186 



THE AMERICAN APICULTURIST, 



you mean two or three thousand pounds, 

 don't you? He didn't know wliat to say. 

 I don't suppose that he ever heard of that 

 much honey before in his life. I sliowed 

 him in my honey room. He was amazed. 

 I thiiilv when he left he was satisfied that 

 I knew more about bees than he did. I 

 have fifty colonies now, not in altogether 

 as good condition as I could wish. I only 

 got about two hundred and fifty pounds 

 of honey this year all told. 

 Salado, Texas, Dec. 27, 1878. 



Gleaninffs in Bee Culture, 



Brood Combs— Some practical 

 points by Dr. C. C. Miller. 



How many cells to the inch? How thick 



are they? How long does it pay to 



keep them? etc. 



On page 898, friend Koot, you straighten 

 me up as to the size of worker-cells, for 

 whicli I am obliged. I had Clieshire's 

 book and the ABC for authority. Let 

 nie, then, amend the figures, counting 24 

 cells to five inches. At tliat rate there are 

 26.6 cells to the square inch, so that it 

 will be nearer the truth to say tliere are 

 27 cells to tiie square inch tiian to call it 

 25. In order to make foundation which 

 should contain 25 cells to the square inch, 

 we must have 4.65 cells to the inch, or cells 

 of such size that 2Z\ cells, side by side, 

 shall measure five inches. These are not 

 matters of the greatest importance, but 

 we may as well have them nearly correct. 



Thickness of worker-comb. 

 How thick is it? I have been very un- 

 fortunate in my search, or else the books 

 are very silent upon this point. Dzierzou, 

 in his book, calls it about an inch in thick- 

 ness, and Prof. Cook, in his Manual, says : 

 "The depth of the worker-cells is a little 

 less than half an inch." I think in general 

 it is considered about seven-eighths of an 

 inch. I measured an empty comb, in 

 which probably not more than two or three 

 generations of brood had l)een raised, and 

 it measured just seven-eighths ol an inch, 

 as nearly as I could tell with a connnon 

 rule. Then I ineasured one black with 

 nniny years' service and it measuied a lull 

 inch in thickness. In the first case the 

 division wall was a very thin afi'air; but 

 in the old comb it was an eighth of an inch 

 in thickness, the additional thickness be- 

 ing inatle up of successive layers left by 

 the many generations of brood. Tliis dif- 

 ference in thickness, along with some other 

 things, makes me thiidi it possibly worth 

 while to reconsider the questiou. 



At what age should brood-combs 

 be renewed? 



I had laid this upon the shelf as a set- 

 tled question, saying that I had used combs 

 twenty-five years old and could see no 

 difl'erence between bees raised in them and 

 bees raised in new combs. But if, in the 

 course of years, a lining is left in the cells 

 sufficient to increase the division wall an 

 eighth of an inch, may there not have been 

 a dift'ereuce in the size of bees raised that 

 would have been noticed by a more care- 

 ful observer? Not long ago a writer in 

 The Ladies' Home Journal advised, if I 

 remember rightly, tlnit brood-combs more 

 than two years old should be renewed. 

 Undoubtedly that is rather wild advice; 

 but in the British Bee Journal for Nov. 10, 

 1887 (and the B. B. J. is not addicted to 

 giving wild advice), occurs the following : 

 "We may fairly suppose that three batches 

 of brood are hatched from the same cells 

 — taking the brood-nest only — In every 

 season. In five years, therefore, we shall 

 have fifteen layers of exuviae in these cells 

 provided they are not removed by the 

 bees, which experience seems to prove 

 they are not. The brood-cells, conse- 

 quently, are much reduced in size at this 

 age and the bees reared will be small in 

 size. We have used the same combs for 

 fifteen years without a bi'eak, when the 

 brood-cells became so diminutive that the 

 bees hatched therefrom were a pigmy race 

 and the combs vvei'e as black as Erebus, 

 and pollen-clogged. This was before the 

 days of foundation. With our present ad- 

 vantages we do not think it profitable to 

 use combs longer than four or five years." 

 Dziei'zon, in his book, p. 28, says : "Tiie 

 more frequently a comb has been used for 

 breeding, the darker will be its color and 

 the thicker the walls of the cells, the lat- 

 ter becoming more and more narrow and 

 less and less fit for use, so that in time it 

 becomes necessary for the combs to be 

 renewed, although in case of need the bees 

 themselves partiy remove the casings, or 

 even pull down tiie cells entirely." 



Now, I suppose there are a great many 

 like myself, with combs by the thousand 

 more than four or five years old. AYe do 

 not want to have the ti'ouble and expense 

 of renewing all these; but if there is any 

 gain in it, we must do it. Although some 

 of these things have si)niewhat shaken my 

 former views, I confess I am anxious not 

 to be convinced that it is necessary to re- 

 move combs four or five years old, and 

 will be obliged for any facts that may help 

 to slitten my faith. 



Looking at the old coinl) an inch thick 

 and pulling it apart, I find it has a division 

 wall made chiefiy by the successive depos- 

 its left by the brood ut the bottom of the 



