April 25, 1907 



357 



Aiii(>rican Hee Journal 



methods on problems conceded to be 

 practical, as to discuss the practical im- 

 port of questions now considered as 

 merely theoretical by most bee-keepers. 



At the Chicago meeting of this Asso- 

 ciation, I spoke at some length of the 

 need of better bees. Here is one place 

 where science can work untold wonders 

 for Apiculture. Of recent years breed- 

 ing has become a subject of very general 

 discussion, and much scientific work has 

 been done on variation and heredity, the 

 ground-work of breeding. By contin- 

 ually selecting first-class breeding ma- 

 terial a bee-keeper may improve his 

 stock until he really has a superior line 

 of bees. He cannot expect, however, to 

 make progress which will be lasting un- 

 less he knows something about the 

 hereditary transmission of characters, 

 and the variations according to the laws 

 of chance of all characters. The only 

 way for a bee-keeper to become a breed- 

 er is by studying scientific works, and 

 doing some work himself, and I regret 

 to say that very few of our queen-rear- 

 ers are doing this. Breeders in other 

 lines of work are studying and working 

 on these problems, and their results 

 can be read by breeders of queens. Here 

 science can help Apiculture. 



As an example of what science can 

 do for bee-keeping, take the work on 

 bee-diseases. We know the causes of 

 our two worst bee-diseases, and by com- 

 parisons (scientific method) we know 

 what to do to destroy disease. Without 

 scientific work on this subject the prac- 

 tical bee-keeper would be absolutely ig- 

 norant as to the nature of the different 

 diseases, and cures would be mere ac- 

 cidents. As an example of the inef- 

 fectiveness of efforts of practical men in 

 the face of a lack of scientific investiga- 

 tion we have only to cite the discus- 

 sions of bee-paralysis, as it is called. A 

 number of practical men, thoroughly 

 competent from a practical standpoint, 

 have undertaken to write on paralysijL, 

 and several cures have been advocated 

 for this particular disease. No one can 

 doubt, however, that we are still in ig- 

 norance of a universal cure and I am 

 inclined to the opinion that we will re- 

 main in this state until the cause of the 

 disease is determined by some one 

 thoroughly trained in methods of scien- 

 tific observation. In his book, "Bees 

 and Bee-Keeping," Cheshire mentions a 

 bacterium, Bacillus gaytom, which he 

 says causes the workers to become 

 shiny; but this is no proof that Bacillus 

 gaytoni causes paralysis. 



Bee-Keeping would be benefited by 

 work in various branches of science. 

 Take, for example, work in chemistry. 

 Those who have had anything to do 

 with having samples of honey analyzed 

 cannot fail to conclude that the work 

 that has been done so far is entirely un- 

 satisfactory, and that there is great need 

 of better methods of honey analysis. 

 The polariscope method is not reliable 

 enough so that adulteration can be 

 determined with certainty, because 

 honeys from o different sources differ 

 so greatly in their polarization. The 

 same condition is true to almost as great 

 an extent, of wax-analysis. 



While the bee-keeper must depend 

 largely upon natural forage, the fact 



still remains that the industry would 

 be greatly benefited by a careful study 

 of honey-producing floras. We need to 

 know the exact climatic and soil con- 

 ditions necessary to the growth of all 

 uur honey-plants so that they produce 

 nectar, for with such knowledge we 

 would be able to make plantings of 

 value. The exact geographical distribu- 

 tion of the honey-producing plants, and 

 the marking out of the areas in which 

 given plants secrete nectar, would help 

 greatly. 



The bee-keeper would be greatly bene- 

 fited by better information as to the 

 function of the bee in fertilizing flowers. 

 ,\t present it often happens that there 

 are times when bees are looked on as 

 very detrimental, but if the apiarist has 

 an array of actual facts to present in 

 place of the generalities now indulged 

 in by the journals, it would have more 

 weight with municipalities which try to 

 banish bees, and in similar cases. 



And now as to scientific work on the 

 bees themselves ; Those present may 

 remember the bootless discussion in the 

 bee-journals some time back as to 

 whether bees pack pollen into cells with 

 their heads. In the face of such dis- 

 cussions the question might well be 

 asked why some one did not look. It 

 was argued that the head of the bee 

 is hard, and that it could pack pollen 

 if it wished to; but the writers were 

 content to argue, and not investigate, 

 reminding one very forcibly of the aca- 

 demic discussions of the middle ages. 



Properly constructed observation hives 

 are of some value in such a case. For- 

 tunately or otherwise, we have a few 

 writers for apicultural papers who feel 

 fully competent to cope with any sub- 

 ject connected with bees, but just how 

 much weight w'C may give to their ex- 

 pressed opinions can be determined only 

 when we find out how much observa- 

 tion they have made. Random discus- 

 sions based on compilation of obsolete 

 work are of meager value. 



There are numerous facts concerning 

 the habits of bees inside the hive which 

 are highly important from a purely 

 practical standpoint, which can be de- 

 termined only by scientific observation. 

 In spite of the fact that the bee-keepers 

 have for years made observations con- 

 cerning the swarming of bees, we still 

 do not know just what it is that causes 

 a swarm to issue. This is of paramount 

 importance. Possibly some of these 

 problems will forever foil the investi- 

 gator, but it does not pay to be pessi- 

 mistic. 



We know that under certain condi- 

 tions queen-cells are started, and we al- 

 so know that there are some conditions 

 under which the workers feed the royal 

 larvae better than others. By the use of 

 the swarm-box we are able to produce 

 these conditions of superior feeding so 

 that the larva; are fed as well as dur- 

 ing preparation for swarming, but we 

 still do not know why it is that this con- 

 finement produces the effect of the 

 "swarming fever." If we could but 

 analyze the swarming impulse we would, 

 beyond all doubt, be able to devise vast- 

 ly superior methods of queen-rearing. 

 It need scarcely be pointed out, also, 

 that a knowledge of swarming would 

 enable us to devise methods to prevent 



that bane to the bee-keeper, and this 

 would benefit many more betvkeepers 

 than better methods of queen-rearing. 



We need also but mention the desir- 

 ability of knowing the methods used 

 by bees in storing surplus honey. This 

 is important. If honey is first deposited 

 in the brood-chamber and then carried 

 to the surplus chamber, then it is impor- 

 tant that care be exercised in feeding 

 sugar syrup, for under such circum- 

 stances any sugar syrup left from the 

 feeding for winter or spring stimulation 



ould possibly reach the super, and the 

 bee-keeper be open to the charge of 

 adulteration. If such is not the case 

 sugar-feeding before supers are put on 

 is justifiable; but this can be determined 

 only by scientific investigation. The 

 care of larvae is an unknown factor in 

 bee-life, as well as many other points 

 which may have an exceedingly import- 

 ant bearing on practical work. 



As far as the hearing of bees is con- 

 cerned, we may be safe in saying that 

 it matters little to the bee-keeper wheth- 

 er bees hear or not, but, still, almost 

 every bee-man wants to know. No or- 

 gan of hearing has yet been discovered, 

 and the evidence that bees hear is ex- 

 tremely meager. In spite of this fact 

 the majority of persons familiar with 

 bees believe that bees do hear. The 

 arguments generally advanced as proof 

 of this are absolutely valueless, and we 

 await impatiently a scientific investiga- 

 tion. 



Not only will Apiculture be benefited 

 by new scientific work on subjects re- 

 lating directly to bees, but comparisons 

 with results obtained in other fields will 

 yield results of great value. Bee-keep- 

 ing is not a science entirely apart from 

 all others, but is most intimately con- 

 nected with many sciences. For exam- 

 ple, if we look at bee-keeping from the 

 standpoint of breeding it becomes evi- 

 dent that it is not necessary that all the 

 principles of bee-breeding be worked 

 out on bees. From multitudes of results 

 in such work it is evident that a few 

 underlying principles are concerned in 

 the improvement of a species, race, or 

 variety, by selection ; it matters not in 

 the least to the bee-breeder whether 

 these principles are discovered by work 

 on bees. There are already scores and 

 hundreds of papers detailing the meth- 

 ods used by the breeders of other spec- 

 ies, and these papers await the persons 

 who are to take up the one great prob- 

 lem of Apiculture. Improved appliances 

 and manipulations are valuable, but 

 their importance becomes infinitesimal 

 when considered with the improvement 

 of the bees themselves. The problem 

 is so great that it is not to be wondered 

 that it has not been undertaken syste- 

 matically, but the day will come when 

 it is begun, and then the results of other 

 scientific breeders will be of inestimable 

 value. 



The second great problem which con- 

 fronts American bee-keepers is the dis- 

 eases to which bee-flesh is heir. Per- 

 haps no one factor is so great a draw- 

 back to advance in Apiculture. The 

 two virulent diseases of the brood are 

 spreading through the States of the 

 Union at a rate which is truly appalling, 

 and heroic measures are necessary. I 

 do not wish to become an alarmist, but 



