168 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



Mar. 15 



ed in the small or even also in the large in- 

 testine. 



This subject of digestion leads to a discus- 

 sion of the origin of brood food, concerning 

 which writers on bee physiology are divided 

 into two classes — one holding that this sub- 

 stance is produced in certain large glands 

 situated within the head of the workers, the 

 other claiming that it is formed in the stom- 

 ach, and is simply regurgitated "chyle." 

 On each side there seems to be evidence 

 contradictory of the opposite view. In the 

 first place, the mouth of the stomach is so 

 constructed that regurgitation of its contents 

 looks impossible; yet Schonfeld claims to 

 have produced regurgitation by artiticial 

 stimulation of the stomach. The contents of 

 the stomachs of bees examined by the writer, 

 however, show no resemblance to the brood 

 food or to royal jelly, being a dark brown 

 mucilaginous slime containing pollen 

 grains. On the other hand, Cowan jjoints 

 out that the work of Planta, showing that 

 there is a constant difiference in the food of 

 the various forms of the brood at different 

 stages, indicates that the substance is not 

 produced by glands. Cheshire, after ad- 

 vancing his arguments in favor of the glan- 

 dular origin, ends with the statement that 

 "the naturalist will, in delight, realize that 

 his bee is more a wonder of wonders than 

 he had before imagined." But the days of 

 delight in imagination are over, and we need 

 some hard investigation of all the facts bear- 

 ing on the subject before we can have any 

 opinion worth having on the origin of the 

 brood food and royal jelly. 



Another of the "w^onders of nature" usu- 

 ally pointed out in the bee is the so-called 

 stomach-mouth, suppt sed to be for the pur- 

 pose of taking the pollen from the nectar 

 within the honey-stomach. Again looking 

 to Cheshire we get the information that, 

 "while the little gatherer is flying from 

 flower to flower, her stomach-mouth is busy 

 in separating pollen from nectar." This is 

 a very pretty sentiment, but the author 

 does not give us sufficient evidence as to 

 how such hidden secrets were revealed to 

 him. It is hardly enough to catch a bee in 

 the field, cut it open, and see the stomach- 

 mouth working, lor it does this on any oc- 

 casion when dissected from a freshly killed 

 bee, whether there is pollen in the honey- 

 sac or not. To the writer it seems much 

 more probable that the stomach-mouth is 

 simply an organ for passing any kind of 

 food from the honey-stomach to the true 

 stomach, comparable with the similar organ 

 possessed by other insects, rather than a 

 special structure of the bee for separating 

 pollen from nectar. 



These are but a few of the problems di- 

 rectly suggested by a study of the anatomy 

 of the bee. A thorough knowledge of anat- 

 omy is, of course, fundamental to a study 

 of physiology, and a knowledge of physiol- 

 ogy is again most essential in the investi- 

 gation of all forms of diseases — a subject of 

 vital importance to all bee-keepers. If we 

 add to these subjects a study of the senses 



of the bee, its behavior, and its place in na- 

 ture, the field for future work enlarges with- 

 out limit, and the student realizes that a 

 lifetime might be spent in exploiting this 

 small insect. Since, however, all of us seem 

 to prefer to do several things in a lifetime, 

 it is evident that it will require several in- 

 vestigators to find out yet all there is to 

 know about this already much studied 

 creature, the honey-bee. 

 Washington, D. C. 



A STANDARD HIVE. 



The Ten-frame Hive Used in New Zealand Ex- 

 clusively. 



BY I. HOPKINS. 



I was much pleased, Mr. Editor, in noting 

 your remarks on this subject in your issue 

 for Nov. 15, and quite agree with you as to 

 the great advantages that would result to 

 bee-keeping in your country could a stan- 

 dard hive be adopted. There has been suf- 

 ficient time to test the various forms of frame 

 hives that have been in use since Langstroth 

 gave us his, and I don't think there would 

 be any difficulty, at the present time, in de- 

 ciding which is the most convenient and 

 best. The advantages of having one form 

 of hive in use are so many and so gnat that 

 I think it folly not to use every endeavor to 

 bring so desirable a condition about. It is _ 

 a national and an urgent question, and ■ 

 therefore comes, properly within the scope 1 

 of your National Bee-keepers' Association, 

 which, in my opinion, is the right party to 

 deal with it. 



You, Mr. Editor, are not altogether blame- 

 less for the present condition of things as I 

 see them. It seems to me that you have 

 been too ready to publish illustrated articles 

 on so-called improvements from inexperi- 

 enced contributors which were any thing 

 but improvements; and the fact of your pub- 

 lishing such articles under big headlines 

 has given them such prestige that, no doubt, 

 many beginners have accepted the improve- 

 ments (?) as the latest thing out. It is usu- 

 ally the inexperienced who bring forward 

 the doubtful improvements. 



In speaking of the advantages of having 

 but the one form of hive, I do so from some 

 experience. It was my good fortune, in 

 1877 and '8, after experimenting for some 

 years with various forms of primitive hives, 

 to obtain a copy of Langstroth's " Hive and 

 Honey-bee." After some little study I con- 

 cluded the ten-frame Langstroth hive was 

 just what I needed; and after a season's ex- 

 perience I felt quite satisfied with my choice. 

 At that time there were no frame hives but 

 my own in use in New Zealand. Shortly 

 after, I contributed a series of articles on 

 modern bee culture to two leading daily pa- 

 pers, always advocating the ten-frame Lang- 

 stroth; and in 1881 I published the first edi- 

 tion of my bee manual in which I gave full 

 instructions for making it, and compared 



