1S94 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



•).i3 



boginins to favor largor cnloni.-s. No such idea 

 ever entered my lu-ad at all. Besides, it would 

 be terribly expensive, not only to bee-keepers, 

 but to us as sui.ply-dealers, to change our pat- 

 terns, our -ngravings, and. in fact, our whole 

 catalog and machinery, all of which is especial- 

 ly adapt,'d to the hives and fixtures such as we 

 have recommended and still recommend. I 

 have tried to be honest with our readers, and 

 tried to get at the facts, no matter whether 

 they favored my views or not, or our conven- 

 ience as manufacturers ; and I mean to carry 

 out this course, even if it necessitates turning 

 our whole establishment upside down. Inci- 

 dentally it may be remarked that the supply- 

 dealers'should not only keep up with the times, 

 but be a little in advance of them, and at the 

 same time observe that conservative spirit that 

 will prevent rushing into new and useless 

 things. 



THE DIFFERKNT MAKES OF FOUNDATION AS 



TESTED AT THE MICHIGAN APICUL- 



TUHAI- EXPERIMENT STATION. 



In the Bee-keepers' Review for November, 

 Mr. R. L. Taylor gives a further detailed ac- 

 count of his experiments with different makes 

 of foundation. Mr. Taylor concerns himself 

 this time in the study of the" comparative 

 value of different samples of foundation," and 

 the"thinness to which bees work the septum 

 in drawing it into comb." He refers to " the 

 very earnest and commendable efforts " made at 

 the Root establishment, in the direction of im- 

 proving machinery for making foundation. 



The experiment it question was conducted to 

 verify or disprove a similar experiment of last 

 year; viz., what grades of foundation give the 

 thinnest septa, or bases, in the drawn-out 

 comb; or, in oiher words, show the least per- 

 ceptible amount of "fishbone" in eating the 

 comb honey made from the foundation. As 

 before, samples were obtained from the various 

 manufacturers, and these were put into hives, 

 drawn out, and filled with honey. A section of 

 comb made from each of the samples to be test- 

 ed was selected, extracted, and thoroughly 

 washed and dried, after which it was trimmed 

 to a given thickness— about half an inch. 

 These pieces were submitted to the weighing 

 test at the laboratory of Dr. Kedzie, of the 

 Agricultural College. They were then measur- 

 ed by Dr. Beal. of the same institution, to de- 

 termine the thinness of the septa. Other sam- 

 ples were sent to our establishment to be mea- 

 sured by our micrometer— the one we use in our 

 •own work. The samples were all lettered, so 

 it would be impossible for bias or self-interest 

 to creep in. The results are all carefully tabu- 

 lated—both the weights and measurements- 

 and it is remarkable how nearly the two har- 

 monize. Our own measurements and those of 

 Dr. Beal were averaged so as to get greater 

 accuracy. Well, now, the figures show that the 



Dadant foundation, when drawn out into comb, 

 had the thinnest septa; namely, Ta^^(>• ^^^^ 

 in order was a samph; of the Root. While 

 the Dadant registers the smallest fraction, so 

 f a- as the tlminess of the base is concerned, our 

 own, on the scales, showed the least treight. 

 Next in order came the Dadant and the Given. 

 Mr. Taylor then furnishes another table 

 showing the measurements of the various 

 makes of foundation for 1893 with those for 

 this year; and the comparison shows a decided 

 improvement with one exception, all of which 

 is very encouraging. 



In concluding. I can not do better than to 

 quote the summary in Mr. Taylor's own lan- 

 guage, which is as follows: 



1. In all cases except the Van Deusen there seems 

 to have been an improvement in the foundation 

 over that used in 189T; and in the ease of the Van 

 Deusen it is to be noted tliat the bees accepted only 

 the septum, which was shown by their removin<? the 

 cell-walls, and building, instead, more or less regu- 

 lar drone-cells. 



3. Most remarkable is the improvement in the 

 foundation made by Root and by the Dadants in so 

 far as the lightness of the septa is concerned. By a 

 comparison with the measurements of the septa of 

 the unworked foundation as shown in the table it 

 will be seen that the foundation has been so skill- 

 fully made that the bees have either pared down the 

 septa or else manipulated the entire wax of the 

 septa, using for them only what was necessary, so 

 that the resulting comb does not suffer at all, so far 

 as thinness is concerned, in comparison with the 

 natural comb. 



3. The same thinning process is very apparent in 

 the drawing-out of the Hunt foundation. 



4. In the case of the Van Deusen. and generally 

 in a greater or less degree in the case of that made 

 on the Given press, the process has been changed 

 to a thickening one. 



5. In point of tliinness of base of the comb pro- 

 duced, the foundations stand in the following order: 

 Tlie Dadant first; then in their order the Root, the 

 Given, the Hunt, and the Van Deusen. _ 



6. The comparison by weighing places them in 

 substantially the same order. Where there is vari- 

 ance it is reasonably accounted for by the difference 

 in the size of the cells. Thus the Van Deusen. had 

 it carried the amount of cell-walls that would have 

 been necessary for worker comli, would evidently 

 have been of considerably greater weight 



It would, of course, be of great interest to know 

 the methods and the peculiarities of the wax used 

 in making the foundation which seems to disclose 

 such a decided advance over what has been made 

 heretofore. It is to be hoped that the improvement 

 has been made wittingly, so that a knowledge of it 

 may be perpetuated if not disseminated. In order 

 to determine what the utmost existing skill and 

 knowledge could produce, the several manufactur- 

 ers were acquainted with the use to which the foun- 

 dation was to be put when it was ordered; and the 

 question arises, whether all the foundation made 

 was of equal quality. To determine this it is ap- 

 parent that future experiments should be made 

 with foundation so procured that it can not have 

 been made with the express purpose of having it 

 used for experimentation. 



