666 



Aug. 2, 1906 



American Ttee Journal 



mology, I produced enough Caucasian drones to stock a 

 queen-breeding yard with an output of 2,000 queens a year, and 

 this could have been done with half that number to advan- 

 tage. I may also add that pure matings were secured in the 

 very large majority of cases, although that apiary is far 

 from being isolated : mention this to show that more drones 

 are unnecessary. 



We have pedigreed horses and cows, and even pedigreed 

 corn and wheat; why not pedigreed bees? I think I am not 

 asking too much. I hope the day will come when the breed- 

 ers will advertise as follows: 



"I am this year using my celebrated breeding queen 

 Smith 168, which is the mother of a colony which last year 

 produced 50 per cent more honey than my average colony. 

 This queen is the descendent of 6 purely mated queens, 

 all of which were mothers of colonies producing over 300 

 pounds of honey a year. For drones I am using 5 queens, 

 all of which are mothers of colonies which last year pro- 

 duced over 300 pounds each." 



This is not visionary by any means, for it is exactly 

 what breeders of other stock are doing; and it is pleasant to 

 note that some wide-awake queen-breeders are doing almost 

 that now. 



There is the recorded case of a colony producing 1,000 

 pounds of honey in one year; of course this was in a good 

 season, and under careful manipulation, but think what a 

 valuable queen was lost when that queen was not made the 

 mother of a long line of breeders to be distributed all over 

 the United States. Few honey-producers are so situated 

 that each colony can produce any such amount of honey, but 

 it is necessary to aim high. 



There are two points which require additional considera- 

 tion. The first is the desirability of breeding the race pure. 

 Crosses or hybrids are so variable that they should be avoided 

 except when necessary. Let me quote from Dr. W. E. Cas- 

 tle, of Harvard University, on this point : 



"Since cross-breeding is likely to modify characters even 

 when these conform to the laws of alternative inheritance, 

 and is certain to modify them when they give blended in- 

 heritance, it should be practiced with extreme caution, and 

 only by the breeder who has a definite end in view, and a 

 fairly clear idea of how he is going to attain it. 



"The purity of standard breeds should be carefully 

 guarded, and much attention should be given pedigrees, for 

 even when individual excellence is not apparent, it may be 

 present in recessive or else in a latent state, which suitable 

 matings will bring into full realization, provided the ancestors 

 were superior animals. 



"At the same time the breeder should be on the lookout 

 for individual peculiarities of merit. And he should not be 

 discouraged if these are not transmitted to the immediate off- 

 spring. A simple character which disappears from the chil- 

 dren, but reappears among the grandchildren, can at once 

 be made a racial character, for it is recessive in heredity." 



The breeder who uses a mixture of races for breeding is 

 doing something which is very likely to cause him trouble. 

 There is very little necessity under present conditions for this, 

 since a good race may be chosen as a foundation stock which 

 can be surpassed by crossing, only with difficulty, and careful 

 and systematic selection within the race will bring almost 

 as good results with the great advantage of more stability — ■ 

 a point of vital consideration. Let me make this point a little 

 more clear. There is reason to believe that, where some 

 queen-breeder takes up the improvement of bees by cross- 

 ing, he will outstrip all the rest. He will induce greater 

 variability, and will, consequently, have a greater range of 

 material for selection ; he will be enabled to combine the 

 desirable traits of two or more races, and, at the same time, 

 if proper care is used, eliminate the undesirable traits. This 

 can be done purposely only by a person who has a most 

 thorough understanding of heredity and variation and no one 

 else should undertake it, for there is otherwise too great a 

 danger of bringing out all the undesirable traits and losing 

 the good ones. This, then, is why pure races are generally 

 so essential ; when the proper men take hold of crosses they 

 will get great results, but the majority of breeders should 

 not risk the handling of fire in that way, and, as for the 

 rank and file of bee-keepers, it is, I think, absolute folly. 

 A bee-keeper may say that he cares nothing for races; that 

 all he wants is honey. All this is very true, but he cannot 

 afford to overlook the fact that nature has laws which he. 

 with all his independence, dares not disregard. I consider the 



bee-keeper who fills his apiary with what we may call scrub 

 hybrid stock as a poor bee-keeper. 



The second point is the common prejudice against in- 

 breeding. I can do no better on this point than to quote from 

 Mr. N. W. Gentry, who is well known as an extensive breeder 

 in Berkshire hogs. Mr. Gentry has for years practiced in- 

 breeding, and before the Champaign meeting of the Ameri- 

 can Breeders' Association, in February, 1905, he said: 



'From father to son for generations has been handed 

 down the common belief that inbreeding of animals pro- 

 duces offspring of less vigor, less vitality, less constitution in 

 proportion to the extent to which it is carried on contin- 

 uously, and this belief seems to have been accepted as true 

 without any proving by the very great majority. My ex- 

 perience has led me to believe otherwise, or rather that such 

 results need not necessarily be true. 



"Neither inbreeding nor the reverse will be a success 

 unless matings are made with animals suited to each other, 

 that is, having no weakness in common, if possible, and as 

 much good in common as possible. This, in my opinion, is 

 the key to success in all breeding operations and success will 

 come in no other way. In my opinion inbreeding as a rule 

 is very good or very bad." 



"I have watched results of inbreeding in my herd for 

 years, and until I can discover some evil effects from it — 

 and I have not yet — I shall continue to practice it." 



Mr. Gentry has one exceptional boar known as Long- 

 fellow 16,835; ne sa Y s concerning the stock: 



"In my breeding operations I reasoned that if the Long- 

 fellow blood was the best to be found (and I have no reason 

 to change my mind yet), and, if I used a boar not related at 

 all, as most would advise, I would lose at first cross half 

 this good blood, and upon another like cross a quarter more, 

 leaving them only one-fourth the Longfellow blood. This 

 I reasoned would be losing a good thing too rapidly. I 

 think I have continued to improve my herd, being now able 

 to produce a larger percentage of really superior animals 

 than at any time in the past." 



In breeding it is generally believed that inbreeding is 

 detrimental or fatal, but, fortunately, breeders are now see- 

 ing that the idea is usually without foundation. Of course, 

 inbreeding accentuates common weaknesses but we should 

 use it in accentuating strength, as it will when properly 

 directed. Think what it would have meant to bee-keeping 

 if the blood of the Cyprian queen whose bees produced 1,000 

 pounds of honey had been preserved by inbreeding; and what 

 it will mean if some of the present good queens are kept 

 by this method. I do not advocate universal inbreeding, for 

 it is well known that inbreeding is, generally speaking, not 

 natural, but, even in nature,' it is frequent, and it is by no 

 means universally true that it is detrimental. Therefore, if 

 there is reason to think that it is best, it should be fearlessly 

 practiced. How this prejudice against inbreeding arose, I do 

 not know, but we all know how general it is. Nevertheless, 

 it is true, that the breeders of stock who now practice it are 

 the ones who are getting results of lasting value. On one 

 or two points, I do not wish to be misunderstood. I 

 do not wish to condemn the breeding for color or for long 

 tongues. I really consider color selection a fad, but 

 there are those who prefer the lighter colored bees, and as 

 long as there is a market it will pay to select them. Long 

 tongues would be an advantage doubtless but in whatever 

 way we are breeding let us not forget that increased honey- 

 production is the essential. If these bees have longer tongues, 

 all right and well, but the selection should be made by the 

 scales. 



Now you may ask whether in the work of the Bureau 

 of Entomology this problem is to be taken up. I can make 

 no promises for the future, for I am not in a position to 

 outline future policy, but whoever takes up scientific breed- 

 ing of bees will do a good work, and results seem certain 

 enough. It is not my purpose to confine myself to promises 

 for I do not like to make promises for fear that I may 

 not be able to fulfill them, but I hope this may be done by 

 some one. It may not be out of place to say here that the 

 idea of having any outside aid for this work which it was 

 suggested that I do, was entirely that of Professor Cook and 

 had neither ray sanction nor approval, either before or after 

 publication. I desire no such assistance. 



But to leave general experimental aniculture, it mav not 

 be amiss if I speak of the work of the Bureau of Ento- 



