1902 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



233 



TONQUE-LENOTH AND TONGUE-REACH. 



An Explanation. 



BY PKOF. C. P. GILLETTE. 



How easy it is to be misunderstood! In 

 my paper upon " Lon^ - tong^ued Honey- 

 bees," I seem to have been misunderstood 

 in two important particulars. The first is 

 in reg'ard to the relation existing- between 

 tongue -leng-th and tongue -reach. In the 

 current volume of Gleanings, page 8, the 

 editor, in commenting upon my measure- 

 ments of bees' tongues, says, "It seems 

 there is no fixed relation between total 

 length of tongue and tongue-reach." Dr. 

 Miller, in the number for Feb. 15, page 145, 

 says, "One thing that seems to be settled 

 is that tongue reach is not determined by 

 tongue-lenglh," and refers to mj' measure- 

 ments to prove the statement. Similar com- 

 ments have been made in print by others. 



I tried to explain in my paper that I had 

 found it unsatisfactory to depend upon 

 tongue-reach directly measured, as I be- 

 lieved the measurements could not be de- 

 pended upon as being very acurate. I stat- 

 ed that, "If the tongue-reach seemed too 

 short when first measured, I could usually 

 increase it by two or three hundredths of 

 an inch by a little careful stretching." 

 This is not a real stretching, but a straight- 

 ening of the joints of the org-an which 

 tend to close upon one another like the 

 closing of a pocket-knife. I also said, "I 

 have considered the entire tongue-length 

 the best measurement upon which to base 

 conclusions as to tongue-reach." Also, "I 

 believe, for practical purposes, it may al- 

 ways be considered true that the bee with 

 the longest tongue has the longest possible 

 tongue-reach." 



I place no value whatever upon my mea- 

 surements of tongue-reach except to show 

 how variable and unreliable such measure- 

 ments are. If any one thinks a bee with a 

 shorter tongue can outreach another bee 

 with a longer tongue, the burden of proof 

 lies with him to show that such is the case, 

 for it seems very unreasonable that it could 

 be true. Is there any real evidence what- 

 ever that such is the case? 



The other point I wished to mention is 

 that some writers in bee-journals seem to 

 think that I expressed the opinion that bees 

 do not gather honey from red clover. I sim- 

 ply asked a very timid question. These 

 are the words: "It makes me wonder if it 

 is possible that those who think bees have 

 gathered honey from red clover can be 

 mistaken," and then followed the remark, 

 "This is only a suggestion." 



In this connection I might correct a wrong 

 impression that the editor of Gleanings 

 has in regard to the variation in length of 

 tongue of bumble-bees corresponding to the 

 age of the bees. In his comments upon my 

 paper on page 17 of the present volume, the 

 editor says, "Apparently the tongue-length 

 of bumble-bees varies consideriibly. This 

 might be accounted for by the difiFerence in 



ag-e of the bumble-bees measured. It will 

 be remembered that the bees of Apis mellif- 

 ica, when a week old, are as large as they 

 ever will be, while those of Bombus vary in 

 size considerably, according to age. " The 

 bumble-bee does not grow after leaving the 

 cell any more than a honey-bee. The small 

 bumble-bees in a nest are the workers; the 

 very large ones in the same nest are queens, 

 and the queens have longer tongues than 

 the workers. This is not surprising, as 

 the queens are also workers, and have to 

 do all the work of the nest or colony in the 

 spring until workers are reared to help her, 

 then she stays in the nest, for the most part, 

 and the little workers go out to collect nec- 

 tar and pollen. There are many species 

 of bumble-bees also in the same locality, 

 and these vary much in size and coloration. 

 The State Agricultural College, 



Fort Collins, Colorado, March 7. 



[What Prof. Gillette says is a good deal 

 true; but in measuring tongue-reach there 

 is one of our workmen who would get the 

 same results as myself, and we both mea- 

 sured according to the same plan. But I 

 can readily see that two different people 

 attempting to follow the same directions 

 Diiff/it measure the same tongue and get 

 different results so far as tongue-reach is 

 concerned. In my own experience a cer- 

 tain kind of combing of the tongue will 

 bring it just so far and no further ; and my 

 own measurements showed there was quite 

 a variation in tongue-reach. 



With regard to the honey in red clover, 

 my only purpose in referring to it was that 

 some who read what you said, even though 

 it was merely a suggestion, might get the 

 impression that there was no honey in red 

 clover. I merely desired to state that it 

 was definitely proven that red clover did 

 contain, some seasons, large quantities of 

 honey. — Ed.] 



SELLING HONEY. 



Plain, Practical Advice from a Practical Man. 



BY ADRIAN GETAZ. 



So much has been written on this subject 

 it is almost needless to go over the ground 

 again. In this paper I will mention only a 

 few points which have not received suffi- 

 cient attention. 



Honey can be sold to four different class- 

 es of buyers: 1. The wholesale merchants; 

 2. The commission merchants ; 3. The re- 

 tailers or grocers; 4. The consumers. 



Selling to the consumers is generally 

 called "peddling." Between the two first 

 classes of buyers there is little choice. I 

 would say that the ability and integrity of 

 the parties shoul.' be the principiil consid- 

 eration. 



If there is doubt as to the honesty of the 

 buyer, the commission merchant would be 

 the safer. The dishonest dealer who buys 

 outright may get your honey and never pay. 



