# Randy Oliver, Queen Breeding, explanation for Treatment-Free Successes and Failures?



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> http://www.abfnet.org/associations/10537/files/Randy Oliver_PBQBS.mp3
> 
> Some paraphrases and excerpts.
> 
> ...



I'll preface my post with the following:

I haven't read much of Randy Oliver's Epigenetic application to bee genetics.
I haven't read much on Epigenetics in general.


Solomon Parker's parapharasing of Randy's article strikes me as a perfect example of Evolution, Lamarckian style.

"*Lamarckism* (or *Lamarckian inheritance*) is the idea that an organism can pass on characteristics that it acquired during its lifetime to its offspring (also known as heritability of acquired characteristics or soft inheritance). It is named after the French biologist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744–1829), who incorporated the action of soft inheritance into his evolutionary theories." (from the wiki article below)

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


Is this now becoming an acceptable theory? It was consistently debunked for most of the 20th Century.

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

adamf said:


> I haven't read much of Randy Oliver's Epigenetic application to bee genetics.
> I haven't read much on Epigenetics in general.


Perhaps you should. Commenting on the material without actually reading (or in this case listening to) the material is a very poor way of blundering about. As the great deknow once said (something to the effect of) staring at the link for a moment is not nearly as effective for discussing the material as actually reading the material.


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> Perhaps you should. Commenting on the material without actually reading (or in this case listening to) the material is a very poor way of blundering about. As the great deknow once said (something to the effect of) staring at the link for a moment is not nearly as effective for discussing the material as actually reading the material.


My reply to your Randy Oliver quote addresses a specific aspect of Epigenetics that you stated. I was replying to that. Is that "blundering about"?
I don't feel that is so. You paraphrased a theory. I commented on your take. If you had posted on Epigenetics, then I'd be out of line, as you say I am.

Do you know about the basic theories of inheritance and historical evolutionary biology? Some people don't. I wanted to make sure to point out the similarity between your paraphrasing Randy Oliver and Lamarckism. 

I mentioned my unfamiliarity with Randy Oliver's Epigenetic application to bee genetics to be honest. 

You or anyone else needn't "stare" at the link I posted: the information is interesting and appropriate. That's why I posted it. I have no motive other then to provide information. I'm not refuting Randy Oliver, Epigenetic's or your praphrase.

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

The subject is conclusions drawn from Mr. Oliver's presentation. Please stay on topic.


----------



## Delta Bay (Dec 4, 2009)

Epigenetics is a wonderful thing if you keep the toxic substances out of the equation. What you put into the hive today can very well have negative effects for many generations down the road.


----------



## Gypsi (Mar 27, 2011)

Delta Bay said:


> Epigenetics is a wonderful thing if you keep the toxic substances out of the equation. What you put into the hive today can very well have negative effects for many generations down the road.


Delta, I agree. I tried to type up a basis for why, and chickened out. Someone's just going to "yell" at me anyway.


----------



## really_so_sorry (Feb 23, 2012)

Before folks jump into Lamarkism and epigenetics, I think we should be clear on something. Epigenetics _does_ change the expression of genes in the genome, but it does so not across the organism, but in a cell or cell line. Only if the cell is gametic will the change be heritable. That is, if I have an epigenetic mutation or alteration in my brain I will _not_ pass it on to my offspring. If the mutation is in my gonads, then I have the potential to pass it on. 

TL;DR - your genome is in every cell of your body and mutations can only be inherited if they are in gonad tissue. This is true of bees too.

EDIT: Grammar


----------



## really_so_sorry (Feb 23, 2012)

Delta Bay said:


> Epigenetics is a wonderful thing if you keep the toxic substances out of the equation. What you put into the hive today can very well have negative effects for many generations down the road.


In this case, I think you mean cultural or environmental inheritance and not epigenetics. Bees, if left in the same environment as their predecessors inherit that environment. If the environment is contaminated with toxins, then they too are inherited. Epigenetic effects in this case, are unlikely.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Solomon Parker said:


> http://www.abfnet.org/associations/10537/files/Randy Oliver_PBQBS.mp3Pupae left without capping dehydrates the mites, possibly to stop varroa males from reproducing.


I'm impressed you were able to get all this from the audio. He talks so fast I could barely keep up. 

I was struck when he made the comment above. He wasn't real clear how this happened in his hives, but uncapped pupae in the purple eye stage as well as chewed pupae immediately showed up in my hives when I stopped all treatments and started doing shakedowns. Until then, I had never seen this before. That was 10 years ago. I sense from his talk that he has just recently started seeing this. Wonder if there has been any management change that corresponds to this.


----------



## oklabizznessman (Oct 24, 2011)

I have a question from the tape! He said to remove the Drones from the weaker hive but usually I thought there would be drones before you could determine which hive was weaker. Is there something I'm missing here? what is the best way to remove Drones?


----------



## really_so_sorry (Feb 23, 2012)

Drone comb and you remove the pupae or a "drone trap" at the hive entrance catching them as the come/go.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

That's part of the point of having an isolated mating yard. You can to some extent "bring in" the drones that you want. Keep you poor colonies away, or pull out drone brood etc. You won't get all of them, but you can certainly limit their influence.

I'm passingly familiar with epigenetics. The inheritance thereof, less so. I would agree that only characteristics (esp. mutations) that occur in the gonads can be passed on. This is why many of our apple varieties are only grown from cuttings because the beneficial mutations do not necessarily occur in the seeds since plants are modular organisms (one limb can be genetically different from another because of a mutation that occurs after it has started growing). However with epigenetics we are looking at an upregulation of a particular gene that is already there. It does not necessarily have to be from just one particular cell line. It is possible that the gene is upregulated (I think a common method is methylation adding on a group to the gene or its primer etc) throughout the entire organism, including the gonads. If the gene is turned off it can still have this upregulation, which could be inherited without actually being expressed in the gonadal cell. You could for instance upregulate a gene that produces an antimicrobial compound thoughout the body. In the immune cells this would have the effect of making them more effective against say nosema. In the cells of the rest of the body it would have no effect because that gene is turned off.

That would explain the inheritance of some of those traits, because most of the epigenetics that we're looking at probably have no function in the gonads, where they must occur in order to have any effect on the next generation.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> I'd say a migratory beekeeper should use queens bred from migratory stock.


I'd say a migratory beekeeper would be a better judge of this than someone with 6 stationary hives blundering about.

Too many conclusions have been leapt to.


----------



## really_so_sorry (Feb 23, 2012)

Mr. C said:


> That would explain the inheritance of some of those traits, because most of the epigenetics that we're looking at probably have no function in the gonads, where they must occur in order to have any effect on the next generation.


This isn't necessarily true. I will use your methylation example. If a gene is methylated it will increase expression, but only in the methylated cell. A single cell. If methylation occurred during ebryogenesis, then maybe you can have organism-wide expression. Otherwise, you're only causing the change in one cell. If the cell divides, you get two cells. Methylation of an immune cell or line is not inherited. Now, if the organism in question is methylated at gene B across every cell line, this can turn on expression of the gene in only specific cells--such as your immune cell--and still be inherited.

The big point here is that mutations can only be inherited if present in the gonad. 

I don't know what you mean when you say "the inheritance we observe". Could you elaborate, as I am kind of curious?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

He concluded that selection for queen breeding should be based on honey production, comb pattern and varroa/virus resistance.

I'm not sure why he even mentioned epigenetics if he is advocating for traditional selective breeding.

He gave the IAPV/RNAi find by Maori et al. short shrift when it should have been the focus of his epigenetics discussion.

Honeybees don't have immune cells, they have a molecular immune system based on retrotransposition and RNAi.

Also, the epigenetic insertions that provide for resistance are edited out within a few generations in the reproductive tissues by a system known as PIWI. So, it doesn't last long without selective pressure.

He also gave Instrumental Insemination the short shrift because it is the most likely method by which queen breeders can select for drones bearing sperm with favorable insertions.

While he did mention that the whole colony can act to provide for immunity, so the queen just represents a fraction of the source of the resistance trait, he could have also inferred that RNAi based resistance could be transferred between colonies rather easily. By, transferring combs between colonies for example.

I don't think that he captured the real message behind epigenetic regulation for queen breeders, or for treatment free beekeeping.

But, he was rushed.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

My apologies, my bee anatomy is not up to snuff, I was oversimplifying by saying immune cell, I was simply trying to point out that not every cell is necessarily involved in the immune response.

Methylation is not a change in the gene itself, it's added afterwards, the base sequence remains the same. I guess my point is that it does not have to happen to just one cell. It clearly is happening in gametes as well (at least part of the time) because the change has been shown to be heritable. I was making an assumption that it may be organism wide if that was the case, simply not expressed in a gene that is turned off. The weeding out process sounds fascinating. I guess I have some more things to add to my reading list.


----------



## D Semple (Jun 18, 2010)

WLC said:


> He gave the IAPV/RNAi find by Maori et al. short shrift when it should have been the focus of his epigenetics discussion.
> ...
> Also, the epigenetic insertions that provide for resistance are edited out within a few generations in the reproductive tissues by a system known as PIWI. So, it doesn't last long without selective pressure.
> ...
> I don't think that he captured the real message behind epigenetic regulation for queen breeders, or for treatment free beekeeping.


WLC, please elaborate.

Thanks. ....Don


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

adamf said:


> Is this now becoming an acceptable theory? It was consistently debunked for most of the 20th Century.


It is. Because of new technology and research in cellular biology - and statistical meta-research. It is no longer crackpot country. The difference is that now the mechanism is understood (kinda).


----------



## Delta Bay (Dec 4, 2009)

really_so_sorry said:


> In this case, I think you mean cultural or environmental inheritance and not epigenetics. Bees, if left in the same environment as their predecessors inherit that environment. If the environment is contaminated with toxins, then they too are inherited. Epigenetic effects in this case, are unlikely.


I know very little on this science other than what I've read that endocrine disruptors have recently been shown to promote an epigenetic transgenerational phenotype involving a number of disease states.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Barry said:


> ... uncapped pupae in the purple eye stage as well as chewed pupae immediately showed up in my hives when I stopped all treatments and started doing shakedowns.


I have noticed it as well. I wasn't surprised, as you know, Dee predicted it. I wonder how it starts though. Is it possible that the parasite pressure Randy is talking about causes genes to be expressed that were used at some point in the genetic past but have been forgotten about? Or is it just something a small part of the population has and it's only those ones that survive? I don't know.

Listening to Mr. Oliver's presentation, I wondered why he doesn't just go treatment-free. I know he needs his bees to make money, but it only makes sense with the things he's talking about, selecting for weak bees, needing constant pressure from pests, etc. It really speaks to me to answer the question why so many newbees fail. They're given bees not adapted to their location, bees been treated, sometimes by law, packages and nucs with fresh unproven queens, packages which by their nature are already very stressed, and other things I'm sure I'll think of later.

I've received a couple comments 'round about, the gall I have to suggest anything to migratory beekeepers. Pay attention to the subject of this thread fellas. These are my conclusions from this presentation, what are yours? Let's be civil and intellectually honest about this and all discussions here in the Treatment-Free Beekeeping forum. Let's make this enjoyable and intellectually stimulating.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Is it possible that the parasite pressure Randy is talking about causes genes to be expressed that were used at some point in the genetic past but have been forgotten about? Or is it just something a small part of the population has and it's only those ones that survive? 

I doubt it's genetics changing, but I would say in my observation many traits in bees do not get expressed until some point of stress is reached. That is my problem with any short term study of anything with bees. If you want to see if bees are going to survive Varroa, you have to wait until there is a battle for survival going on to expect to see things change. I doubt you will see bees uncapping pupae until there is a serious Varroa threat, not when there are only a few Varroa.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Barry said:


> uncapped pupae in the purple eye stage as well as chewed pupae immediately showed up in my hives when I stopped all treatments and started doing shakedowns. Until then, I had never seen this before. That was 10 years ago. I sense from his talk that he has just recently started seeing this.


Barry I've always had that in my treated hives if varroa levels are getting up, and see it in the hives of others also. I've seen it in my sc tf hives also but have not been around sc tf long enough to really say if it's more common than in treated hives. But I think it's just a sign of varroa numbers getting high wether the hive is treated or not, I would concur with Michael Bush on that.

As to Sol's suggestion that this may be a manifestation of something left in bees genes from some threat they were exposed to in the distant past, I think this is highly likely. Otherwise, how would they know to do it.
However, the other explanation could be somewhat different, fully hygienic bees remove the pupa completely, and bees that just remove the capping may be trying to be hygienic, but not doing it properly. Do they really have the "intelligence" to attempt to dry out the male varroa mite? Who really knows? But I suspect there may be another explanation.

As to the question raised why Randy does not go treatment free, this is part of the dilema faced by people who have to make a profit. He can see the reasons for being treatment free, and possibly has a better understanding of the subject than anyone here. But he has to be practicle, it is not just a hobby for him.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

really_so_sorry said:


> The big point here is that mutations can only be inherited if present in the gonad.


Only if those gonads are used. If not, no passing on of change. Or was that not necassary to say?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Oldtimer said:


> Barry I've always had that in my treated hives if varroa levels are getting up, and see it in the hives of others also. I've seen it in my sc tf hives also but have not been around sc tf long enough to really say if it's more common than in treated hives. But I think it's just a sign of varroa numbers getting high wether the hive is treated or not, I would concur with Michael Bush on that.


I would agree with both you and Michael on this. My take on what Randy said in his talk indicated this was something "new" and more research was being done regarding this "varroa sense of hygiene" in the VSH and Russian line at Baton Rouge. Bees will naturally do this if given the chance to.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Randy Oliver's website can be found at ScientificBeekeeping.com. It would be worth checking out for better understanding of what Randy Oliver does and is all about.


----------



## D Semple (Jun 18, 2010)

Oldtimer said:


> Barry I've always had that in my treated hives if varroa levels are getting up, and see it in the hives of others also. I've seen it in my sc tf hives also but have not been around sc tf long enough to really say if it's more common than in treated hives. But I think it's just a sign of varroa numbers getting high wether the hive is treated or not, I would concur with Michael Bush on that.



Dee, contends that this behavior and other hygienic traits are most expressed during the fall brood turnover period and that it's critical to the overall health of the colony not to disrupt the fall brood turnover cycle with treatments or manipulations.


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

A woman with a chainsaw who traps swarms and does cutouts surely can't fear the garden variety grumpy old men around here?



Gypsi said:


> Delta, I agree. I tried to type up a basis for why, and chickened out. Someone's just going to "yell" at me anyway.


----------



## Gypsi (Mar 27, 2011)

Vance G said:


> A woman with a chainsaw who traps swarms and does cutouts surely can't fear the garden variety grumpy old men around here?


Not fear. I have sense enough to know that outside of fish, and some botany, I do NOT know what I am talking about when it comes to genetics, so I am going to zip my lips and READ. When I think of an intelligent comment, it will be one I'm willing to argue over if I get yelled at.


----------



## KQ6AR (May 13, 2008)

I liked the audio file.
It takes genetics out of the lab, & into the farmers hands as its been done for thousands of years. Really made a lot of sense to me, with the way he explained it.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Solomon Parker said:


> Listen to the audio and share your conclusions. Let's not argue over each other's conclusions, just share your own please.


It sounded like he switch philosophies in mid stream.
He starts off explaining how pressure on the colony can build resistance to a parasite so you shouldn't buy queens from far away places and then all of a sudden he is talking about selecting queens for packages at the end. Almost if he realized who was paying for his speach and the audiance was not the right mix. A lot of what he said made sense to me but it seemed like a U turn at the end.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

I didn't take that away, you don't have to buy a package from far away. If your migratory where is your local? I think he was just trying to explain how the system could work for multiple situations, though now that I say it I guess I can see how that might be switching gears from stationary beekeeping to migratory /shrug I've got my hands full just trying to figure out how to move my bees from apples to blueberries this year, I don't want to even touch a migratory operation.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Solomon Parker said:


> I'd say a migratory beekeeper should use queens bred from migratory stock, but I don't know of many migratory queen breeders, usually the breeding operation stays put.


[Edit] It sounded like Randy was picking queens from bees on almonds.


----------



## KQ6AR (May 13, 2008)

He's talking more about the right bee for the right job. Locally adapted, or adapted for the right job.
I don't think you could raise the right queen for migratory beekeeping, their conditions are always changing.
Randy does almond pollination.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

KQ6AR said:


> I don't think you could raise the right queen for migratory beekeeping


I think you could. And I believe you'd have to, to do migratory treatment-free beekeeping. You'd need a bee that was able to thrive despite constantly changing conditions and those conditions would need to be constantly changed in order to maintain selective pressure. Queens bred from migratory super star queens would themselves need to be tested under migratory conditions. It would seem to me to be a difficult proposition to succeed, but I'm coming to believe it could be done.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I think any reasonable bee would be as good as any other, for the reasons given by KQ6AR.

As well as those reasons, there is a lot of other stuff in the mix of migratory beekeeping, other than just the queen. Such as, nutrition, exposure to different bees, exposure to different mites, to name just a few.

It is interesting how various ideas come into vogue, then fade again. One I've seen coming up lately is a belief in the need for local bees. If this is correct, it would run counter to a migratory breed. Probably, neither are absolutely true, or absolutely false. Bees will be bees.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> It would seem to me to be a difficult proposition to succeed, but I'm coming to believe it could be done.


I don't know if we have them now or not, that is a point which some could argue, but we have had bees which were suitable for migrating. I have no reason to believe that migrating is a cause of current problems in commercial beekeeping or beekeeping in general.

Look at what is different today compared to the way things were before 1984 and tell me it what way, besides going to California for Almonds, things are different. Mites, nosema cerana, and SHB. Maybe some changes in other parts of agriculture.

The biggest difference may be a culmination of all factors.

If we wish to concentrate on producing a sustainable migratory bee, what would we be looking for in that bee? What is a sustainable migratory bee? One whose queen will live and produce well from the Spring in which its' nuc was made, thru that Summer and on until the next Spring so a nuc came be made from that colony? And then thru another Summer and Winter? Two years?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

sqkcrk said:


> I have no reason to believe that migrating is a cause of current problems in commercial beekeeping or beekeeping in general.


Not all of them of course, but a portion of this presentation was about localization. Epigenetics are expressed through activation or inactivation by stress or other factors, and moving is stressful to bees. At this point in time, major migration can't be done with treatment-free bees. And you know that treatment-free bees sold off to somewhere else don't have that great a success either.



sqkcrk said:


> If we wish to concentrate on producing a sustainable migratory bee, what would we be looking for in that bee? What is a sustainable migratory bee? One whose queen will live and produce well from the Spring in which its' nuc was made, thru that Summer and on until the next Spring so a nuc came be made from that colony? And then thru another Summer and Winter? Two years?


Sure, that sounds good. I don't question your experience, you are the one actually doing it. But it's not just sustainability, you have that, it's treatment-free sustainability that we want. We don't have treatment-free migratory beekeepers except that guy deknow mentioned whose name we do not yet know. Do you think we should?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> and moving is stressful to bees.
> 
> At this point in time, major migration can't be done with treatment-free bees.
> 
> ...


I acknowledge that moving bees is stressful for them. Shucks, it's stressful for me. But, to what degree are bees stressed by moving? How can we record and evaluate that stress? How do we measure the effects?

Major migration can't be done w/ treatmentfree bees? I'd say that it hasn't been demonstrated that keeping bees can be done treatmentfree, yet. All cases are anecdotal, until there are many more documentable demonstratable examples which also include being nonlocal. If the only way we can say that treatmentfree beekeeping is successful is that it is successful nuntil the bees are moved, that isn't successfull enough.

I hope you don't come down on me for the above. You opened the door.

I am the one actually doing what? I'm not sure what you are refering to. I want to be sure I understand.

I'm not sure of whom you are refering when you speak of the person who deknow won't mention by name. Perhaps he is refering to Sam Comfort. I am not up on your exchanges w/ Dean. Sam, as a beekeeper, and as a migratory beekeeper, is in a class of his own. I like him as a person and enjoy his company. Even though he doesn't bathe enuf for some friends of mine he is a breath of fresh air in some ways, an excentric in others.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

sqkcrk said:


> I acknowledge that moving bees is stressful for them. Shucks, it's stressful for me. But, to what degree are bees stressed by moving? How can we record and evaluate that stress? How do we measure the effects?


I don't know. This is a thread about conclusions. It was my conclusion that migratory TF is possible. That wasn't always my position. How to? I don't know. I'm not migratory. It's just my conclusion from this presentation.



sqkcrk said:


> If the only way we can say that treatmentfree beekeeping is successful is that it is successful nuntil the bees are moved, that isn't successfull enough.


I have no problem with that. It's obviously not successful enough for you because it doesn't provide what you need. I'm not as disagreeable as you might have heard. 



sqkcrk said:


> I am the one actually doing what?


Migrating. It's a nod to your expertise in that area.



sqkcrk said:


> Perhaps he is refering to Sam Comfort.


I hadn't heard Sam was migratory. It's definitely someone else.

What other conclusions have others drawn? Better fed queen better than a better bred queen? Oooh, I think I'm going to use that one!


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Solomon Parker said:


> I hadn't heard Sam was migratory. It's definitely someone else.


I believe he is migratory... at least in the sense that Mark is. I know people who have met him on HiWay 95 (not too far from here) in order to buy and sell nucs. I may not be correct.... but seems he was wintering in Mullins, SC. Now I have heard he is going to FL. I have a feeling that Sam C. is someone that Solomon would have a very enjoyable conversation with. Sam Comfort = Philosopher, musician, poet, beekeeper.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Conclusion: Considering what Randy Oliver said about mites moving into worker brood instead of staying in drone brood as they once did w/ Apis cerana, what if, instead of limiting drone production in a bee hive, instead we dedicated a certain amount of space to drone comb, encouraging drone production to attract mites and instead of uncapping and interrupting varroa life cycle, allow varroa to complete its' reproductive cycle.

I believe I have heard that if one leaves a colony to its own devices it will build the amount of drone comb it wants. Often, I will move drone comb to the outside of the brood box. Either against the wall of second comb in.

Perhaps I should observe where drone combs are in a hive and leave them there. Only that would preclude something I planned on doing this Summer which is to dedicate one yard of 40 hives to Rolands' varroa management technique and raising frames of brood above an excluder, to see if the intensive management results in increased honey production and to see how well drone comb smashing positively effects varroa population.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

hpm08161947 said:


> Sam Comfort = Philosopher, musician, poet, beekeeper.


That's me! Except the poet part. I rarely write poetry.

Mark, that would be great. I'd be very interested in hearing how it works for you, in either sense.


----------



## Delta Bay (Dec 4, 2009)

Randy's talk was very interesting in a scientific way but I have to say there have been members on this list that have been talking this talk plus walking it for somewhere close to a decade or more. 

Just thought this should be brought up and give credit where credit is due.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I listened to the talk again and took notes this time. Boy he talks fast. I'm glad I am not a student of his trying to take notes in a College class. So here are some of the things I wrote down and thoughts I had while doing so. Quotes aren't accurate, so don't jump on me. I didn't figure out how to stop and restart the audio until my wife wanted to speak to me. Anyway,... My thoughts in [Brackets].

"New parasite changes the dynamics."
"Varroa, DWV, Nosema cerana"
"Red Queen Hypothosis, because varroa keeps evolving meaning we have to keep running just to stay in place. [just like what happened in "Alice in Wonderland", my thought]
[conclusion: Do something to slow the varroa's evolution. But what?]

"Cycle of building up, thriving and crashing." [note to readers just in case you didn't know. he is talking history here. beekeeping goes thru this cycle. what we are doing know is surfing the crest of that cycle. some will ride it well. others will fall and get crushed by the big wave. this sort of cycle has been seen before, such as when Isle of Wight Disease occured and when AFB became epidemic.]

"Genetic shuffling."

"If parent colony is exposed to a parasite their offspring will be genetically resistant."
[conclusion: expose bees to parasites and breed from those cols which show resistance through low mite counts.]

"Don't have populations too inbred."
"Feral populations maintain thier integrity." he talked about toy poodles and wolves(?).
[question: if we breed from feral colonies will they over time become "toy poodles"?]

He talked about breeding for one trait. AFB resistance, tracheal mite resistance, etc., but, when breeding for one trait like tha leads to the lose of something. AFB resistant bees produce poor honey crops. Foraging ability is lost.

"Stop supporting ones that are not resistant."
"Nothing should go into the beehive except queens."

Mites weren't a problem for us until the mites changed to be able to reproduce in worker cells.
"We need to change the definitive host back to the drone brood."
"Active and passive resistance- Russian and VSH queen lines. Suppresion and chewing."
"Exposed drone pupae."

BREEDING REGIONAL QUEENS
"Breed designer queens for your specific operation."

"Select for production." "Give bees a job description. Honey production. No honey production, "Your fired.""

[conclusion: if management, such as intensively raising frames of brood above an excluder while also smashing drone brood caps to interfere w/ varroa life cycle so bees are encouraged to chew, will produce a good crop of honey, grow queens using Olivers methods of selection, while maintaining a variety of VSH and Russian stock in the operation.]

[select colonies to raise queens from while they are in the apple orchards in May. Look for strong colonies w/ lots of brood and really low mite counts. Doing this seven months after the previous mite treatment.]

In conclusion, whether I will actually end up doing much of any of what would be nice if I did is probably unlikely. Though it would be nice to try. I will have to give all of this some thought and see what is practical for me to do.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

As per migratory beekeeping. Whether this is true or not, and it may be good for more than just migratory, I believe that a certain amount of the maintaining of "mutts" in an operation can be benficiual. I have never believed in running just one breed of bee in my operation.

I would think that this would be born out in those who have gathered feral bees into their apiaries. No one knows exactly where they came from or what exact breed they are. imo

This variety may be a key to success.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

sqkcrk said:


> [conclusion: Do something to slow the varroa's evolution. But what?]


Good question. I say quit treating for them and the most virulent ones will kill off the colony they're inhabiting and will die in the process.



sqkcrk said:


> [conclusion: expose bees to parasites and breed from those cols which show resistance through low mite counts.]


Sounds like the best plan to me.



sqkcrk said:


> [question: if we breed from feral colonies will they over time become "toy poodles"?]


Funny, but I don't think bees have a large enough genetic code to allow such variation. Honeybees have 236 million base pairs, dogs have 2.5 billion, humans 3.2 billion. But I do believe on a base level, we can easily create care dependent bees and my impression was the same from the presentation.



sqkcrk said:


> [conclusion: if management, such as intensively raising frames of brood above an excluder while also smashing drone brood caps to interfere w/ varroa life cycle so bees are encouraged to chew, will produce a good crop of honey, grow queens using Olivers methods of selection, while maintaining a variety of VSH and Russian stock in the operation.]


I would tend to agree, but since I haven't done it that way, I can say nothing for sure. My practice is to keep the bees without any sort of treatment or beneficial manipulation whatsoever and multiply the productive survivors as rapidly as possible while at the same time adding a handful of queens bred hundreds or thousands of miles away every year or two. I don't feel like I'm contributing to any major loss of genetic material, though I can understand the thought that certain traits are diminished (such as honey production for example) wherefore they had bred for many generations.



sqkcrk said:


> [select colonies to raise queens from while they are in the apple orchards in May. Look for strong colonies w/ lots of brood and really low mite counts. Doing this seven months after the previous mite treatment.


Sounds good. Maybe you could get into queen breeding? Is it feasible?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I don't think it likely. Unless i can get someone to do it w/ my bees. My eyes aren't good enuf to graft.

BBM, back before mites, beekeepers from near here used to transport their bees to SC for the winter where in the Spring they would be split and allowed to grow their own queens. So, until a time when queen rearing and breeding really became practical and affordable many operations made thier replacements and growth by allowing splits to make their own queens.

Those were also times of great honey production.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Do something to slow the varroa's evolution. But what?]

He he he......now what might do that?????


I think it would be easier to be treatment free and migratory than treatment free and sedentary. It is winter that causes the most losses. If we could move all the bees down south, it would be alot easier to replace winter losses. Mites are easily handled without miticides, N. apis and N. ceranae can be handled without Fumigillon(sp?), it is AFB that is a tougher row to hoe, but can be done. The problem is it is cheaper to use miticides at this time, and no one will pay extra for pollination from treatment free bees.

Yes, I think there are some fine details of pathogen interaction, and treatment effects on mites, that Randy will be discovering soon. Alot of his conclusions could have been drawn up about 3-4 years ago, when the data was first available. That said, he is still the best reporter of solutions we have. 

Crazy Roland


----------



## HiveAtYourHome (Aug 16, 2011)

You folks were wondering who Dean is refering to who is a treatment free migratory beekeeper (someone said Sam, I think its he who migrates to the bees not the bees migrating). I'm not Dean, but to quote him from the 2011 Northeast Treatment Free Beekeeping Conference:

"Chris Baldwin: Chris is the only treatment free beekeeper that we know who is migratory (he travels between South Dakota, Texas, and California to the almonds!). As a producer of bees and honey, Chris will talk about the unique challenges migratory beekeeping presents to treatment free beekeeping practices, and the nuts and bolts of what makes his operation work. Chris came to the conference last year as an attendee and his impromptu talks were so well received that we convinced him to come back this year as a full-fledged speaker!"

Chris is with Golden Valley Apiaries http://southbeekota.com/

He could have been referring to someone else but from the above thats a good guess.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Nice, well produced website. Looks like a professional beekeeper. Thanks for exposing him to us. I wonder why previous references were so obtuse? Simply didn't know or was Chris' identity being kept secret for some reason?


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

This is a very interesting operation. Definitely worth some study. I was surprised at the diverse number of activities carried out by the operation. Also I have yet to find the phrase "Treatment Free".... it may well be there, but I have yet to see it. But what really surprises me is their statement... that they have been using the same bees for 40 years... no outside blood! I would have thought that the bees would have been terribly "Inbred" by now... but heck... who knows... maybe that is the secret to TF Migratory operation....


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

I would be more surprised if they were inbred, it's not all that easy to get inbred bees without AI or an isolated mating station most places just because of the DCAs.


----------



## Mr. C (Oct 27, 2011)

Side note, their homepage says they have a chemical free goal, so they definately put it out there.


----------



## HiveAtYourHome (Aug 16, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Nice, well produced website. Looks like a professional beekeeper. Thanks for exposing him to us. I wonder why previous references were so obtuse? Simply didn't know or was Chris' identity being kept secret for some reason?


Well I doubt there is any cloak and daggers subterfuge, or at least I hope not as I didn't mean to stumble into anything, I just thought that people were all discussing something that someone not currently online said to someone else and people were coalescing onto the idea that Sam/Anarchy Apiaries migrates his bees, which would defeat the local overwintered breeding concept for northeast bees, but created an interesting image of hTBHs traveling up and down 95. I can see the misconception as he does have bees down south and up north, makes sense even not migrating as your northern bees are left alone for months throughout winter leaving not much to do and us young folks in the northeast could learn from the old snowbirds in that Florida isn't that bad in the wintertime. Since I went to the conference I had the info, that is all. (That and I remember Chris speaking, he has an engaging personality.)


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Probably the last time I saw Sam Comfort, it was 2010 and we were both at the ABF Conference in Orlando, FL. He told me then that he had brought TBHs down from NY. I'd say that he moves bees South and North. Call it, them, and him what you want. I'm not arguing one way or t'other.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

The way it was described to me.... was .. Sam Comfort was headed South on 95 with a load of what looked like tiny TBHs.. and he had a bunch of Bee Tattoos...


----------



## heaflaw (Feb 26, 2007)

Roland said:


> The problem is it is cheaper to use miticides at this time, and no one will pay extra for pollination from treatment free bees.
> 
> Crazy Roland


Since that is the case, beekeeping may not become treatment free in the foreseeable future even with progressively better breeding.


----------



## HiveAtYourHome (Aug 16, 2011)

heaflaw said:


> (RE: The problem it is cheaper to use miticides at this time, and no one will pay extra for pollination from treatment free bees.) Since that is the case, beekeeping may not become treatment free in the foreseeable future even with progressively better breeding.


Or at least commercial beekeeping might not, it would be nice to decouple hobby (and sideline beekeeping,) as even if those statements are true for commercial it doesn't carry over, I know hobbyists are a "small" market, but it doesn't make sense to use the same easy-die welfare bees that are supposedly cheaper to use miticides on, and don't say bees are bees as the scale factors, or migratory action changes everything. (And I'd contest it is cheaper long run for anyone to use miticide dependent easy-die bees, but even though a business should look at some type of extended net present value (5, 10, 15, 30, 50 years depending on model & scale of business) it seems this "cheaper" business is looking only short term. If I'm wrong on that then I don't want to hear another word about times beeing hard on bees and only that its easy living and the pharm stuff works just fine. I don't expect to hear that, I'd be happy for folks to hear losses are at historic lows though, people have just been presenting figures showing that is not the case.)


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I don't know where you get this "easy die" idea from. How short a life does an "easy die" colony have? How long a life does a "non-easy die" colony have? Seems to me as though I have quite a few colonies which haven't died for a number of years. Perhaps you do the same thing I do? Split the live ones to replace the dead ones?

Last Fall I had 500 colonies. Now I have 440. 12% died, easily or not, I don't know.
Previous to that I have had some Springs w/ 30% dieback over Winter, a cpl more.
One Spring, the same year David Hackenberg had his first "CCD" experience, I had an 85% dieback. My diagnosis of the reason for the dieback was ineffective or late mite treatment, poor management.

Now, I don't know for certain that those that survived did so because of the mite treatments, maybe it was other factors. I certainly wasn't going to try to build back w/out treating. And now, this year, as is true for others, dieback is less than it has been in 6 to 8 years.

Back when Varroa mites hit NY, 1986, they got to me in '88, I had 50% and 75% dieback. That's when I got into Apistan and migrating south for the winter. And grew to 800 colonies.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

HiveAtYourHome said:


> I'd be happy for folks to hear losses are at historic lows though, people have just been presenting figures showing that is not the case.)


I can say that for my operation it is true, dieback is historically low. The same is true for another 800 hive operation and another 1,000 colony operation and more of which I know. But, for definitive data we will have to wait for reports from the Apiary Inspectors of America Annual Report.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Please remember which forum this is. Advocating treatments is forbidden as is disparaging commercial beekeepers.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I keep forgetting about that PM function. Hitting Reply is too easy. Tracking again.


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

really_so_sorry said:


> Before folks jump into Lamarkism and epigenetics, I think we should be clear on something. Epigenetics _does_ change the expression of genes in the genome, but it does so not across the organism, but in a cell or cell line.


Yes, that's correct. However, I posted my response to this:

"Epigenetics more important than genetics. It's how the genes are expressed.
Queens and workers wildly different, but genetically identical. What your grandparents experienced affects your expression of genes.
If a parent colony is exposed to a parasite, the next generation is better
prepared for it."

That sounded Lamarkian. I commented.
Adam
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

David LaFerney said:


> It is. Because of new technology and research in cellular biology - and statistical meta-research. It is no longer crackpot country. The difference is that now the mechanism is understood (kinda).


The more research that's used to elucidate the underlying methods involved in molecular biological functioning in organisms, the more complex things become. So far, we understand how little we understand!

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.ocm


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>>"...If a parent colony is exposed to a parasite, the next generation is better
prepared for it."

>That sounded Lamarkian.

It sounds VERY Lamarkian. But it's ok. They gave it a new name...


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Am I missing something? (duh!!,stupid question) But, isn't that statement, "If a parent colony...", aort of inherently intuitive? If the previous generation survives something, isn't it entirely likely that the next generation will be prepared, to a degree, to survive the same thing? Aren't the survivor genes passed down to the offspring?

I'm not a genetisist, I just think I understand what I probably don't.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

sqkcrk said:


> If the previous generation survives something, isn't it entirely likely that the next generation will be prepared, to a degree, to survive the same thing? Aren't the survivor genes passed down to the offspring?


Survivor genes are what the parents already have. They don't gain them by surviving. They have them because they survived and that's what we call them now. It's how things like MRSA (Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus) got to be prevalent. Originally, they just had Staphylococcus Aureus and they treated it with methicilin. For the most part, only resistant staph survived. The rest were extinct. Now what's left has a lot of trouble being killed because there's nothing to kill it with.

Here's a Lamarckian anecdote. After generations of people wearing shoes that were too tight, my friend Thomas was born with only four toes on each foot. :lpf: 

But seriously, Lamarck's ideas pertain to things like giraffes stretching their necks and over time their necks get longer. It's an entirely different concept to epigenetics where the genes are already there, they are just expressed differently.


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Am I missing something? (duh!!,stupid question) But, isn't that statement, "If a parent colony...", aort of inherently intuitive? If the previous generation survives something, isn't it entirely likely that the next generation will be prepared, to a degree, to survive the same thing? Aren't the survivor genes passed down to the offspring? I'm not a genetisist, I just think I understand what I probably don't.


Well yes, you're describing "fitness" via natural selection and basic Mendelian heredity. The basic premise is that parents have the genetic potential to
provide genetic possibilities to their offspring. The way in which the genetic information combines and is then expressed is the offspring's genotype. Neo-Darwinists believe that it was all in the genetic code and that the only adaptation to environment was by chance or by mutation. Otherwise the combination wasn't "fit" and the offspring was not competitive.

Lamark and to some extent Darwin himself, believed that there was some interplay between the environment and the potential hereditary handoff to the offspring. With the Neo-Darwinist movement of the early 20th Century leading up to the discovery of DNA and subsequent understanding of how DNA works, there was no other interpretation: you got what you got and if it wasn't a good combination, too bad. A few random changes and maybe, just maybe, you'd have a better combination. 

With Epigenetics, there is understanding that there are processes beyond the template DNA that can occur in the organism that can influence the template DNA to express a different result then what is hard-coded. (All protein production here). The Neo-Darwinist's blockade of anything other then DNA's basic genomic template ended with Epigenetics. We know now that there is SO MUCH going on so quickly at a molecular level that we know we don't have too much of a handle on the mechanisms. We do know that there can be environmental stimulus that can cause the protein making mechanisms in the cell to influence the expression of the basic coding template DNA that is inherently different then the original coding DNA's output. That's a gross oversimplification of Epigenetics. However, this does not necessarily mean that resulting "adaptations" in organisms will be heritable or significant. Lamark and Darwin stated that the organism could adapt to environmental stimulus and pass along these adaptations to it's offspring.

The bottom line in animal husbandry, is still *selection*. Pick the most suitable ones. Breed from them. This technique has been working for a long
time.


For background reading:

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/epigeneticInheritance.php

www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2009/03/lamarck-didnt-say-it-darwin-did/


Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------



## adamf (Jan 28, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> I listened to the talk again and took notes this time. Boy he talks fast. I'm glad I am not a student of his trying to take notes in a College class. So here are some of the things I wrote down and thoughts I had while doing so.


Regarding sqkcrk's summary and the "explanation for Treatment-Free Successes and Failure" from Mr. Randy Oliver, in the context of epigenetics,
using the principle of Occam's Razor , we can assume that the *most genetically suitable* queens survive when there is no treatment to mask the negative effects of pathogens.

The underlying method is moot for now: breeders practicing selection for fitness (read healthy, productive bees) using only the population's best genetic combinations, will come up with some queens that will be desirable. 

Performing selection in this scenario is what will make the outcome succeed. People are doing this now. 

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com


----------

