THE BROOD-BEARING CYCLE OF THE HONEYBEE 29 



colonies ; in fact, a rate nearly equal to the maximum was maintained 

 throughout June. On July 19 the queen was confined to the lower 

 hive body. Little response was made to the fall nectar flow. The 

 brood-rearing activity of this colony did not augur well either for 

 surplus or strength for winter. 



Colony D (fig. 22 and Table 21) is the only other of the 1920 colo- 

 nies comparable to colony A. It underwent the checks to brood 

 rearing in April and May before reaching its maximum at the begin- 

 ning of June. Colony A had reared more brood during this time 

 than had colony D. Brood rearing in colony D, as in colony A, 

 suffered a decrease immediately after the maximum. On July 7 the 

 queen was confined to the lower hive body, was allowed the freedom 

 of the second hive body on July 13, but was again confined to the 

 lower hive body on July 20. Throughout the remainder of the season 

 the brood nest was in the lower hive body. On August 10 the super 

 was removed. During the last week of August the old queen was 

 superseded. The combination of a new queen and the fall nectar flow 

 caused a rather large increase in brood-rearing activity during 

 September. 



Colony E (fig. 23 and Table 22) lost its queen in early spring and a 

 laying queen was introduced, the result being a condition somewhat 

 equivalent to an early spring supersedure. The giving of a laying 

 queen undoubtedly made the break in continuity of brood rearing 

 shorter than would have resulted had it been necessary to wait for the 

 mating of a virgin queen so early in the year. Even so, the colony 

 did not reach its maximum brood-rearing activity until the second 

 week in June. A decline ensued, the sharpness of which indicates a 

 restriction due to incoming nectar. A rather slight recovery was 

 made during the last week of June, followed in turn by a sharp decline. 

 On July 2 the queen was confined to the lower hive body; was given 

 access to the second hive body again on July 10, but on July 16 was 

 confined to the lower hive body once more, where she remained for 

 the rest of the season. On August 13 the super was removed. This 

 colony made little response to the fall nectar flow. 



In none of the five colonies did the initial expansion proceed without 

 a check. The maximum brood-rearing activity of the season was 

 reached too late to be of greatest value during the main honey flow, 

 which, in the vicinity of Washington, D. C, usually occurs in May. 

 With the possible exception of colonies B and C, in none of the colo- 

 nies did brood rearing become so active just prior to the final con- 

 traction as to insure the number of young bees needed for good 

 wintering conditions. As in the curves for 1921 (figs. 1 to 16), so 

 in the curves for 1920 (figs. 19 to 23) there is shown a tendency for 

 brood-rearing activity in the vicinity of Washington to reach its 

 maximum during the fore part of the active season; this is succeeded 

 in turn by a midseasonal decline broken more or less by incoming 

 pollen or nectar. This decline is usually checked somewhat during 

 the latter part of the active season by an abundant pollen yield in 

 August and a nectar flow in September. Thus, barring differences 

 due to variation in seasons, strength of colonies, and certain other 

 factors within the hives which would cause in different colonies a 

 variation in the responses even to identical stimuli during the same 

 year, the general character of hrood-rearing activity -in the colonies 

 under observation in I '.(20 is strikingly similar to that of hrood- 

 i-fjiring activity in the colonies under observation in 1921 and 1922. 



