-8- 



BEVim OF LITERATURE 0^ BEE RSPELLHITS 



Since certain individuals are urging the use of so-called repellents 

 in spraying as a possible safeguard for bees, the following sfuramary of experi- 

 mental work is presented* 



One of the earliest known references to the use of bee repellents was 

 the reconnendation in 190D of carbolic acid for this purpose. 



In 1921, Melander conducted some tests to detejrmine the value of several 

 naterials as repellents. Among his conclusions are the following: (1) Creosote, 

 craosol and carbolic acid are -^ery repellent. (2) Carbon disulfide, nicotine 

 sulfate and napthalene are quite repellent. 



In 1922, Morse in eastern Massachusetts, suggested the use of a proprie- 

 tary cresol confound, "Milkpl." The only "evidence" was that bee losses were 

 reduced even though all shade trees had been sprayed, 



Dadant, 1923, declared that liiae sulfur and bordeaux mixture were repel- 

 lent to bees. He stated that these materials, mixed with spray solutions, 

 would prevent bees from sucking up the poison. 



Bourne, 1927, stated that nicotine sulfate acted as a repellent. Bees 

 v/hich had a choice of blossoms sprayed with solutions containing nicotine sul- 

 fate or untreated blossoms alv/ays preferred the latter. 



In 1936, Root declared that the odor of creosote was not offensive to 

 bees so far as is known, 



Bottchor, 1937, stated that nicotine, lime sulfur, and sodium fluoride 

 or sodium fluosilicate act as repellents. 



Southv;ick, 1928 and later, has insisted that creosote, at the rate of one 

 pint to 100 gallons of spray solution, is an effective bee repellent. He states 

 that the use of this material has reduced bee losses. 



Milum, 1940, stated that llilkol had been used as a repellent apparently 

 with good results . He also thought that Black Leaf 155 might have some value 

 since its residue would contain nicotine. 



In 1941, Shaw and Mendall tested many materials including creosote, tar 

 oil, phenol compounds, Milkol, naphthalene and alpha and beta naphthols. The 

 number of visits of bees to treated foliage in all cases V^as less than to the 

 untreated foliage. The materials were applied by means of a compressed air 

 sprayer. It is realized that agitation might not have been adequate even 

 though the sprayer was shaken thoroughly before any spraying was done. In 

 all Milkol combinations, from alight to moderate blossom injury occurred. Both 

 creosote and tar oil compounds produced severe blossom injury. 



In 1942, Butler stated that in England no very Satisfactory results had 

 been obta ined with creosote and its use at present is not recomi:iended. 



— F. R. Shaw 



