Oct. 10, 1901. 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



647 



different position — for instance, a wild animal be domesti- 

 cated — and variations in size, color, disposition, etc., will 

 appear at once. 



3. The more alike the father and mother, the more 

 strongly and surely will their characteristics be transmitted 

 to their offspring-. And if they are very different, all sorts 

 of variations may be expected. 



The more fixed the characteristics and peculiarities, 

 the more surely will they be transmitted. A " sport " — that 

 is, an animal or plant showing some extraordinary peculi- 

 arity — is not at all sure to transmit it to its descendants, 

 while the " fixed "' qualities will nearly always be trans- 

 mitted. 



A fixed characteristic is one that has been transmitted 

 from generation to generation either through the natural 

 operation of the survival of the fittest or through the 

 choice of the breeder. 



IN-BREKDING. 



That is, breeding between close parents or relatives. 

 This is said to be injurious to vitality. The fact is quoted 

 that in natural process of reproduction of plants and ani- 

 mals, in-breeding is avoided. On the other hand, all our 

 best breeds of horses, cattle, fowls, etc., have been obtained 

 by in-breeding. Numbers of bulls and stallions have done 

 service as long as they lived, with their own mothers, 

 grandmothers, daughters, granddaughters, etc. 



One thing is certain, in breeding from close relatives, 

 we breed from animals having the same characteristics and 

 same peculiarities, and, according to the above rules, such 

 will more likely be transmitted, and even intensified ; for 

 the fixingof a characteristic generally intensifies it. Now 

 any defect which that breed maj' have, will thereby be 

 fixed and intensified until it may eventually endanger or 

 destroy the very life of the animals themselves. 



INFLUENCE OF THE MALE. 



In breeding horses, cattle, etc., it is found that the male 

 has more influence on the offspring than the female. This 

 is due in a great measure, if not altogether, to the fact that 

 the male used is of a superior stock, with qualities better 

 fixed and more intense than those of the females. If the 

 process was reversed, that is, if the females were of the 

 improved stock, and the males of the common stock, the 

 reverse would probably take place. In the human race we 

 do not see that the children inherit more characteristics 

 from their father than from their mother. 



INFLUENCE OF THE FEMALE. 



The horse-breeders tell us that the male gives the quali- 

 ties and the female the size. That is true, more or less, of 

 all the animals that are developed in the mother's womb, 

 but more of the horse than any other. 



All those familiar with horse-raising know that a colt 

 at his birth has nearly the full length of his legs ; and that 

 when full-grown his height (if he has not been stunted by 

 lack of food or other hindrance) is about twice the length 

 of his fore legs. It is easy to see that the colt born of a 

 large mare has a start at his birth that he will keep during 

 all his growth. 



In plants and animals born of eggs or seeds, such an 

 advantage does not occur. 



In bees, the size is limited also by the size of the cell. 

 It is a well-known fact, that drones born in smaller cells 

 than the regular drone-cells are smaller in proportion to the 

 size of the cells. 



AS TO BEES. 



In our attempts to improve our races of bees, we have 

 to meet several difficulties that do not occur in other lines : 



1. We have not the same control of the reproductors. 

 If we desire to improve a herd of cattle we have the choice 

 of the very individuals. We choose the best cow, and a 

 bull descended from a superior stock. In improving our 

 stock of bees, we want to improve the qualities of the 

 workers. But we can not use the workers themselves. We 

 have to fall back on their mothers, and use for reproduction 

 drones and queens ivhose mothers have produced ^ood ivork- 

 e?-s, and lake our chances. 



2. We have only an imperfect control of the drones, and 

 if we could breed from an individual drone of our choice, 

 how could we tell that this drone would give better workers 

 than that one? There is nothing to show. At best we 

 could eliminate the weakest and undersized one. The only 

 point where " hand-picking " of drones could help is in 

 regard to color. The yellowest drones will undoubtedly 

 produce the yellowest workers. 



3. We are to work in the same line as Nature. In 

 improving cattle, for instance, in getting up a good milking 

 stock, we are developing a quality that in the wild state 

 was completely undeveloped, hence we can obtain wonder- 

 ful results. In the wild state, the animals (something like 

 the Texas steers) have developed chiefly hardiness, health 

 and strength. If we were to take the Texas stock and try 

 to increase the same qualities of hardiness, strength, etc., 

 we would make but little headway, because Nature has 

 already developed them almost, and perhaps up, to the limit 

 attainable. 



In bees, what we want chiefly is hardiness and honey- 

 gathering qualities ; that is, the very qualities that Nature 

 has been developing for thousands of years, and we may 

 expect that the limit has been nearly reached, if not alto- 

 gether. We may perhaps increase the size of the bees and 

 length of tongue. 



CONCLUSION. 



After all is said and discussed, all that is to be done is 

 to get the queens and drones from the very best colonies 

 obtainable, and rear the cells under the most advantageous 

 conditions of warmth, feed, etc. It is needless to say that 

 undersized or defective queens (and, if possible, drones) 

 should be rejected. 



That's all. Knox Co., Tenn. 



Size of Hives Not Necessarily in Accord With Lay- 

 ing Capacity of Queen-Bees. 



BY G. M. DOOLITTLE. 



A CORRESPONDENT writes thus: " I would like your opiaion 

 regarding the size of hive to use. Should I adopt the eight-frame 

 LangstrotU hive, so generally recommended, the same would, if 

 entirely occupied with worker-comb, contain about 1168 square 

 inches, and g-ire about 5s,'W0 cells. From this we must deduct at least 

 ten percent of the space for the usual supply of honey and pollen, leav- 

 ing about 52,51)0 cells, .\llowiog 21 days from the egg to the time the bee 

 emerges from its cell, and one day for the bees to clean the cell and for 

 the queen to lay in it again, we have an average of about 34U0 cells for 

 the queen to fill per day. Now, is 2400 eggs the utmost daily laying capa- 

 city of a queen in a strong colony? If not, should any queen be 

 restricted to that amount when she could and would lay more? I ask 

 these questions to help me determine what size of hive to build the com- 

 ing winter. Please answer in the American Bee Journal, so it will 

 appear in time for me to decide what size to malie my hives." 



I did not know that it was necessary to make our hives, 

 as to size, to accommodate the prolificness of the most pro- 

 lific queens, nor do I so think. Suppose that a queen could 

 lay SOOO eggs daily, on an average, as some think possible. 

 What is the price or worth of those eggs ? Does the sum 

 and substance of bee-keeping depend upon keeping all 

 queens employed at egg-laying to their fullest capacity ? 

 Bees, when they come on the stage of action at just the 

 right time, are very valuable, but eggs are of no value, 

 only as they tend in the direction of producing these valu- 

 able bees. Aye, they tend to%vard positive disadvantage, 

 and, to take away the value we already have, only as 

 they look toward the end of producing the required bees 

 in the field at the time of the honey harvest. Here is a 

 point often lost sight of by the large-hive advocates. 



Eggs cost practically nothing ; but as soon as the bees 

 begin to perfect them toward other bees, then they begin to 

 cost ; and if this perfecting is going on to any great extent 

 at a time when the perfected product is placed on the stage 

 of action, either before or after their presence in large 

 numbers is needed, we not only have the cost of perfecting 

 to pay for, but the cost of their consuming, after being per- 

 fected, as well. This consuming part we alwaj's have to 

 pay for ; but we willingly do it at any time when the pro- 

 duction of the individual bee is greater than what it con- 

 sumes. But I can see no object in doing this at any other 

 time, simply that the extra laying capacity of any queen 

 may be gratified. A hive that is large enough to gratify 

 the greatest aspirations of very prolific queens, at the times 

 of their greatest aspirations, will have too much capital 

 lying idle in it the largest share of the year, and be a bung- 

 ling, unwieldy hive besides. 



From all past experience I think that 2400 eggs per day 

 would be a good maximum average for any queen. Rain, 

 cold, or other disturbing influences often retard the activity 

 in the hive, and of the queen, and thus it happens that at 

 times the best of queens often does not lay more than 1000 

 eggs in a day, while, with the right conditions, she may 

 multiply this number by four, and still have plenty of room 

 in a hive which will give an average of only 2400 daily. 



Then, again, as two and one-seventh generations of 

 bees can be brought on the stage of action to where one 

 steps ofl", we find that, in a hive giving an average of 2400 



