464 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Ape. 1 



of the heap, foi" it is already clear that hu- 

 man nature abhors all "made " or artificial 

 substitutes for real food. There is also a re- 

 coil against the excessive use of particular 

 foods which of themselves are all right in 

 moderation— for example, sugar, which the 

 American people eat to excess. 



Proprietary or prepared foods would seem 

 to have a hard time of it under the new dis- 

 pensation, and some we thought well of will 

 have to go liecause they have no luerit that 

 would entitle them to live. In this connec- 

 tion we particularly refer to the foods popu- 

 larly known as "baby foods," and often 

 spoken of as being "predigested." 



Probal)ly honey stands as good a chance 

 as any thing to gain by the new agitation, 

 because, as a food for mankind, particularly 

 for children, it will bear the strictest kind of 

 criticism. It supplies the natural ci'aving in 

 young people for sweets in a way nothing 

 else can do, and it can be shown that much 

 of the confectionery hitherto given to chil- 

 dren was -simply slow-acting poison. Par- 

 affine, it has been proved, was absolutely 

 deleterious, and much of it has been used in 

 candies. Gelatine is also bad, as likely to 

 carry disease germs, being produced \;nder 

 filthy conditions. Beeswax, on the other 

 hand, is perfectly safe. Perhaps the best 

 thing bee-keepers can do is to let the moth- 

 ers know that no sweet can equal honey for 

 children. We can rest assured the next gen- 

 eration will entertain a very high opinion of 

 honey. It can, for example, be pointed out 

 that, while honey is a highly nutritious arti- 

 cle of food, it leaves no residue to distress 

 the kidneys, spleen, or bowels; and practic- 

 ally all of it is digested and used up by the 

 body. It is also free from bacteria of a per- 

 nicious type, and it is, in fact, an antiseptic, 

 so that it carries no contagion. Physiologi- 

 cally speaking, then, honey is practically a 

 perfect food. 



AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN FOUL BROOD; 

 A QUESTION OF FACTS AND NAMKS. 



In the British Bee Journal for Jan. 31 ap- 

 peared an editorial taking issue v/ith Dr. 

 White and Dr. Phillips, of the Department of 

 Agriculture, on the subject of brood disease. 

 The editor, Mr. Cowan, has given this sub- 

 ject of foul brood, from the standpoint of a 

 microscopist, considerable time and study. 

 His statement, therefore, will command more 

 than ordinary attention, and we are pleased 

 to place it before our readers. 



We are indebted to the Department of Ag-riculture 

 in Washington for the receipt of three pamphlets 

 ■which have just been issued by the Bureau of Ento- 

 mologr.v, and which relate to brood diseases of bees. 

 In view of the widespread distribution of infectious 

 brood diseases among- bees in the United States, and 

 the importance of the industry in that country, the 

 Kovernment has printed these pamphlets so that bee- 

 l?eepers mitfht learn to distinguish the diseases as 

 they ai)pear. Notwithstandintr that there is legisla- 

 tion in many of the States, and foul-brood inspectors 

 are visitintr apiaries, destroyinj^^ and curing colonies, 

 Mr. E. R. Root, in an editorial in Gleanings for De- 

 cember 1.5, 1906, says: " There Is no use trying to dis- 

 guise the fact that bee-diseases in many parts have 

 been getting the upper hand of us, and now the au- 

 thorities at Washington are giving us practical aid." 



The first pamphlet relates to " The Bacteria of the 



Apiary, with special reference to Bee-diseases," by 

 Dr. G. P. White, expert in animal bacteriology in the 

 Biochemic Division of the Bureau of Animal Indus- 

 try. This paper was prepared by Dr. White as a the- 

 sis in part fulfillment of the requirements for the de- 

 gree of doctor of philosophy at Cornell University in 

 June, 190.). The pamphlet is a purely technical one, 

 and describes the work done in the laboratory by Dr. 

 White, and the conclusions he comes to. So many 

 investigators have found different bacteria in bees, 

 and have tried to ascribe foul brood to some other 

 microbe than Bacillus alvei. that it is not astonishing 

 to find that Dr. White has added a new one to the 

 list. There are two diseases in the United States 

 that have hitherto been known as foul brood and 

 black brood. Until now it has been supposed that 

 foul brood was the same in all countries where it has 

 been investigated, and that Bacillus alvei was always 

 present as a cause or result of the disease; but now 

 Dr. White tells us that this microbe is not found in 

 American foul brood, but is present in every case of 

 black brood, and that the microbe of the former is a 

 new one, which he has named Bacillus larva;. There- 

 fore to distinguish between them he calls black brood 

 European foul brood. 



The next pamphlet, of five pages, is entitled "The 

 Brood Diseases of Bees," by Dr. E. P. Phillips, ex- 

 pert-in-charge of apiculture during the absence of 

 Mr. Benton. Dr. Phillips says there are two recog- 

 nized forms of disease of the brood, designated re- 

 spectively European and American foul brood, which 

 are particularly virulent. He then describes the 

 symptoms and characteristics of each disease. That 

 there are two forms of foul brood, a mild and a viru- 

 lent one, has long been admitted; but we are certain- 

 ly not yet prepared to admit that these differ from 

 American foul brood upon the slender evidence ad- 

 duced. The symptoms and characteristics of Ameri- 

 can foul brood as described by Dr. Phillips corre- 

 spond with those of foul brood as we have it here, and 

 such as we found in the United States when we first 

 visited the apiaries at Medina in 1887. We have since 

 that time had the opportunitj' of seeing specimens of 

 foul brood in the States and Grenada, and in every 

 case the symptoms were similar. Slight variations 

 occur, but there was the distinctive ropiness and un- 

 pleasant odor which can be compared to bad glue. 

 We have also seen many specimens from different 

 parts of Europe and Africa, always with the same 

 characteristics, 



Our first acquaintance with black brood, or " New 

 York bee-disease," as it was at that time called, was 

 made some years ago in California, This was sent 

 from New York State by Mr. West, State bee inspec- 

 tor, and on examining it we at once saw that it differ- 

 ed from what we called foul brood; for, although the 

 outward appearance of the comb was similar, the dis- 

 tinctive ropiness and odor were absent. Notwith- 

 standing that our experience with foul brood was 

 pretty extensive, and dated back more than thirty- 

 five years, this was the first, time we had come in con- 

 tact with black brood. It was entirely unknown to 

 us except from descriptions in the journals, and not a 

 single sample had been sent to the British Bee Jour- 

 nal office for diagnosis. Last year, however, we be- 

 gan receiving from time to time specimens of dead 

 brood differing in a marked degree from any we had 

 previously seen in this country, and which corre- 

 sponded in nearly every particular with the descrip- 

 tion given of black brood, and they at once reminded 

 us of that we saw in California. Black brood is of 

 quite recent occurrence here, and we naturally hesi- 

 tate to accept the statement defining it as " Europe- 

 an foul brood," or the assertion of Dr. White that it 

 is caused by Bacillus alvei. To say the least, it is 

 quite possible that Dr. White has made a mistake, 

 just as others have done, and has cultivated one of the 

 numerous saprophytic bacteria found in bees. It ap- 

 pears to us that the most important test has been 

 omitted; and until that has been made successfully 

 our judgm' nt must be suspended. The test we allude 

 to is to prove that the disease can be reproduced in 

 healthy brood from a pure culture of Dr. White's Ba- 

 cillus larvse showing the characteristic symptoms of 

 foul brood— that is, the ropiness and odor. We know 

 that this was done by Mr. Cheshirt with Bacillus al- 

 vei. but we can not see that Dr. White has hitherto 

 been able to reproduce the disease with his microbe. 

 Until this has been done the investigations and the 

 conclusions arrived at are of very little value so far as 

 solving the question is concerned. 



This we referred to Dr. E. F. Phillips, of the 

 Department of Agriculture, Washington, D, 



