22 Bulletin 54. 



foundation is drawn out by bees into a comb approximating the 

 lightness of the natural product. 



In contrast to this last example, but also in harmony with 

 results given on preceding pages, notice that the "1898" deep-cell 

 foundation gave a comb heavier than the preceding, though the 

 honey weighed less by more than one-fourth. The proportion of 

 wax to honey was greater in this case than in any of the others, 

 except thq,t of natural comb only .75 of an inch thick. It should 

 have given a larger proportion of honey than any of the samples 

 built on small starters, as the comb in the latter was thinner in 

 every case. 



From the facts given in the above table, it is evident that if we 

 are to secure a comb honey with the least possible amount of wax, 

 it will be necessary to have it built in sections that will secure the 

 greatest thickness of comb. In this way we can also economize 

 very considerably the labor and energy of the bee in wax secretion 

 and comb building. 



Attention might also be called to the fact that it takes more 

 wax and more work for the bees to cap ten pounds of honey in thin 

 comb than in thick comb. 



The reader will not understand that I am advocating the use 

 of deep sections ; there may be other reasons why they are not pre- 

 ferable; I am only mentioning points which, according to my 

 experiments, favor thin sections. 



