106 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



" [For the American Bee Journal.] 



Prolific and Long-lived Queens. 



For the past rive years I have been experi- 

 menting in regard to the longevity and fertility 

 of queens. In some respects I may differ from 

 all other writers or writings on this subject, 

 that I am acquainted with. But the reader 

 will bear in mind that an old experienced api- 

 arian is not so liable to be mistaken or jump at 

 conclusions, as one with less experience, or a 

 novice in the business. 



It is a fact that cannot be disputed that some 

 queens are more prolific than others ; and the 

 question arises how can we secure all proMfic 

 queens ? The first swarm of bees I ever owned 

 I kept for twelve years ; and, as I said in a 

 previous article, I never failed of having a pro- 

 lific queen in said swarm in the whole twelve 

 years. The com wa3 all worker comb. I had 

 swarms whose comb was nearly all drone comb, 

 and at different times, I exchanged the queens 

 to see whether the fault was in the queen or in 

 the comb. And I invariably found that there 

 was no difference in the fertility of queens of 

 the same age. The queen put in where there 

 is but little brood comb would breed but little, 

 and vice versa. But these were all natural 

 queens. Natural queens, or queens raised in a 

 strong swarm, at swarming time, are almost in- 

 variably started from the egg, and fed on royal 

 food from the beginning. Such queens are in 

 their prime the second season, and do not show 

 any signs of failure until the third season, or 

 sometimes not until the fourth. They are in- 

 variably very prolific, provided they have a 

 chance. On the contrary a queen that is started 

 from the larva or grub, varies in length of life 

 according to the number of days it was fed on 

 worker food. For example, an eight days 

 queen, hatched in May or June, has invariably 

 failed the first season. They are but little if 

 any longer-lived than a common worker. A 

 ten days queen fails the second season. What 

 I mean by this is, a queen hatched in eight or 

 ten days from the time the nucleus is made up, 

 or from the time a full swarm is deprived of its 

 queen. Nearly all writers give ten days as the 

 shortest term ; but I have at different times had 

 them come out in eight days, and in one case in 

 particular I examined a nucleus before sunrise 

 on the eighth day, and found the queen out and 

 all the other cells,, seven in number, destroyed. 

 This was in May, 1867, and said queen died of 

 old age in August following. (A friend writes 

 me from New York State that he has this sea- 

 son had one come out on the seventh day. ) 

 Consequently an eight day queen is or has been 

 fed on worker food five days, that is allowing 

 sixteen days for a natural queen, from the time 

 the egg is laid ; and I have had a considerable 

 number of queens that did not come out of their 

 cell until the seventeenth day after the swarm 

 was deprived of its queen. In the case of my 

 neighbor Mr. Harding's bees, after making four 

 swarms from one, and taking out the last queen 

 cell, as he supposed, and leaving one queen, 

 his wife informed me, on the morning of the 

 eighteenth day from the time the old queen was 



taken away, that the queens were still piping in 

 the old swarm. (The weather had been ex- 

 tremely fine and pleasant). To satisfy myself, 

 I went and examined the hive, and found one 

 queen in the cell, having been retained there 

 by the workers. I opened the cell, took the 

 queen, and introduced her to a queenless colo- 

 ny belonging to another neighbor. She proves 

 to be an extra prolific queen. Most writers say 

 that all queen cells hang perpendicular, or near- 

 ly so, when completed, or the queen hangs head 

 downward. I have had as many as five in one 

 hive in horizontal cells. The only difference 

 was, the cell was a trifle enlarged at the outer 

 end, and capped over similarly to a drone cell, 

 only somewhat more elongated or rounded at 

 the point. I know by experience, that such 

 cells are frequently found ; but queens raised 

 in them are not worth keeping, except for ex- 

 periment. Now the question arises, how is the 

 novice to raise prolific and long-lived queens ? 

 Answer : either by waiting until natural cells at 

 swarming time are built and sealed, and then 

 transferring them to nuclei ; or by taking out a 

 swarm with the old queen, as I recommended 

 in a former article, headed " How to make 

 natural swarms artificially." By taking out 

 a swarm in that way, and leaving the old 

 swarm on its old stand, the bees do not appear 

 to be in such a hurry to raise queens, as when 

 deprived of their queen and placed on a strange 

 stand. Old swarms or nuclei deprived of their 

 queens at unnatural seasons, are more apt to 

 raise eight or ten days' queens, thau they are 

 when deprived at the natural season for raising 

 queens. Queens raised in a strong nucleus, or 

 a strong swarm, when forage is abundant, I am 

 inclined to think are better than those raised in 

 small nuclei, weak swarms, or when forage is 

 scarce, on the same principle that a full fed calf 

 makes a better cow than a half-starved one. I 

 picked up an old paper this summer, with an 

 article in it from Bidwell Brothers, of St. Paul, 

 Minnesota. I saw from it that they have ar- 

 rived at nearly the same conclusions that I 

 have, in regard to forced or unnatural queens. 

 And in their circular, they advertise and war- 

 rant their queens to be all prolific, &c. There 

 are scarcely any queens sent out by queen rais- 

 ers, that prove to be good for anything the 

 second season, for this reason, they are nearly 

 all forced or unnatural. On the 2Gth of June, I 

 received three queens from W. W. Cary. 

 They all commenced breeding about alike, and 

 for the first three weeks I could discover no 

 difference between them in their fertility. But 

 after three weeks one began to fail, and by the 

 10th of August, she died with feebleness and 

 old age. Another commenced failing soon after, 

 but she is still alive, October 17. One out of 

 the three still holds out in her fertility. As I 

 said, in a former article, their purity proves 

 satisfactory. Now, I do not wish to be under- 

 stood as finding fault witli Mr. C, or any other 

 queen-raiser, for sending out such queens ; but 

 merely desire to call their attention to the sub- 

 ject. The practical queen-raiser will readily 

 see that there is some reason why a queen 

 raised from the egg, and fed on royal food from 

 the start, should be longer-lived and more pro- 



