June, 1909. 



211 



American l^ee Journal 



matter of swarming for so many days; 

 and then, by removing all cells but one 

 before they begin to hatch, he has mas- 

 tered the situation, for by that time 

 there is no condition whatever to cause 

 swarming until they have a laying queen, 

 and brood in all stages, when the honey- 

 flow is over and we have obtained the 

 crop. 



The other plan was to remove the 

 queen but leave the brood on the old 

 stand, then in 10 days renjove all but 

 one cell. In the first case the absence 

 of all but one comb of brood would 

 call for a mass of bees such as Mr. 

 Trout had, literally a brood-chamber 

 and one or more supers full of them 

 so that they at once do a big business 

 in storing. I say "at once," for this 

 should not be done until the flow is 

 already started : but such colonies will 

 decrease daily in numbers with no brood 

 hatching to keep up the death rate. But 

 if the colony has not sufficient bees, and 

 all the brood is left that thereby the 

 colony may be gaining strength every 

 day from hatching bees, and that the 

 storage room in the brood-chamber be 

 at a minimum so the super will be used, 

 we are just using the same principle 

 of control, but trying to intensify the 

 storing capacity. The whole thing is to 

 get the great mass of workers and hold 

 them together for honey, and if a single 

 colony does not have enough bees the 

 end must be obtained in one of two 

 ways : 



We must double up forces from 2 

 or more hives till we have the neces- 

 sary numbers, or we must contract the 

 brood-chamber so that the weaker col- 

 ony can use the super — or, more prop- 

 erly, are forced to use it if they do 

 business in honey. But, in either case, 

 to leave a queen with these colonies, 

 that is, the big one in a normal brood- 

 chamber, or the smaller one in a con- 

 tracted chamber, brings about swarm 

 conditions, and we lose control. We 

 must absolutely put the colony into a 

 non-swanning condition first, so as to 

 eliminate that difficulty; then the next 

 thing to do is to produce conditions 

 favoring getting the stores where want- 

 ed and in the desired shape. That means 

 work, and intelligent work, too. 



\ow go again to that page 52, and 

 read the 3d paragraph beginning, "For 

 those producing extracted honey," etc. 

 There is given a third plan, but really 

 first in order of record. It is to put 

 the queen at the bottom with a mini- 

 mum amount of brood, the excluder 

 over her, and on that an extracting 

 super of dry combs (even part combs, 

 or foundation or starters will do), and 

 above this put the bulk of the brood 

 from the entire colony. Here we have 

 the entire working force, queen, brood 

 and all kept together, that is, on the 

 same stand and in the same hive. But 

 while the whole force is there, the 

 brood being clear at the top, and so 

 much space between it and the queen, 

 with but little brood with the queen be- 

 low, produces a condition in which the 

 stores will go into that top chamber 

 as fast as it comes in, or there are 

 empty cells to receive it, and the dry 

 combs next below it will be filled first 

 after the top ones have no more room 

 for foundation or starters worked out 



.if they have been given) — the last place 

 to receive storage except for temporary 

 or immediate use is the bottom body 

 where the queen has been laying at will, 

 and where the nurses and inside w'ork- 

 ers not needed to ripen, store and build 

 comb above are kept busy. 



But this plan is for extracted honey, 

 and for reasons that are obvious not 

 so workable in comb-honey production. 

 For extracted it. will get to the front 

 and will give almost perfect control of 

 swarming. If your queens are old, or 

 poor layers at this time from any cause, 

 an eflfort at supersedure would very like- 

 ly result in swarming : this again shows 

 the value of having all queens this side 

 of their prime when a honey-flow is 

 imminent or on. 



So we see that it is the master who 

 must master: if he have all things fa- 

 vorable he can do wonders, but when not 

 favorable he must simply make the most 

 he can out of the material at hand. 



But some say when we clip queens 

 or make these forced conditions we take 

 away the energy of the colony, we pro- 

 duce an abnormal state of the colony 

 and lose thereby. Nine-tenths of those 

 who say so do not know the principles 

 governing bees; do not understand at 

 all bee-nature and general natural laws 

 governing insects that do things be- 

 cause of environment and not from 

 reason. No specific rules are applica- 

 ble except as related to environment. 

 (Continued next month.) 



Food for Queen and Worker 

 Larvae 



BV DR. C. C. .MILLER. 



On page 129 is an article by W, W. 

 McNeal, some of which I do not under- 

 stand; but if I understand correctly the 

 main drift of the article, it is to the 

 effect that young queens and workers 

 receive the same kind of food while in 

 the larval state, the only difference be- 

 ing that the queen receives a larger 

 quantity than the worker. I think this 

 is the first time that 1 have ever known 

 any one to take this ground. Indeed, 

 Mr. McNeal evidently understands that 

 his view is against "the teachings of 

 orthodoxy," for he starts out with the 

 assertion that, " Careful research has 

 failed to disclose any evidence to verify 

 the teachings of- orthodoxy relating to 

 the food of a queen-larva." 



I am not a scientist, and have made 

 no researches relating to the matter 

 other than the observations which any 

 bee-keeper may make; but, Mr. McN'eal, 

 if you are going to take ground against 

 all the authorities who have previously 

 expressed themselves, don't you think 

 you ought to give us some sort of 

 proof of the correctness of your posi- 

 tion? Please tell us what careful re- 

 search has been made that has failed 

 to verify the teachings of orthodoxy. 

 Even if that be true, is there any evi- 

 dence that quantity of food alone will 

 make the difference between a worker 

 and a queen. 



But what about the researches of 

 Planta and others, whose analyses show 

 distinctly that after the third day the 

 food f)f the worker - larva is quite 

 changed in character, while the royal 



larva continues to be fed throughout 

 with the same food it received during 

 the first 3 days? So far as I know, 

 this has been accepted as correct until 

 the appearance of your article. Surely, 

 you ought not to expect us to throw 

 it all aside and accept your view with- 

 out telling us what later research had 

 failed to confirm previous research. 



For the sake of the younger readers 

 it may not be amiss to say what "the 

 teachings of orthodoxy" are. Put in a 

 very few words, a larva intended to 

 become a queen is, after its first 3 days* 

 existence as a larva, fed abundantly 

 witli a different food from that given 

 to larva; that are to become workers. 

 Perhaps the average bee-keeper who 

 holds this view would not be ready off- 

 hand to say whether he thinks the qual- 

 ity or the quantity of the food is the 

 greater factor in the matter of queen- 

 making. 



There is no difference of opinion as 

 to the food of the first 2 or 3 days. 

 It is the same, whether fed in a queen- 

 cell or a worker-cell, only a larger 

 quantity is put in the queen-cell. Does 

 that larger quantity make any difi^er- 

 ence? Without referring to the scien- 

 tists, we common bee-keepers can an- 

 swer that question pretty well. We 

 know that a worker-larva, taken any 

 time before it is 3 days old, can be 

 made into a good queen. That seems 

 to show that there is no difference be- 

 tween a worker-larva and a queen-larva 

 during the first 3 days. During that 3 

 days the larva in the queen-cell has a 

 greater quantity of food placed beside 

 it, but that greater quantity can make 

 no difference, since there is no differ- 

 ence. 



.\fter the first 3 days the worker- 

 larva is weaned, that is, it has fed to it 

 a coarser food, not so fully digested, 

 while the food of the royal larva re- 

 inains unchanged. That abundant feed- 

 ing of a better food for the remaining 

 time of some 3 days before sealing 

 makes the difference between the work- 

 er and the queen. Is it the abundance 

 of the food, or is it the quality that 

 decides? More food is put in the 

 queen-cell usually than the larva can 

 consume, for we generally find quite a 

 quantity of royal jelly remaining after 

 the young queen emerges; indeed it 

 would seem that the abundance of food 

 given to a royal larva over and above 

 the amount fed to a worker-larva most- 

 ly goes to waste, being left to dry up 

 in the cell, .^s quantity of food made 

 no difference in the first 3 days, and 

 as most of the extra quantity during 

 the remainder of the time is not con- 

 sumed, docs it not look as if quality 

 had more to do with the matter than 

 quantity? Indeed, if one should say 

 that quality had everything to do in the 

 case, and quantity nothing, it might be 

 hard to disprove it. 



r think there are many who will 

 watcli with interest for Mr. McNeal's 

 proofs for his belief. 



Where to Put B,\it-Sections. 



Generally I have given to each super 

 a single bait-section, and that in the 

 center of the super. Sometimes the 

 bees have begun on a super toward the 

 close of the season, filling some of the 

 central sections half full or less, taper- 



