272 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



May, 1918 



NOT ALL ITALIAN QUEENS GOOD 



Eternal Vigilance Necessary. Where- 

 in Some ^een-breeders Fail. oA 

 Show-down of '^est Strains. 



By Earl C. Walker 



WHILE most 

 beekeepers 

 recognize 

 the fact that 

 there is a dif- 

 ference in bees 

 and consider 

 the Italians su- 

 perior to other 

 races, yet I feel 



safe in saying that most apiarists do not 

 recognize the fact that there is a vast dif- 

 ference in Italians of different strains, and 

 hence pay little or no attention to selection 

 in breeding or in purchasing queens for re- 

 queening. It is common practice for many 

 beekeepers to save queen cells with no re- 

 gard to the merits of the stock from which 

 they are taken. And, in buying queens, they 

 order from the breeder who sells the cheap- 

 est, or perhaps from a breeder who is suppos- 

 ed to have good stock and they are satisfied 

 that such stock is as good as any. Such 

 beekeepers are apt to consider it too much 

 trouble to keep a record of their colonies and 

 of the pedigree of their queens. 

 Stocks That Deteriorate, 

 While I regret to say it, I am convinced 

 that some commercial queen-breeders either 

 pay no attention to the selection or have 

 thru years of line-breeding or inbreeding al- 

 lowed their original stock which gave them 

 their reputation as breeders to deteriorate. 

 I have in mind one breeder who is reputed 

 to have very superior stock and from whom 

 I have purchased queens off and on for the 

 last 25 years. The stock originally was, 

 without doubt, most excellent, but the queens 

 received during the last few years have prov- 

 ed poor indeed and in my opinion are de- 

 genvirates. This conclusion is drawn from 

 my own observations as well as from re- 

 ports from other beekeepers who have re- 

 cently tried this same stock. Now this breed- 

 er is honest and really thinks he is offering 

 high -class stock as he formerly did, but he 

 has, I believe, practiced inbreeding so long 

 that his stock has degenerated and he is de- 

 pending on his past reputation as a queen- 

 breeder. 



I believe however that most queen-breed- 

 ers by careful selection are constantly improv- 

 ing their stock, but what is needed is a gen- 

 eral awakening among the rank and file of 

 beekeepers to the importance of selection 

 and improvement of their own stock. This can 

 be done only by keeping a record of the per- 

 formance of each colony and a record of the 

 pedigree of each queen and then breeding 

 from the best. Likewise careful attention 

 must be paid to rearing drones from stock 

 that has been thoroly tested. Every bee- 

 keeper who is striving for stock improve- 

 ment, should read in the August, 1916, num- 

 ber of the American Bee Journal, Dr. C. C. 

 Miller's article on this subject of drone se- 

 lection, in which is emphasized the impor- 

 tance of rearing good drones for breeding. 

 Contrary to general practice and belief it is 

 conclusively shown that there is more to the 



problem than 

 simply rearing 

 drones from a 

 queen whose 

 workers have a 

 record as honey- 

 gatherers. Such 

 workers depend 

 for their charac- 

 ter not only upon 

 the queen but also upon the drone with 

 which the queen was mated. In other words 

 these workers have the composite character 

 of their mother and their father, that is the 

 drone with which the mother mated. But 

 the drones of this same queen, since they 

 sjjring from unimpregnated eggs, are not 

 influenced by the mating of their mother. 

 These drones are sons of their mother alone 

 and depend for their character entirely upon 

 her own blood without regard to her mating. 

 Now since this queen is the product of the 

 combined blood of her mother and father, 

 slie transmits to her sons the character of her 

 dual parentage. In other words a drone gets 

 its character from its grandparents. Hence 

 it is clear that in choosing drones for breed- 

 ing, we must estimate their value not by 

 their mother or her colony of workers but 

 must know the record of their grandmother 

 and her colony. 



I conducted the following experiment 

 which to me is conclusive evidence that 

 blood tells. In 1914 queens were purchased 

 from three prominent queen-breeders in this 

 country and also from one breeder in Italy, 

 so that four distinct strains of Italians were 

 used. During the first season the best queen 

 of each strain was selected to be used the 

 following season (1915) as a breeder. From 

 each of these breeders, daughters were rais- 

 ed and mated with the best drones of my 

 own stock. That is, an abundance of select 

 drones were raised with a view of mating 

 them with these queens. Ten of the best 

 queens of each of these strains were used to 

 head the colonies. This last season a care- 

 ful record of each of these colonies was kept 

 and the difference in pounds of honey stor- 

 ed by each strain is conclusive evidence that 

 it is a mistake to think that "bees is bees." 

 All these colonies were kept in the same 

 yard and all were managed in the same way 

 and given an equal chance. Extracted and 

 bulk comb honey were produced by all but 

 two colonies which were run for comb honey. 

 In setting forth the results, the three do- 

 mestic strains of Italians are designated as 

 A, B, and C, while the imported strain is des- 

 ignated by the letter I. 



Strain A. Produced an average yield of 

 122 lbs. per colony. All were run for ex- 

 tracted except one which produced 97 sec- 

 tions of fancy comb. The best individual 

 colony yield was 191 lbs. extracted, the low- 

 est 90 lbs. extracted. 



Strain B. All run for extracted. Average 

 yield 86 lbs. Best individual colony yield 

 134 lbs, lowest 55 lbs. 



Strain C. All run for extracted. Average 



