372 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



odor is one of the conditions; but it is not 

 the only one. The caging- method of intro- 

 ducing is the one commonly recommended 

 by the commercial queen-breeders to their 

 ■customers. It is simple, convenient, and in 

 most cases it gives good results. In our 

 -own apiary it rarely fails. Why do we 

 •believe in the odor theory? We may cite 

 ■a, few instances that will help to explain 

 our position : 



The ordinary queen that has traveled 

 from a hundred to a thousand miles in the 

 mails acquires a variety of odors that are 

 foreign to the inside of the liive. It is well 

 known that a queen from the mails is hard- 

 er to introduce than one out of the same 

 yard, especially if the latter is introduced 

 wliile in the height of her egg-laying from 

 a vigorous colony. The odor of a fresh- 

 laying queen is an important factor in suc- 

 cessful introduction. The bees know that 

 she has been recently at her job. Indeed, 

 she has so much of the general colony odor 

 that they may not know that a change of 

 queens has taken place. In this connection 

 we recognize that there may or may not be 

 a specific colony odor; but we believe there 

 is. We will refer to this later. 



Now, then, the object of caging a queen 

 just from the mails, before letting her loose, 

 is to let her get rid of the variety of odors 

 foreign to a hive, and at the same time let 

 her acquire a general colony odor. The ob- 

 ject of caging is not alone for the purpose 

 of getting the odor right, but for the pur- 

 pose of letting the queen get out of her con- 

 finement quietly and without disturbance. 

 When the queen and the bees eat out the 

 candy, she works herself into the presence 

 of her subjects so gradually and so easily 

 that there is no disturbance, and she begins 

 her duty shortly as if nothing had ever 

 happened. The object of caging then is for 

 a twofold purpose — like odor, and entrance 

 into the colony without disturbance. 



We haye recommended the caging in pref- 

 erence to the various methods of direct in- 

 troduction because we believe that the aver- 

 age beginner will succeed better with them. 

 The method described by our correspondent 

 may be better, but requires an exact proce- 

 dure, some details of which the average 

 novice and some veterans might inadver- 

 tently omit. 



A little way back we spoke of the impor- 

 tance of a like odor in a colony. We have 

 for years practiced what we call dual and 

 sometimes plural introduction — that is to 

 say, there may be two or more virgin queens 

 caged at the same time in a nucleus. Virgin 

 No. 1, caged first, will be released. If ac- 



cepted she will soon be laying, when she 

 \^dll be removed and No. 2 is released. She 

 has been in the hive or nucleus for several 

 days; has the same odor as the queen just 

 removed. No. 2 begins to lay, when she is 

 finally succeeded by No. 3, and so on the 

 process of caging and removing proceeds. 

 While one queen is getting ready to lay, the 

 other is acquiring the nucleus or colony 

 odor. 



Now as to the question whether a colony 

 has an individual odor. We do not know 

 how the inmates of the hive would recog- 

 nize that the outside bees were robbers un- 

 less there were an individual odor to each 

 colony. Again, in uniting, two strains of 

 bees will often fight, sometimes utterly an- 

 nihilating each other. A little tobacco smoke 

 or even common smoke obscures the distinct 

 colony odor so that all smell alike of tobacco 

 or common smoke. Mr. Miller possibly holds 

 the view that the disturbance arising from 

 the use of the smoke brings on a condition 

 of demoralization that obliterates the fight- 

 ing qualities. We admit that on this point 

 he may be right. Neither do we say that he 

 may be wrong in regard to the odor theory 

 in the general subject of introducing. 



Right in this connection we believe that 

 the plan here outlined by our correspondent 

 for direct introduction by the use of smoke 

 is a good one; but it is our opinion that 

 two elements — odor of smoke and disturb- 

 ance — make up a combination that insures 

 the success of the plan, although we admit 

 that either one alone would be sufficient in 

 most cases. 



There are several interesting facts that 

 Mr. Miller brings out in his valuable article 

 to all of which we give assent, except that 

 we attach more imj^ortance to the odor the- 

 ory than he does, and at the same time we 

 believe that the caging, plan for the novice 

 is the safer one to follow. The average be- 

 ginner might make the mistake of closing 

 up a colony over-populous on a veiy warm 

 day, and that would make trouble. It is a 

 little difficult to tell him when he may and 

 may not do tliis. But almost anybody can 

 follow the directions to lay the cage on the 

 top of the brood-nest, and let the bees do 

 the I'est. 



In this connection we believe the push-in- 

 the-comb-eage plan of introducing would 

 be better than the eat-out-candy plan; but 

 we have hesitated to give it to our customers 

 for fear that they might not get the cage 

 properly adjusted on the comb. 



This is a good question for discussion, 

 and we should be glad to hear from othei-s, 

 — Ed.1 



