84 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Feb. 1 



dantly pay I have no doubt. It surely ought 

 to give us better prices, better and more equal 

 distribution, should increase the consumption 

 of honey, should cheapen the distribution, 

 and, all things considered, be a benefit to both 

 producer and consumer. 



Such an undertaking as this is really the 

 business of government (I am not bring- 

 ing in any politics), and should include the 

 distribution of all products. Management by 

 the government would insure its being more 

 equal and general. Some will say there would 

 be too much jobbery ; but to such I need 

 but say that there is plenty of jobbery 

 now in the distribution of products, and 

 it would be hard indeed for a government dis- 

 tributing agency all in one concern to beat the 

 producer out of any more than he loses now 

 under present methods. One of the argu- 

 ments in favor of combines and trusts is that 

 one management can do the work cheaper and 

 better than several, and the argument is good. 



What is the use of two warehouses and 

 agents where one can do all? But, why ar- 

 gue ? It ne-ds only a little common sense and 

 thought to prove that government should 

 do this work ; but she does not, and we as in- 

 terested producers should do it until such 

 time as we can get government to take it off 

 our hands. 



rr. 





MEASUREMENTS OF TONGUES AT THE MICHI- 

 GAN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE. 



The Direct Relation of Long Tongues to Large 

 Yields of Honey. 



BY JOHN M. KANKIN. 



A short time a^o lwu cages of bees were 

 sent to me from J. H. Gerbracht, Spring Grove, 

 Illinois, for measurement. Cage No. 1 was a 

 sample from a colony that stored 240 pounds 

 surplus, and were a strain of his own breed- 

 ing. Cage No. 2 was from a five-banded strain 

 that stored 135 pounds of surplus honey dur- 

 ing the past season. The measurements of 

 ten bees from each cage are as follows : 



Cage No. 1. — Lengths of tongues were as 

 follows: 6, 5.9, 6, 5.8, 6, 6, 5.9, 6, 5.8, 5.7. 

 Average length, 5.9 millimeters. 



Cage No. 2. — Lengths of tongues were as 

 follows : 4.5, 5, 4.8, 4.7, 4.8, 5, 6, 5.5, 4.5, 4.3. 

 Average length, 4.9 millimeters. 



It will be seen that the measurements are 

 very irregular, probably owing to the fact that 

 the bees were of all ages, as Mr. Gerbracht 

 says that he ran them into the cage just as 

 they came. These colonies were on a double 

 stand, with the entrances only a few inches 

 apart. This will easily account for the one 

 long tongued bee in the cage with the five- 

 banded ones, as they doubtless worked from 

 one hive to another to a certain extent. One 

 experiment, of course, does not absolutely 



prove any thing ; but after many cases of this 

 kind I am sure that the difference of length 

 of tongue goes with the co responding differ- 

 ence in honey production, other things being 

 equal. The more work I do along this line 

 the more certain I am that there is nothing in 

 bee culture to-day that furnishes the opportu- 

 nity for improvement that is offered along this 

 line of improving the strains of our bees. I 

 am confident that there are tons of honey go- 

 ing to waste every year simply because the 

 bees have not the ability to gather it. As I 

 have said before, it probably will not be prac- 

 tical for every bee-keeper to run an experi- 

 ment station of his own, but he can well af- 

 ford to pay more attention to this phase of 

 improvement, and select his breeding stock 

 from his best workers, even if they are not 

 the highest-colored bees in his yard. 

 Agricultural College, Mich., Dec. 7. 



[Yes, you are just right. It does look more 

 than ever as if the difference in the length of 

 tongue is in direct ratio to the corresponding 

 yields of honey, other things being equal. 

 But I was particularly interested in the mea- 

 surements you made of the tongues of those 

 bees that gathered 240 lbs., and the tongue- 

 measurements we made of those very same 

 bees. In Gleanings for December 1, page 

 924, the tongue measurements of Mr. Ger- 

 bracht's best workers average .19. Your aver- 

 age for the same bees is 5.9 millimeters, which, 

 figured out in hundredths, is 23 plus. But 

 you measured the entire length after it was 

 dissected, and we measured that portion of the 

 tongue that will stick out from the end of the 

 mandibles. It appears, then, according to 

 your average and our average that there is a 

 difference of .04. Of course, you understand 

 that this does not signify that your experi- 

 ment was wrong and ours right, but that we 

 measured from one point and you from anoth- 

 er ; yet, unless cleared up to the average read- 

 er, this is somewhat confusing. Your average 

 tongue length for the five-banded bees was 4.9 

 millimeters, which, when converted into hun- 

 dredths, gives .19 plus a very small fraction ; 

 or by our own way of measuring 15 plus. 

 That strain of five-banders, to say the least, 

 would hardly be worth cultivating. As I have 

 said before, the breeder evidently worked for 

 bands, and got bands and nothing else. 



Regarding the direct relation of tongue- 

 length to yields of honey, a very interesting 

 corroboration of this is given in Dr. Miller's 

 Straws in this issue ; but the reader will no- 

 tice that the average of the measurements of 

 A. Charton are considerably in excess of the 

 average of the measurements of myself and 

 even of Prof. Rankin. This goes to show that 

 Mr. C. is measuring from another point. Sure- 

 ly it's high time we got together and measured 

 from one point, all of us. But for purposes of 

 comparison we have got enough so far to show 

 that the increase in the yield of honey is al- 

 most in direct ratio to the increase in the 

 length of tongue. I have been talking this up 

 for the last six months, and it is no little sat- 

 isfaction to know that my impressions along 

 these lines have been proven by those who 



