are different !
Based on Randy's document and the Excel spread sheet the team
Suggests that we use Weight gain and frames of brood as the metrics.
The experiment shall run for 60 days. - Mid May to Mid July.
Each hive will be weighed every two weeks. Five (5) sets of data points.
We will use 12 hives control and 12 hives with monthly DFM treatment.
Queens will be the same age and same race. Holding all factors equal.
We will run a 2 sample T test to statistically test the means of each sample group.
Using a significants level of 5% - If P < 0.05 then they are different.

IF you have any questions on this Trial or can make any suggestions PLEASE send me a PM.
thanks much - EHOFFMA2


----------



## Ian

Earl, will you be analyzing bee samples from each group to determine the bee's gut microbial populations and diversity?

Perhaps trials looking at antibiotic use and other hive treatments and if the DFM shows any significant colony improvement .


----------



## ehoffma2

REPLY BACK TO IAN.

YES, we have three (3) other trials going for 2015.

We will have a newer product for 2015, with two more bee GUT bacteria strains.

bacterial species that are closer in relation to honeybees: Lactobacillus keunkeii and Fructobacillus fructosus (formerly known as Leuconostoc)

We will be running data collections on seasonality of microbial populations for trends.

Last we will follow the USDA lead and start sampling fresh pollen from an organic farm.

so we have a total of four (4) trials running for 2015.

Hope this answers the question. 

EHOFFMA2


----------



## Ian

Yes thanks Earl. It will be interesting to see how this bacteria treatment pans out. 

I encourage ventures like this to proceed. Unlike what some convey, I am encouraged to see RandD into a wide range of bee related health issues.  
Just take the cropping business for example. Billions are spent into RandD and the industry has progressed to the point of trippling our crop production over the last 50 years. Specific end use products diversify our income and our land has never been in better shape since the deep tiller started ripping the lands. 

Criticize criticize criticize all that's needed for balance but remember without this attention and investment into the industry very little will come out. 

Forage on I say. Just ask Keith how much time and investment he has put into his product. He has found something unique and has the top guys working on progressing his product for the betterment of his bees and everyone else's!


----------



## camero7

Ian said:


> Then take it to corporate and ask for an apology and whatever else your issue involves


Doesn't it worry you that the information they supply for support of their product is old news and some of it may be wrong, according to the site they lifted it from. Doesn't that impact their credibility and make you suspicious?


----------



## deknow

camero7 said:


> Doesn't it worry you that the information they supply for support of their product is old news and some of it may be wrong, according to the site they lifted it from. Doesn't that impact their credibility and make you suspicious?


I think it is worse than that.

If ehoffma2 and the text that he has pasted here from the company itself is an accurate representation of their understanding of what is known, then they are woefully uninformed.

It is possible that an infusion of some kinds of microbes that do not colonize the bees themselves may show some actual performance effect (positive or negative). 

Unfortunately, if that is the case, those doing the research don't seem to understand the difference between that kind of temporary effect and that of repopulating depleted microbial populations. Regardless of what they understand, they are trying to state the latter when they are only doing the former.

It is most telling that they offer no answer to how long after the bees were fed DFM they were tested for the presence of DFM microbes in the gut...or the fed concentration vs the concentration found in the guts.

I'm relatively certain, Ian, that if you realized that you inadvertently lifted something that I had written, that you would email me and offer an apology...even on Christmas.

There is a level of dishonesty here that sucks all the credibility out of all the claims...this (ehoffma2, strong microbials) isn't a reliable source of information.

deknow


----------



## Ian

camero7 said:


> Doesn't that impact their credibility and make you suspicious?


Corporate funded testing strike one
Stating claims on the products efficacy before any scrutiny strike two

Earls forthcoming on much the information coming from the project, plus one
If you want more than that perhaps emailing corporates microbiologist would be useful. 

Early days yet


----------



## deknow

Ian, I think you are misunderstanding me.

I posted on this thread when I felt that a product was being misrepresented. Ehoffma2 was claiming (and posting claims from Strong Microbials) that indicated that one needed only to feed their magic potion and your bees will be repopulated with the good bacteria they might be missing.

This is simply not true (wrong strains of bacteria, wrong wrt the routes of innoculation of newly emerged bees, etc), and is the most troubling aspect of this thread.

I tried to clear things up by pointing out (asking) what the interval between feeding and checking the gut for bacteria was. I tried to understand how one isolates gut contents from homoginzed bees.

Ehoffma2 continued to misinform while pretending to inform.

This helps no one unless one is selling the stuff....and I think that people who strive to mislead and misinform should generally be made to feel unwelcome.

The fact that they used my own educational material as unattributed advertising copy is a separate matter...but one that is unambiguous, and one that is consistent with dishonesty in many forms. I don't think one has to 'be on my side' to use the facts here as evidence that Strong Microbials either doesn't understand what they are selling, or they don't want you to understand what they are selling.


----------



## Ian

I appreciate the conversation in this thread up til a few pages back. Lots of interesting discussion (from my point of view anyway) and I have learnt quite a bit of stuff. Including your points Dean! I can be as guilty as the next guy for attacking the conversation and further muddying the waters. Probably not to anyone's benifet. 

Relax fella's! Dip another into that Rum!


----------



## Keith Jarrett

deknow said:


> Ian, I think you are misunderstanding me..


Agreed, Ian, please take a few minutes and reread some of Deknow posts.


----------



## Roland

With all legalities asside, from my perspective, the success of this product hinges on one word: "novel". From my understanding, the critters inside a bee are "novel", meaning that they are generally found no where else. If that is a true statement, then what will be the value of adding microbe NOT found inside the bees? Tom make it worse, what if the various populations are dynamic, shifting with the seasons and weather? Even if you could culture the novel microbes, how would you know what mix is needed that day? 

I may be crazy, but if they copied Dean, and did not do their home work there, what makes a person believe they would have done their homework on what the bees really needed?

Crazy Roland


----------



## Ian

Roland said:


> what makes a person believe they would have done their homework on what the bees really needed


Early days. 
Our farm spends tens of thousands on bacterial inoculants, Farmers love to spend money to find that edge.
Whether the application proves usefull in a beehive,? Looks like the industry is getting a lot of attention towards it, 

Earl, it would be interesting to see a side by side trial with all the other supporting agents minus your cultured bacteria.


----------



## Ian

Cam, how are you determining the efficacy of the probiotics you added to the sugar blocks this last fall? What kind of probiotics were they?


----------



## camero7

I have 15 nucs I put the probiotics in the sugar blocks on the hives. Rest are either commercial fondant or Lauri's recipe. They all look about the same. The nucs are eating the blocks at about the same pace. Fondant not as quickly. I guess the only way to tell will be winter survival. They were human probiotics I got on line. Seemed like an interesting idea so I tried it. It certainly hasn't seemed to hurt the nucs so far. Since there is little moisture added to the sugar to make the blocks and I cook it at a pretty low heat - 125° - I think it should still be there when the bees eat the sugar. I mix the sugar dry before I add cider and it should be pretty well distributed in the patty.


----------



## Ian

Thx Cam I appreciate the feedback.

From the conversation in this thread, what are the thoughts on your human probiotic bee feed supplement now ?


----------



## camero7

Hard to judge. It hasn't hurt them as far as I can tell. No excess dead bees in front of the nucs, clusters are good and eating away, but so are all my other nucs. No losses at all so far this fall. I did treat them with Amitraz in August and got an excellent mite drop. So they went into winter pretty healthy. But the cold is yet to come. I think spring might tell a story but I'll have to wait to see. It was kind of an expensive experiment and if I don't see positive results I won't repeat it.


----------



## Ian

camero7 said:


> Hard to judge. It hasn't hurt them


The bee supply store in MN has plastered their pages with *Now with Probiotics!*

"To meet the nutritional needs of your bees ... are now formulated with probiotics! Bulk format means no paper to mess with and soft formula is a breeze to apply."

Gives you that nice tingly sales pitch feeling inside...


----------



## deknow

It is entirely possible that there is a measurable change in the bees by using this product, and it might even be a positive one. The fact that they don't seem to understand ('they' being some combination of the marketing and technical folks at strong microbials) the systems they are designing a product to "improve" doesn't mean it doesn't work....it does mean that improving and refining the product will be more difficult. It also means that it is impossible for them to accurately explain what their product is actually doing.

After all, sticky notes were the product of a failed adhesive, and Hey! ...you got your peanut butter in my honey!


Roland said:


> With all legalities asside, from my perspective, the success of this product hinges on one word: "novel". From my understanding, the critters inside a bee are "novel", meaning that they are generally found no where else. If that is a true statement, then what will be the value of adding microbe NOT found inside the bees? Tom make it worse, what if the various populations are dynamic, shifting with the seasons and weather? Even if you could culture the novel microbes, how would you know what mix is needed that day?
> 
> I may be crazy, but if they copied Dean, and did not do their home work there, what makes a person believe they would have done their homework on what the bees really needed?
> 
> Crazy Roland


----------



## ehoffma2

Keith Jarrett said:


> The other product that has new stuff in it is HIVE ALIVE ?
> 
> *URL - http://www.advancescience.com/hive-alive*
> 
> Active Ingredients
> 
> ingredients in HiveAlive (MacroAlgae, Thymol, Lemongrass)
> 
> OceaShield™ was developed in partnership with industry leaders in animal nutrition and expert marine biologists. Using a patented process, we developed a unique combination of MacroAlgae extracts, some found only on the coast of Ireland, with naturally active compounds ideal for bee health. These extracts are scientifically validated to have anti-microbial, anti-viral and anti-fungal properties. This rich and nourishing food source promotes bees’ intestinal well-being.
> 
> 
> Thymol (active phenol in thyme): in addition to showing miticidal properties, Thymol is recognised as a key substance in the fight against Nosema. We have developed a unique emulsification process it to ensure it blends easily into sugar syrup and does not cause separation or re-crystallisation.
> 
> 
> Lemongrass is added to HiveAlive™ for its anti-microbial properties. It also calms the bees and makes sugar syrup attractive to them.
> 
> *I think that this sounds like honey bee healthy ? Maybe Maybe NOT ?*


----------



## ehoffma2

*The Bacterial Communities Associated with Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Foragers*

This looks newer ? Not sure If I have read it before. I post the URL below.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0095056

Published: April 16, 2014

The honey bee is a key pollinator species in decline worldwide. As part of a commercial operation, bee colonies are exposed to a variety of agricultural ecosystems throughout the year and a multitude of environmental variables that may affect the microbial balance of individuals and the hive. While many recent studies support the idea of a core microbiota in guts of younger in-hive bees, it is unknown whether this core is present in forager bees or the pollen they carry back to the hive. Additionally, several studies hypothesize that the foregut (crop), a key interface between the pollination environment and hive food stores, contains a set of 13 lactic acid bacteria (LAB) that inoculate collected pollen and act in synergy to preserve pollen stores. Here, we used a combination of 454 based 16S rRNA gene sequencing of the microbial communities of forager guts, crops, and corbicular pollen and crop plate counts to show that (1) despite a very different diet, forager guts contain a core microbiota similar to that found in younger bees, (2) corbicular pollen contains a diverse community dominated by hive-specific, environmental or phyllosphere bacteria that are not prevalent in the gut or crop, and (3) the 13 LAB found in culture-based studies are not specific to the crop but are a small subset of midgut or hindgut specific bacteria identified in many recent 454 amplicon-based studies. The crop is dominated by Lactobacillus kunkeei, and Alpha 2.2 (Acetobacteraceae), highly osmotolerant and acid resistant bacteria found in stored pollen and honey. Crop taxa at low abundance include core hindgut bacteria in transit to their primary niche, and potential pathogens or food spoilage organisms seemingly vectored from the pollination environment. We conclude that the crop microbial environment is influenced by worker task, and may function in both decontamination and inoculation.


----------



## ehoffma2

*I think that Brushy Mountain will carry the Hive alive product for 2015.*

"The traditional treatment (for Nosema) was chemical – Fumidil B – now being phased out under EU regulations. One “natural” treatment which shows encouraging results is HiveAlive™ produced by Advance Science which boosts the strength of colonies to enable them to fight off the effects of Nosema."

Mike Oliver, beekeeping teacher, UK

http://www.advancescience.com/testimonials


----------



## ehoffma2

*Here is the URL to a discussion on using Thymol in bee feed*

*http://www.beekeepingforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=13731*

From reading several forums and Randy Oliver's website it seems that thymol can be used for preventing fungal growth in sugar syrup and also for treatment of nosema (although not licensed for the latter). The commonly recommended concentration seems to be 0.44mm thymol, which is an effective level for preventing fungal growth:



0.44mM is 0.066g thymol / litre and at this level the sugar solution apparently does not have an appreciable thymol smell.

Thornes sell thymol and state that 2 teaspoons (10ml?) of a 20% alcoholic solution of thymol should be added to 1 gallon (4.55 litres) of syrup. This works out at 0.43 g / litre, so is >7 more concentrated than the recommended dose of 0.44mM and the resulting syrup does have a very strong thymol odour. A Beesource member suggests adding 1 ml of 20% thymol to 3 litres which is 0.066 g / litre or 0.44mM



Have there been any studies on the levels of thymol which can be tolerated by bees?

'Teaspoons', are hardly the most accurate measurements available! Or have Thornes made a mistake on their thymol label? Why don't they say so many mls?

*I'm thinking that you can make your own hive alive stuff - ?*


----------



## Honey-4-All

In reference to the plosone Article.

I happen to have a relative who works for them. When meeting for our Christmas dinner the relative made a comment that it was easily noted that nothing stirs up the debate with a little passion like a "bee article" 

Seems like any other subject and the interested parties won't even consider breaking into the armory. When the bee articles get published the nuclear weapons get armed. 

Sound familiar? Later ............ Back to arms folks... Back to arms....


----------



## JSL

ehoffma2 said:


> *The Bacterial Communities Associated with Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Foragers*
> 
> This looks newer ? Not sure If I have read it before. I post the URL below.
> 
> http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0095056



Earl,

I am a bit puzzled by this... I posted the same link to the same article back at post # 115. Have you read it? It makes similar points as deknow pointed out... Bacteria are very specific to their environment, mode of transmission and host.


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> *I was asked a question today that I do not know the answer to*
> 
> *Does anyone know if the Fungi used to fight varroa, play nice with enzymes and bacteria?*
> 
> http://www.fungi.com/beefriendly.html
> 
> Host Defense® Mushrooms Bee Friendly™ Research Initiative
> 
> Bees drinking from mushroom mycelium
> Drivers of Colony Decline
> 
> Microbial & Viral Pathogens
> Apparently healthy bee colonies may be simultaneously infected by multiple pathogens that are normally held in check by the colony’s immunity. Pathogen infection harms bees already challenged by other stress factors.
> 
> Parasitic mites
> Varroa mites are parasites that feed on the bodily fluids of bee adults, pupae and larvae. Varroa mites transmit viruses and sap strength from the colony.
> 
> Pesticides, Fungicides & GMO Exposure
> Sub-lethal pesticide exposure can alter bee immunity, behavior, smell, memory, metabolism, flight and mobility, and increase susceptibility to diseases. Exposure to fungicides kills or reduces the beneficial fungi found on pollen, and degrades the nutritional quality of the “bread” that the bees make from it. More research is needed, though many suspect that GMOs may negatively impact bee colonies.
> 
> The synergistic stressors of infection, parasitism, toxins, and immune deficits/depression may initiate Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD).
> Bee Friendly Approach to Recovery
> 
> Immune Support
> Researching the role that extracts of the mycelium of mushrooms can have in strengthening the immune systems of bees and reducing their viral burden.
> 
> Controlling Bee Parasites
> Developing ways to use the common bio-control fungus Metarhizium anisopliae to control the parasitic mite Varroa destructor. Significantly, this fungus is safe for bees, birds and humans and appears to be highly active against Varroa mites.
> 
> Detoxification Support
> The bee genome has relatively few detoxification genes compared to solitary insects such as flies and mosquitoes. Select mushroom species release myconutrients that may modulate and up-regulate detoxification pathways in bees.
> 
> BEE F R I E N D LY™
> 
> To receive the latest information on this and other developments at Fungi Perfecti, sign up for our email newsletter at the bottom of this page.
> 
> 
> 
> © 2014 Paul Stamets


----------



## ehoffma2

*As I look at the question? Does fungi used to fight Varroa interact with enzymes and bacteria ? *

It is not clear to me If they interact. Bacteria are much smaller than fungi.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/160582-the-difference-between-a-fungus-bacteria/

The Difference Between a Fungus & Bacteria

*Does anyone know who participated in the fungi trials ?* 

Thanks


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> Corporate funded testing strike one
> Stating claims on the products efficacy before any scrutiny strike two
> 
> Earls forthcoming on much the information coming from the project, plus one
> If you want more than that perhaps emailing corporates microbiologist would be useful.
> 
> Early days yet


*Ian, If I may PLEASE correct you on what you stated about the testing*

There is NO Company "sponsored" testing. I have not been paid one dime. 

I ran the studies for FREE! I bought the antibiotics. I sampled the live bees.

I bought the containers and I paid for the postage to Milwaukee WI.

I am the one who demanded that we run a LD -50 test at 100X normal dose.

I tried to kill my bees with bacteria. I am the one who demanded that we run a 

blind study. I refused to tell the the company what was in the samples until after

the analysis was complete. All they got were live bees in boxes a,b,c ... x,y,z

So far I have been PAID Zero dollars by the company. OK, yes they gave me the bacteria.

So PLEASE do not call this company funded, because it is has not been funded.

ALL of the work done so far has been done by me for FREE. It came out of MY POCKET!

EAS MASTER BEEKEEPER - 2001.


----------



## apis maximus

ehoffma2 said:


> I ran the studies for FREE! *I bought the antibiotics.* I sampled the live bees.
> 
> So far I have been PAID Zero dollars by the company. OK, *yes they gave me the bacteria.*


:scratch:
OK, what are we talking about here? Antibiotics? 
Are you calling the DFM bacteria you used, antibiotics?


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> *Ian, If I may PLEASE correct you on what you stated about the testing
> 
> 
> 
> I got this message this morning in PM from another beekeeper;
> 
> "Here we go again, Sunday morning wake-up coffee  my computer is the modern replacement for the coffee shop"
> 
> Earl, if you could clarify one thing of many... You are an agent of the company, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian said:


> ehoffma2 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Ian, If I may PLEASE correct you on what you stated about the testing
> 
> 
> 
> I got this message this morning in PM from another beekeeper;
> 
> "Here we go again, Sunday morning wake-up coffee  my computer is the modern replacement for the coffee shop"
> 
> Earl, if you could clarify one thing of many... You are an agent of the company, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ian, I am still as independent today as I was last year.
> 
> If you look up the definition of a manufacturer agent, they do not work for the company.
> 
> I have purchased bacteria for my own consumption last year and this year. amazon.com
> 
> When I ran the trials and sampled the bees this Fall, I was Not an agent for the company.
> 
> I had to sign legal papers on intellectual property and non-compete clause. So after I signed the
> 
> papers, now I have a title. I'm not an employee nor do I plan on being an employee.
> 
> So let me get back to my last posting. Right now I'm doing all of this work for FREE.
> 
> And worse yet, I signed myself up to do more free stuff next year.
> 
> You tell me whats wrong with this picture.*
Click to expand...


----------



## ehoffma2

apis maximus said:


> :scratch:
> OK, what are we talking about here? Antibiotics?
> Are you calling the DFM bacteria you used, antibiotics?


Hi, Sorry. I'm not sure IF you read the blind study I performed.

One of the trials involved placing terramycin in a hive and seeing how the good bacteria was killed. I bought the terramycin with my money and used it per the directions.
Then I sampled the bee from that hive after the three week time period.
Then we placed bacteria in the hive to see if we could get the good bacteria back to normal.
Then I sampled the hive again. the data indicated that the bacteria recovered after
the treatment of the product. So you can kill it and put it back.
DFM ( direct fed bacteria ) is not antibiotics. Sorry for the poor communications.


----------



## deknow

manufacturer's agent
noun
:an agent middleman operating on a contractual basis within an exclusive territory who sells for a manufacturing client noncompeting but related goods and who has limited authority over price and terms of sale

http://i.word.com/idictionary/manufacturer's agent


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> manufacturer's agent
> noun
> :an agent middleman operating on a contractual basis within an exclusive territory who sells for a manufacturing client noncompeting but related goods and who has limited authority over price and terms of sale
> 
> *Correct, but there is no territory, and I do not sell product. and I have no authority.*


----------



## deknow

You get no commission from selling the product? ...or get compensated in any way when product is sold when you initiate the contact that leads to a sale?


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> You get no commission from selling the product?


*Dean, If a retailer ordered product, then yes I could get a commission.*

I'm not a retailer. someone would have to order product from the manufacturer.

Respectfully - ehoffma2.


----------



## deknow

1. Are there any retailers?
2. Do you make a commission when/if a retailer buys in wholesale?

Adding in edit.....I think you answered #2 as yes. ....doesn't this mean that you get commission on every unit sold?


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> 1. Are there any retailers?
> 2. Do you make a commission when/if a retailer buys in wholesale?
> 
> Adding in edit.....I think you answered #2 as yes. ....doesn't this mean that you get commission on every unit sold?


*Dean, the answer to Question number one is; I'm working on it.*

EHOFFMA2


----------



## deknow

I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but to me it seems like anything you've spent in trying to demonstrate the benefits of this product is an investment against expected returns rather than "free work" done for the benefit of the beekeeping community.


----------



## deknow

....and that the claims of efficacy here in this thread is nothing other than marketing copy.

...and most importantly, that we are speaking to someone that does represent Strong Microbials, and that answers, lack of answers, and evasions on a public forum are the official communications from a contracted representative of the company.


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> Free work.
> 
> Dean, you make this sound so easy.
> 
> Please see attached a picture that I was given permission to use by Dr. Eva Frosgren.
> 
> I'm not sure why but no one on the US side seems to have any desire to share these pictures.
> 
> In the picture you can see the good bacteria suppressing the American foul brood bacteria.
> 
> The Europeans are five years ahead of us. Antibiotics are not your friend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EHOFFMA2


----------



## deknow

That is really awsome that you got permission to post that photo. What is it about Dr. Frosgren or her work that makes her eligible to be asked before you use her intellectual property to sell a product?


----------



## deknow

In the photo you see (as described in the abstract):


> The results demonstrate that honey bee specific LAB possess beneficial properties for honey bee health.


The photo is not of some general pool of probiotic bacteria fed to chickens and pigs, it is of specific strains that are novel to the honeybee and known to be found in the honeybee. 



ehoffma2 said:


> deknow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Free work.
> 
> Dean, you make this sound so easy.
> 
> Please see attached a picture that I was given permission to use by Dr. Eva Frosgren.
> 
> I'm not sure why but no one on the US side seems to have any desire to share these pictures.
> 
> In the picture you can see the good bacteria suppressing the American foul brood bacteria.
> 
> The Europeans are five years ahead of us. Antibiotics are not your friend.
> View attachment 15046
> 
> 
> EHOFFMA2
Click to expand...


----------



## camero7

Does anyone know if Lactobacillus johnsonii is the same in honey bees and humans. If so maybe adding probiotics to feed makes sense.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

ehoffma2 said:


> Please see attached a picture that I was given permission to use by Dr. Eva Frosgren.
> 
> I'm not sure why but[HIGHLIGHT] no one on the US side seems to have any desire to share these pictures.[/HIGHLIGHT]


I find it curious that you should think that. That _very same _photo was posted on one of Randy Oliver's pages along with extensive comments by Randy. Click the link below:

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/sick-bees-part-5-multiple-infections/


----------



## deknow

lactobacillus johnsonii crl 1647 is the (or a) strain that has been isolated from the bee gut. I don't see a reference to it anywhere outside of Bee literature.....certainly I don't see it being advertised as available anywhere.


camero7 said:


> Does anyone know if Lactobacillus johnsonii is the same in honey bees and humans. If so maybe adding probiotics to feed makes sense.


Adding in edit: also don't forget that putting even the proper bacteria in feed won't inoculate the colony with a sustaining population.


----------



## deknow

Crl 1294 seems to be a normal vaginal bacteria in humans, and is a different strain


----------



## camero7

Not sure the source for this since it was listed under a translate site, but it seems to indicate that there is very little difference between strains:

Eight strains belonging to Lactobacillus spp. and fiveto Enterococcus spp.were isolated
from the gut of worker Apis mellifera L. bees.Studies based on 16S rRNA sequencing
revealed that AJ5,IG9,A15 and CRL1647strains had a 99%identity with Lactobacillus
johnsonii, while SM21 showed a 99%similarity with Enterococcusfaecium. L. johnsonii
CRL1647,AJ5 and IG9 were high lactic acid producers(values were between 177 and
275 mM),and in vitro they inhibited different human food-borne pathogen sand
Paenibacillus larvae, the American foulbrood agent. This bacterium was the most
sensitive to the lactic acid effect being inhibited by44 mM of this metabolite.
L. johnsonii CRL1647,AJ5 and IG9 also presented important surface properties.These
cells showed between 77%and 93%of auto-aggregation.The preliminary study of the
chemical nature of the agg regating factors revealed that the molecules involved in the
surface of each L. johnsonii strain were quite complex;and something of a peptidic
nature was mainly involved. E. faecium SM21 produced bacteriocin-like compounds with
anti-Listeria effects.Further more,a band close to 6.0–7.5kDA was detected by SDS-
PAGE studies,and the ent A,Band P structural genes were amplified by PCR reactions.
For the first time,bee-gut associated L. johnsonii and E. faecium strains have been
isolated,identified,cultivated and some of their functional properties reported.


----------



## camero7

BTW - I was not trying to set anyone up... did some more research based on Dean's answer.


----------



## deknow

Cam, remember that the 99% similarity has to do with the 16s RNA not the similarities between strains. It is (i believe..I'm not an expert) a good indication of evolutionary origin and a time scale for when various strains diverged from one another because this gene doesn't mutate rapidly. 

The study you quote above looks at three separatseparate strains that are all 99% match.


----------



## camero7

The more I look the more confused I get. I can find no probiotics for sale that contain Lactobacillus johnsonii.
Interesting that Lactobacillus johnsonii CRL1647 has been studied in humans. I have come full circle and my research seems to indicate the enzymes are the way to go. Lactobacillus johnsonii is manufactured from them according to my research. still looking. I do believe that this thread is on to something.


----------



## ehoffma2

camero7 said:


> The more I look the more confused I get. I can find no probiotics for sale that contain Lactobacillus johnsonii.
> 
> *Cam, here is the circle of gut bacteria that I was given*
> 
> Please see attached file showing Honeybee Gut bacteria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not see Lactobacillus johnsonii listed ?
> 
> ehoffma2


----------



## camero7

Hi Earl,

According to all my research _Lactobacillus johnsonii_ is the major Lactic Acid Bacteria in honey bees. _Lactobacillus johnsonii_ CRL1647 appears to be the major one but there are 3 others [all _Lactobacillus johnsonii_ ] that have been identified. Is the slide you show from honey bees. Source?


----------



## camero7

Interesting that there will be a presentation at the 2015 AMERICAN HONEY PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION

Probiotic use of Acetobacteracae Alpha 2.2 (Parasaccharibacter apium) for improving honey bee 
colony health

I also found, thanks Earl, this paper which shows another LAB

Microbial Ecology of the Hive and Pollination Landscape: Bacterial Associates from Floral Nectar, the Alimentary Tract and Stored Food of Honey Bees (_Apis mellifera_)

AbstractNearly all eukaryotes are host to beneficial or benign bacteria in their gut lumen, either vertically inherited, or acquired from the environment. While bacteria core to the honey bee gut are becoming evident, the influence of the hive and pollination environment on honey bee microbial health is largely unexplored. Here we compare bacteria from floral nectar in the immediate pollination environment, different segments of the honey bee (_Apis mellifera_) alimentary tract, and food stored in the hive (honey and packed pollen or “beebread”). We used cultivation and sequencing to explore bacterial communities in all sample types, coupled with culture-independent analysis of beebread. We compare our results from the alimentary tract with both culture-dependent and culture-independent analyses from previous studies. Culturing the foregut (crop), midgut and hindgut with standard media produced many identical or highly similar 16S rDNA sequences found with 16S rDNA clone libraries and next generation sequencing of 16S rDNA amplicons. Despite extensive culturing with identical media, our results do not support the core crop bacterial community hypothesized by recent studies. We cultured a wide variety of bacterial strains from 6 of 7 phylogenetic groups considered core to the honey bee hindgut. Our results reveal that many bacteria prevalent in beebread and the crop are also found in floral nectar, suggesting frequent horizontal transmission. From beebread we uncovered a variety of bacterial phylotypes, including many possible pathogens and food spoilage organisms, and potentially beneficial bacteria including _Lactobacillus kunkeei_, Acetobacteraceae and many different groups of Actinobacteria. Contributions of these bacteria to colony health may include general hygiene, fungal and pathogen inhibition and beebread preservation. Our results are important for understanding the contribution to pollinator health of both environmentally vectored and core microbiota, and the identification of factors that may affect bacterial detection and transmission, colony food storage and disease susceptibility.


----------



## deknow

Cam....I'm not sure what you are trying to say or trying to unravel

Enzymes are produced by living cells. ....bacteria are not made from them. Some commercial enzyme manufacture is done by modifying the dna of easy to grow bacteria to make something they don't normally make...sometimes they are cultured for their natural occurring enzymes.

The core bacteria (which make up about 95% of the bacteria population in the bee) are pretty well documented by the Moran lab along with a few others (like Vince Martinson). 

One study to be careful of is the Mattila study that shows different strains present.....read the Moran lab's response to see that it was not the raw data that was faulty, it was the way it was handled....some data not used for no explained reason, and some kind of scrambled statistical modeling in analyzing the data they did use.


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> Is this the study discussed ?
> 
> at the URL - http://www.yalescientific.org/2013/...crobiota-may-yield-clues-to-honey-bee-health/ ?
> 
> 
> Beneficial Gut Communities Revealed
> 
> The great diversity of bacteria that make up the gut community of host organisms, whether humans or honey bees, was for a long time inaccessible to scientists. Due to the environmental conditions bacteria normally habitat, many cannot live in the presence of oxygen, for example, they are not easily cultured, or grown, in a lab, making their study very difficult.
> In more recent years, the development of DNA sequencing and other approaches that provide insight into an organism’s genome has allowed Moran to elucidate the essential role of gut bacterial species in bees.
> 
> Moran describes bacteria as largely beneficial in honey bees and “incredibly important in basic functioning,” particularly in metabolism. Animals lack the ability to synthesize vitamins and ten of the twenty amino acids necessary to make proteins. These nutrients must instead be ingested in food or produced by bacteria symbionts in the gut. In bees, gut microbiota also play an important role in metabolizing sugars from nectar and pollen into energy as well as in breaking down pectin in pollen cell walls that can be toxic to honey bees. In one European bumblebee species, gut microbiota have been shown to protect against an intestinal pathogen; bacteria likely have the same protective role in honey bees.


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> *Dean, Question PLEASE*
> 
> Which product is the one you are ordering from URL - http://canadianbio.com/ ?
> 
> PRODUCTS
> 
> Superzyme™ Plus
> Superzyme™-W Conc
> Superzyme™-L Plus
> Superzyme™-L
> Superzyme™-CS L Plus


----------



## ehoffma2

Dean, at the Canada Bio web site they talk about - Provides a broad spectrum of enzyme activities including "phytase"

Dean, What is phytase and do you use it ?


----------



## deknow

I've never purchased or used any such product...nor have I discussed such a product in this thread.

I do find it a little strange that you are asking me for help.


----------



## camero7

I believe it was Davidsbees who was using the Canadian Bio company.

Dean I've read some of the Moran Lab stuff. I'm trying to figure out if/which probiotics might work and which might not. It's pretty confusing to me. What I've learned so far is the stuff I put in some sugar blocks is probably useless to the bees but shouldn't hurt them. 

Even Ms. Moran indicates that less floral diversity may be limiting the beneficial bacteria and there should be a way to assist their growth in the hive. I know from my many years of farming that some things are sold to farmers that are useless and some things are very helpful. I trying to find the good stuff in my non-scientific way. thanks for the help.


----------



## deknow

Unlike the standard probiotics for livestock and people, it isn't likely to directly affect the gut colonization to put them in feed. I think there are some proclaimed probiotics sold for humans that are certainly killed by the stomach acid (yogurt enemas used to be popular in some circles...either Kellogg or Post was a big proponent (i think cold yogurt might be the source of Tony the Tigers "greeeeeeaaaat" catchphrase).

There may be bacterial cultures that can be introduced that will help with production or "health" for the bees....but it is not by supplementing or displacing the core set with standard livestock strains.

One of the most promising treatments for chrones disease is the introduction of pig whipworms. Their presence in the human gut suppresses the symptoms (probably by giving the overactive immune system something productive to do), but the worms do not colonize the human gut...they are passed and need to be reintroduced (not the same ones!). I expect that you are as well equipped to play with this as anyone....it is totally uncharted waters.



camero7 said:


> I believe it was Davidsbees who was using the Canadian Bio company.
> 
> Dean I've read some of the Moran Lab stuff. I'm trying to figure out if/which probiotics might work and which might not. It's pretty confusing to me. What I've learned so far is the stuff I put in some sugar blocks is probably useless to the bees but shouldn't hurt them.
> 
> Even Ms. Moran indicates that less floral diversity may be limiting the beneficial bacteria and there should be a way to assist their growth in the hive. I know from my many years of farming that some things are sold to farmers that are useless and some things are very helpful. I trying to find the good stuff in my non-scientific way. thanks for the help.


----------



## camero7

Well, you and Romona are the guru's of this stuff as far as I know... so I pay attention to your posts.


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> I've never purchased or used any such product...nor have I discussed such a product in this thread.
> 
> I do find it a little strange that you are asking me for help.


Thank you Dean for the reply - my mistake.

I understood that you had used the product from Canada Bio.

I was wrong.

And I do not think that it is strange to ask you for help.


----------



## ehoffma2

deknow said:


> Dean, PLEASE see attached the file that shows the correct STRAINS for honeybees.
> 
> Question PLEASE what is the letter number system for describing each bacteria strain called ?
> 
> View attachment strains.pdf
> 
> 
> thank you EHOFFMA2


----------



## ehoffma2

Table 2. Bioactive substances produced by each of the 13 LAB symbionts from honeybees (Apis mellifera)*
Genus	Strain	Acetic acid	Formic acid	Lactic	H2O2	Benzene	Toluene	Octane	Ethylbenzene	Xylene	Nonane
*
The table depicts organic acids (lactic-, acetic- and formic acids), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and volatiles (benzene, toluene, n-octane, ethylbenzene, xylene and n-nonane). The depicted amounts refer to microgram per sample and `+` refers to a positive reaction.
Lactobacillus	Fhon2	>263	>17	680 0·0045	0·004	0·0	0·0022	0·39	0·0
Lactobacillus	Fhon13	>327	>28	600 0·0018	0·008	0·0	0·031	0·29	0·0068
Lactobacillus	Hma11	>306	>16	500	+	0·0005	0·036	0·027	0·0	0·23	0·0127
Lactobacillus	Hon2	>290	>16	770 0·001	0·045	0·049	0·0004	0·28	0·02
Lactobacillus	Bin4	161·8	9·3	600 0·074	0·0	0·0	0·017	0·01	0·0
Lactobacillus	Hma2	>271	>16	710	+	0·0003	0·057	0·049	0·0	0·25	0·0127
Lactobacillus	Bma5	>267	>16	900	+	0·0004	0·046	0·059	0·004	0·28	0·0163
Lactobacillus	Hma8	206·4	12·7	1060	+	0·0008	0·07	0·049	0·0005	0·24	0·02
Lactobacillus	Biut2	>258	>14	950	+	0·0006	0·036	0·039	0·0004	0·26	0·0159
Bifidobacterium	Bin2	>302	>20	260 0·0002	0·040	0·369	0·003	0·27	0·0147
Bifidobacterium	Bin7	>297	>25	420 0·009	0·045	0·579	0·004	0·25	0·02
Bifidobacterium	Hma3	>294	>20	220 0·0014	0·040	0·559	0·004	0·26	0·02
Bifidobacterium	Bma6	208·2	13·0	260 0·0005	0·0	0·419	0·003	0·01	0·0
Summation	All 13 LAB	>3451	>223	7930 0·094	0·427	2·198	0·0695	3·011	0·1594


----------



## ehoffma2

*URL - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/iwj.12345/full*

Biofilm formation
The LAB symbionts reside inside honeybees within the honey crop in biofilms [11]. In order to assess if this biofilm can be formed outside the honey stomach, we investigated biofilm formation in vitro by a previously described method [30].Shortly, each LAB symbiont was grown in supplemented MRS and Pollen broths. LAB strains were allowed to reach early stationary phase (∼108 CFU/ml), and 100 µl of the culture was inoculated into a polystyrene MicroWell plate (Nunc®, Sigma-Aldrich) in different dilutions and incubated at 35°C for 72 hours.


----------



## ehoffma2

*URL - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteria*

*Since we tested frozen pollen that was one year old, I assume that this was the cause of the low bacteria count. We will collect fresh pollen from an organic farm this summer and publish our findings.*

Bacterial growth follows four phases. When a population of bacteria first enter a high-nutrient environment that allows growth, the cells need to adapt to their new environment. The first phase of growth is the lag phase, a period of slow growth when the cells are adapting to the high-nutrient environment and preparing for fast growth. The lag phase has high biosynthesis rates, as proteins necessary for rapid growth are produced.[100] The second phase of growth is the log phase, also known as the logarithmic or exponential phase. The log phase is marked by rapid exponential growth. The rate at which cells grow during this phase is known as the growth rate (k), and the time it takes the cells to double is known as the generation time (g). During log phase, nutrients are metabolised at maximum speed until one of the nutrients is depleted and starts limiting growth. The third phase of growth is the stationary phase and is caused by depleted nutrients. The cells reduce their metabolic activity and consume non-essential cellular proteins. The stationary phase is a transition from rapid growth to a stress response state and there is increased expression of genes involved in DNA repair, antioxidant metabolism and nutrient transport.[101] The final phase is the death phase where the bacteria run out of nutrients and die.

Please contact me if you have any microbial data on pollen that you have collected.


----------



## camero7

You might find this study interesting.

Hive-stored pollen of honey bees: many lines of
evidence are consistent with pollen preservation,
not nutrient conversion


Abstract
Honey bee hives are filled with stored pollen, honey, plant resins and wax, all antimicrobial to differing degrees. Stored pollen is the nutritionally rich currency used for colony growth and consists of 40 – 50% simple sugars. Many studies speculate that prior to consumption by bees, stored pollen undergoes long-term nutrient conversion,becoming more nutritious ‘bee bread’ as microbes predigest the pollen. We quantified both structural and functional aspects associated with this hypothesis using behavioral assays, bacterial plate counts, microscopy and 454 amplicon sequencing of the 16SrRNA gene from both newly collected and hive-stored pollen. We found that bees preferentially consume fresh pollen stored for <3 days. Newly collected pollen contained few bacteria, values which decreased significantly as pollen were stored

>
The estimated microbe to pollen grain surface area ratio was 1:1 000 000 indicating anegligible effect of microbial metabolism on hive-stored pollen. Consistent with these findings, hive-stored pollen grains did not appear compromised according to microscopy. Based on year round 454 amplicon sequencing, bacterial communities of newly
collected and hive-stored pollen did not differ, indicating the lack of an emergent microbial community co-evolved to digest stored pollen. In accord with previous culturing and 16S cloning, acid resistant and osmotolerant bacteria like Lactobacillus kunkeei were found in greatest abundance in stored pollen, consistent with the harshcharacter of this microenvironment. We conclude that stored pollen is not evolved for microbially mediated nutrient conversion, but is a preservative environment due primarily to added honey, nectar, bee secretions and properties of pollen itself.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mec.12966/pdf


----------



## ehoffma2

* I contacted Fungi Perfecti today regarding the question that was asked about

Compatibly between honeybee direct fed microbials and the fungi used in the varroa

Control product called Bee Friendly™* I suggested that I could provide samples of bacteria for 

them to test. I also called them and spoke to one of their agents. Excellent dialog.

http://www.fungi.com/email-confirmation/contact-form-success.html

Controlling Bee Parasiteseveloping ways to use the common bio-control fungus Metarhizium anisopliaeto control the parasitic mite Varroa destructor. Significantly, this fungus is safe for bees, birds and humansvii and appears to be highly active against Varroa mites.

http://www.fungi.com/beefriendly.html

By [email protected] PhoneOrder Line: 800-780-9126(toll free in the US & Canada)Phone: 360-426-9292Fax: 360-426-9377By MailFungi PerfectiPO Box 7634Olympia, WA 98507USA


----------



## ehoffma2

*Here are the URL links to the independent studies on honeybee bacteria.*

I would best describe the product Super DFM as a biological control for Chalk brood.

https://rirdc.infoservices.com.au/downloads/09-120.pdf Australia 

http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/ar/archive/aug98/bees0898.pdf

There are several other studies on the novel honeybee GUT bacteria.

This seems to be a hot research topic


----------



## Ian

"conclusion this has been a successful major study of the Australian bee gut bacterial flora, which has shown how important this system is to maintain a healthy bee colony. It has clearly established that bee gut bacterial numbers are important for a healthy colony, and indicated that the types of bacteria may also be important in playing a role in keeping hives healthy. However, as this is the first detailed study of bee gut bacteria it has also given rise to more questions. Through future development of this technology it may be possible to develop various new technologies for disease diagnostics, biocontrol of diseases such as Chalkbrood, and development of probiotics for bees."

Lots of questions, interesting to see how these type of studies unfold


----------



## squarepeg

Ian said:


> Lots of questions, interesting to see how these type of studies unfold...


so have we concluded that the technology may not be quite ready for prime time?

cam, interesting abstract discussing how stored pollen is antimicrobial, similar to honey.


----------



## camero7

squarepeg said:


> so have we concluded that the technology may not be quite ready for prime time?


Not sure I agree, we just need to figure out what to add and when to feed it. I'm going to continue to experiment with my nucs. They respond faster and less loss if I screw up some.


----------



## Ian

I had a good conversation with my feed nutritionist this morning. We are feeding probiotics and prebiotics in our cattle feed supplements. The main reason why we are adding these products into our feed supplements is to complement the micro flora in the animals gut. My nutritionist gets extremely technical, but spoken simply, these bacteria's are ingested and aid in providing the optimum conditions for the micro flora gut bugs to thrive. Some of the bacteria adheres to O2, some adhear to other type nutrients, some adhere to harmful pathogens like ecoli to which all these are passed through and expelled from the animals body. All the while consuming and releasing nutrients. These guys are adding pro and pre biotics to the animal feed to optimize the condtions in the animals digestive tract to enhance digestion and to help target and remove harmful pathogens. 
Interesting stuff.

I remember back further into this conversation Earl mentioned feeding bacteria to bees in patty is not as effective? That is also what my nutritionist mentioned. To ensure whats being fed is actually there the probiotics should be fed in its dormant stage. In our case with our cattle supplement the bacteria is kept dormant in its dry form and is activated immediately after ingestion. 

In these prepared patties sold now with added probiotics, I wonder how much of the bacteria is able to activate after the bees ingest the product?


----------



## camero7

Check my nucs yesterday... all were still alive, which is nice. I saw no difference between those fed sugar blocks [just sugar] sugar blocks [Lauri's recipe] and sugar blocks [Lauri's recipe w/ probiotics]. Fondant nucs did not seem as active and strong. These were checked by lifting the lids and observing clusters, no frames pulled - too cold for that.


----------



## Ian

Camero7, What kind of an objective have you determined to follow in order to compare the effectiveness of your added probiotic?


----------



## camero7

Really not sure I'll be able to determine. First consideration was would it hurt the bees. Doesn't seem to at this point. Second consideration is winter survival compared to the other nucs. That will have to wait until April. Third will be spring buildup if there is any difference between the 4 methods. All nucs are in the same yard, will continue to feed them as necessary until spring.


----------



## Ian

One thing my feed nutritionalist told me about the probiotics and prebiotics on our animal feed. We administer ours continuously throughout the year in every feeding. The supplement conditions the digestive tract continually. It's not so much trying to populate the gut bugs but rather introduce bacteria and other agents to create the best environment for micro flora to thrive. Our pro and pre biotic supplement is cheap, not accounting for cents per head costs.
They are targeting pH in the stomach and guts, binding O2 and introducing binding agents to help counter harmful pathogens present.


----------



## tedlemay

Haven't read all these post but is there anyone familiar with Caspian solution? has anyone used it, any studies out there? I like what i read on there site but would love to hear from some on who actually used it.


----------



## camero7

I've used this product on a few nucs [10] and a few packages [5]. It's probably not enough of a sample to be very helpful but this product seems to have helped the packages to get off to a quicker start than the other packages. They were all in the same yard, came from the same supplier [smaller producer in South Carolina] and queens from the same graft. I see about a frame more of brood on the treated hives. I didn't see any benefit on the nucs - which were overwintered - but the conditions were excellent and all of them exploded so not a great test. I did my splits and once queens are released and settled I will put this product on 1/2 of them. I will report any observations. I have not noticed any detrimental effects from the product and would not be afraid to tell people to try it. Seems like the worst thing that can happen is that it will have no effect and might be beneficial.


----------



## Ian

I used it on 100 hives, single spring treatment. My observations on the colonies are not finished. I did not see any real production differences between treated and control hives but I did observe something extremely interesting... 
We have been experiencing a funny spring, with heat waves and COLD snaps. These heat waves promotes hive growth where as the cold snaps 'snap' back the overly optimistic growth... AND these are perfect conditions for chalkbrood to express itself. In all of my apiaries EXCEPT the 100 hives treated with DFM. 
I'm not running a professional trial, just a beekeeper who has started a topic out of interest, who recieved a packet of the product in the mail, who run an in house trial... take it for what its worth.


----------



## ehoffma2

View attachment Carol and Earl Hoffman ERK Results 05-26-2015.pdf
Ian, We ran the bee informed partnership - ERK bee samples. we sent live bees into Maryland for varroa count, nosema spore count and Virus identification. The Direct Fed Microbials group had a significant reduction in nosema spore count. I have the report in a PDF file, I will try to attach it or email it to you.
I'll post the pdf report from bee informed partnership on a webbly website later next month.




Ian said:


> I used it on 100 hives, single spring treatment. My observations on the colonies are not finished. I did not see any real production differences between treated and control hives but I did observe something extremely interesting...
> We have been experiencing a funny spring, with heat waves and COLD snaps. These heat waves promotes hive growth where as the cold snaps 'snap' back the overly optimistic growth... AND these are perfect conditions for chalkbrood to express itself. In all of my apiaries EXCEPT the 100 hives treated with DFM.
> I'm not running a professional trial, just a beekeeper who has started a topic out of interest, who recieved a packet of the product in the mail, who run an in house trial... take it for what its worth.


----------



## Ian

ehoffma2 said:


> The Direct Fed Microbials group had a significant reduction in nosema spore count.


That is not what my spring trials tested


----------



## ehoffma2

Ian, question please are you still using - Fumagillin ? or some other antibiotics ?

Like - Terramycin oxytetracycline - Antibiotic Drug
Tylosin tartrate - Antibiotic Drug
Lincomycin Lincomix - Antibiotic Drug

EARL



Ian said:


> That is not what my spring trials tested


----------



## Honey-4-All

Here in Cali the nosema count jumps all over the place. A set of hives can be clean in one instance and quite loaded shortly there after with a back to low not to far down the road once again.


----------



## high rate of speed

Thanks again Earl and Carol for a successful sdba convention. Very knowledgeable and sales were great. We will keep up the good work.


----------



## Saltybee

I'm not sure that it is always the common or typical bacteria that are the big hitters. If you want fat bees maybe a little human anal grooming is on the right track.

http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2015/06/when-it-comes-to-poop-doctors-dont-know-sht.html


----------



## Jlberry

ABF has scheduled a webinar to cover DFM and other similar theories. Should be interesting and hopefully helpful. Since the owner of stron Microbials is the presenter, bring a grain of salt just in case. Here's the scoop:

"New Beneficial Microbial Supplements For Honey Bees 
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
8:00 p.m. ET / 7:00 p.m. CT / 6:00 p.m. MT / 5:00 p.m. PT / 3:00 p.m. AKST / 2:00 p.m. HST
Vera Strogolova, Co-Founder of Strong Microbials
Commensal, or naturally occurring bacteria promote honeybee health and play an important role in inhibiting honeybee pathogens. Commensal bacteria include Lactic Acid Bacteria, Bacillus, and Yeast. We introduced a direct-fed microbial product containing commensal bacteria, SuperDFM-HoneyBee. DFM-supplemented hives had better 2014-2015 winter survival rate (79%) than control hives (60%). We discuss modes of action of this DFM supplement. We also have new exciting data on developing biological control agents for treating AFB."


----------



## Andersonhoney

An interesting thread, some trials, experiment and research data were going to be brought forward. Has anyone got any information to bring to this thread.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

Nope, BTW, watch out for that rattler.


----------



## Ian

I have no idea what that means


----------



## Roland

The rattle snake used to make the oil?

Crazy Roland


----------



## jean-marc

A rattler is a snake, so me thinks Keith is thinking the DFM falls under the snake oil category, if I were to guess.

Jean-Marc


----------



## Andersonhoney

So keith how do I get some of your product here in Australia? Good thing we don't have rattle snakes over here?


----------



## Ian

Oh a rattler, lol, good old snake oil 
There seems to be lots of it in this industry


----------



## Keith Jarrett

I think spending your hard earned money on good Queens, mite treatments too keep the mites low is a good way too start. You guys know what it takes to keep & run good bees, & where to spend your resources. Best of luck to all this summer.


----------



## Ian

We don't have rattlers up here lol


----------



## liljake83

After reading this entire thread from start to finish I am still curious of the general consensus of those who have tried it is it snake oil or a good tool for preventative maintenance of disease and general health?


----------



## Jeff L

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/probiotics-and-colony-productivity/


----------



## manddhoney

I have been using Super DFM for 4 years now; except for first 8 months of 2018. Recorded 80% hive loss for winter of 2018. Attribute loss to lack of forage, mites, and poor health. Back on the Super DFM since last September and surviving hives wintered well. This is only 1 of many tools in my tool box. Believer.


----------

