732 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



The 'Wasp and the Bee. 



A wasp met a bee that was just buzzing by, 

 And said, " Little cousin, can you tell me why. 

 You are loved so much bettor by people than I? 



" My back sliiues as bright and as yellow as 



gold, 

 And my shape is most elegant, too. to behold. 

 Yet nobody likes me for that, I am told." 



" Ah, cousin !" the bee said, " 'tis all very true. 

 But if T were half as much mischief to do, 

 Indeed they would love me no better than you. 



■' You have a fine shape, and a delicate wing ; 

 They own j-ou are handsome, but then there's 



one thing 

 They cannot put up with, and that is— your 



sting. 



" My coat is quite homely and plain, as you see. 

 Yet nobody ever is angry with me, 

 Because I'm a harmless and diligent bee." 



From this little story let people beware. 

 Because, lilvc the wasp, if ill-natured they are, 

 They will never be loved,if they're ever so fair. 

 —Chatterbox. 



Queries ajid Replies. 



Drones from an Onfertilizel Oiieen, 



Query 821. — Suppose we take a 

 queenless colony of bees at the time 

 when there are no drones, and give 

 thera some eggs ; they rear a queen, and 

 she is not fertilized, as there are no 

 drones, and the result will finally bo a 

 hive full of drones. Are the drones 

 roared from that unfertilized queen of 

 any value for breeding purposes '?- Calif. 



Yes. — Mrs. L. Harrison. 



It is said not. — Mrs, J. N. Hp;atkr. 



Yes, certainly. Why not? — Dadant 



& Son. 



Theory says they are, but I doubt it. — 

 E. France. 



I do not know. No one does. I think 

 not. — J. A. Green. 



With the microscope, I can discover 

 no difference. — II. U. Cuttino. 



I should consider such drones of no 

 use for fertilizing purposes. — C. II. Dib- 



BERN. 



I don't know. Some of the best au- 

 thorities say they are. — C. C. Miller. 



I am told they are good, but I have 

 never tested the matter. — P. H. Elwood. 



If reared under favorable circum- 

 stances, I know of no reason why they 

 would not be as good as any. — R. L. 

 Taylor. 



I believe they are. I have reason to 

 believe that I have had queens fertilized 

 by drones from eggs of laying workers. 

 — M. Mahin. 



I guess so. I guess they are perfect, 

 according to the accepted theory. I am 

 pretty busy producing honey about those 

 days. — James Heddon. 



Authorities say so, so far as the repro- 

 ductive functions are concerned, but 

 should the queen bo from a colony of 

 worthless blacks, I would say no. — J. 

 M. Hambaugh. 



I have no doubt but that they are as 

 good as any. There are those, however, 

 who say no. The microscope detects no 

 reason why they may not be entirely 

 virile. — A. J. Cook. 



Some doubts have been expressed in 

 regard to this matter, but in my opinion 

 they are not. In this opinion I am 

 aware that many differ, but it is safe to 

 follow it. — J. E. Pond. 



If they were developed in drone-cells 

 they would be capable of performing the 

 functions of fertilization ; but if devel- 

 oped in worker-cells it would bo doubtful 

 if they would be of any service. — J. P. 

 H. Brown. 



No such result as a "hive full of 

 drones " will occur, unless worker brood 

 is added to keep up the strength of the 

 colony. There is a difference of opinion 

 as to the value of drones from an un- 

 fertile queen.— G. M. Doolittle. 



I don't know, but I think " yes." With 

 some other insects I believe it is a recog- 

 nized fact that several generations are 

 produced without fertilization, after 

 ,wliich the other sex is produced. Dzier- 

 zon thought that drones from laying 

 workers are virile. — Eugene Secor. 



I liad such a queen once, and tried to 

 get an early lot of queens mated to her 

 drones, but not one of tiie queens be- 

 canui fertile until drones from colonies 

 with fertile queens began to lly. Others 

 have had tln^ same experience; lumce, it 

 is b(dieved that in some way the drones 

 of unfertilized quctus arc impotent. — G. 

 L. Tinker. 



