Too much, too soon

When does the beekeeping season start?

Some would argue that it’s the time of the year when you prepare colonies for the winter. After all, without good winter preparation there’s unlikely to be a beekeeping season. Others might consider it’s the beginning of the calendar year, just after the longest nights of the year when beekeeping is but a distant memory and all you can do is plan (and build frames).

Ribes sanguineum ...

Ribes sanguineum …

However, perhaps a more logical start of the beekeeping season is the first full hive inspection. This varies from year to year, depending upon the weather. Many consider the full flowering of Ribes sanguineum, the ornamental flowering current, to be a good indicator that the season is underway and that colonies can be inspected. However, the time this plant flowers appears to vary depending upon how sheltered its location is (and possibly the particular cultivar). There’s some in a very sheltered spot approaching the bus station in St. Andrews that was flowering in mid-February this year. Too early by far.

Macho beekeeping

It’s worth stressing here that not only is there season to season variation, there’s also geographic variation. It gets warmer in the South before the North (at least for the ~95% of the readers of this site who live in the Northern hemisphere). If you’re fortunate enough to live in the uncluttered, quiet, pollution-free, traffic-free and scenic (clearly I’m biased 😉 ) North, don’t be misled by the discussions on the online forums of 8 frames bursting with sealed brood in late March.

Not what it seems ...

Not what it seems …

Firstly, the poster might actually live in Northern Spain. You can be anything you want on the internet … and anywhere you want. Secondly, some contributors exaggerate when describing their activities and successes (or failures for that matter). Some who, while stressing the fantastic build-up of their Carniolan colonies, conveniently omit to mention they are an overseas breeder and exporter of – you guessed it – Carniolan queens. An omission, but also as the late Alan Clark said, somewhat economical with the actualité. Finally, there’s also a sort of chest-beating macho amongst some where the poster describes pulling colonies apart very early in the season – essentially bragging about the strength of the colonies and their beekeeping prowess.

Use your own judgement about when to open a colony in the early part of the year. Don’t blindly follow the recommendations of others (or me for that matter). The ‘when’ really needs to be informed by the ‘why’.

Not when, but why?

Opening colonies is disruptive. The propolis-sealed crownboard is removed and the colony – even with the gentlest manipulation – is disturbed. There needs to be a good reason to go rummaging through a brood box. That isn’t a justification to not inspect colonies. Just make sure there’s a good reason to compensate for the disruption.

The first inspection should be a quick progress check. Is everything OK? It shouldn’t be a full-blown inspection in which every frame is carefully scrutinised for signs of brood diseases. You’re simply trying to determine whether the queen is laying well, that she’s laying worker brood rather than drone brood and that the colony have sufficient stores and space to expand

All that can be determined in a couple of minutes. You don’t need to see the queen, though it’s not unusual to spot her as the colony is probably relatively sparsely populated. If the box is stuffed with stores consider replacing a frame on the side of the brood nest with a frame of drawn comb. It’s almost certainly too early to only provide foundation.

Outside and inside

Spring is appreciably later in Fife, Scotland than in the South of England. At the time of writing (~8/9th of April) it’s rarely been much above the low teens Centigrade. Colonies are working well during the warmest part of the day, but there’s still a chill in the wind and little point in opening the majority of hives.

Bee shed ...

Bee shed …

The exception are the hives in the bee shed. Based on my experience last year these colonies are 2-3 weeks more advanced than those outside. On a warm day – yesterday just reached 15°C – the temperature inside the shed was almost 20°C. Three of the colonies were giving me cause for concern. One was a poly nuc that seemed very active. The other two were hives headed by purchased queens from last season – these had gone into the winter well and had been flying on borderline days in midwinter. However, having been away for most of March, I’d noticed they were much quieter than other hives when I checked the entrances in early April.

The strong nuc was doing reassuringly well. It had nearly four frames of brood and last years’ marked and clipped queen laying well. The brood pattern was a bit patchy, but I’ll reserve judgement until later in the season when there’s ample pollen and nectar coming into the hive, together with a full complement of workers to support the queen.

In contrast, the two hives were almost devoid of bees. Both queens had clearly failed in the winter as there was no brood. There was no sign of overt disease (in the few remaining bees) and mite drop had been low in autumn and during the midwinter treatment. I suspect that the queens were poorly mated. Disappointing, but these things happen.

Looking back

I have yet to look in any other colonies. It needs to warm up significantly before I do. It’s interesting to compare the development of this season with previous years – and to have some notes I can refer back to in the future. As I write this (remember, it’s the 8/9th of April):

  • Fieldfares are still present, although clearly in reduced numbers and drifitng North.
  • I have yet to see any house martins or swallows (update – saw both mid-morning on Friday 14th, but still only 9°C).
  • Only about 5% of the oil seed rape is flowering (not necessarily a good comparison as different strains can flower at different times).
  • Primroses are at their peak but neither bluebells or wild garlic are flowering yet.
Primroses ...

Primroses …

Regional climatic differences are a significant influence on colony development. Remember this as you plan your early season inspections and – particularly if you are a relatively new beekeeper – when you compare how your colonies are doing with those reported by others elsewhere.

Finally, it’s also worth remembering the importance of relative colony development between colonies in the same apiary. A single colony that is developing slowly might be being held back because of poor weather. However, if you have two colonies to compare, one that is obviously retarded might be cause for concern … and should be checked for disease or a failing queen.

This is a good example of when it is beneficial to have two colonies to compare.


Too much, too soon

Too much, too soon was a 1958 biographical film about the actress Diana Barrymore starring Dorothy Malone and Errol Flynn. The film, based on a best selling book of the same name, describes the life of the alcoholic movie star and was pretty-much panned by the critics.

Not one to set the recorder for …

Upstairs, downstairs?

There are two common hive manipulations that involve stacking two brood boxes on top of each other – the vertical split and uniting colonies. Should the queenright colony go on the top or bottom when uniting colonies over newspaper? What about when conducting a vertical split? Does it make a difference?

In the following discussion I’m assuming the colonies being stacked are originally in single brood boxes. This is so I don’t have to qualify how many boxes are involved every time. For convenience, let’s also assume that you are uniting a queenless and queenright colony, rather than getting into a discussion of the benefits or otherwise of regicide.

Uniting colonies

There are a number of methods to unite (merge) two colonies. The simplest, the most often taught during beginners courses and – in my view – the (almost) foolproof method if you are not in a rush is uniting over newspaper.

All gone ...

All gone …

To unite over newspaper the roof and crownboard from one colony are removed and one or two sheets of newspaper are laid over the top bars of the frames. One or two small holes are made through the newspaper and the second brood box is placed on top. Replace the crownboard and roof. The only precaution that needs to be taken is to ensure there isn’t brace comb on the bottom of the frames of the top box – this would puncture the newspaper and allow the bees to mix too quickly. This is also why I stressed a small hole in the paper.

Over the next 24-48 hours the colonies slowly chew holes through the paper, allowing the bees to gradually mix. It’s best not to interfere for a few more days. One week after uniting the frames can be rearranged and the bees cleared down to a single box if needed.

What matters and what doesn’t when uniting?

You’ll read three bits of advice about uniting using the method described above:

  1. The queenright colony should be on the bottom.
  2. The weaker colony should go on the top.
  3. The colony moved should be at the top.

Frankly, I don’t think it makes any difference whether the queen is in the top or bottom box. I’ve done it either way many times and never noticed a difference in success rates (generally very high), or the speed with which shredded newspaper is chucked out of the hive entrance. I think you can safely ignore this bit of advice. I can’t even think of a logical explanation as to why it’s beneficial to have the queen in the bottom box. Can you? After uniting I usually find the queen in the top box a week later.

If colonies differ markedly in strength I do try and arrange the top box as the weaker one. I suspect this is beneficial as it stops the foraging bees from the strong hive trying to get out or return mob-handed, potentially overwhelming the weaker colony.

I think it’s also sensible to locate the moved colony at the top of the stack. I think forcing them to negotiate the bottom box encourages the foragers from the moved hive to reorientate to the new hive location.

Vertical splits

A vertical split is a hive manipulation that can be used as a swarm control strategy or as a means of ‘making increase’ – the beekeeping term for generating a new queenright colony. Whatever the reason, the practicalities are broadly the same and have been described in detail previously. Briefly, the queen and flying bees are separated vertically from the nurse bees and brood in two brood boxes with separate and opposing entrances.

Split board

Split board …

As described, the queen is placed in the top box with the split board entrance facing the opposite direction to the original hive entrance. The logic here is that the flying bees are depleted from the queenright half of the colony, so both reducing the swarming impulse and boosting the strength of the half rearing a new queen.

After one week the hive is reversed on the stand – the front becomes the back and the back becomes the front. This results in depletion of flying bees from the queenless half, so reducing the chances of them throwing off a cast should multiple virgin queens emerge. Simultaneously the queenright half is strengthened, boosting its nectar-gathering capabilities.

The problem with vertical splits

Although I’m an enthusiastic proponent of the vertical split I acknowledge there are some drawbacks to the process.

Once there are supers involved things can get pretty heavy. Simply reversing a double brood box can be taxing for some (me included). I’m dabbling with building some floors and split boards with opposing entrances to try and simplify (or at least reduce the strain of) this aspect of the process.

A second problem is the need for subsequent inspections of the colonies. When used for making increase (or for that matter replacing the queen) nothing final can be done with the colonies until the new queen – reared in the bottom box – is mated and laying well.

Inspections

Of course, determining whether she is ‘mated and laying well’ involves splitting the boxes and carefully examining the lower colony. This inspection should probably take place about a month after the initial split (up to 16 days from egg to emerged queen, a week or so for her to get mated and a further week for the laying pattern to be established). Depending on colony strength, weather and the temperament of the colonies, this inspection might have to be conducted in a maelstrom of bees returning to the upper colony (which has had to be removed for the inspection). Perhaps not the most conducive conditions to find, mark and perhaps clip the new queen.

During the month that the new queen is being reared and mated there’s probably little or no need to inspect the queenright colony. They have ample laying room if you’ve provided them with drawn comb. If you gave them foundation only, or foundationless frames, they will likely need thin syrup if there’s a dearth of nectar. If you’re using a standard frame feeder this is a pretty quick and painless process.

Under the conditions described above I think it makes relatively little difference whether the original queen is ‘upstairs or downstairs’ at the outset of the split (though see the comments at the end on the entrance). However, having the new queen in the bottom box might dissuade you from inspecting too often or too soon – neither is to be encouraged where a new queen is expected.

More queens from more ambitious vertical splits

You can use a version of the vertical split to rear several queen cells. Rather than then reversing the colony and depleting the queenless half of bees you can use it to create a number of 2-3 frame nucs, each populated with a big fat ripe queen cell. In this way you can quickly make increase – trebling, quadrupling or perhaps quintupling the original hive number. The precise details are outside the scope of this article – which is already too long – but Wally Shaw covers it in his usual comprehensive manner (PDF) elsewhere.

For this you want to make the initial queenless half to be as strong as possible (to rear good queens). You also want it to be as easy to access as possible to facilitate checking on the development of the new queen cells. Under these conditions I think there’s good reason to start with the original mated queen ‘downstairs’.

Upstairs, downstairs?

Upstairs, downstairs?

A higher entrance

Remember that at the start of a vertical split, and for a couple of days after, bees will be exiting the rear entrance and returning to the ‘front’ of the hive to which they originally orientated.

Kewl floor – fixed …

If you decide to leave the original queen in the lower box this will necessitate reversing the hive at the very start of the process, then placing the split board entrance at the hive front. Bees cope well with this vertical relocation of a hive entrance. Sure, there’ll be a bit of milling about and general confusion, but they’ll very quickly adjust to a hive entrance situated about 25cm above the original one. In the original description of the vertical split they had to make precisely this adjustment at the 7 day hive reversal. It helps to try and restrict bees from accessing the underside of the open mesh floor during these hive reversals – for example with a simple plastic skirt (see above right).

In conclusion

Bees are pretty adaptable to the sorts of manipulations described above. Yes, there are certainly wrong ways to do things, but while being careful to avoid these, there are several different ways to manipulate the process to achieve the desired goal(s).

It’s worth thinking about the goal and the likely behaviour of the bees. Then have a go … what’s the worst that could happen?

 

Apistan redux†

I’ve discussed Apistan, a pyrethroid treatment for Varroa, in two recent posts. In these I explained in some detail its molecular mechanism of action. I also explained the two major problems associated with Apistan (and the related tau-fluvalinates ) – the widespread resistance of Varroa to Apistan and the residues it leaves in wax.

In this final post I’m going to revisit just how useful Apistan could be if it was used in a more rational manner. I’m going to concentrate on resistance and you’ll probably need to read the previous post on this topic to provide necessary the background. I’ll only really touch on the residues in wax at the end – I’ve already discussed how these can be minimised if you consider them an issue.

This is (another) long post. It draws together the concepts described in previous articles and links the science of Varroa control to potential strategies to benefit practical beekeeping.

How good is Apistan if Varroa are not resistant?

Apistan

Apistan

Exceptionally good. Pyrethroids are some of the most widely used pesticides. They are widely used because they are very effective. Apistan is no exception. When used to treat Varroa populations that are not already resistant it kills over 98% of the mites in the colony when used according to the manufacturers instructions. 98% … that reduces the National Bee Units’ recommended maximum mite load of 1000 to just 20.

Just how effective is emphasised by a quote from the Apidologie paper cited above. “In treated hives, worker pupae and adult bee infestations decreased from 14.2 ± 7.3% to zero and from 15.7 ± 7.3% to zero, respectively. Whereas, in the two control hives, during the first 6 weeks, the average worker pupae infestation increased from 15.9 ± 2.9% to 19.7 ± 3.5%”.

Most mite mortality occurred during the first 4 weeks of treatment and the level of Apistan present at the beginning and end of treatment remained at about 10% i.e. it should be as active at the end of the treatment period as at the beginning.

How good is Apistan in reality

Resistance was first demonstrated in 2002 and is now widespread in the UK. In a recent paper, Ratneiks and colleagues (University of Sussex) demonstrated that Apistan was significantly less effective at killing Varroa when used for a second treatment, four months after the first. In this study they showed only 33% of mites were killed at the second treatment, whereas 58% were killed in colonies treated for the ‘first time in five years’.

This isn’t rocket science … if there are some resistant mites in a population then Apistan will preferentially allow these to survive. Consequently they will make up a greater proportion of the mite population when re-treated.

Since we know the molecular basis of resistance to Apistan it would now be possible to determine – without doing the treatment and counting the corpses – what proportion of mites were resistant in a population before treatment. It would therefore be easy to determine whether treatment would be likely to work.

Equally, it would be possible to determine whether the colonies ‘not treated with Apistan for five years’ still maintained significant levels of Apistan resistant mites. As will become clear, there are studies that contradict this, and the definitive test – the presence of absence of the mutation that confers resistance – was not done in the Sussex study.

Apistan resistance and fitness costs

Mutations, such as the one that confers resistance to Apistan, can – in broad terms – exert three different effects:

  1. Beneficial – the presence of the mutation favours the organism (a fitness benefit), the mutation will be selected for and it’s presence in the population is likely to increase.
  2. Detrimental – the mutations causes a fitness cost and organisms that carry it are likely to reproduce less well, resulting in it being lost from the population.
  3. Neutral – the mutation is neither beneficial nor detrimental.

In the presence of Apistan, the Leucine to Valine mutation at residue 925 (L925V) of the voltage gated sodium channel (VGSC; please see the previous article on the molecular basis of resistance), is a beneficial mutation. Any mites that carry it will not be killed and will be able to reproduce, so increasing it’s prevalence in the population. The same reasoning applies to other Apistan resistance mutations.

The VGSC of Varroa evolved over eons in the absence of Apistan. The mutation is in a part of the protein critical for its function (that’s why Apistan binding blocks function). It’s therefore perhaps unsurprising that in the absence of Apistan selection there is evidence that the L925V mutation is detrimental. In simple terms the VGSC works less well with a Valine at position 925 than a Leucine unless Apistan is present. Where’s the data that supports this?

The influence of prior treatment on Varroa genotype

Table 1. Apistan resistance mutations in Varroa from treated and untreated colonies

Table 1. Apistan resistance mutations in Varroa from treated and untreated colonies

The table above needs a little explanation. Colonies from Henlow and Shillington were treated with Apistan and tested one month later. Colonies from Harpenden, Bishop Stortford, St. Albans and Peterborough had no history of Apistan treatment in the recent past. Unfortunately, the paper does not make clear when the last treatment was, with the exception of a sample from Harpenden which had not been treated for at least 3 years.

Varroa is diploid i.e. there are two copies of the gene for the VGSC. The S and R heading the columns SS, SR, RR, indicates whether the Apistan resistant mutation is absent (S = sensitive) or present (R=present). SR indicates that the mite was heterozygous, one resistant copy and one sensitive. Whether these mites have lower resistance than RR mites has not been determined – for the purpose of the remaining discussion I’m going to lump the SR mites with the RR mites and assume they are resistant§.

Of 279 mites tested, 40 were from Apistan-treated and 329 from -untreated colonies. Of the 40 mites from Apistan-treated colonies, all contained the mutation conferring resistance to the fluvalinate. Of the 239 mites from colonies not recently treated with Apistan, 215 were sensitive and only 25 were resistant.

This suggests that in the absence of Apistan, Varroa sensitive to the fluvalinate replicate better.

Is this a surprise?

No. Partly for the reasons explained above … the Leucine at position 925 is likely to stop the VGSC working as well. More compellingly though is the wealth of data suggesting that insecticide resistance is associated with fitness costs in a range of other insects.

Colorado beetle

Colorado beetle

For example, pyrethroid resistant Myzus persicae (peach-potato aphid) exhibit fitness effects in overwintering survival, response to aphid alarm pheromone and vulnerability to parasitoids; pyrethroid-resistant Cydia pomonella (codling moth) have reduced fecundity, body mass of instars, adult male longevity and larval development; finally, pyrethroid-resitant mutants of the snappily-named Leptinotarsa decemlineata (which you of course know as the stripy-attired Colorado beetle) have reduced fertility and fecundity.

Google will find relevant reference on all the above examples or you can refer to a concise mini-review by Kliot and Ghanim Fitness costs associated with insecticide resistance published in Pest Management Science (2012) 68:1431-37.

Before discussing implications for practical beekeeping I should add that the rate at which the loss of the L925V mutation, and other mutations associated with Apistan resistance, needs to be accurately determined. If, as looks likely, a period of 3+ years results in selection for the sensitive variant of the VGSC, it might be possible to develop rational Varroa treatments that exploit this.

Apistan resistance, rational Varroa control and practical beekeeping

For the sake of discussion, let’s accept the following statement:

  • Apistan is devastatingly effective on sensitive mite populations.
  • Apistan is much less effective (or almost completely useless) on resistant mite populations.
  • Resistance by Varroa is acquired rapidly and lost over the subsequent 2-3 years in the absence of selection.

An effective and rational Varroa control strategy would only use Apistan once every 3-4 years, alternating it with other treatments. To mitigate the transfer of Apistan-resistant mites between colonies due to drifting and robbing, or due to the movement, sale and/or relocation of hives during the season, Apistan use would have to be coordinated. This coordination would have to be both geographical and temporal. There would be no point in the Fife beekeepers using it one year if the Angus beekeepers planned to use it the following year.

“Like herding cats” I hear some mutter …

Perhaps, but the benefits would be considerable. How could it be achieved? Perhaps by restricting the sale of Apistan to certain years, in a formulation or package that meant it had to be used quickly or became inactive.

What about the residues in wax?

I’m not sure whether the level Apistan accumulates to in wax is sufficient to be a selective pressure on the mite population. Apistan strips are 10% Apistan. Nothing like that much accumulates in wax. In a recent study fluvalinate levels ranged between 2 and 200,000 parts per billion in wax (mean ~7500 ppb). However, it is a valid concern and so would necessitate a relatively simple experiment to determine the rate at which Apistan resistant mutations are lost in the presence of absence of trace levels of Apistan in comb.

Herd immunity and the responsibility of the individual

There’s a debate in human healthcare about the necessity to vaccinate individuals in a well-vaccinated population. The chance of an infectious disease spreading to the unvaccinated individual in a protected population is very slight. So, why vaccinate?

Well, what if increasing numbers decided not to vaccinate? Once protection in the population falls below a certain level there is a significant chance that an infectious disease will spread widely. We saw this in the UK after the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine was falsely claimed to be associated with autism. Vaccination rates dropped from 90+ percent, to low 80’s and – in parts of the country – to only 60%. Unsurprisingly, measles cases increased and – tragically, for the first time in years – there were childhood deaths due to measles infection.

This may seem a million miles away from looking after our bees, but there are parallels. As beekeepers we have responsibility for our own stock. We also have responsibility to the wider community of beekeepers which – because of the way our bees forage and mingle – happily exchange pests and pathogens.

Beekeepers who do not control Varroa (and consequently virus) levels threaten the viability of their own colonies and those of other beekeepers in the area. The same applies to the foulbroods. This is why the bee inspectors try and check all colonies in the vicinity of an outbreak. This is why standstill orders are placed on apiaries where outbreaks occur.

Perhaps this sort of communal responsibility also applies to Varroa treatment using Apistan? Beekeepers who treat without demonstrating very high levels of susceptibility first in their stocks are simply selecting for resistant mites, reducing the efficacy of treatment for themselves, and others, in the future. Indiscriminate or incorrect use of Apistan has resulted in widespread resistance, thereby compromising Varroa control for all beekeepers.

The coordination and control, geographically and temporally, of Apistan usage would benefit beekeeping and beekeepers.

And … it would also benefit those who chose never to treat with Apistan. Treated colonies in the one year in three Apistan was used would have very low mite levels. Fewer mites would be transferred from these colonies by drifting or robbing … what’s not to like?


 Redux, as in the literary term meaning brought back or restored, derived from the Latin reducere (to bring back).

 This is one compelling reason why Apistan strips should not be left in the colony longer than is recommended. It kills the susceptible mites within the first month or so. After that it effectively selects for resistant mites, allowing them to replicate.

 With apologies to any population biologists who were reading this and have now given up in horror.

§ And I’ll save discussion of the influence of the incestuous lifestyle of Varroa and Varroa levels on the ratio of homozygotes to heterozygotes at different stages of the season for a later post. It’s a fascinating and at the same time rather sordid tale …

 Or 4 or 5 – this would need to be determined empirically.

Finding the queen

One of characteristics that distinguishes inexperienced and experienced beekeepers is the time taken finding the queen. Generally an experienced beekeeper will be much, much faster. Not every time – anyone can have a good day or a bad day – but on average.

A local queen

A local queen

An inexperienced beekeeper will carefully scrutinise every frame, turning it end over end with the half-way rotation they were taught during the midwinter beekeeping beginners course they attended. They’ll examine the end bars and the bottom bar. They’ll look again at either side of the frame and will then slowly return it to the box.

The experienced beekeeper will gently open the hive and lift out the dummy board and the adjacent frame. They’ll look across the remaining seams of bees before splitting them somewhere in the middle. They’ll lift out the frame on the nearside of the split and expect to find the queen on it or on the frame on the far side of the split.

And they usually do.

Magic?

No, experience. And not necessarily in actually spotting the queen. Mostly this experience is in better handling of the colony in a way that maximises the chances of seeing the queen.

In the couple of paragraphs above I hinted at these differences. The beginner goes through the entire brood box thoroughly. The experienced beekeeper ‘cuts to the chase’ and splits the box at or near the middle of the brood nest.

The beginner takes time over the scrutiny of every frame. The time taken by the beginner – probably coupled with additional smoking of the hive – disturbs the colony. Disturbance results in the bees becoming agitated, which causes the beginner to give them a couple more puffs of smoke … all of which unsettles the colony (and the queen) further. Ad infinitum.

In contrast, the experienced beekeeper only bothers with the frames on which the queen is most likely to be present. The experienced beekeepers is quick, as gentle as possible and causes as little disturbance as possible … and probably uses only a small amount of smoke.

Focus where needed, skip the rest

Locally bred queen ...

Locally bred queen …

With minimal disturbance the queen will be in or around the brood nest. She’ll almost certainly be on a frame with eggs, young larvae and ‘polished’ cells. Polished cells are those that have been prepared by the workers ready for the queen to lay in. They usually have a distinctive shiny appearance to the inner walls; this is particularly easy to see if the comb is old and dark.

There’s little chance the (undisturbed) queen will be on sealed brood and even less chance she’ll be wandering around on frames of stores. All that time taken by the beginner examining a frame of sealed stores contributes to the disturbance of the colony and reduces the likelihood of the queen being where she should be.

The experienced beekeeper splits the box at or near where s/he expects to find eggs and very young brood. There’s probably only a couple of frames in the box that are at the right stage and it’s experience – of the concentration of bees in the seams and the behaviour of those bees – that allows most of the other frames to be safely ignored.

Reassuring but unnecessary

The reality is that, during routine inspections, finding the queen is not necessary. The only times you have to find her is when you’re going to manipulate the hive or colony in a way that necessitates knowing where the queen is e.g. an artificial swarm or vertical split.

The rest of the time it’s sufficient to just look for the evidence that the queen is present. The first of these is the general temperament of the colony. Queenless colonies are usually less well tempered. However, this isn’t alone a dependable sign as lots of other things can change the temper of the colony for the worse e.g. the weather or a strong nectar flow stopping.

The key thing to look for is the presence of eggs in the colony. If they are seen the queen must have been present within the last 3 days. In addition, the orientation of the eggs – standing near vertically or lying more horizontally – can provide more accurate timing. Eggs start vertical and end horizontal over the three days before they hatch. This is usually sufficient evidence that the queen is present.

Of course, just finding eggs isn’t sufficient evidence that the colony isn’t thinking of swarming. To determine that there are other things to check for e.g. the rate at which eggs are being laid and the presence or absence of queen cells, but I’ll deal with these in more detail some other time.

Stop looking

If you still feel the need to see the queen on every inspection my advice is to stop looking for her … at least consciously. Instead, concentrate on what really matters. Look for the evidence that the colony is queenright, by comparison with your notes work out whether the queen is laying more or less than at the last inspection, observe the laying pattern and look for signs of brood diseases.

By doing this you’ll predominantly be concentrating on the frames the queen is most likely to be on anyway. By doing this with minimal disruption to the colony the queen should remain undisturbed. Instead of running around frantically she’ll be calmly seeking out polished cells to lay eggs in. Therefore your chances of finding the queen are increased.

Observe the behaviour of bees to other bees on the frame – not by staring at every bee, but by quickly scanning for normal and unusual behaviour. Get used to the rate they walk about on the frames, their pattern of movement and how closely they approach each other.

When undisturbed, the queen is the one that looks out of place. She’s bigger of course, she walks about with more purpose and often more slowly than other bees. The workers make way for her, often parting as she approaches and closing up again as she passes. She may stop regularly to inspect cells or to lay eggs. Bees may be more attentive to her than to other bees. She’s the odd one out.

If you’re intent on finding the queen, stop searching and start seeing.

May the force be with you.

Mid-season memories

Mid-season memories …

Welsh BKA Convention 2017

Cymdeithas Gwenynwyr Cymru

I’m honoured to be delivering the Pam Gregory Memorial Lecture at the Welsh Beekeepers Association Convention this year. The Convention is being held at the Royal Welsh Agricultural Showground in Builth Wells on the 25th of March.

Pam Gregory was one of the founders of Bees Abroad, a beekeeping charity that does work to relieve poverty through beekeeping. You can read more about her life and work, as the first Welsh Regional Bee Inspector and global beekeeping consultant, in the Spring 2016 Welsh Beekeeper. Pam was the author of Healthy bees are happy bees so it’s entirely appropriate I’m talking about deformed wing virus and Varroa control … and that the talk is sponsored by Bee Diseases Insurance.

There’s an influx of Scotland-based speakers for the Convention this year with Bron Wright and Phil McAnespie – the current and past Presidents of the Scottish Beekeepers Association – also talking.

 

Pagdens’ artificial swarm

Every beekeeping association that runs a winter course for beginners will teach swarm control. In almost every case they use the artificial swarm method that evolved from that promoted by James Pagden (1814-1878). So universal is this teaching that the terms ‘Pagden’ and ‘artificial swarm’ are used almost interchangeably.

Swarm control – defined below – is an important skill in beekeeping. It saves your bees from bothering the neighbours and by not losing swarms you increase your honey crop. Furthermore, understanding the principles may help apply some related queen rearing techniques.

I’m planning a few posts on swarm control this season and realised I’d never described the ‘classic’ artificial swarm – possibly because I don’t often use it. To avoid referencing other sites with more or less comprehensive (or correct) descriptions I’ve catalogued the ‘bare bones’ of the process here.

Swarm control

A small swarm

A small swarm …

Swarm control and prevention are two different things. The latter are the steps taken to stop a colony from ‘thinking’ about swarming, e.g. young queens and ample space. In contrast, swarm control are what is needed once there are signs that swarming by the colony is imminent. The most common sign is the discovery of unsealed, charged (i.e. occupied) queen cells during an inspection. You practise swarm prevention to prevent, or at least delay, the need for swarm control. Once swarm control is needed many beekeepers use Pagdens’ artificial swarm.

If you discover sealed queen cells during an inspection there’s a good chance your swarm prevention didn’t work and that it’s too late for swarm control. Colonies with unclipped queens usually swarm when the developing queen cells are capped. If there are sealed queen cells and no sign of the queen or eggs then they’re probably hanging in a tree or occupying a bait hive by now.

The artificial swarm

Pagdens' artificial swarm ...

Pagdens’ artificial swarm …

The principle of the artificial swarm is to separate the queen and flying bees from the brood and nurse bees. This is achieved by a couple of simple colony manipulations. These exploit the tendency of flying bees to return to the location of the hive they were reared in, or more accurately, the location of the hive from which they took their orientation flights. If you remember this it all makes sense.

The diagram is colour coded. The original hive location is the centreline of the image. The old hive is mid-grey, the new hive is light-grey. Brood-containing frames are red, foundation or drawn comb is black. The queen is indicated Q (black if mated, white if a virgin or recently mated). The timings of the manipulations are indicated.

Day 0 and Day 1

Don't panic

Don’t panic …

During a routine inspection of a strong colony anytime from mid-April to late June (depending upon the season) you discover unsealed, charged queen cells. Don’t panic. Collect the necessary equipment for an artificial swarm – a complete new hive consisting of a floor, brood box and full complement of frames (preferably some or all are drawn comb, the rest can be just foundation – or foundationless frames), a crownboard and a roof. An additional hive stand is also useful, though not essential.

In the diagram I’ve assumed that it takes a day to collect this lot and get back to the apiary … whatever, once you’re ready, proceed as follows.

  1. Move the old hive a couple of metres away from the original location. If there are supers present remove these and the queen excluder first, putting them aside.
  2. Place the new floor and filled brood box on the original site, with the entrance facing the same way as before.
  3. Remove two frames from the centre of the new brood box.
  4. Gently go through the old hive. Find a frame of open brood. Shake the frame gently to dislodge the flying bees, inspect it carefully, place the queen onto the frame and put it into the centre of the new brood box. There must be no queen cells on this frame.  Push together the adjacent frames and add a spare frame so the hive is full.
  5. If there were supers present at the start place them on the new hive above the queen excluder. If there were no supers you might need to feed this colony some thin syrup to encourage them to draw new comb.
  6. Add the crownboard and roof to the new hive.
  7. Push together the frames in the old hive, add one more frame, put the crownboard and roof back and leave them to get on with things.

What does this first manipulation achieve?

At the end of this first manipulation you’ve manually separated the queen from almost all the brood and nurse bees. The queen is in the original location in the new hive. All the flying bees will return to the original location – because that’s where they first orientated to – over the next day or so. This new hive is viable as it contains a mated queen, bees to support her and lots of empty space for her to lay in.

The old hive is also viable, but only of they first rear a new queen. Since there are open queen cells present these must be sealed to allow pupation and metamorphosis which takes 7 days.

Day 7

Move the old hive to the opposite side of the new hive. A couple of metres away is fine. Flying bees that have matured in the old hive during the preceding week will find the hive missing when they return from foraging. They’ll most likely enter the hive closest to the hive they flew from, which is the one with the queen in it i.e. the new hive on the original hive stand. This boosts the strength of the queenright colony. More importantly, it depletes the old hive of bees, making it less likely that they’ll throw off a cast if more than one virgin emerges§.

It’s important that the old hive is not interfered with after the first 7 days. There will be a new virgin queen present who will be going out on mating flights a few days after emergence. Leave this hive untouched for at least another fortnight. In the diagram above the black frame in the old hive indicates that the oldest brood is emerging, leaving plenty of young bees to tend to the newly mated queen and ample space for her to lay in due course.

Day 21+

The old hive should now contain a newly mated and laying queen. Inspections of this colony can start again. The new colony – on the original site – should be building up well.

If you want to increase your colony numbers (make increase), you’ve done so. If you don’t want to make increase then the two colonies can be united over newspaper. Remove the old queen first, either terminally (!) or by giving her to another beekeeper.


I tend to prefer a vertical split for two reasons – it uses less equipment and it takes up less space. However, the underlying principles of the two processes are very similar as will be discussed in a future post.

 Day 0 and Day 1 can be done on the same day. I’ve separated them on the assumption that you’re as badly prepared as I am and don’t have piles of spare equipment waiting to be used in the apiary. The only thing to be sure of is not to let the queen cells be capped. If necessary knock back all the visible queen cells … once they’ve decided to swarm they will start more.

 I can never write those words without hearing them uttered in the voice of Lance Corporal Jones from the sitcom Dad’s Army. Since this was broadcast between 1968 and 1977 writing that last sentence makes me feel rather old.

§ I’m trying to steer well clear of the thorny problem of how many queen cells to leave in the old hive. That’s a separate topic in its own right. Some suggest letting the bees decide (i.e. do nothing), others leave one or two.

Apistan resistance

Apistan

Apistan

In an earlier article I discussed what Apistan is – a pyrethroid miticide – and the consequences of using it. These include decimation of the mite population if it is susceptible, coupled with the accumulation of long lasting residues in wax. These residues may adversely effect queen and drone development. I also discussed ways to avoid build-up of Apistan residues in comb.

The key phrase in the paragraph above is ‘if it is susceptible’. Unfortunately, resistance to Apistan and the related tau-fluvalinates develops very quickly. To understand why we’ll need to look in a little more detail at how Apistan and other pyrethroids work.

How does Apistan work?

Apistan, like other pyrethroids, works by blocking the activity of voltage gated sodium channels (VGSC) resulting in paralysis because the axonal membrane cannot repolarise.

What on earth does that mean?

Action potential

Action potential

Nerve transmissions – like the signal from the Varroa brain to tell the Varroa legs to move – travel along axons. These are usually very long thin cells. In the adjacent image the ‘brain’ is on the left and the leg muscles on the ‘right’. The nerve impulse (the moving arrow) travels down the axon ‘driven’ by a change in polarity (charge) across the membrane of the axon. In the resting state, when there is no impulse, this is positively charged on the outside and negatively charged on the inside. Sodium – remember the ‘S’ in the acronym VGSC – is positively charged and crosses the membrane (out to in) via a small pore or hole as the impulse passes. This makes the inside of the axon transiently positive. The pore or hole is the VGSC.

Top view of a VGSC

Top view of a VGSC

The VGSC is a transmembrane protein. It actually crosses the membrane multiple times and assembles to form a very narrow channel through which the sodium passes. The cartoon on the right shows the top view of a VGSC, looking “down” the pore into the inside of the axon. The blue bits can move to open or close the pore, allowing sodium to traverse – or not – the membrane into the axon. Apistan binds to the transmembrane protein and prevents the pore from closing. As a consequence, sodium continues to pass from the outside to the inside of the axon, the nerve cannot repolarise and no further impulses can be transmitted. As a consequence, Apistan paralyses the Varroa.

But I don’t suppose many beekeepers will feel much sympathy for the mite 😉

Why isn’t the beekeeper paralysed as well?

Nerve impulses in Varroa and humans are transmitted in essentially the same way. We also have VGSC’s that operate in a similar manner. Why doesn’t Apistan also paralyse careless beekeepers? More generally, why are pyrethroids the most widely used insecticides, available in all garden centres and supermarkets?

Two factors are at work here. The first is the specificity of binding. The VGSC is a protein. Proteins are made from building blocks termed amino acids. The precise sequence, or order, of amino acids is usually critical for protein function. However, two proteins with a similar function can exhibit differences in the amino acid sequence. Although the human and mite VGSC have a similar function they have a different amino acid sequence. Apistan binds much better to the mite VGSC than the human VGSC (this also explains why bees aren’t also paralysed by Apistan … the miticide is specific for the mite VGSC and binds poorly to the honey bee VGSC). In addition, many mammalian species have a number of detoxifying enzymes which deactivate pyrethroids, rendering them ineffective. Together, this explains the specificity of Apistan and other pyrethroids, and the low level of toxicity to humans.

So now you know how Apistan works we can address the much more important question …

Does Apistan work?

Unfortunately, usually not. Since the late-1990’s there have been a large number of publications of Apistan- or fluvalinate-resistant mites from many countries, including the USA (1998, 2002), Israel (2000), UK (2002), Spain (2006), Korea (2009) and Poland (2012). The National Bee Unit used to report Varroa resistance test results by geographic region in England and Wales. Resistance was first reported in mites from Cornwall and Devon (in 2001 and 2002). By 2006 resistance was very widely distributed throughout England. By then approximately a third of all mite samples tested were resistant. The number of tests conducted (or at least reported) then dwindled and there have been none reported since 2010. Not no resistance … no tests. Presumably it’s no longer worth reporting as resistance is so widespread.

The most up-to-date map on the distribution of Apistan resistance I could find is in the NBU booklet on Managing Varroa [PDF; page 28 of the 2015 edition], though the data presented is from 2009.

However, bee equipment suppliers continue to sell Apistan (even Vita, the manufacturer, states that resistance is widespread) and beekeepers continue to use it. Many do so without first testing whether the mite population in their colonies is sensitive to the miticide. How should this be done?

Testing for resistance

Vita suggest two tests. Their first (the “rule of thumb test”) is deeply flawed in my view. It suggests simply looking for a drop of 100’s of mites in the first 24 hours after treatment starts as indicative of a sensitive population.

This isn’t good enough. What if there were thousands of mites present? Perhaps 20% of the population are sensitive, with the remainder resistant. 20% of 5000 mites is 1000 … so you might expect a drop of 100-200 (the majority of the phoretic population) within the first 24 hours. Some might consider this drop indicates a sensitive population … it doesn’t.

It’s not sufficient to count the corpses … you need to know how many mites were unaffected by the treatment.

The second Vita-recommended test is a cut-down version of the “Beltsville” pyrethroid resistance test which is fully described in an NBU pamphlet (PDF). This is much more thorough. Essentially this treats ~300 bees with Apistan, counts the mites that are killed in 24 hours and then counts the unaffected mites remaining on the bees. It’s only by knowing the total number of mites at the start and by determining the percentage of mites sensitive that you can be sure that the treatment is effective.

What is the molecular basis of resistance?

We’re almost there … specific pyrethroids, like Apistan, bind to specific parts of the VGSC. The VGSC is a protein made up of a long connecting chain of amino acids. The binding of the pyrethroid requires an interaction with a small number of specific amino acids in the VGSC. If these particular amino acids change – through mutation for example – then the pyrethroid will no longer bind. If the pyrethroid does not bind the VGSC can open and close again, so the axon repolarises and the mite is not paralysed. The mite is resistant and can then go on to rear lots more resistant baby mites … which, in due course, transfer the viruses that kill your bees.

And that’s exactly what happens.

Leucine

Leucine

A single mutation that causes a substitution of amino acid number 925 in the Varroa VGSC, which is usually a leucine, to either a valine, a methionine or an isoleucine, is sufficient to prevent Apistan and other tau-fluvalinates from binding. At least 98% of mites resistant to Apistan have one of these substitutions. Apistan resistant mites with substitutions at position 925 have been found in the UK, eastern Europe and several sites in South-Eastern USA. It wouldn’t be surprising if the remaining ~2% of resistant mites had a mutation at one of the other amino acids involved in pyrethroid binding. Further studies will confirm this (there are alternative mechanisms that cause resistance, but the one described here is the most frequently seen).

Why aren’t all Varroa mites resistant to tau-fluvalinates?

Apistan resistance has clearly been demonstrated for the last two decades. Resistance is easy to acquire and selection – in the presence of the pyrethroid – is effectively absolute. Without the necessary mutation the mites die, with the mutation they survive.

Bees – and the phoretic mites that are associated with them – are moved around the place all the time, by migratory beekeepers, by importers and through robbing and drifting between colonies.

Why therefore aren’t all Varroa mites now resistant to Apistan and other tau-fluvalinates?

The answer to that is interesting and suggests strategies that could make Apistan an effective treatment again … but I’ll save that for another time.


Only transiently as the charge is reversed shortly afterwards by a similar, though not identical,  mechanism that does not use the VGSC. However, life is simply too short to describe this bit as it’s not needed to understand pyrethroid – or Apistan – activity and resistance.

 The incestuous life cycle of the Varroa mite is important here. This post is already too long to fully elaborate on this but the size of the mite population relative to available open brood (and whether you get single or multiple occupancy of cells) will likely influence the proportion of resistant, partially resistant and sensitive mites in a population.

Credits – the action potential GIF was created by Laurentaylorj from Wikipedia.

 

Avoiding disaster

Top view of Kewl floor

Top view of Kewl floor

Kewl floors (sometimes called Dartington-inspired floors) have an ‘L’ shaped entrance that I think offers advantages to the colony when defending against wasps (or robbing by nearby colonies) and negates the need for mouse guards. However, the very feature that provides these advantages – the ‘L’ shaped gap about 9mm high – also makes them liable to get blocked with bee corpses during late winter.

During the depths of the winter, with a relatively quiescent colony and winter bees that are only a couple of months old, this isn’t usually a problem. However, as the winter turns to spring and the colony starts to become active again the attrition rate increases. As the weather improves and the winter bees expire the corpses can block the entrance, trapping the remaining colony inside.

Blocked Kewl floor

Blocked Kewl floor …

This is the sort of thing that should only happen once. Early in the season you go and visit the apiary on an unseasonably warm and calm day. With one exception the colonies look reasonably active. Foragers are returning with pollen and there are bees setting off on orientation flights.

If you listen carefully at the hive with no activity you might be able to hear the bees panicking inside. Splitting the brood box from the floor reveals the scale of the devastation. It’s a distressing sight. If you’re lucky there will be good numbers of flying bees. If you’re unlucky the colony will have already perished or there will be obvious signs of Nosema.

Kewl floor unblocker ...

Kewl floor unblocker …

With reasonably regular visits to the apiary this is a situation that can easily be avoided. Insert a piece of bent wire – I use an old bicycle spoke – in the entrance slot, turn through 90° and drag it across the full width of the entrance. The ‘vertical’ piece of the wire needs to be longer than the depth of the entrance slot on the floor, but not so long that it fouls the bottom of the frames.


 But, do we always learn from our mistakes? I’ve had this happen a couple of times. In both cases the colony was strong going into the winter and on a double brood box. The first time the colony perished, though it’s not actually clear whether they died from being trapped or from a midwinter virus overload. The second time, April 2015 (shown in the hive photo above), the colony survived. When I discovered the blocked entrance there were still lots of flying bees. I swept the floor clean and cleared the entrance, reassembled the hive and left them to it. On checking a couple of days later they were taking in pollen and I found the laying queen, none the worse for wear, at the first full inspection the following week.

 

 

Apistan and residues

This is the first of two or three posts on Apistan, a widely used yet often ineffective miticide sold for Varroa control. I was originally going to title this post “Don’t do this at home” and restrict discussion to Apistan misuse and resistance in the UK. However, having drafted the article it was clear there was more than could be covered in a single post (or at least comfortably read).

I’ve therefore split it up; the first focuses on what Apistan is, how it’s used and the consequences of use for the hive. Next time – though possibly not next week – I’ll cover the molecular mechanism of activity and mite resistance.

What is Apistan

Apistan

Apistan … tau-fluvalinate

Apistan® is a miticide used to kill Varroa. It is a registered tradename used in the UK and other parts of the world. The active ingredient is a synthetic pyrethroid tau-fluvalinate (or sometimes τ-fluvalinate). Synthetic in this instance means it is not a natural compound, but is produced using a chemical process. Other miticides containing the same active ingredient include Klartan® and Minadox® – precise compositions may vary, but the important component is the tau-fluvalinate. In the UK, Apistan is supplied by Vita (Europe) Ltd. and sold by all the leading beekeeping equipment suppliers. I’ll use the name fluvalinate and Apistan interchangeably in the remaining text.

Instructions for use

Apistan can be used at any time of year but its use is recommended in late summer after the honey harvest. The active ingredient, fluvalinate, is supplied as impregnated polymer strips, two of which are hung vertically in the brood box, between frames 3 & 4 and 7 & 8. It is a contact miticide and needs to be located near the centre of the colony to get trampled through the broodnest. Nucs and weak colonies only should be treated with one strip. The treatment period is 6 to 8 weeks i.e. a minimum of two full brood cycles. The instructions specifically state that it should not be used for less than 6 weeks, or more than 8 weeks. This is to avoid the selection of a resistant mite population. Apistan should not be used when there is a nectar flow.

How effective is Apistan?

On susceptible mite populations Apistan is fantastically effective. Cabras and colleagues in Italy reported greater than 99% efficacy in studies published in 1997.

Fluvalinates and foundation

Importantly, because of its chemical formula, Apistan is fat soluble, meaning it is readily absorbed into or dissolves in fats … like beeswax. It is also a very stable compound. In a relatively recent study by Jeff Pettis and colleagues all 21 samples of commercial foundation tested were contaminated with fluvalinates. This was a US study and I’m not aware of an equivalent analysis of UK foundation suppliers. However, there is an international trade in beeswax and fluvalinates are used globally. I’d be very surprised if any commercially-purchased foundation – perhaps other than the certified organic stuff – was  not contaminated with fluvalinates.

Are fluvalinates in wax foundation a problem?

These studies are difficult to conduct using field-realistic levels of miticides. Nevertheless, despite the fact that the absolute toxicity of fluvalinates for honey bees is very low (i.e. a lot is needed to kill the bees – the compound has a high LD50 0%) there is compelling evidence that sub-lethal levels are probably detrimental. Drones reared in fluvalinate-treated hives exhibit increased mortality, reduced bodyweight and decreased sperm production. Similarly, queens reared in treated colonies exhibited lower body weight. More recent studies by Keith Delaplane and colleagues tested emergence weight, memory, learning and longevity of workers exposed to fluvalinates and did not show any significant differences between treated and untreated colonies. In contrast, coumaphos – an organophosphate used for Varroa control – was clearly detrimental in these studies. Perhaps the most significant result in this study was that mite levels in treated and untreated colonies were unaffected … there was no evidence that the Apistan worked. I’ll discuss resistant in a future post.

Avoiding fluvalinate residues in comb

There are a variety of ways to avoid fluvalinates in comb. The first would be to use certified organic wax foundation. Thorne’s sell this for about twice the price of their standard worker brood foundation. This foundation is manufactured from beeswax sourced from New Zealand. Although certified organic, it’s not clear whether the wax has been tested for the presence of fluvalinates (an expensive process … so I’d be surprised if it had been). For reasons that will become clear shortly, just because the colonies used to source the wax had not been treated does not mean that there are no fluvalinates present in the comb from which the wax was rendered. Apistan was licensed for use in New Zealand seventeen years ago, shortly after Varroa was imported to the country.

An obvious way to reduce fluvalinates in comb is to use foundationless frames. Even if commercial foundation contains traces of the chemicals, by using only thin starter strips you can significantly reduce contamination. Perhaps even better, by making your own starter strips from wax recovered from your own brace comb, cappings or foundationless frames, you can exclude the need for commercial foundation – and all the ‘extra goodies’ it contains – completely. I’m also investigating the use of unwaxed wooden starter strips this season, removing any chance of initial contaminants (note that this is not my primary reason for trying these).

And now the bad news …

Unfortunately, avoiding commercial foundation of any sort and letting the bees draw comb directly from unwaxed starter strips still might not prevent the appearance and accumulation of fluvalinates in your hives. In the Delaplane study they used brand new hives and foundationless frames with plastic starter strips. After one year they compared treated and untreated colonies for the presence of fluvalinates in drawn comb. Unsurprisingly, treated colonies contained high levels of residual Apistan. However, untreated colonies also contained statistically significant levels of Apistan, four times higher than their detection limit. Coumaphos was also detectable at significant levels in untreated colonies. The authors suggest that the presence of both Apistan and Coumaphos was due to drifting of bees from treated colonies carrying the miticide into the untreated colonies. Therefore, even if you don’t use Apistan, if your neighbour does you are likely to get low levels of fluvalinates accumulating in comb – even when using foundationless frames.

The Delaplane study appeared in 2013. An earlier article appeared in Bee Culture in 2009 which described the fluvalinate contamination of both commercial foundation and comb supplied by ‘chemical free’ beekeepers. It’s much easier reading than the data-rich Delaplane article.

Conclusion

If used appropriately, at the right time of the season on a susceptible mite population, Apistan is very effective at killing Varroa. If used like this, Apistan levels will accumulate in the beeswax in the colony. This may be detrimental for drones or queens reared in the colony, but current studies indicate is probably has negligible effects on the worker bees.

However, widespread use of Apistan has resulted in the rapid and widespread selection of resistance in the mite population … meaning that Apistan often has negligible effects on Varroa. I’ll discuss this in more detail in another post.


What do you think happens to all the reclaimed beeswax traded with Thorne’s and other companies? It’s recycled into new sheets of foundation. You might not use fluvalinates, but many beekeepers do and this will be generously divided up across all the new sheets of pressed foundation.

Honey warming cabinet element

Ecostat 100 kit

Ecostat 100 kit

I recently spent an enjoyable evening giving a talk to the Edinburgh and Midlothian Beekeepers Association. In questions after the talk I was asked where to buy the Ecostat heating element used in my honey warming cabinet. It’s not always listed on the website of the suggested supplier, Patrick Pinker (but is as I write this).

These incubator elements are usually purchased be people rearing chickens or gamebirds. An alternative supplier listing Ecostat kits in 50 and 100 eggs sizes is Strangford Incubators in Northern Ireland. You will almost certainly need the 100 egg size to generate enough heat to melt OSR honey properly.

Shop around before you purchase as there can be quite a variation in prices … £64 vs £93 (including P&P) for the two suppliers listed here  😯