Apiary Experiments. 
21 
Table Giving the Proportionate Weights of Honey and Wax in Capped 
Comb Honey. 
KINDS OF COMB. 
i 
Thickness in 
Inches. 
. Total Weight 
in Grams. 
Weight of the 
Honey in Grams. 
Weight of Wax 
only in Grams. 
Proportion of. 
Wax to Honey. 
Natural. 
1.37 
308.45 
297.95 
10.50 
1 to 28.38 
44 
1.13 
174.00 
167.71 
6 29 
1 to 26.66 
4k 
.75 
75.00 
71.14 
3.86 
1 to 18.43 
On Small Starter. 
374.00 
356.76 
17.24 
1 to 20.70 
44 44 44 
351.00 
334.40 
16.60 
1 to 20.02 
44 44 44 
346.00 
330.40 
15.60 
1 to 21.12 
44 44 44 
344.20 
328.50 
15.70 
1 to 20.92 
44 44 (4 
344.00 
328.19 
15.81 
1 to 20.76 
44 44 44 
312.80 
298.00 
14.80 
1 to 20.13 
44 44 44 
287.00 
273.20 
13.80 
1 to 19.80 
On Full Piece ’99 Deep-Cell Starter. 
544.00 
525.08 
18.92 
1 to 27.75 
On Full Pitce ’98 Deep-Cell Starter. 
.... 
404.00 
384.00 
20.00 
1 to 19.70 
In case of natural comb honey 1.37 inches thick the honey 
weighed 28.38 times as much as the wax, while the sample .75 of 
an inch thick, which was built at the same time as the thicker 
comb and by the side of it, had only 18.43 times as much honey as 
wax. The intermediate sample (1.13 inches thick) had 26.66 times 
as much honey as wax. 
All other comb samples in this table were taken from sections 
measuring 4fx4f inches and If inches thick. The combs were 
built on small top starters, except in case of the last two examples, 
one of which was built upon a full-piece ot the “1899'’ deep-cell 
foundation and the other upon a similar sheet of “1898” deep-cell 
foundation. The thickness of the comb was not taken in these sec¬ 
tions, but it did not vary much from one and one-fourth inches in 
any case. 
The comb in the sections with small starters did not vary 
much from one-twentieth of the weight of honey in any case, and 
the proportion of wax was somewhat greater than in the samples of 
natural comb of similar thickness. 
Passing to the sample of comb on the “1899” deep-cell founda¬ 
tion, we notice, first, that it is much heavier than any of the preced¬ 
ing, and hence much thicker, and in consequence it has a much 
higher ratio of honey to wax, 1 to 27.75. This is also in keeping 
with results announced on previous pages, indicating that this 
