1895 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



19 



in a lump on the ground. He tried, and suc- 

 ceeded in two ways in getting rid of " tiiose 

 devils of fertile workers." The first is a little 

 more tedious. He took two frames of brood, of 

 all ages, with the young bees from one of his 

 best colonies, put them into an empty hive, and 

 put the same into a dark place, to stay there for 

 three days. On the evening of the third day he 

 placed this nucleus, which then had five queen- 

 cells, on the stand of the laying workers, which, 

 in turn, were carried to the cellar. Some days 

 afterward it was taken out again and placed at 

 some distance from the nucleus, and the bees 

 were brushed on to the grass. Most of them, 

 excepting, perhaps, a thousand or more, return- 

 ed to their old stand, where now and then some 

 bees were killed, "hut this was all." Those 

 bees which remained on the grass were merci- 

 lessly destroyed. A month later he opened the 

 hive and found a " magnificent" queen (reared 

 in a two-frame nucleus). 



The second way is less complicated. One 

 evening he gave the same scent to the colony 

 with the laying workers and to the weakest of 

 his other colonies, on account of fighting. On 

 the following day he moved the colony with the 

 laying workers about 350 feet from their old 

 stand, on which he set the scented weak colo- 

 ny, and brushed the bees off on the ground. 

 Nearly all went back to the old stand, and 

 there was no fighting. About 300 or 400 bees 

 remained on the ground and were killed. Eight 

 days after, he opened the hive and every thing 

 was normal. 



In speaking of the preservation of drones for 

 late queen-rearing, Mr. A. I. Root, in his ABC 

 book, says: " I believe drones have been, under 

 such circumstances, wintered over." Well, one 

 Mr. Cedre, relates that, after sufficient rains 

 toward the 15th of October, the queens not only 

 laid pretty well, but that drones had been rear- 

 ed, and says: " These drones, in small quantity, 

 to be sure, have wintered over in two or three 

 hives, and died after some flights in March. 

 This is the first time I have observed this fact." 



St. Petersburg, Fla. 



^ I — ^^— 



DRONES, DRONE-LAYING ftTJEENS, AND LAY- 

 ING WORKERS, USELESS. 



AN INTEKESTIXG EXPERIMENT. 



By Willie Atchley. 



If I remember aright, I promised the readers 

 of Gleanings that I would test the value of 

 drones from drone-laying queens and those 

 from laying workers and unfertile queens. 

 Now, I must recall the promise that I would 

 try this on an island 18 miles out at sea this 

 year, and report. As the experiment would 

 cost me in cash ^.50, not counting time, I had to 

 postpone the scheme till some future time. As 

 the hot July wind very nearly ruined our nu- 



clei, we had to use all the means we had to re- 

 stock our queen-rearing business, and had no 

 money to spare for the proposed experiment. 

 But as we have places here on the prairie 

 where we can get five or more miles away from 

 bees, timber, or anybody, we tried the experi- 

 ment in a small way. While this could not be 

 taken conclusively, I am now fully convinced 

 that I do not want any of my queens mated 

 with any but drones from best fertilized queens. 

 We are satisfied that nearly all, if not all, the 

 queens put on the prairie were mated with the 

 drones from laying workers ; and while they 

 seem to be just as prolific as any queens, they 

 are ruined by being mated with these unde- 

 veloped drones. What I mean by undeveloped 

 drones is this: drones from any but good fertil- 

 ized and laying queens, as we all know that a 

 queen is not thoroughly developed till she is 

 mated and begins to lay. Then a drone from 

 any other source is from an undeveloped 

 mother, and is an undeveloped drone. 



Now, our experiment queens would mate and 

 lay as well as any queens, so far as we could 

 see, in worker-cells, and nearly all the eggs 

 would produce drones. My idea is, that the 

 mating of these queens by such drones was so 

 feeble that not one egg in twenty would touch 

 the fluid and be transformed from a drone to a 

 worker egg, as the fluid is so scant, and the 

 vessel containing the same is not full enough, 

 and the eggs pass right on by without being 

 impregnated, and all caused from improper 

 mating. 



I am now of the opinion that weakness, 

 either in the queen or drone, will cause a defect 

 in the mating, and a drone-laying queen will 

 be the result. I believe that a queen can be 

 fertilized by an undeveloped drone, and yet no 

 v/orker eggs be laid, as the fluid deposited by 

 the drone is so small that the duct that conveys 

 the eggs is not touched at all by the fluid from 

 the drone, just the same as an egg deposited in 

 a drone-cell for a drone; still, nature may be 

 satisfied to such an extent that the queen may 

 think she is depositing worker eggs. I have 

 now come to the conclusion that I shall never 

 allow any but drones from my best queens to 

 fly near my queen-yards, for I believe it will 

 sooner or later prove very damaging. I am 

 perfectly satisfied that the queen has the power 

 to deposit eggs without having them come in 

 contact with the semen, or fluid deposited by 

 the drone, and all such produce drones. 



I should be glad indeed to have some of the 

 old heads take this thing in hand, say Doolittle 

 or Prof. Cook, and see if I am not right. I do 

 believe that we as bee-keepers are standing in 

 our own light, and sleeping over our rights, not 

 to have this thing put through and settled be- 

 yond a doubt, as poor mating is (tlivays a loss to 

 the bee-keeper. We had arranged to have 

 some of these drone-laying queens dissected 

 and thoroughly examined by Dr. Howard, at 



