Oct. 12, 1899. 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



643 



and I strong^ly urge all who wish to winter their bees in a 

 repository to place one of these instruments in the room. 



It matters but little whether the room used is above or 

 below the surface of the g'round, if the temperature may be 

 retained at the point I have mentioned. But it seems to me 

 much more difficult to retain sufficient heat for the purpose 

 in a room above ground, even in a repository lined with 

 sawdust in a climate like that of northern Iowa. In a very 

 hard winter, unless the room contains enough bees to keep 

 up the heat inside, we all know that the cold will, after 

 awhile, penetrate a very thick lining of non-conducting' 

 material. How nearly the temperature may be kept to the 

 proper degree cannot be assured except by such as have 

 tried it. 



But to my mind, in a hilly country, it would be cheaper 

 and much safer to make the repository partly, if not alto- 

 gether, in the ground. The natural temperature of cellars 

 is higher than that required by the bees, and it is much 

 easier to bring in cold air than warm air, unless we fuss 

 with a stove, which would lead to trouble without end. So 

 very probably a cellar would be best. 



I have in mind a cave owned by Mr. Parent, of Benton 

 Co., Minn., which seems to me to be about as cheap a build- 

 ing as may be had. I understand that in those cold regions 

 there is but little to fear from dampness during the winter, 

 because the ground being frozen to a great depth there is 

 no possible chance for surface water to infiltrate. Thus 

 they are perfectlj' safe from a danger against which we 

 must carefully guard in our latitude. 



The cave is dug in a gentle slope, closed with a double 

 door, with a good bed of straw between the doors. Its walls 

 and roof are entirely of ground boarded up, and the bee- 

 house is placed above it. This kind of a repository is cer- 

 tainly better than a house-cellar, which is often enough out 

 of the ground to become very cold, and in which one places 

 all sorts of vegetables that are apt to more or less vitiate the 

 air. The bee-cave is made only for the bees, and thej' are 

 there in perfect quiet. 



In another article I will consider the questions of venti- 

 lation, of the space required, and of the time most suitable 

 for the removal of the bees to the repository. 



Hancock Co., III. 



Density of Nectar in Flower-Cups. 



BY A. NOKTON. 



IN my first remarks upon this subject I did not mention 

 Mr. A. J. Bates by name, partly to avoid offense by an- 

 tagonizing him personally. And I would not further 

 mention the subject, or him personally, but that his reply 

 on pages 515-16 contains so many mistakes, as it seems to 

 my humble judgment, and that he has brought out the per 

 sonal feature so as to make it no object to avoid it. 



If Mr. Bates \vill permit me I will call his attention, in 

 a fraternal spirit, to some errors of statement of his in said 

 reply. His first stateinent I do not really grasp as to 

 whether he deals with ripe honey absorbing moisture in the 

 comb or with thin honey parting with moisture, the thin 

 part being drawn to the mouth of the cell. I think he over- 

 looks the fact that (whichever way he means) the honey 

 would never ripen or become entirelj' thin if the thinner 

 parts did not take from that which is thicker. And the 

 rapidity of the ripening of honey comes from the great 

 readiness with which this is done. 



The thick honey in the cell would staj' thick with a 

 thin surface, or the thin honey would remain thin with a 

 thick surface (not being at the top exactly, but on one side, 

 from its position in the comb), but that, as .soon as one part 

 becomes different from the rest, the thicker part is quickly 

 made into the same consistency as that of the thinner part 

 by the absorption of part of its sweetness. 



Mr. Bates is mistaken in his second statement, for the 

 earth and most objects upon it g'ive off heat faster than 

 does the air. Hence the air, %vhere it comes in contact with 

 cooler objects than itself, has its vapor condenst into dew. 

 Dew would never form by contact of air with objects 

 warmer than itself, as he states on page 516. From my re- 

 membrance of the structure of red clover blossoms with 

 their slender, partly-closed tubes, the dew would not form 

 within them, since dew does not *' fall," as .so many use the 

 term ; and it would probablj- not get into the nectaries un- 

 less it formed so plentifully over the heads as to flow over 

 into the tubes of the flowers. Rain mig-htbeat in and wash 

 the nectar out ; but that is a different consideration. 



I think the reason why the Italians work more freely 

 on the red clover in the morning is that the flowers have 



been secreting nectar all night with nothing to deplete it, 

 while the morning's work leaves the flowers more or less 

 destitute, so that bees forsake them. If any outside mois- 

 ture iiappens to have gotten into the flowers, it will have 

 taken up the same kind of sweetening as that they hold, and 

 will doubtless be of the same lliickiicss as the rest of the 

 contents. Even before it has become equally thick, it is 

 equally good, needing only more evaporation, and involv- 

 ing difference of quantily, not quality. 



Soon after reading Mr. Bates' reply, I took a small 

 drop of honey to represent specially thick nectar, a small 

 bit of candied honey to represent still more fully evapo- 

 rated nectar, and a little sugar to represent that entirelj' 

 dried down. Upon these separately I placed small drops of 

 water no larger than the amounts of sweetening, just lay- 

 ing the water carefully on top with no stirring. In a less 

 time than dew remains on flowers after it forms, these were 

 all of evenly uniform densitj', with no layers that were to 

 be detected by examination. Should thin nectar dry grad- 

 ually, it would thicken uniformly unless the waxy nature 

 of the thick product should cause a thick film to adhere at 

 the sides or edg'es, and thus be held at the top instead of 

 on the bottom of the thinner portion. 



Regarding Mr. Bates' last statement, I will only say 

 that I have made mortar in my day and am familiar with 

 it, and that it is not lime in a state of suspension in water, 

 but water in a state of adsorp/ion in lime, and that it has no 

 illustrative bearing on the subject. 



I don't wisli to make this subject seem too important 

 and so I will imitate Mr. Bevins by crawling back into mj' 

 hole : and I promise not to speak up again, and to cheer- 

 fully give Mr. Bates, "Cogitator," or both, the right to 

 have the last word if they desire it. 



Monterey Co., Calif. 



[We think this subject has been sufficiently exhausted 

 now, so we let the above conclude the discussion. — Editor.] 



The Dzierzon Non-Sperm Theory a Fallacy. 



BY C. THKILMANN. 



IN " Beedom Boiled Down," on page 538, we find the fol- 

 lowing : "The Dzierzon theory, says Deutsche lUus- 

 trierte Bienenzeitung, so far stands as solid as a rock, 

 and it will require more proofs than have yet been brought 

 against it, to budge it in the least." 



This will probably be the last kick the Dzierzon non- 

 sperm in drone-eggs will make, as many bee-keepers will 

 (according to Mr. Hasty 's afterthought, on page 566) try the 

 experiments set forth by Prof. Dickel, and the formula rec- 

 ommended by myself. All who will try it will most surely 

 be "comrades," as Mr. Hasty suggests. 



For myself, with the experiments I had in 1883 with a 

 swarm, and again with five swarms the past July, I have 

 gained indisputable facts of the fallacy of the Dzierzon 

 theory. My formula is so simple and easily performed (see 

 page 500) that almost anj' bee-keeper can try it and satisfy 

 himself of its correctness, that bees can and will produce 

 either sex from eggs laid in worker-cells by a normal queen. 



I will give the readers of the American Bee Journal the 

 experiments I made the past summer with five swarms, to 

 make sure of what I experienced heretofore. 



On July 9 I prepared two swarms for stock colonies, 

 with starters in frames. July 11 a frame of the above was 

 taken and given to a swarm just issued and made queenless, 

 and put on the old stand after the old hive was removed 

 where they came from. The frame was partly stockt with 

 eggs in worker cells. The same evening the hive was re- 

 moved to another stand, but the bees made a big commo- 

 tion on account of dissatisfaction, and some deserted the 

 hive, but when put back to their old stand they quieted 

 down and seemed to be satisfied. 



On examination, on the 19th, the frame was destitute 

 of eggs or larva;, and another frame with eggs was given 

 immediately; on July 2+ four queen-cells and two drones in 

 worker-cells were nearly completed, also about 300 workers. 

 On this day laying-worUers had already started laying — I 

 counted nine eggs in a newly-started queen-cell. 



No. 2 swarmed July 11, and was treated the same, with 

 a frame of worker-cells stockt with eggs ; examined on the 

 24th there were found nine queens, ten drones, and two 

 worker-cells, all capt. This swarm also changed stands like 

 the first. 



No. 3 swarmed July 13, and treated the same as No. 2. 



