THE DEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW. 



219 



111 early spring, before tlie bees can Suild 

 combs or diaw out foiiiidaticii. ll^e i.tw 

 comb may be of advautatre iu 'be brood 

 chamber to spread tlie brood. EKperiei'ce 

 will show how much value the uew fo'iuda- 

 tiou will have for this purpose. Later iu the 

 season 1 think it is better to use the old 

 foundation with the so-called round cell 

 walls. For u,ew colonies anil swarms I pre- 

 fer starters to foundation and foundation to 

 empty coiubs, consequently 1 would never 

 use the new foundation for this purpose. I 

 am of the opinion that we already aV)use the 

 foundation in this respect. The main pur- 

 po'^e of the new article is for the production 

 of comb honey. 



" Lately the question was discussed in bee 

 papers: ' How much extracted honey can be 

 produced as comb honey '? The answers are 

 iiuite differe'it. While some say twice or 

 three times as much and more, others think 

 think they can produce exactly as much 

 comb as extracted honey. ( )f course, if this 

 were true we would have no use for the new 

 foundation. Accordiusi to my experience we 

 can iiive no definite answer. In a very poor 

 season I can get a few pounds of extracted 

 honey from some colonies, while I would not 

 get any comb honey in sections at all. In 

 very yood seasons the difference seems very 

 small. The following will explain this. If 

 the honey How is very good and the colonies 

 strong I sometimes use full sheets of founda- 

 tion between extracted combs and extracting 

 supers. I always found them worked out by 

 the bees at once, filled with honey and 

 capped at the same time as the other cells. 

 In a moderate honey flow this foundation is 

 nesrleded l)y the bees for st)me time. The 

 cells of the neighV)orintr comb are prolonged 

 and afterwards you will find the foundation 

 drawn out more or less and filled with 

 hone>-. but the cells do not have the normal 

 depth. These observations make it reason- 

 able that under very happy circumstances 

 the same amcjiint of comb as extracted honey 

 could be procured. But the production of 

 comb honey in sections has some f>ther diffi- 

 culties for bees. They dislike to work in 

 the small chambers foriiif-d by 4i4x4'4 inch 

 sections and separators. I think with larger 

 Bections, ]\ in. wide, and no separators, 

 more honey could be procured. 



" If we take all this info enjrsideralion. my 

 opinion is that the new foundation, if it will 

 not cost too much, will lie very valuable in 

 many cases, bnt I doubt if it will revolution- 

 ize the production of cfimb honey or have 

 any influence on the iiriees of the same; so 

 the fear of 'uin by the small producer is 

 surely without reason. 



" We have to consider another objection 

 against the new drawn foundation. Some 

 prominent bee keepers think it will cause 

 more «o-called ' tish bone' in comb honey. 

 The new foundation Iris tio heavier midrib 

 than the extra thin oltl st^le fctundation 

 though the cell walls are snid to Se a littl« 

 heavier than thosi- of the natural comb. E. 

 Root says that accord in tr to his observation 

 bees work over the side walls and gnaw them 

 in the same manner as the natural comb. 

 Whoever has observed how bees build 

 combs and work out foundation will surely 



doubt this statement. We see that the outer 

 edges are always stronger at the cell walls 

 than elsewhere. This strengthens not only 

 the comb and gives the bees a sufficiently 

 strong foothold while walking over the 

 combs, but here, too, is accumulated the 

 material for prolonging the cells out for 

 forming the cappings. When the bees cover 

 a comb they never use a comb without this 

 strengthened edge, and if the temperature is 

 t )0 low for them to secrete wax, they gnaw 

 off a part of the cell wax to form this edge. 

 llie working of the wax is always done in 

 the same way as a sculptor works clay. It is 

 entirely impossible that bees can gnaw any- 

 thing from a wall with their mandibles. For 

 bees to gnaw an object they must get it be- 

 tween the mandibles. This is the reason why 

 the midrib of any foundation is never 

 changed in thickness by the bees. If E. 

 Root has observed that the cell walls of the 

 new foundation were thinner after the bees 

 had the foundation worked over, it was be- 

 cause they had gnawed off a part of the cell 

 walls and worked them over in the way des- 

 cribed above. If the cell walls were thinned 

 out to the bottom of the cell, it would be 

 proof for me that the bees had gnawed off 

 the whole cell wall, but then the new foun- 

 dation would have no advantage over the 

 old. But I know that bees do not do so. 

 Bees have no objection to strong cell walls; 

 they accept the Schuiz comb and old combs 

 in which the cell walls are quite thick by the 

 accumulations of the conoons. The bees 

 are not able to remove them except they re- 

 move the whole comb and build a new one. 

 This is another proof of my assertion that 

 'bees cannot gnaw off anything from a 

 straight wall. E. Root further says that the 

 foundation had a quite different appearance 

 after the bees had worked over it. This is 

 the same with every foundation, and is 

 caused by saliva which the bees always 

 t)rush over the wax when they commence to 

 work it. This saliva dissolves the wax and 

 gives it that opa(ine, roughened appearance. 

 It softens the wax and makes it easier to 

 be worked and stretched. By this prepara- 

 tion with saliva the wax loses the hard con- 

 dition we oViserve in melted wax and gets 

 the appearance and condition of newly 

 built natural comb. 



"From this theoretical standpoint I do 

 not expect more 'fish bone' with the new 

 foundation than with that used at present, 

 but further experience will prove who is 

 right in this respect." 



I see by Gleanings of July 1.") that Mr. 

 Root has been getting different hands in the 

 factory to try comb honey built from the 

 new foundati(jn and compare it with natu- 

 rally built drone coinb. The latter was 

 found to be more "' gobby " than that built 

 on the foundation. I wish that he had tried 

 them with hou'-y stored in new worker 

 comV', as we know that drone comb is 

 heavier than worker comb. B'lt it is some- 

 thing to know that the product is lighter 

 than drone comb. 



