9:>i 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Dec. 15. 



tendency to white. That same germ implanted 

 in the womb of a red mother might have pro- 

 duced a red calf. So it seems pretty clear that 

 the calf received inherited traits by means of 

 the food it received before the time it came 

 forth as a perfect calf. 



A white hen mated to a white cock lays an 

 egg. Whether that egg be hatched under a 

 white, black, or speckled hen, or in an incuba- 

 tor, the chances are a hundred to one that the 

 chicken will be white. An egg laid by a white 

 hen mated to a black cock is hatched under a 

 black hen, and it turns out a white chicken. 

 Isn't it a pretty clear case that the chicken gets 

 its color from its mother, that no change took 

 place during the period of incubation, and that, 

 potentially, a white chicken was in the egg 

 when it was laid ? In a certain sense there may 

 be some truth in that — so far. at least, as to say 

 that the hen which sat on the egg had no in- 

 fluence on its color; yet in the fullest sense it is. 

 I think, not true. When the egg was laid, if I 

 am not mistaken, the germ was there with no 

 characteristics except those received from the 

 sire. If such delicate operations could be per- 

 formed as to transfer the germ from that egg to 

 one laid by a speckled hen, I imagine that it 

 might hatch out a speckled chicken. 



If I am correct in this, then the traits of the 

 mother were received by the germ during the 

 lime of incubation through the nourishment 

 contained in the egg. A minute ago I said that 

 the calf received inherited traits by means of 

 the food it received before the time it came 

 forth as a perfect calf. In that statement, 

 change "calf " to " chicken " and will not the 

 statement be just as true? That is, the chick- 

 en received inherited traits by means of the 

 food it received before the time it came forth as 

 a perfect chicken. 



I think now you will see what I am driving 

 at. If it be true of the calf and the chick(>n, 

 may it not be equally true of the young queen, 

 that she receives inherited traits by means of 

 the food received before tbe time of coming 

 forth as a perfect queen? In the case of the 

 calf, the pre-natal nourishment is furnished 

 and used inside the mother: in tlie case of the 

 chicken it is furnished inside the mother, but 

 used outside after the expulsion of the egg. A 

 step farther is taken in the case of th(> queen, 

 and The nourishment is not only used after the 

 expulsion of the egg, but furnished afterward, 

 and furnished from a different source; viz.. 

 the food furnished by the workers. Why shall 

 we not admit that this food used before the 

 time that the queen comes forth a perfect insect 

 makps its impi-esson the character of theqneen, 

 just as much as the food used before the emerg- 

 ing of the perfect calf or chicken? Moreover, 

 we well know that a difference in the food used 

 at that time makes all the difference between a 

 queen and a worker; and is it not possible that 

 it may make other differences? To this, how- 

 ever, it may be replied that there is no differ- 

 ence in character caused by the food in the case 

 of queen and worker— that it is only a case of 

 completed or retarded development. 



One of the strong arguments used by those 

 who think traits are inherited from workers is, 

 that the young queen can hardly inherit from 

 the father or mother any traits which neither 

 of them ever possessed. Neither the father nor 

 mother of a young queen ever gathered stores, 

 built comb, or chased a bee keeper to sting him. 

 How can they transmit traits that shall make 

 good storers or comb-buildeis. or that shall 

 make cross bees? How can a queen transmit 

 the trait of hardiness, no matter through how 

 many generations bees be kept in a bleak cli- 

 mate, so long as the queen is kept in the center 

 of the brood -nest, and there kept warm? 



If. now. you ask me to say whether bees in- 

 herit traits through the nurse-bees by which 

 they are fed, I can only say, "I don't know.'^ 

 Some good authorities say they do. Other good 

 authorities say they do not. The theory that 

 traits descend only from fathei' and mother is a 

 long-established one. An exception to a long- 

 established theory is not readily admitted. But 

 we Ivnow now that the Dzierzon theory is true, 

 although it came in direct conflict with a long- 

 established theory. So there is at least a possi- 

 bility that there may be an exception to the 

 rule, that traits descend only through father 

 and mother. If there is truth in it, then it is of 

 great practical importance that we know it and 

 act upon it. The interests involved make it 

 wise for us to try to find the truth, whatever it 

 may be. C. C. Millkk. 



Marengo, 111. 



[During the reading of the fore part of the 

 article we felt somewhat skeptical as to any in- 

 herited traits being received other than from 

 mother and father; when we came to the latter 

 part we doubted less. While we may say. in 

 the case of the calf and the chicken, there 

 would be none, yet when we come to the bee we 

 may have to take a different view, been (f.se sever- 

 al hundred individuals, besides the father and 

 mother, may have and probably have had some- 

 thing to do in the rearing and feeding of the 

 baby- bee. We have had scores of report** 

 showing that bees from a queen and drone of 

 gentle stock are nearly as vicious as the bees 

 from the queen formerly in the hive, and whose 

 removal was deemed advisable because her bees 

 were so cross. Now, in this case, either the new 

 lot of bees from the new queen learned to be 

 naughty per force of example, or else the food 

 partially digested in the glands of the original 

 cross nurse-bees served to carry naughtiness to 

 the new stock. We have sometimes thought bees 

 learned good and bad tricks of each other. For 

 instance, the habit of robbing seems to cling to 

 a colony somewhat, even after a change of 

 queens, and after the bees of the former queen 

 are gone. We know that we can teach a colony 

 to be cross by kicking a hive, using it roughly a 

 few times. A runaway horse knocked over a 

 couple of hives for us. Of course, they were 

 cross at the time, but they were cross for weeks 

 afterward, when, before the mishap, they had 

 been well-behaved bees.1 



OHIO'S APIARIAN EXHIBIT AT THE WORLD'S 

 FAIR. 



DK. MASON DESCHIBES IT. 



Mr. Edit(,r:—Ju accordance with your request 

 I send you a description of the Ohio apiarian 

 exhibit at the World's Fair. Those who have 

 seen the exhibit will not need to be told how it 

 looked; and the photo I sent you, although' 

 fairly good, does not show how it was arranged, 

 so I will give a description of it. 



I was informed by the chief of the depart- 

 ment in which our exhibit was made, that the 

 case in which honey and wax were to be dis- 

 played was feet wide, 2.5 long, and 8 high, in- 

 side measure, and I made my plans accordingly. 

 When I got to the place for the exhibit I found 

 the case was only 4 feet and 4 inches wide and- 

 7 feet high, so that the framework I had made 

 at home was too large to go into the case, and 

 the exposition company put two men at work 

 on it to make it smaller, and it took them three 

 days to do it. 



The frames, or honey-stands, as we called 

 them, were made of inch gas-pipe, 4 pieces on 

 each side and one between at each end, making- 

 ten risers, or supports, in each stand. Each. 



