24 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



January 



frames. So we have both kinds, and 

 1 now propose to give the weak points 

 and good points of each style, from 

 my viewpoint. 



First let me say that neither I nor 

 any one else has any interest what- 

 ever in supporting the Dadant hive, 

 outside of the idea of progress. Those 

 who read of the Dadant hives being 

 used as far away as Russia, Siberia, 

 Argentine, Morocco, perhaps think 

 that some Dadant agent has been sell- 

 ing hives in those countries, to the 

 profit of the Dadants. Not by any 

 means. Not a single Dadant hive has 

 been sold or even offered in any coun- 

 try, outside of the United States, at 

 any time, and the only hives which 

 we have ever shipped across were 

 those donated to the Franco-Belgian 

 fund and half a dozen pattern hives 

 sent in 1920, to Ancona, Italy. Other 

 companies, who sell bee supplies all 

 over the world, can testify to the 

 truth of this. Their goods, and not 

 Dadant's, except foundation, have 

 been sold in far-away countries. The 

 Dadant hive was never patented and 

 has been adopted through the reading 

 of the Langstroth-Dadant book, and 

 in no other way. 



Now to the loose-hanging frame 

 question. In the sixties of the past 

 century, the senior Dadant used De- 

 beauvoys frames with self-spacing by 

 having a wide V/z inch top-bar, with 

 openings in it to permit the bees to 

 go into the sections. Then we tried 

 side-spacing and did not like it any 

 better. Every one of those edges of 

 side-spacing frames was whittled off 

 by me at some time or other during 

 my early experience, in order to get 

 rid of the feature. The objections 

 were as follows: 



1. Whenever we opened a hive in 

 which the frames were heavily coated 

 with propolis, it was necessary t use 

 a chisel to pry the frames apart. 



2. When we pushed the frames back 

 together, we always caught some bees 

 between the joints. * 



3. As we did not then use comb- 

 foundation (it was i.ot yet invented), 

 it was impossible to change frames 

 around or exchange them from one 

 hive to another; as the least project- 

 ing or bulging of a wavy comb would 

 cause it to come in contact with the 

 opposite one, and we could not, as 

 with the loose-hanging frames, set 

 them a little farther apart, in case of 

 necessity. 



4. In extracting honey out of self- 

 spacing frames, the projection was in 

 the way. It was still worse, if the 

 projection was a nail instead of a 

 wooden shoulder, for in that case the 

 honey knife would jam more or less 

 against it and be dulled. 



5. If, through some accident or in- 

 advertance, some frames were al- 

 lowed to stay in the hive without be- 

 ing closely pressed against each other, 

 the bees always filled those interstices 

 with propolis. Huber, in his unedited 

 letters, called attention to the great 

 celerity with which, in time of honey 

 shortage, the bees would fill every 

 crack or crevice with propolis, both to 

 protect their combs against enemies 



and against the danger of their break- 

 ing down. Wherever propolis is plen- 

 tiful, and it is plentiful in Hancock 

 County, they fill with it all the spaces 

 through which they cannot pass. 

 Frames having propolis along their 

 projection had to be scraped in order 

 to make them fit in the hive. 



6. Without the use of a movable di- 

 vision-board or dummy, it is next to 

 impossible to remove the first frame 

 from a hive in which the bees have 

 been over a year, if the combs are 

 propolized as we are accustomed to 

 lind them. While the loose-hanging 

 frame, they may be readily moved, 

 each a little, until there is room to 

 remove one. 



I am quite willing to admit that, 

 with the present comfortable use of 

 comb-foundation, which secures very 

 straight combs, some of the above dis- 

 advantages are eliminated. There are 

 also some advantages to the Hoffman 

 self-spacing frames which cannot be 

 denied. They are as follows: 



1. The frames are held in place, so 

 that they may not move sideways. 

 When the hive is new and the combs 

 not yet glued, this feature enables us 

 to transport the bees easily without 

 any other fastening. When moving 

 loose-hanging-frame hives, it is some- 

 times necessary to fasten the frames 

 with a rack at the top. We have never 

 found it necessary in our nomadic 

 beekeeping, moving bees on trucks a 

 distance of 20 to 30 miles. The pro- 

 polis holds them sufficiently. 



2. It is possible to handle colonies 

 with greater speed, because you may 

 handle 3, 4 or even 5 frames fastened 

 together by propolis as quickly as 

 you handle one. When I visited the 

 Wilder apiaries in the hands of W. B. 

 Bradley, in southern Georgia, in 1918, 

 I admired the speed with which he 

 handled half a dozen combs to reach 

 the cluster in the center of. the hive. 

 With the loose-hanging frame, we 

 have to use a different method and 

 "spread the frames" to get to the cen- 

 ter one. 



3. If you employ "green help'" there 

 is no danger of their making mistakes 

 and putting 9 or 11 frames in a hive 

 that should contain 10. That is why 

 the Modified Dadant hive has been 

 made with Hoffman self-spacing 

 frames. And, by the way, let me say 

 that Mr. Julius Hoffman, who invent- 

 ed them, was a very practical man and 

 had great regard for Charles Dadant. 

 I have before my eyes a postal card 

 from him to Charles Dadant dated 

 January 11, 1879, in which the follow- 

 ing words occur : 



"I take the liberty of assuring you 

 of my highest esteem, as I think you 

 have done as much or more than any 

 other man to benefit the bee business 

 in this country." 



know just why this is, but it is con- 

 firmed by people of experience, and 

 also that the pails should not be used 

 foT syrup or honey ■ lore than twice. 

 I have heard of people selling honey 

 in pails who would allow for the 

 return of the pail, provided it was re- 

 turned unwashed. Perhaps the thing 

 can be solved by noting the chemical 

 action of soap on tin. 



Tym C Reynolds. 



THE CAUSE OF ISLE-OF-WIGHT 

 BEE DISEASE 



Important Results by Investigators 

 at Aberdeen 



HONEY CHANGING QUALITY 



In the November number, page 376, 

 inquiry is made about honey turning 

 to syrup in tin pails. Around here 

 it is universally said that if a tin pail 

 is washed out with soapy water, the 

 next contents will spoil, e en if the 

 pail is rinsed afterwards. I don't 



For some years past an investiga- 

 tion has been conducted by Dr. John 

 Rtnnie and his collaborators. Miss 

 Harvey and Mr. Bruce White, under 

 a special Joint Committee of the 

 University and the College of Agri- 

 culture at Aberdeen, on the cause of 

 Isle-of-Wight bee disease. The funds 

 necessary to finance the investigation 

 have been provided equally by A. H. 

 E. Wood, of Glassel, Aberdeenshire, 

 and the Development Commissioners. 

 At a meeting of the Royal Society of 

 Edinburgh held on the 1st of No- 

 vember, a series of papers illustrat- 

 ed by micro-photograph lantern 

 slides was read describing the work 

 of the investigation, and making the 

 important announcement that an or- 

 ganism had been discovered which 

 the investigators considered had been 

 proved to be the causal agent in this 

 disease. The authors stated that 

 this disease had been known in bees 

 in this country since 1904, at least, 

 and it was still highly prevalent 

 throughout the United Kingdom. 

 Since 1907 investigations have been 

 going on in England, and for a 

 shorter period in Scotland. Eight 

 years ago certain English workers 

 claimed that the causal organism 

 was protozoan, named Nosema apis. 

 It was due to Mr. J. Anderson, of 

 Aberdeen, to state that he was the 

 first to call in question this hypothe- 

 sis, and more recent work from the 

 Parasitology Laboratory at Aber- 

 deen, under the joint committee 

 above referred to had shown Nosema 

 apis to be a harmful parasite to bees, 

 but not causally related to "Isle-of- 

 Wight" disease. This disease had, 

 up till now, remained an unsolved 

 problem. At the meeting of the 

 Royal Society of Edinburgh, the pa- 

 pers read by the Aberdeen Bee Re- 

 search staff revealed the existence of 

 a hitherto unknown type of parasit- 

 ism in bees of a remarkable kind. In 

 Isle-of-Wight disease tlie respiratory 

 system of the bee was invaded by an 

 extremely small mite. It belonged 

 to a genus known as Tarsonemus. 

 This creature, which was specialized 

 in structure, was bred within the bee 

 and was confined to an extremely 

 limited but very important region of 

 its breathing system. Within a space 

 of a few cubic millimetres, scores of 

 these creatures might be found in 

 all stages of development, sometimes 



