Date sent:                Wed, 17 Jun 1998 02:34:24 -0400
From:                     
 "L-Soft list server at University at Albany (1.8c)"              <LISTSERV@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Subject:               File: "DATABASE OUTPUT"
To:                         Allen Dick
> SEARCH 'Kashmir' IN BEE-L -
> FROM 1-Jan-90 TO 31-Dec-98
--> Database BEE-L, 42 hits.
> INDEX
Item #   Date   Time  Recs   Subject
------   ----   ----  ----   -------
000783 92/09/23 20:23  326   23-09-92 20:15:38
001089 93/03/29 19:54  121   Hawaiian transshipments?
001195 93/04/26 20:22  701   Bee Science Symposium Abstracts
001197 93/04/26 20:24   84   BEE VIRUS SURVEY
001203 93/04/27 09:25  416   BEE SCIENCE SYM ABS - ASCII
001204 93/04/27 09:27   40   BEE VIRUS SURVEY - ASCII
003376 94/11/17 10:20  272   November issue of APIS
003533 94/12/22 09:37  274   December APIS
003822 95/02/25 08:58  151   Your help needed to protect Hawai'i's honey bees
003837 95/02/27 09:44  104   Re: Your help needed to protect Hawai'i's honey be+
007865 96/03/26 17:38   68   bee disease spread, we better think NOW
007869 96/03/27 22:44   72   Kashmir bee virus...
007880 96/03/27 18:42   28   Re: Kashmir bee virus...
007886 96/03/28 01:17   67   Re: Kashmir bee virus...
007890 96/03/28 08:06   75   Re: Kashmir bee virus...
007897 96/03/28 11:28   59   In Response
007904 96/03/29 21:09   58   Re: Kashmir bee virus...
007918 96/03/29 10:31   52   Re: BEE-L Digest - 27 Mar 1996 to 28 Mar 1996
007930 96/03/30 06:48   77   Responding
008010 96/04/03 17:15   62   Re: Virus Alert
008069 96/04/06 22:13   84   N Z Bees
008165 96/04/11 07:12   40   Re: Hawaii's mite-free status
008325 96/04/19 12:32  170   New Zealand Honey Bee Disease Programmes
009022 96/05/27 09:12   70   BEE virus alert
009148 96/06/06 10:57  273   Mites and patties
009207 96/06/08 23:21  116   Re: America's honeybees
009212 96/06/08 08:05  136
009539 96/06/28 08:11   41   Parasitic Mite Syndrome (PMS)
009919 96/07/24 19:20   82   Bleak Future ? Yes
010718 96/09/11 19:49  717   Essential Oils update
011918 96/11/10 16:58  582   Re: Commercial Testing Labs.
013574 97/02/01 14:49  122   Re: Surviving Varroa
013869 97/02/19 13:58   14   Help on a new subject
016099 97/05/31 08:05   66   HONEY BEE ACT 1922 STATUS
016102 97/06/01 10:03   30   Re: HONEY BEE ACT 1922 STATUS
017921 97/08/31 09:01  133   Re: HAWAII honey bee concerns ALOHA
023339 98/06/11 20:15   20   kashmir virus
023350 98/06/13 13:23   35   Re: kashmir virus question
023354 98/06/12 21:45   34   Re: kashmir virus
023358 98/06/06 14:32   27   kashmir virus
023373 98/06/16 12:30   34   Re: kashmir virus
023395 98/06/17 00:08   23   Re: kashmir virus question
> PRINT
>>> Item number 783, dated 92/09/23 20:23:00 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 23 Sep 1992 20:23:00 +1200
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         NICKW@WAIKATO.AC.NZ
Subject:      23-09-92 20:15:38
BUZZWORDS 45, SEPTEMBER 1992
BUZZWORDS is the monthly newsletter of the National Beekeepers Association of
New Zealand.  Though some of the topics are of 'local' interest only, I post
copies to the bee list for those who will find items of interest.
-----------------------------------
     Nick Wallingford
  Internet  nickw@waikato.ac.nz
-----------------------------------
FROM THE PRESIDENT
As was arranged at the time of conference our executive officer Ted Roberts
and I travelled to Taumaranui and met with members of the Manawatu Wanganui
Regional Council and local pest destruction officers.  This has turned out to
be a very worthwhile exercise. Farmers have a serious problem in the threat to
their exports caused by T.B.  Likewise five beekeepers with a total of about
6,000 hives were having their livelihoods threatened.  John Bassett, the local
beekeeper spokesman was present at the meeting.  It was a case of reaching a
compromise.
The outcome was very satisfactory to all concerned.  The pest destruction
officers are to use phosphorous baits until such time as testing of oxalic
acid in jam baits has been completed.  This means they are able to carry on
with their planned programme of possum eradication.  Beekeepers will be able
to carry on without the need to shift out of the area.
The battle over the import of heat-treated Australian honey is intensifying.
Branches and individuals have reacted well followed by action from your
executive.
I have just received a letter from David Kay advising that the Honey Industry
Trustees have agreed to a grant of $20,000 for the clinical testing of manuka
honey.  They have asked of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,
Auckland University, taht the methodology and personnel involved will ensure
that the results of the trial will be acceptable to the medical profession and
the Health Department.  A big thank you to our trustees and we all hope the
end result will be positive.
QUOTES FROM CHAIRMAN FLOYD
Here's a sampling of the wit and wisdom of marketing man Bill Floyd, from the
talks he gave at this year's Hastings conference. We couldn't include them
with the item on the NBA Marketing Programme in last month's Buzzwords due to
space limitations:
'House brands are taking over the New Zealand retail honey market.  Overall,
house brands of honey have increased from 25% to 39.6% of the market in the
last three years.  In the South Island the figure is 53.5%!'
'We haven't had a lot of market research on honey in New Zealand, but all the
studies which have been done show clearly that price is not the main factor in
why people buy honey.'
'Small industries like honey need to hunt as a pack.  Once the prey is on the
ground, then you can fight between yourselves for the tender bits.'
'The Commerce Commission will not let you abuse your dominant position in the
market place.  That sounds like something out of the Kamasutra.'
'It is often said that 50% of money spent on advertising is wasted.
Professionals don't come anywhere near that figure, but amateurs waste more
like 70%.'
'Make it and hope' doesn't work.'
'In marketing, if you're not going to go all the way, don't start.'
'The more benefits you add to your core product, the more you differentiate
that product.'
'If we market honey correctly, consumers will soon be seeking it out in
products the way they now do for oat bran.'
'The honey industry needs to market like a commando group, not a large
battalion.  Use your competitors' environment and live off the land.'
'The innate goodness of honey is our number one competitive advantage.'
BOOKS, BOOKS, BOOKS
Practical Beekeeping in New Zealand, this country's most well- known
beekeeping book, will once again be available, beginning this September.  The
book, written by International Bee Research Association director Andrew
Matheson, has been completely revised and updated.  Even the front cover will
be new!
The first edition of Practical Beekeeping in New Zealand was extremely
popular, both with hobbyist beekeepers and the general public, and provided an
informative introduction to the unique features of beekeeping in this country.
The revised edition will make a welcome return for this important industry
resource which has unfortunately been out of print for the last several years.
The new edition, published by GP Publications, will retail at $29.95.
Cliff Van Eaton and Peter Brunt, New Zealand's representatives for the
International Bee Research Association, are having a big sale of books from
their IBRA book shelves.  The IBRA is the world's leading source of beekeeping
information, and one of the important things the IBRA does is to provide a
mail order book service for members.  Their current catalogue lists over 250
different books and 120 reprints on all aspects of bees and beekeeping.
As a help to New Zealand beekeepers, Cliff and Peter keep a selected number of
titles so that they can fill orders quickly, and they have been given
permission to offer discounts of 20 - 60% on these stocks for a limited time
only.  Bargains include the classic Honey: A comprehensive Survey, by Eva
Crane, at $44.20 (25% off); Anatomy and Dissection of the Honey Bee, by Dade,
at $36.80 (25% off); and Honey Bee Pests, Predators and Diseases, edition 1,
by Morse at $26.20 (50% off).  Great prices, but stocks are very limited.
For a list of titles and prices contact either Cliff, c/- MAF, Private Bag,
Tauranga, or Peter, c/- Nelson Polytechnic, Private Bag, Nelson.  And in case
you're wondering, the sale is definitely non-profit.  All proceeds go directly
to the IBRA (after all, they own the books!).
Mention was made at this year's conference of an inexpensive booklet which has
colour pictures and descriptions of exotic and endemic bee diseases.  The
booklet is called Honey Bee Diseases and Pests, and is published by the
Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists (CAPA).  The booklet is
very comprehensive, and has good pictures of EFB, Varroa, and the tracheal
mite, as well as most of the more common (and uncommon) bee diseases.  As for
pests, New Zealand readers will no doubt enjoy the sections on bears and
skunks (and we thought we had problems!).  For a copy of the publication, send
$5.00, together with a stamped, self-addressed A4 size envelope to:
        Bee Diseases and Pests Booklet
        Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries
        Private Bag
        TAURANGA
MINISTER PROMISES 1080 REPELLENT
Readers are by now well aware of the long-running battle our industry is
currently having over the inclusion of oxalic acid in 1080 jam possum baits.
Research conducted by Mark Goodwin at Ruakura showed that oxalic acid acted as
a bee repellant in possum baits, but so far the Animal Health Board has not
approved its use in the many possum poisoning programmes being conducted
around the country.  Executive member Nick Wallingford has been lobbying
government on behalf of the industry, and he recently receiv ed, through MP
Robert Anderson, a very interesting letter from Denis Marshall, Associate
Minister of Agriculture. According to Marshall, 'Trials will be initiated this
spring and will probably continue into the summer period.  By autumn 1993,
answers should be found to the problem of possum bait acceptance and by winter
next year jam products containing the bee repellent should be available for
use.'
The minister protects himself somewhat with all those 'should's', but your
executive will definitely be reminding him of his statement that the bee
repellent should be available for use next winter, when the possum poisoning
programmes are announced in 1993.
FROM THE BRANCHES
The Marlborough branch has already scheduled meetings for their spring
diseaseathon.  They are:  Briefing Meeting - Monday, September 14, beginning
at 7.30 pm, at MAF Blenheim; Inspection Day - Saturday, September 19.  Contact
Murray Bush (03-578-3923) or James Jenkins (03-578-9325) by September 1.  Good
support is essential if the branch is to meet the nation-wide percentage
inspection target of 5.8% of local district apiaries.
The Poverty Bay branch also has a diseaseathon scheduled for Saturday,
September 12.  The branch plans to use part of the diseaseathon to collect
adult bee samples which it hopes to plate out the next day (Sunday, September
13).  The branch hopes it will then be able to more effectively target both
MAF and members' inspections during the rest of the Spring.  For information
contact Barry Foster -  phone 06-867-4591, evenings.
Hawkes Bay branch has a Branch Apiary Field Day planned for 10 am at
Chesterhope Reserve on September 5.  They also have a branch meeting on Monday
September 14, with the prograrmme to be arranged.
KASHMIR APOLOGY
In Buzzwords 39 we reported on an article by Dr. T.P. Liu from Canada on
Kashmir bee virus and a rebuttal in the American Bee Journal by Dr. Denis
Anderson, former research scientist with our DSIR.  Dr. Anderson refuted
claims made by Dr. Liu that Kashmir bee virus was a virulent pathogen of honey
bees and that the 'disease' was only found in New Zealand and Australia.
Now it seems the whole thing was a mistake. The winter 1992 edition of
Canadian Beekeeping contains reference to a phone call received by the editor
from Dr. Liu claiming that his original article was taken from published
material and was directed at 'academically informing' beekeepers about the
virus, and in particular three mutant strains.  He says that for sometime
Canada has been importing queens from New Zealand and Australia and so the
whole discussion on the pathogenic nature of the virus is 'academi c'.  He
also urged that the editor publish Dr. Anderson's article as a 'counter view'
on the nature of Kashmir bee virus.
Well, we suppose this is an apology.  However, it's a shame Dr. Liu didn't
also point out to the editor the number of factual errors made in the article
(academic or not) and maybe also make an apology to queen and package
producers in both New Zealand and Australia for creating doubt in the minds of
their Canadian clients.  He also doesn't explain how this information 'taken
from published material' ended up in every important beekeeping journal in
North America last year.
HAWAII MISSES OUT
We mentioned in Buzzwords 32 the possibility of the Canadians allowing in
queens from Hawaii this year and the concerns some beekeepers in Canada were
expressing regarding the state's lack of an inspection and registration
programme.
Well, no queens were approved for export during this shipping year (March-
June, 1992) and it looks like it may be difficult for the Hawaiians to meet
even the newly changed protocols negotiated with the Canadian federal
government.  The stumbling block to getting approval by the Canadians seems to
be the lack of state funds in Hawaii which would allow them to conduct
required apiary testing.  The head of the Canadian federal quarantine service,
Dr. William McElheran, changed the protocol requiring the Hawai ians to test
their hives for mites from 50% of all colonies in supply apiaries to 20%, but
that still doesn't seem to be enough. As the winter edition of Canadian
Beekeeping points out, 'one has to realize that Hawaii has no bees act and
limited manpower and funds to implement regulations for what is a small
industry.'
MARKETING, PRICES, AND SUBSIDIES
From time to time in Buzzwords we make mention of the US federal government's
honey subsidy programme.  Readers here in New Zealand no doubt wonder why we
go to the effort.  After all, what can policies half way around the world have
to do with our own beekeeping industry?
The answer is quite a bit, as evidenced by the softening of New Zealand honey
prices in the late 80's.  That softening related directly to a major downturn
in world honey prices, brought on by the 'eruption' of the U.S. government's
'honey mountain' which dumped the equivalent of one year's U.S. production on
the world market at an artificially low price.
In hindsight, we can at least be grateful that we were on the other side of
the world with an industry which wasn't greatly dependent on exports.  In
Canada, where one third of total production was normally sold to the U.S., the
'eruption' caused severe problems.  Canadian honey prices dropped out of
sight, with some beekeepers not able to sell their honey at any price. Many
commercial beekeepers went to the wall, and there are now one third less
beekeepers in Canada than there were 5 years ago.
So how did the U.S. situation come about?  Back in the 70's, the U.S.
government, with the best of intentions, decided to do something about the
'boom and bust' nature of yearly honey prices.  In the U.S., as elsewhere,
beekeepers found it impossible to get a good price for their honey because the
year's total production entered the market all at the same time.  U.S. packers
took advantage of this situation and invariably played one beekeeper off
against another, driving the wholesale price of honey down.
The U.S. government put in place a loan programme, under the Commodity Credit
Corporation, to help the beekeepers out.  The idea was that the government
would take the honey on loan, paying the beekeeper a set price, and allow the
beekeeper to buy the honey back once demand increased later in the year.
The theory was fine, but unfortunately the pricing mechanism for loans was
based on a 'parity price' set in the 70's, just after the world price of honey
went through the roof.  Adjusted yearly for inflation, that price became so
high that U.S. packers eventually found that they could buy overseas honey at
a much lower price.  U.S. producers didn't buy back the honey they had loaned
to government and the honey mountain was thus created.
This situation carried on through the early 80's, but it finally became
obvious that something had to give.  Beekeepers were actually being paid a
further fee to hold the honey in their sheds, and the government could only
find an outlet, through their 'food to the poor' programmes, for a small
amount of what was building up.
So in the infinite wisdom of the U.S. bureaucracy, it was decided to allow
beekeepers to 'buy back' their honey at a price lower than the one paid for
the original loan.  The idea was that this would encourage packers to buy from
the domestic producer (at a lower rate), while the producer still received an
artificially high price.  The U.S. government would be able to clear its
backlog of honey, and everybody (at least in the U.S.) would be happy.
To their credit, the U.S. industry decided at the same time to set up a
national honey promotion programme, called the National Honey Board, to
stimulate increased honey consumption in the U.S. The programme is funded by a
levy of just over 4 cents (NZ) on every kg of honey (domestic and imported)
sold in the U.S.
The National Honey Board has been extremely successful.  By concentrating on
new market areas for honey such as the food ingredient and food service
industries, the board has been responsible for a 10% increase in U.S. honey
consumption at a time when traditional table spread sales have remained more
or less static.

But as you can imagine, with any mandatory levy, the Honey Board certainly has
it detractors, especially since in the last six months prices paid by packers
have softened somewhat.  There have been calls in American beekeeping journals
for a re-structuring of the Board, including the removal of all non-beekeeper
members from its board of directors.
Finally, in the May edition of The Speedy Bee, a major honey packer and past
member of the board, Dwight Stoller, answered these critics.  In so doing, he
became one of the few leading U.S. beekeepers to call the loan/buy back
programmes what it really is - a government subsidy.  He also let beekeepers
in on the big change which was being obscured by the convoluted way the
programmes are being run.
According to Mr. Stoller, the only aspect of the U.S. honey price which has
taken a major tumble in the last 3 years is the subsidy (difference between
loan and buy back price) itself.  In that time the subsidy has been reduced by
81% (from NZ$0.90 to $0.17/kg).  Net income to the producer may have decreased
by 9% during the same period, but prices paid by packers actually rose by 29%.
The increase in honey consumption has actually led to an increase of over 42%
in real income.  It's just that the National Honey Board has been so
successful that it has allowed the U.S. government to substantially get itself
out of the honey subsidy business.
Mr. Stoller doesn't see anything wrong with this, and in fact in the article
he makes some comments about agricultural subsidies and government
indebtedness that would make even Ruth Richardson proud.  He reckons the U.S.,
with its US$3.5 trillion debt, is actually behind such countries as Brazil,
Argentina, and Mexico, in solving its debt crisis, and says it is about time
the U.S. stopped blaming others for its financial problems.  Not paying their
way eventually catches up with all industries and governme nts, and according
to Mr. Stoller, beekeepers in the States need to realize that they won't be
guaranteed a government subsidy forever.  As he says, 'we've made remarkable
progress toward reaching a point of survival without it.'
Courageous words from Dwight Stoller.  We just wonder whether the rest of the
beekeepers (and politicians, for that matter) in the U.S. agree.
>>> Item number 1089, dated 93/03/29 19:54:00 -- ALL
Date:         Mon, 29 Mar 1993 19:54:00 +1200
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         NICKW@WAIKATO.AC.NZ
Subject:      Hawaiian transshipments?
NZ has shipped package bees and queens to Canada for about 20
years now.  The exports are generally trans-shipped (taken from
one plane to another) in Hawaii.  The State of Hawaii has now
closed this off entirely, ostensibly due to the risk of bee
diseases from NZ.  Dr Liu's work, referred to in the letter from
the State of Hawaii's Dept of Ag, has been challenged in American
bee magazines.  I'd be curious to see what sort of response
(scientific, please, not emotive) there is on this issue.  Its
that fine line where bee science is being used to create trade
barriers, and its very important that the science be good!
FROM BUZZWORDS, THE MONTHLY NEWSLETTER OF THE NEW ZEALAND
BEEKEEPERS ASSOCIATION, NUMBER 51, APRIL 1993.
BEE EXPORTS JEOPARDISED
This year's shipments of New Zealand queens and package bees to
Canada could be at risk, thanks to actions recently taken by
state and federal governments in the United States.  The
lucrative Canadian market, worth over $1.5 million to New Zealand
and Australian producers, is currently in limbo following a
decision by the US Department of Agriculture to agree to a
Hawaiian state government request to end transshipments of live
bees through its borders.  The move follows hard on the heals of
a Canadian federal government decision to allow the import of
queen bees produced in Hawaii for the 1993 production year.
The Hawaiians had tried unsuccessfully for several years to
access the Canadian market which was closed to live bee shipments
from the continental United States in 1987 in an effort to keep
out the Varroa mite.  The move resulted in losses to US queen
producers estimated at NZ$6.8 million per year (see Buzzwords
30).
The decision by Canadian authorities to allow Hawaii queens into
their country is seen as a victory for elements in the Canadian
industry who believe that the US border should no longer be
closed.  Varroa outbreaks have now been identified in several
Canadian provinces and last year the Canadian federal government
announced that it would no longer pay all the costs for varroa
mite control programmes.
Unfortunately for the Canadians, however, if the Hawaiian ban
remains in place, Canadians will be unable to obtain package bees
from any outside source.  The Canadian approval is only for
queens from Hawaii, and even if the Hawaiians obtained export
clearance for packages it is unlikely that they could supply more
than a small portion of Canada's package needs.  With those sorts
of pressures on the Canadian industry, it's conceivable that the
Canadians could call for a return to package imports from
California, just so they can continue to restock their hives.
The Canadian authorities are requiring several strict export
certification procedures for Hawaiian queens.  These include the
testing of 15% of the producer's colonies for varroa and one hive
per apiary for tracheal mite.  However, the procedures do not
require area freedoms for American foulbrood, as required for New
Zealand queens.  Hawaii currently does not have an American
foulbrood control programme and has no government register of
beekeepers and apiaries.
The Hawaiians, for their part, have used some very tenuous
arguments in an effort to get the USDA to stop transshipments of
our bees through their ports.  Mr. Yukio Kitagawa, chairperson of
the Hawaiian State Government Board of Agriculture, claims that
bee shipments from Australia and New Zealand pose the threat of
introducing foreign diseases and pests into Hawaii.  As evidence
for this, he quotes the articles written by Dr. Stephen Liu, from
Agriculture Canada, which appeared in a number of bee
publications in North America in the past several years.
According to Mr. Kitagawa, Dr. Liu 'detected two serious honey
bee diseases, not present in Hawaii, in samples of package bees
shipped into Canada from New Zealand and Australia'.  The
diseases mentioned are Kashmir bee virus and melanosis.
As Denis Anderson pointed out in his rebuttal in The American Bee
Journal in 1991 (see Buzzwords 39), Dr. Liu's articles 'omitted
important published information about Kashmir bee virus and made
claims that were not supported by scientific evidence.'  There is
also much disagreement amongst scientists as to whether melanosis
is even a disease.  But the real point is that the Hawaiians
don't even know whether they have these two problems (we're sure
they do) because no one has really ever looked.
Dr. Liu made it clear last year that his comments about Kashmir
and melanosis were directed at 'academically informing'
beekeepers and were not really scientific articles (see Buzzwords
45).  Still, that hasn't stopped the Hawaiians from grasping this
very inconsequential straw and holding the whole of Australasia's
Canadian bee exports to ransom.  We strongly believe it is about
time someone in the North American bee science establishment took
Dr. Liu to task for his lack of scientific ethics.  Dr. Liu needs
to apologise to US and Canadian officials for the errors in his
articles on Kashmir and melanosis and he needs to do it now.
* * *  STOP PRESS  * * *
Agriculture Canada has just approved several new
transit/transhipment ports for this year's package bee exports to
Canada.  These include Singapore, Seoul, London, and Hong Kong.
There is still a problem, however, of available space on
aircraft.  We understand that at this point only one air carrier
has agreed to consider shipping packages through Hong Kong.
We have also just been informed that the US authorities will
allow transshipments of live bees through LA for valid sales
contracts made prior to March 19.  Contact your local AAO for
details.
-------------------------------------
          Nick Wallingford
  National Beekeepers Assn of NZ
     Internet nickw@waikato.ac.nz
-------------------------------------
>>> Item number 1195, dated 93/04/26 20:22:38 -- ALL
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1993 20:22:38 -0300
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         Dick Rogers <"PAM::DR"@AC.NSAC.NS.CA>
Subject:      Bee Science Symposium Abstracts
 WPC
 2






WB      dDigital DEClaser 21
   00DIDEC210.PRS+x








@+P,D0#P_ #|x3'
   3'Standard
3'3'Standard.+
   LDDigipɦ Bee Science Sympos
ium
"Current Developments in Bee Research"
ABSTRACTED PROCEEDINGS
Mar
ch 12, 1993
Cornwallis Room, Agricultural Centre, Kentville, Nova Scotia,Canada
Sponsored by the Nova Scotia Beekeeper
s' Association and the
Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Marketing
with assistance from the Human Resource Deve
lopment component of
the Canada/Nova Scotia Agri-Food Development Agreement
FORWARD
On Ma
rch 12, 1993 a unique symposium on current scientific research
related to honeyb
   ees and their diseases and pests was held in the
Cornwallis Room at the AgriculturalCentre, Kentville, N.S.  The
speakers at thi
   s symposium are recognized worldauthorities from
the U.K., U.S., Alberta, Ontario and Nova Scotia.  The topics
coveredgenetic en
   gineering, selective breeding, viral diseases an
d
their transmission,honeybees as vectors of biological control
agents, and pest
   s of bumblebees.The following are abstracts of t
he
presentations except in one case a summarytranscript is included.
C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S
1.    Dr. Brenda V. Ball, Honey Be
e Virus Infections Associated
with Varroa jacobsoni Infestation.
2.    Don Stoltz, Virologist, Development of Diagostic Tools f
or
Virus Infection in the Honeybee.
3.    John Phillips, Engineering a Gene for Insecticide Resistance
in the Honeyb
   ee.
4.
Thomas E. Rinderer, Breeding of Resistance to Varroa
jacobsoni.
5.    Dr. Don Nelson, Tracheal Mites Detection and Control
Meth
ods.
6.    John C. Sutton, Use of Bees to Deliver Biocontrol Agents for
Controlling F
   lower-Infecting Pathogens.
7.    Richard
M. Fisher, Bumble Bees:  Parasites, Predators,
Disease.
8.    Summary List of Speakers, Addresses and Fax Numbers.+$
+







1.  Honey Bee Virus Infections Associated with Varroa jacobsoni
InfestationBrend
   a V. Ball, AFRC Institute of Arable Cr
ops Research,
Rothamsted ExperimentalStation, Harpenden, Herts.   AL5 2JQ   Fax:
0582 760981.
ABSTRACT
The parasitic mite Varroa jacobsoni causes little apparent damage
in colonies of
    itsnatural host Apis cerana, the e
astern hive bee.
The transfer of the mite to theEuropean honey bee, Apis mellif
   era
and its spread to every continent except Aus
tralasiahas been
accompanied by reports of devastating colony losses, although t
   he
effects ofinfestation seem variable and are s
till poorly
understood.  Differences in thereproductive potential of mites on
di
   fferent species and races of bees and hostbehavi
oral responses
may account for some of this variability.  However, recentresearc
   h
has shown that the mite affects the type and p
revalence of honey
bee virusinfections causing mortality.  This talk will consid
   er the
role of V. jacobsoni as anactivator and v
ector of honey bee viruses
and examine some of the factors affectingdisease outb
   reaks in
infested colonies.++






2.  Development of Diagostic Tools for Virus Infection in the
HoneybeeDon Stolt
   z, Department of Microbiology & Immunology,
Dalh
ousie University, Halifax,Nova scotia   B3H 4H7   Fax:
902-494-5125.
ABSTRACT
My laborator
y has been developing approaches to diagnostics which
we think will proveuseful
   in the not-too-distant future.  For
example, in
preliminary studies we havefound that virus infection
in a single bee pupa can b
   e readily detected by Westernblotting.
Our prim
ary focus thus far, however, has been directed towards an
assessmentof polymeras
   e chain reaction (PCR)-based technology for
the
detection of black queencell and Kashmir bee viruses.  Use of
PCR primers specif
   ic for conserved humanenterovirus sequences gave
rise to several products; one of these, a 450 base pairamplicon
from KBV has no
   w been cloned and sequenced.  Computer analysis
indicate thatthis sequence comes from the viral RNA polymerase gene
and shares s
   ignificant homologywith the same gene found in a
variety of known picornaviruses - including humanhepatitis A - and
with many pl
   ant virus genomes as well.  Future work will be
directedtowards the development of both universal picornavirus
primers and prime
   rs specificfor individual bee viruses.+
+






3.  Engineering a Gene for Insecticide Resistance in the
HoneybeeJoh
   n Phillips, University of Guelph, Department of
Molecular Biology and Genetics,Guelph, Ontario, Canada  Fax:
519-837-2075.
ABSTRACT
We are
 applying current techniques of insect molecular biology to
the design andintrod
   uction of useful genes in beneficial insects.
S
uch genes would include thoseencoding resistance to conventional
insecticides.
   A potentially useful insecticideresistance gene,
 the
`opd' gene, has been identified and cloned from bacteria.  Thisgene
specifi
   es a unique phosphotriesterase which efficiently
 cleaves and
detoxifiesa broad spectrum of organophosphorus insecticides.  We
ha
   ve redesigned this gene tofunction in insects an
d have
transferred it into the genome of the model insect,Drosophila
melanogaste
   r, where it functions to confer significant resi
stance
toorganophosphate toxicity.  This demonstrates the feasibility of
conferr
   ing usefultraits on strains of insects through t
he design
and introduction of carefully designedgenes.  We are now refining
the
   structure of the gene to target expression in sp
ecifictissues
and developmental stages in order to enhance the efficacy of
insec
   ticideresistance.  In addition, we have begun to
 develop
techniques for transferring thisand/or other useful genes into the
hone
   ybee genome to confer useful and novel traitson
the beneficial
insect species.+S+






4.  Breeding for Resistance
   to Varroa jacobsoniThomas E. Rinderer,
United St
ates Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
ResearchServices, Honey-Bee Breedin
   g Genetics & Physiology
research, Baton Rouge, L
ouisiana Fax: 504-389-0383.
ABSTRACT
A stock of honey bees was bred in Yugoslavia for resistance to the
parasitic
mite,Varroa jacobsoni.  This stock was imported by the
USDA to the US and extens
   ively testedin field trials in Florida.
These t
ests showed that the stock has some degree ofresistance to
Varroa jacobsoni, a s
   trong resistance to a second parasitic
mite,Acar
apis woodi, which is also a relatively new and
economically troubling pest of ho
   neybees in the US, and excellent
general beekeep
ing characteristics.  Based on theseresults, the
Yugoslavian honey bee stock is
   scheduled to be released to industry
nextspring.
  This release will be the first honey bee stock
released from the USDA toindust
   ry in decades.  The general
potential for develo
ping honey bee stocks resistantto parasitic
mites will be examined.
Editor's Note:An excellent article by Rinderer, et al, in t
he
March '93 issue of American BeeJournal, covers this subject in
detail.+
   h+






5.  Tracheal Mites Detection and
 Control MethodsDr. Don Nelson,
Agriculture Canada, Research Station, Beaverlodg
   e, Alberta   Fax:
403-354-8171
ABSTRACT
Tracheal mites are becoming a common pest of honey bee colonies in
most of Canad
   a. Therefore, it i
s important to know when colonies
are infested and at what levels.  Atthe same t
   ime it is important
to know at what levels trach
eal mites are detrimentalto colonies,
and how to control their buildup.The only
   method of detection at
present is the dissection
 (and microscopic examination)of the
thorax of individual bees.  This method is
   time consuming and
costly.   TheBeaverlodge Rese
arch Station has developed a
monoclonal antibody specific to thetracheal mite an
   d is currently
using and evaluating an ELISA (En
zyme-LinkedImmunosorbent Assay)
method for detection of tracheal mites in bulk b
   ee samples.
Withfurther evaluation this method
may become a preferred
alternative to individual beeanalysis.Several approaches
   to
reducing or minimizing the effect of tracheal
 mites are
beingstudied; a) chemical control, b) management practices and c)
sel
   ecting stock forresistance.  The emphasis in the
 short term has
certainly been to have one or moreregistered chemical controls
a
   vailable.  Chemicals currently approved for use
in Canadafor the
control of tracheal mites are menthol and formic acid (by sprin
   g
of 1993). For the short and mid-term, several
management practices
along with chemical controlsseem promising and for the long
    term
selecting bees more resistant to the trach
eal miteholds great
promise.  Ultimately, all three methods will be used in
vari
   ouscombinations to provide the best results.+
+






6.  Use of Bees to Deliver Biocontrol Agents for Controlling
F
   lower-Infecting PathogensJohn C. Sutton, Departm
ent of
Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph,Ontario, Canada
 N1G
    2W1   Fax: 519-837-0442
Honey bees (Apis melli
fera) were found in recent studies to
efficiently vector inoculumof microbial bi
   ocontrol agents to
flowers of strawberry (Peng e
t al. 1992), raspberry(J.C. Sutton
1991, unpublished observations), apple and pe
   ar (Thompson et al.
1992). These observations we
re made a century after Waite (1891)
reported for the first timethat honey bees
   vectored a pathogen,
Erwinia amylovora, to flowe
rs of pear trees.  Foreffective
biocontrol of flower-infecting pathogens, it is
   likely that
intensivevectoring of biocontrol age
nts is required.  To achieve
adequate vectoring of agentsto flowers of crop plan
   ts, inoculum of
the organisms must be suitably f
ormulated toallow effective
acquisition, transport, and deposition by bees.Bees
   successfully
vectored spores of various biocontr
ol agents (eg. Gliocladium
roseum,Epicoccum purpurascens, and Alternaria alterna
   ta) when
formulated as powders with talc,pulveri
zed corn meal, wheat flour,
soya flour or corn starch (Peng et al. 1992, Israela
   nd Boland
1992).  The bacterial antagonists Pseu
domonas fluorescens and
Erwiniaherbicola were vectored to apple and pear flowers
    when
absorbed to pollen of apple orcattail (Tho
mson et al. 1992).  The
bees were contaminated with the formulations inspecial i
   noculum
dispensers or pollen inserts inside hive
s.  Bees acquired
inoculumon their legs and bodies and especially on the setae.I
   n a
biocontrol study of fruit rot of strawberry
caused by Botrytis
cinerea, bees eachacquired 88,000 - 1,800,000 (mean 570,000)
   cfu
G. roseum in a talc formulation (5 x108 cfu/
g) and maintained an
inoculum density of 1,600 - 27,000 cfu of the antagoniston
   each
flower (Peng et al. 1992).  By comparison i
noculum density in plots
sprayedweekly with spore suspensions (107 conidia/mL) o
   f G. roseum
ranged from 300 to 15,000cfu/flower.
  Propagule density was more
stable and often higher on flowers of the bee-vecto
   red treatment
than in spray-treated flowers, but
 the treatments were about
equallyeffective in suppressing incidence of the path
   ogen on
stamens and petals, and incontrolling fr
uit rot.Efficiency of
inoculum deposition on flowers by bees probably depends on
subtletiesin physical contact between the bee a
nd the flower as
well as the load and distributionof inoculum on the bee.  Size
   and
morphology of the flowers and of the bees, a
nd theactivity and
posturing of bees while on the flowers undoubtedly affect the
amount ofinoculum deposited and where it is dep
osited on the
flower.  In studies at theUniversity of Guelph, bees delivered
abo
   ut 10 to 18 times more conidia of G. roseumper f
lower to
strawberry than to raspberry.  The formulation and concentration
ofinoc
   ulum used was the same in all studies.  While st
rawberry
flowers are much largerthan raspberry flowers, and foraging
frequencies
    by bees on the two types of lower mayhave diffe
red, the
bees also behaved differently on strawberry than on raspberry
(J.C.Sutt
   on, unpublished observations).  In strawberry, b
ees tended
to move actively overthe face of the flower, often in a rotational
pa
   ttern, and their legs and bodiesfrequently conta
cted the stamens+h)+and other flower parts.  In raspberry howe
   ver, thebees moved only
slightly and tended to c
ling to the elongate stamens by means of
distalportions of their legs, and achie
   ved only minor body contact
with the flower.  Wh
iledensity of vectored inoculum on raspberry
was low, the antagonist nonetheless
   effectively suppressed Botrytis
fruit rot.Many v
ariables influence the frequency of visits by bees
to flowers and may thusinflue
   nce vectoring of biocontrol agents and
the effec
tiveness of biocontrol.  Cooltemperature, wind and rain
generally discourage for
   aging by bees (Free 1968 a,b),however in
our stu
dies in strawberry, bees vectored high densities of G.
roseum to theflowers unde
   r a wide range of weather conditions (Peng
et al
. 1992).  Foraging in testplots or in commercial crops can be
affected by the p
   roximity and attractiveness tobees of other kinds
of flowers in the area that compete as sources of nectar and
pollen(Levin 1978)
   .  For example, biocontrol of B. cinerea in
stra
wberry by means of bee-vectored G. roseum soon became
ineffective when the bees
   preferentially visited freshlyblooming
rapeseed
in nearby field plots (Peng et al. 1992).  Chemical
attractants canbe used in so
   me instances to maintain foraging in
the target
crop.The mobility and foraging patterns of bees present
special problems in fiel
   d studies. Screens generally are needed to
separ
ate treatments with bees from those without bees,but may
modify microclimate and
    exclude important pollinators.  Bees
confined i
n screencages may forage and vector differently from
freely-ranging bees.  Scree
   ning of alltreatments equalizes
microclimatic mo
dification but is impractical when plots or
hostplants are large, and can be cos
   tly.  Vectoring of biocontrol
agents will requir
especial studies in commercial crops to determine
the numbers, size and distribu
   tionof bee colonies needed for
effective vectori
ng of microbial antagonists and forbiocontrol.
In bee-vectoring studies in Utah
   , the antagonist Pseudomonas
fluorescenswas dete
cted on only 556% of apple flowers at 61 m from
a hive, and on only 72% of pearf
   lowers at 7 m from a hive, with an
average popul
ation of 102 cfu per flower (Thomsonet al. 1992) - A
stain of E. herbicola was d
   etected on 92 - 96% of apple flowers ina
2.6 ha
orchard (10-5700 cfu per flower).  To encourage bees to
establish foragingpatter
   ns in a crop as opposed to other plants in
the a
rea, it is important to introducebee colonies shortly after
the crop begins to f
   lower.Various bees potentially could be used
to
vector microbial antagonists to many kindsof plant for
biocontrol of various flo
   wer-infecting pathogens.  Several kinds
ofdomest
icated bees, including bumble bees (Bombus spp.) and leaf
cutting bees (Megachil
   espp., Osmia spp.) as well as honey bees, may
ha
ve potential as vectors.  Wild speciesof halictid bees and
andrenid bees also po
   ssibly could be used, and contaminated
withbioco
ntrol agents at bait stations.  Various berry crops,
orchard fruits, crucifercro
   ps, beans, clovers, and cucurbits
possibly could
 be protected by bee-vectoredantagonists.
Imaginative research could lead to ef
   fective, efficient,
andenvironmentally safe bioc
ontrol of many crop diseases by means
of bee-vectoredantagonists.
Literature cited
FREE, J.B., 1968.  The pollination of strawb
erries by honey bees. +h)+J. Hortic. Sci. 43:107-111.
FREE, J.B., 1968.  The foraging behaviour of honey bees
 (Apis
mellifera) and bumblebees(Bombus spp.) on blackcurrant (Rubus
nigrum), ra
   spberry (Rubus idaeus) and strawberry(Fragaria x
ananassa) flowers.  J. Appl. Ecol. 5: 157-168.
ISRAEL, M., & BOLAND, G.J., 1992.  Influence of formulation on
efficacy of hone
y beesto transmit biological control for management
of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum.
     Can. J.Plant Pathol. (Abstr.) (In
press).
LEV
IN, D.A., 1978.  Pollination behaviour and the breeding
structure of plantpopula
   tions.  Pages 133 - 150 in A.J. Richards,
ed., T
he pollination of Flowers byInsects.  Academic Press, London.
213 pp.
PENG. G., SUTTON, J.C. & KEVAN, P.G., 1992.  Effectivene
ss of honey
bees for applyingthe biocontrol agent Gliocladium roseum to
strawber
   ry flowers to suppress Botrytiscinerea.  Can. J.
 Plant
Pathol. 14: 117-129.
THOMSON, S.V., hansen, D.R., FLINT, K.M. & VANDENBERG, J.D., 1992.
The dissemin
   ationof bacteria an
tagonistic to Erwinia amylovora by
honey bees.  Plant Dis. 76: 1052-1056.
WAITE, M.B., 1891.  Results from recent investigation
s in pear
blight.  Am. Assoc. Adv.Sci. Proc. 40:315.+    +






7.
    Bumble Bees:  Parasites, Predators, DiseaseRichard
 M. Fisher,
Department of Biology, Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova
Scotia,Can
   ada   Fax: 902-542-3466
ABSTRACT
During the 1980
's, advances in bumble bee domestication technology
permitted the cost-effective
    use of these bees for greenhouse
tomato pollina
tion.  At present, threespecies are used for this
purpose (Europe and New Zealan
   d: B. terrestris; eastern
NorthAmerica: B. impat
iens (Cr.); western North America; B.
occidentalls (Grne).  Threeprimary concern
   s have been associated
with the intensive labora
tory culture of thesespecies:  1)
depopulation of bees in areas where queens are
    captured; 2) the
impactof species introductions
 into new area; 3) the possible
spread of disease,either amongBombus populations
   , or
interspecifically between bumblebees and ot
her bees, notablyApis
mellifera.  Data are presented which demonstrate the genus
specificity of a numberof bumble bee pests and
pathogens, including
mites, the microsporidian Nosema bombi,and a number of soci
   al
parasites.  The possible propagation of disea
ses among
culturedBombus species can be eliminated (or at least minimized)
throu
   gh proper managementpractices.+
+






8.  SPEAKERS
Brenda V. BallAFRC Institue of Arable Crops ResearchRothamsted
Experimental Stat
   ionHarpenden, Herts    AL5 2JQF
ax: 0582 760981
Don StoltzDepartment of Microbiology & ImmunologyDalhousie
UniversityHalifax, No
   va ScotiaB3H 4H7Fax: (902) 494-
5125
John PhillipsUniversity of GuelphDepartment of Molecular Biology
& GeneticsGuelp
   h, OntarioN1G 2W1Fax: (519) 837-2075
Thom
as E. RindererUnited States Department of
AgricultureAgricultural Research Servi
   ces, Mid South AreaHoney-Bee
Breeding, Genetics
& Physiology Research1157 Ben Hur RoadBaton
Rouge, Louisiana   70820Fax:  (504)
   389-0383
Don NelsonAgriculture CanadaResearch S
tationBeaverlodge, AlbertaT0H
0C0Fax:  (403) 354-8171
John C. SuttonDepartment of Environmental BiologyUniversity of
GuelphGuel
ph, OntarioN1G 2W1Fax:  (519) 837-0442
Richard M. FisherDepartment of BiologyAcadia UniversityWolfville,
Nova scotiaB0P
    1X0Fax:
  (902) 542-3466
>>> Item number 1197, dated 93/04/26 20:24:32 -- ALL
Date:         Mon, 26 Apr 1993 20:24:32 -0300
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         Dick Rogers <"PAM::DR"@AC.NSAC.NS.CA>
Subject:      BEE VIRUS SURVEY
 WPCd
 2






WBDigital DEClaser 2100
   DIDEC210.PRS+x








@+P,D0#P_#|xBEE VIRUS DIAGNOSTIC SERVICE  SURVEY
Dr. Don Stoltz, Virologist, Department of Microbiology
 and
Immunology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, is
currentl
   y involved in a project to improve the technolog
y for the
diagnosis of honey bee viruses.  It is expected that a diagnostic
serv
   ice for some viruses (e.g. Kashmir, black queen
cell) could be
available by the end of 1993.
Conceivably, a general diagnostic service (i.e., for most if not
all bee viruses
   )
could be developed, in time, if sufficient
interest/need was identified, and som
   e sort of funding arrangement
could be negotiate
d. At this time, we would like responses to the
following questions:
[1]+
+DO YOU REQUIRE BEE VIRUS DIAGNOSIS ON AN ANNUA
L BASIS?
[2]+
+IF ONLY A LIMITED DIAGNOSTIC SERVICE COULD BE PROVIDED, WHICH
VIRUSE
   S ARE OF MOST CONCERN TO YOU?
[3]+
+WHERE DO YOU GET YOUR DIAGNOSIS WORK DONE NOW?
[4]+
+HOW MANY SAMPLES AT ANY ONE TIME?
[5]+
+WOULD YOU USE TH
E SERVICE IF AVAILABLE IN NOVA SCOTIA?
[6]+
+WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO PAY A NOMINAL FEE PER SAMPLE FOR THIS
SERVIC
   E?
It w
ould be appreciated if replies could be returned to Dick Rogers
as soon as possi
   ble.
V: 9026796029
F: 9026796062
EMAIL: DR_
PI@AC.NSAC.NS.CA
>>> Item number 1203, dated 93/04/27 09:25:26 -- ALL
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1993 09:25:26 -0300
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         Dick Rogers <"PAM::DR"@AC.NSAC.NS.CA>
Subject:      BEE SCIENCE SYM ABS - ASCII
Bee Science Symposium
"Current Developments in Bee Research"
ABSTRACTED PROCEEDINGS
March 12, 1993
Cornwallis Room, Agricultural Centre, Kentville, Nova Scotia,Canada
Sponsored by the Nova Scotia Beekeepers' Association and the
Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Marketing
with assistance from the Human Resource Development component of
the Canada/Nova Scotia Agri-Food Development Agreement
FORWARD
On March 12, 1993 a unique symposium on current scientific research
related to honeybees and their diseases and pests was held in the
Cornwallis Room at the AgriculturalCentre, Kentville, N.S.  The
speakers at this symposium are recognized worldauthorities from
the U.K., U.S., Alberta, Ontario and Nova Scotia.  The topics
coveredgenetic engineering, selective breeding, viral diseases and
their transmission,honeybees as vectors of biological control
agents, and pests of bumblebees.The following are abstracts of the
presentations except in one case a summarytranscript is included.
C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S
1.    Dr. Brenda V. Ball, Honey Bee Virus Infections Associated
with Varroa jacobsoni Infestation.
2.    Don Stoltz, Virologist, Development of Diagostic Tools for
Virus Infection in the Honeybee.
3.    John Phillips, Engineering a Gene for Insecticide Resistance
in the Honeybee.
4.    Thomas E. Rinderer, Breeding of Resistance to Varroa
jacobsoni.
5.    Dr. Don Nelson, Tracheal Mites Detection and Control Methods.
6.    John C. Sutton, Use of Bees to Deliver Biocontrol Agents for
Controlling Flower-Infecting Pathogens.
7.    Richard M. Fisher, Bumble Bees:  Parasites, Predators,
Disease.
8.    Summary List of Speakers, Addresses and Fax Numbers.







1.  Honey Bee Virus Infections Associated with Varroa jacobsoni
InfestationBrenda V. Ball, AFRC Institute of Arable Crops Research,
Rothamsted ExperimentalStation, Harpenden, Herts.   AL5 2JQ   Fax:
0582 760981.
ABSTRACT
The parasitic mite Varroa jacobsoni causes little apparent damage
in colonies of itsnatural host Apis cerana, the eastern hive bee.
The transfer of the mite to theEuropean honey bee, Apis mellifera
and its spread to every continent except Australasiahas been
accompanied by reports of devastating colony losses, although the
effects ofinfestation seem variable and are still poorly
understood.  Differences in thereproductive potential of mites on
different species and races of bees and hostbehavioral responses
may account for some of this variability.  However, recentresearch
has shown that the mite affects the type and prevalence of honey
bee virusinfections causing mortality.  This talk will consider the
role of V. jacobsoni as anactivator and vector of honey bee viruses
and examine some of the factors affectingdisease outbreaks in
infested colonies.






2.  Development of Diagostic Tools for Virus Infection in the
HoneybeeDon Stoltz, Department of Microbiology & Immunology,
Dalhousie University, Halifax,Nova scotia   B3H 4H7   Fax:
902-494-5125.
ABSTRACT
My laboratory has been developing approaches to diagnostics which
we think will proveuseful in the not-too-distant future.  For
example, in preliminary studies we havefound that virus infection
in a single bee pupa can be readily detected by Westernblotting.
Our primary focus thus far, however, has been directed towards an
assessmentof polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based technology for
the detection of black queencell and Kashmir bee viruses.  Use of
PCR primers specific for conserved humanenterovirus sequences gave
rise to several products; one of these, a 450 base pairamplicon
from KBV has now been cloned and sequenced.  Computer analysis
indicate thatthis sequence comes from the viral RNA polymerase gene
and shares significant homologywith the same gene found in a
variety of known picornaviruses - including humanhepatitis A - and
with many plant virus genomes as well.  Future work will be
directedtowards the development of both universal picornavirus
primers and primers specificfor individual bee viruses.






3.  Engineering a Gene f
   or Insecticide Resistance in the
HoneybeeJohn Phillips, University of Guelph, Department of
Molecular Biology and Genetics,Guelph, Ontario, Canada  Fax:
519-837-2075.
ABSTRACT
We are applying current techniques of insect molecular biology to
the design andintroduction of useful genes in beneficial insects.
Such genes would include thoseencoding resistance to conventional
insecticides.  A potentially useful insecticideresistance gene, the
`opd' gene, has been identified and cloned from bacteria.  Thisgene
specifies a unique phosphotriesterase which efficiently cleaves and
detoxifiesa broad spectrum of organophosphorus insecticides.  We
have redesigned this gene tofunction in insects and have
transferred it into the genome of the model insect,Drosophila
melanogaster, where it functions to confer significant resistance
toorganophosphate toxicity.  This demonstrates the feasibility of
conferring usefultraits on strains of insects through the design
and introduction of carefully designedgenes.  We are now refining
the structure of the gene to target expression in specifictissues
and developmental stages in order to enhance the efficacy of
insecticideresistance.  In addition, we have begun to develop
techniques for transferring thisand/or other useful genes into the
honeybee genome to confer useful and novel traitson the beneficial
insect species.






4.  Breeding for Resistance to Varroa jacobsoniThomas E. Rindere
   r,
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
ResearchServices, Honey-Bee Breeding Genetics & Physiology
research, Baton Rouge, Louisiana Fax: 504-389-0383.
ABSTRACT
A stock of honey bees was bred in Yugoslavia for resistance to the
parasitic mite,Varroa jacobsoni.  This stock was imported by the
USDA to the US and extensively testedin field trials in Florida.
These tests showed that the stock has some degree ofresistance to
Varroa jacobsoni, a strong resistance to a second parasitic
mite,Acarapis woodi, which is also a relatively new and
economically troubling pest of honeybees in the US, and excellent
general beekeeping characteristics.  Based on theseresults, the
Yugoslavian honey bee stock is scheduled to be released to industry
nextspring.  This release will be the first honey bee stock
released from the USDA toindustry in decades.  The general
potential for developing honey bee stocks resistantto parasitic
mites will be examined.
Editor's Note:An excellent article by Rinderer, et al, in the
March '93 issue of American BeeJournal, covers this subject in
detail.






5.  Tracheal Mites Detection and Control MethodsDr. Don Nelson,
Agriculture Canada, Research Station, Beaverlodge, Alberta   Fax:
403-354-8171
ABSTRACT
Tracheal mites are becoming a common pest of honey bee colonies in
most of Canada. Therefore, it is important to know when colonies
are infested and at what levels.  Atthe same time it is important
to know at what levels tracheal mites are detrimentalto colonies,
and how to control their buildup.The only method of detection at
present is the dissection (and microscopic examination)of the
thorax of individual bees.  This method is time consuming and
costly.   TheBeaverlodge Research Station has developed a
monoclonal antibody specific to thetracheal mite and is currently
using and evaluating an ELISA (Enzyme-LinkedImmunosorbent Assay)
method for detection of tracheal mites in bulk bee samples.
Withfurther evaluation this method may become a preferred
alternative to individual beeanalysis.Several approaches to
reducing or minimizing the effect of tracheal mites are
beingstudied; a) chemical control, b) management practices and c)
selecting stock forresistance.  The emphasis in the short term has
certainly been to have one or moreregistered chemical controls
available.  Chemicals currently approved for use in Canadafor the
control of tracheal mites are menthol and formic acid (by spring
of 1993). For the short and mid-term, several management practices
along with chemical controlsseem promising and for the long term
selecting bees more resistant to the tracheal miteholds great
promise.  Ultimately, all three methods will be used in
variouscombinations to provide the best results.






6.  Use of Bees to Deliver Bioc
   ontrol Agents for Controlling
Flower-Infecting PathogensJohn C. Sutton, Department of
Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph,Ontario, Canada
 N1G 2W1   Fax: 519-837-0442
Honey bees (Apis mellifera) were found in recent studies to
efficiently vector inoculumof microbial biocontrol agents to
flowers of strawberry (Peng et al. 1992), raspberry(J.C. Sutton
1991, unpublished observations), apple and pear (Thompson et al.
1992). These observations were made a century after Waite (1891)
reported for the first timethat honey bees vectored a pathogen,
Erwinia amylovora, to flowers of pear trees.  Foreffective
biocontrol of flower-infecting pathogens, it is likely that
intensivevectoring of biocontrol agents is required.  To achieve
adequate vectoring of agentsto flowers of crop plants, inoculum of
the organisms must be suitably formulated toallow effective
acquisition, transport, and deposition by bees.Bees successfully
vectored spores of various biocontrol agents (eg. Gliocladium
roseum,Epicoccum purpurascens, and Alternaria alternata) when
formulated as powders with talc,pulverized corn meal, wheat flour,
soya flour or corn starch (Peng et al. 1992, Israeland Boland
1992).  The bacterial antagonists Pseudomonas fluorescens and
Erwiniaherbicola were vectored to apple and pear flowers when
absorbed to pollen of apple orcattail (Thomson et al. 1992).  The
bees were contaminated with the formulations inspecial inoculum
dispensers or pollen inserts inside hives.  Bees acquired
inoculumon their legs and bodies and especially on the setae.In a
biocontrol study of fruit rot of strawberry caused by Botrytis
cinerea, bees eachacquired 88,000 - 1,800,000 (mean 570,000) cfu
G. roseum in a talc formulation (5 x108 cfu/g) and maintained an
inoculum density of 1,600 - 27,000 cfu of the antagoniston each
flower (Peng et al. 1992).  By comparison inoculum density in plots
sprayedweekly with spore suspensions (107 conidia/mL) of G. roseum
ranged from 300 to 15,000cfu/flower.  Propagule density was more
stable and often higher on flowers of the bee-vectored treatment
than in spray-treated flowers, but the treatments were about
equallyeffective in suppressing incidence of the pathogen on
stamens and petals, and incontrolling fruit rot.Efficiency of
inoculum deposition on flowers by bees probably depends on
subtletiesin physical contact between the bee and the flower as
well as the load and distributionof inoculum on the bee.  Size and
morphology of the flowers and of the bees, and theactivity and
posturing of bees while on the flowers undoubtedly affect the
amount ofinoculum deposited and where it is deposited on the
flower.  In studies at theUniversity of Guelph, bees delivered
about 10 to 18 times more conidia of G. roseumper flower to
strawberry than to raspberry.  The formulation and concentration
ofinoculum used was the same in all studies.  While strawberry
flowers are much largerthan raspberry flowers, and foraging
frequencies by bees on the two types of lower mayhave differed, the
bees also behaved differently on strawberry than on raspberry
(J.C.Sutton, unpublished observations).  In strawberry, bees tended
to move actively overthe face of the flower, often in a rotational
pattern, and their legs and bodiesfrequently contacted the stamens
and other flower parts.  In raspberry however, thebees moved only
slightly and tended to cling to the elongate stamens by means of
distalportions of their legs, and achieved only minor body contact
with the flower.  Whiledensity of vectored inoculum on raspberry
was low, the antagonist nonethelesseffectively suppressed Botrytis
fruit rot.Many variables influence the frequency of visits by bees
to flowers and may thusinfluence vectoring of biocontrol agents and
the effectiveness of biocontrol.  Cooltemperature, wind and rain
generally discourage foraging by bees (Free 1968 a,b),however in
our studies in strawberry, bees vectored high densities of G.
roseum to theflowers under a wide range of weather conditions (Peng
et al. 1992).  Foraging in testplots or in commercial crops can be
affected by the proximity and attractiveness tobees of other kinds
of flowers in the area that compete as sources of nectar and
pollen(Levin 1978).  For example, biocontrol of B. cinerea in
strawberry by means of bee-vectored G. roseum soon became
ineffective when the bees preferentially visited freshlyblooming
rapeseed in nearby field plots (Peng et al. 1992).  Chemical
attractants canbe used in some instances to maintain foraging in
the target crop.The mobility and foraging patterns of bees present
special problems in field studies. Screens generally are needed to
separate treatments with bees from those without bees,but may
modify microclimate and exclude important pollinators.  Bees
confined in screencages may forage and vector differently from
freely-ranging bees.  Screening of alltreatments equalizes
microclimatic modification but is impractical when plots or
hostplants are large, and can be costly.  Vectoring of biocontrol
agents will requirespecial studies in commercial crops to determine
the numbers, size and distributionof bee colonies needed for
effective vectoring of microbial antagonists and forbiocontrol.
In bee-vectoring studies in Utah, the antagonist Pseudomonas
fluorescenswas detected on only 556% of apple flowers at 61 m from
a hive, and on only 72% of pearflowers at 7 m from a hive, with an
average population of 102 cfu per flower (Thomsonet al. 1992) - A
stain of E. herbicola was detected on 92 - 96% of apple flowers ina
2.6 ha orchard (10-5700 cfu per flower).  To encourage bees to
establish foragingpatterns in a crop as opposed to other plants in
the area, it is important to introducebee colonies shortly after
the crop begins to flower.Various bees potentially could be used
to vector microbial antagonists to many kindsof plant for
biocontrol of various flower-infecting pathogens.  Several kinds
ofdomesticated bees, including bumble bees (Bombus spp.) and leaf
cutting bees (Megachilespp., Osmia spp.) as well as honey bees, may
have potential as vectors.  Wild speciesof halictid bees and
andrenid bees also possibly could be used, and contaminated
withbiocontrol agents at bait stations.  Various berry crops,
orchard fruits, crucifercrops, beans, clovers, and cucurbits
possibly could be protected by bee-vectoredantagonists.
Imaginative research could lead to effective, efficient,
andenvironmentally safe biocontrol of many crop diseases by means
of bee-vectoredantagonists.
Literature cited
FREE, J.B., 1968.  The pollination of strawberries by honey bees.
J. Hortic. Sci. 43:107-111.
FREE, J.B., 1968.  The foraging behaviour of honey bees (Apis
mellifera) and bumblebees(Bombus spp.) on blackcurrant (Rubus
nigrum), raspberry (Rubus idaeus) and strawberry(Fragaria x
ananassa) flowers.  J. Appl. Ecol. 5: 157-168.
ISRAEL, M., & BOLAND, G.J., 1992.  Influence of formulation on
efficacy of honey beesto transmit biological control for management
of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum.  Can. J.Plant Pathol. (Abstr.) (In
press).
LEVIN, D.A., 1978.  Pollination behaviour and the breeding
structure of plantpopulations.  Pages 133 - 150 in A.J. Richards,
ed., The pollination of Flowers byInsects.  Academic Press, London.
213 pp.
PENG. G., SUTTON, J.C. & KEVAN, P.G., 1992.  Effectiveness of honey
bees for applyingthe biocontrol agent Gliocladium roseum to
strawberry flowers to suppress Botrytiscinerea.  Can. J. Plant
Pathol. 14: 117-129.
THOMSON, S.V., hansen, D.R., FLINT, K.M. & VANDENBERG, J.D., 1992.
The disseminationof bacteria antagonistic to Erwinia amylovora by
honey bees.  Plant Dis. 76: 1052-1056.
WAITE, M.B., 1891.  Results from recent investigations in pear
blight.  Am. Assoc. Adv.Sci. Proc. 40:315.






7.  Bumble Bees:  Parasites, Predator
   s, DiseaseRichard M. Fisher,
Department of Biology, Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova
Scotia,Canada   Fax: 902-542-3466
ABSTRACT
During the 1980's, advances in bumble bee domestication technology
permitted the cost-effective use of these bees for greenhouse
tomato pollination.  At present, threespecies are used for this
purpose (Europe and New Zealand: B. terrestris; eastern
NorthAmerica: B. impatiens (Cr.); western North America; B.
occidentalls (Grne).  Threeprimary concerns have been associated
with the intensive laboratory culture of thesespecies:  1)
depopulation of bees in areas where queens are captured; 2) the
impactof species introductions into new area; 3) the possible
spread of disease,either amongBombus populations, or
interspecifically between bumblebees and other bees, notablyApis
mellifera.  Data are presented which demonstrate the genus
specificity of a numberof bumble bee pests and pathogens, including
mites, the microsporidian Nosema bombi,and a number of social
parasites.  The possible propagation of diseases among
culturedBombus species can be eliminated (or at least minimized)
through proper managementpractices.






8.  SPEAKERS
Brenda V. BallAFRC Institue of Arable Crops ResearchRothamsted
Experimental StationHarpenden, Herts    AL5 2JQFax: 0582 760981
Don StoltzDepartment of Microbiology & ImmunologyDalhousie
UniversityHalifax, Nova ScotiaB3H 4H7Fax: (902) 494-5125
John PhillipsUniversity of GuelphDepartment of Molecular Biology
& GeneticsGuelph, OntarioN1G 2W1Fax: (519) 837-2075
Thomas E. RindererUnited States Department of
AgricultureAgricultural Research Services, Mid South AreaHoney-Bee
Breeding, Genetics & Physiology Research1157 Ben Hur RoadBaton
Rouge, Louisiana   70820Fax:  (504) 389-0383
Don NelsonAgriculture CanadaResearch StationBeaverlodge, AlbertaT0H
0C0Fax:  (403) 354-8171
John C. SuttonDepartment of Environmental BiologyUniversity of
GuelphGuelph, OntarioN1G 2W1Fax:  (519) 837-0442
Richard M. FisherDepartment of BiologyAcadia UniversityWolfville,
Nova scotiaB0P 1X0Fax:  (902) 542-3466
>>> Item number 1204, dated 93/04/27 09:27:00 -- ALL
Date:         Tue, 27 Apr 1993 09:27:00 -0300
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         Dick Rogers <"PAM::DR"@AC.NSAC.NS.CA>
Subject:      BEE VIRUS SURVEY - ASCII
BEE VIRUS DIAGNOSTIC SERVICE - SURVEY
Dr. Don Stoltz, Virologist, Department of Microbiology and
Immunology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, is
currently involved in a project to improve the technology for the
diagnosis of honey bee viruses.  It is expected that a diagnostic
service for some viruses (e.g. Kashmir, black queen cell) could be
available by the end of 1993.
Conceivably, a general diagnostic service (i.e., for most if not
all bee viruses) could be developed, in time, if sufficient
interest/need was identified, and some sort of funding arrangement
could be negotiated. At this time, we would like responses to the
following questions:
[1]  DO YOU REQUIRE BEE VIRUS DIAGNOSIS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS?
[2]  IF ONLY A LIMITED DIAGNOSTIC SERVICE COULD BE PROVIDED, WHICH
VIRUSES ARE OF MOST CONCERN TO YOU?
[3]  WHERE DO YOU GET YOUR DIAGNOSIS WORK DONE NOW?
[4]  HOW MANY SAMPLES AT ANY ONE TIME?
[5]  WOULD YOU USE THE SERVICE IF AVAILABLE IN NOVA SCOTIA?
[6]  WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO PAY A NOMINAL FEE PER SAMPLE FOR THIS
SERVICE?
It would be appreciated if replies could be returned to Dick Rogers
as soon as possible.
V: 902-679-6029
F: 902-679-6062
E-MAIL: DR_PI@AC.NSAC.NS.CA
>>> Item number 3376, dated 94/11/17 10:20:02 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 17 Nov 1994 10:20:02 -0500
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         "Malcolm (Tom) Sanford,
              Florida Extension Apiculturist" <MTS@IFASGNV.BITNET>
Subject:      November issue of APIS
Distributed to:
        USR:[MTS]INTERNET.DIS;35, mts
FILENAME: NOVAPIS.94
            Florida Extension Beekeeping Newsletter
    Apis--Apicultural Information and Issues (ISSN 0889-3764)
               Volume 12, Number 11, November 1994
                        AHB IN CALIFORNIA
     The African honey bee (AHB) has finally been found in
California.  The first detection of the migratory front was made 20
miles west of Blythe, in Riverside County.  The feral swarm was
detected at the Chuckwalla Valley State Prison on a 3-inch pipe on
October 24.  The prison fire department destroyed the swarm and
collected the sample that was later identified by the California
Department of Food and Agriculture laboratory as Africanized and
confirmed on October 28, by the Agricultural Research Service Bee
Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland.
                      WHEN BUGS FIGHT BACK
     The 1993 winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Explanatory
Journalism is Mike Toner of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  A
compendium of his articles has been published under the title "When
Bugs Fight Back."  This publication is available by contacting the
newspaper's automatic marketing service, ph 404/222-88991.  It is
must reading for anyone interested in agriculture or public health
at almost any level.
     As Mr. Toner says in his introduction, "the bugs are fighting
back and they are getting very good at it."  This is strong stuff
and Mr. Toner's articles, published between August and April, 1992
give us pause for reflection: "Like the villains in a late-night
horror show, resistant strains of mankind's oldest enemies are
finding ways to sabotage our most sophisticated technology.  And
even the malevolent microbes of 'The Andromeda Strain' or the angry
hordes of 'Killer Bees' aren't as scary as the 'superbugs' that are
now emerging throughout the world."
     Tuberculosis, malaria, pneumonia, and practically every other
human infection is now resistant to at least one class of
antibiotics, according to Mr. Toner.  With reference to insects and
weeds, the prognosis is no better.  At least 17 'super-insects' are
resistant to almost every pesticide.  One, the Colorado Potato
beetle, can now be killed only using a tractor-pulled blow torch.
And in the United Kingdom and Australia farmers are encountering
'mega-weeds' which may threaten the world's wheat supply.

     Chemicals have been subverted, Mr. Toner says, unwittingly
aided by industries that market them, 'experts' who overuse them,
and ordinary people who see them as a promise, for a time, to
change the course of evolution.  As Dr. Robert Metcalf, University
of Illinois concludes:  "The problem is not chemicals; it's the
irresponsible way they are used.  Our shortsighted and
irresponsible use of antibiotics and pesticides is producing
strains of monster bugs resistant to nearly everything in our
arsenal.  The outlook is dismal.  And it is getting worse."
     Beekeeping, like the rest of agriculture, is increasingly
reliant on chemicals.  Does this mean there is potential for
'superbugs' to develop?  Several potentially devastating problems
now under chemical control are candidates.  For decades, beekeepers
have used and continue to employ the antibiotic, oxytetracycline,
as a "preventative" to control American Foulbrood (AFB).  It has
worked amazingly well; how long it will continue to do so is not
known.
     Evidence from extended use of antibiotics in humans, however,
is not encouraging.  Fortunately, for most persons, antibiotics
still work, but for some infections, according to Dr. Fred Tenover
at the Center for Disease Control, we are close to the end of the
road.  As quoted by Mr. Toner, he concludes, "The worst-case
scenario is almost here.  We are very, very close to having
bacteria resistant to every significant antibiotic ever developed.
Only this time, there are no new drugs coming down the pike."
     Physicians can make mistakes in prescribing antibiotics, and
many are simply inappropriate for certain conditions, including
simple colds and diarrhea, and viral infections.  In these cases,
not only don't they work, but this use magnifies the possibility of
developing resistant bacteria.  Another major don't on a list
published by the Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics,
quoted in Mr. Toner's work is: "Don't take an antibiotic to prevent
a disease you think you have been exposed to.  It not only alters
the body's normal population of harmless bacteria, but increases
your chance of getting a resistant infection."
     This last don't is of course what every beekeeper using
Terramycin (R) for AFB control does.  Unfortunately, it has worked
for decades, although there is disturbing evidence from an
Argentinean visitor to this department some time ago that AFB in
that country has shown resistance to Terramycin (R) in certain
areas.  I say "unfortunately" because that means that resistance
has not shown up in the U.S. in spite of decades of treatments by
thousands of beekeepers.  Although this is good news if one wants
to control the disease, it leads to the belief that this antibiotic
is a proverbial "magic bullet" for AFB control.  And if this is so,
there must be other bullets in our gunslinger's belt which are just
as effective for other diseases and pests.
     With the introduction of the honey bee tracheal mite (HBTM)
and then Varroa, the search for magical cure alls, like that now
perceived for AFB, have continued.   There appears to be innate
resistance against HBTM in certain bee populations; in many areas,
it seems that colonies susceptible to this parasite were quickly
killed off.  Nevertheless, menthol continues to be used as a
chemical control in many situations and there is evidence that
vegetable oil patties are also helpful.
     Varroa is another story.  Before this mite was introduced into
the U.S., well over 140 different chemicals had been used worldwide
to control this parasite.  Most didn't work.  And only in 1987,
when the U.S. was finally infested, was a technology found to
effectively kill large numbers of mites and not affect the bees at
the same time.  This, of course, is the chemical fluvalinate, a
synthetic pyrethroid first delivered on wooden strips, then labeled
as formulated in the product called Apistan (R).  The beekeeping
industry could at that time breathe a sigh of relief; a parasite
for which the western honey bee (Apis mellifera) has little
resistance was now under control.  But for how long?  Already there
is evidence that widespread use (or misuse?) of fluvalinate in
Europe may have created resistant mites.
     Although there may be other chemicals on the horizon (e.g.
formic acid), there is no substitute for wise use of one that is
already labeled, legal and effective.  Thus, as Mr. Toner suggests:
"Whether you're farming the lower 40 or a small garden plot in the
back yard, there are things you can do to keep the pests at bay--
and to slow the emergence of resistance:"
Use pesticides sparingly.  When you apply pesticide, do so only
when there is a problem, not before. (Use the ether roll test,
smoke, uncapping brood and washing adults to detect Varroa mites.)
Rotate chemicals.  If possible, alternate at least two different
classes of compounds--organophosphates, pyrethroids, carbamates or
biologicals. [This is not legally possible in the U.S.; in Canada,
Apistan (R) can be rotated with formic acid].  Once resistant mites
are detected, however, this may not be the best approach.
Avoid persistent pesticides.  You run the risk of encouraging
resistance even after the problem is gone. [This is potentially the
most pernicious problem of all when using fluvalinate.  It
accumulates over time in wax comb, making the beehive itself a
continuous possible source of the chemical, encouraging resistance
to develop in mite populations.]
Set up untreated area.  Consider providing an untreated area--a
refuge of sorts--to preserve a stock of susceptible insects to
dilute the effect of resistant genes. [This might be untreated
colonies in nearby yards.  However, this philosophy runs counter to
opinion in the regulatory community that all nearby colonies should
be treated to avoid one of the biggest problems posed by Varroa,
reinfestation.]
     This last is perhaps one of the most interesting new twists
developed by Mr. Toner.   Providing a "safe haven" for pests, he
says, is not a joke.  In this way, resistant populations might be
diluted by individuals that are not resistant, providing overall
better kill rates.  This would be, he concludes, something that
would have been "anathema" a few years back.
     The kill'em all philosophy is a throwback to the time when
eradication was the philosophy of choice.  But there has been a
paradigm shift in pest control.  As Dr. Metcalf states, concluding
the series "When Bugs Fight Back": "When you try to eradicate an
insect, you are going up against a billion years of evolution.
Pests have survived that long because they are very good at
adapting.  We will probably never completely eradicate any pest.
We shouldn't be trying.  We should be looking for a way to live
with them better."
              MORE ON SMALL BUSINESS FOOD LABELLING
     It was too good to be true.  I said in the October, 1994 APIS
that nutritional labeling was automatic without notification of
either the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or Florida
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.  Unfortunately, I
was misinformed on this issue.  Any business requesting exemption
must submit the following information to the FDA:
1.  Name and address of business.
2.  Name of food product for which exemption is claimed.
3.  Average number of full-time equivalent employees from May 8,
    1993 to May 7, 1994.
4.  Approximate total number of units sold in the U.S. between May
    8, 1993 and May 7, 1994.
5.  Signature of responsible party; also stating that the person
    signing will notify the Office of Food Labeling when the
   product no longer qualifies for exemption.
     Send the above to Office of Food Labeling (HSF-150), Center
for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug
Administration, 200 C St. SW, Washington, DC 20204.  Questions
about this should be directed to Jerad McCowin, special assistant
to the director, ph. 202/205-5229.
             NOTES FROM A TRIP TO THE BRITISH ISLES
     James Bach, Washington state apiarist, recently reported on a
trip to the British Isles.  It was published in the last edition of
the Apiary Inspectors of America Newsletter.
Honey Bee Tracheal Mites (HBTM)
1.  New Zealand bees are reported to be more susceptible to HBTM
during seasons of poor weather; losses of up to 30 percent are
seen.  The stock is perceived to build up too fast in Spring and
has small winter clusters.
2.  Local strains are thought to be resistant to HBTM, but losses
of 33 percent are still reported.  There is no sampling for mites
and no treatments given.  Colonies are allowed to die; crawling bee
symptoms are considered to be due to HBTM.
3.  Fifty percent losses in N. Ireland are thought to be from HBTM,
complicated by lack of pollen and a long, cold Spring.  Beekeepers
prefer local queens; few are imported.  Both commercial and non-
commercial beekeepers let the bees raise their own queens.
Viruses
1.  The impact of viruses on bee behavior is not known.  Viral
surveys of healthy colonies have not been undertaken.  Whether the
quality of honey bee nutrition has any effect on viruses is
unknown.
2.  Chronic Paralysis Virus has been known to multiply coincident
with HBTM; both organisms prosper under the same conditions.
Kashmir bee virus is thought to be the most virulent virus in honey
bees.
3.  Cell-cleaning bees are nurseries for developing sacbrood virus
(SBV).  It multiplies in their head (mandibular gland?)  Infected
bees forage earlier and are primarily nectar gatherers.  Nurse bees
with SBV quit feeding larvae earlier.
4.  Viruses appear to spread when bees remain in the hive for
longer than 24-hour periods.  Crowded beehives are also conducive
to viral spread.
Economics
1.  One commercial beekeeper was only breaking even; net profit
came from bee-related commodities like tinctures, salves and
specialty honeys.
2.  Honey prices are soft because of imported honey from China.
European beekeepers are actively demonstrating at European
Community headquarters to gain support for their interests.
Sincerely,
Malcolm T. Sanford
Bldg 970, Box 110620
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620
Phone (904) 392-1801, Ext. 143
FAX: 904-392-0190
BITNET Address: MTS@IFASGNV; INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU
APIS on the World Wide Web--
http://gnv.ifas.ufl.edu:7999/~entweb/apis/apis.htm
>>> Item number 3533, dated 94/12/22 09:37:47 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 22 Dec 1994 09:37:47 -0500
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         "Malcolm (Tom) Sanford,
              Florida Extension Apiculturist" <MTS@IFASGNV.BITNET>
Subject:      December APIS
Distributed to:
        USR:[MTS]INTERNET.DIS;43
FILENAME: DECAPIS.94
            Florida Extension Beekeeping Newsletter
    Apis--Apicultural Information and Issues (ISSN 0889-3764)
               Volume 12, Number 12, November 1994
      Copyright (c) 1994 M.T. Sanford "All Rights Reserved"
                          TAKING STOCK
     It's that time of year again.  Each December, I try to take
the opportunity to reflect on what has happened over the past 12
months as reported in the pages of this newsletter.  This is the
143rd consecutive issue of APIS, continuing this publication's
reputation as the longest-running newsletter of its kind currently
distributed in the United States.  In January,  APIS was recognized
as a pioneer in electronic information delivery in the booklet, 51
Reasons:  How We Use the Internet and What it Says About the
Information Superhighway.  This publication will be distributed by
the publisher, FARNET, Inc., as part of a major effort to
familiarize elected officials about the educational potential of
the National Information Infrastructure (NII).
     In the May APIS I relayed the information that many back
issues are archived at several internet sites around the country.
At that time, I also described other internet resources available
to apiculturists.  A fuller description of electronic information
resources, along with availability of other computer programs, was
also published by myself, and colleagues T.R. Fasulo and J.C.
Medley here at the University of Florida.  A reprint of the paper,
"Electronic Delivery of Apicultural Information," Bee Science, Vol.
3, No. 1, pp. 10-15, July 1993  is available to anyone upon
request. The latest development concerning electronic delivery of
this newsletter, accessibility via the World Wide Web, was
announced in the October issue.  The World Wide Web URL is:
http://gnv.ifas.ufl.edu/~entweb/apis/apis.htm
     The African honey bee (AHB) was a hot topic in 1994.  The
January APIS described the complexities involved in trying to
manage this insect in Texas.  In summary, Bill Vanderput boiled it
down to:  "...25 percent more stings, 25 percent more work and 25%
more sweat."  The spread of the AHB was also reported in Arizona
(June), California (November), and, more ominously for
Florida, in Puerto Rico (October), proving that this insect can be
introduced by sea, as well as by migrating overland.  AHB
Information resources developed in Arizona (June) and Texas,
California and USDA (April) were also described.  Finally, the July
issue discussed the reasons that the AHB invasion seemed to have
stalled in Texas.  The same issue discussed how scientists were
attempting to make sense of the AHB migration by using DNA to track
honey bee ancestry.
     The February issue of APIS focused on apitherapy, describing
some of the activities of the American Apitherapy Society,
particularly its data collection efforts (Multi-Center Apitherapy
Study).  The value of apitherapy for several illnesses was
reported, as was a comment from the dean of U.S. apitherapy,
Charles Mraz:  "The only way to find out if this kind of therapy
works is to try it."
     Other topics during the year included introduction of a new
citrus pest in Florida, the citrus leafminer, and what that
potentially meant to beekeepers (March), the disappearance of
pollinating honey bees (January) thought to be a consequence of
widespread Varroa infestation, use of attractants to increase
pollination potential (June) and employment of non-APIS or pollen
bees (April) in some pollinating situations.
     The real possibility of fluvalinate contamination of hive
products in conjunction with Varroa treatment was discussed in
several issues (January, March and April) of this newsletter, along
with potential effects of general environmental pollution on a bee
colony (May).  Bee poisoning by plants in Florida was reported in
June and the current status of the U.S. beekeeping industry in
July.
     The August issue of APIS was devoted to honey processing,
including how to get a permit, guidelines for honey house
sanitation and the recent rapid rise of adulterating activity.  The
new nutritional labeling law as it applies to small firms was
described in October and November, as was Varroa control and
possible chemical resistance by mites due to heavy use by
beekeepers.  Discussions of vegetable-oil patty use for American
foulbrood (September) and tracheal mite control (October) rounded
out the year.
                        4-H Essay Contest
     Back in June, I wrote that the annual 4-H Essay Contest
sponsored by the American Beekeeping Federation needed entrants.
Since then, I have had only two (2) inquiries.  Florida had no
entries last year; this means there is an excellent chance of
winning by simply entering the contest. Here are the details:
     Cash prizes to three top winners:
          1st Place $250.00
          2nd Place $100.00
          3rd Place $ 50.00
     Each state winner also receives an appropriate book about
honey bees, beekeeping, or honey.
This year, essayists are asked to write an original story on honey
bees, one that is suitable for a teacher to read to second-grade
students.  The story can be about the honey bee family and the
members' life cycles or fancifully casting individuals in the
colony as characters.  Any style is suitable as long as it covers:
*The roles each of the bees--queen, drone, worker--play in the
honey bee colony.
*The life cycle of the honey bee colony as a unit.
*The ways in which honey bees benefit humans.
The title of the story should indicate its context.  Some
suggestions:  The Busy Little Bee; I Like Honey; A Trip to the
Apiary; My Friend, the Beekeeper; Moving Day at the Bee Hive.
RULES:
     1.   Contest is open to active 4-H Club members only.  4-H'ers
who have previously placed first, second, or third at the national
level are not eligible; other state winners are eligible to re-
enter.
     2.   Essays must be 750 to 1000 words long, written on the
designated subject only.  All factual statements must be referenced
with endnotes; failure to do so will result in disqualification of
the essay. A brief biographical sketch of the essayist, including
date of birth, complete mailing address, and telephone number, must
accompany the essay. (The word limit does not include the
references or the essayist's biographical sketch.)
     3.   Essays submitted must be typewritten, double-spaced, on
one side of the paper and should follow standard manuscript format.
Handwritten essays will not be judged.
     4.   Essays will be judged on (a) accuracy, (b) creativity,
(c) conciseness, (d) logical development of the topic, and (e)
scope of research.
     5.   Essayists in Florida should forward essays directly to
Essay Contest, Dr. M.T. Sanford, Bldg. 970, Box 110620,
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620.  The deadline is February 15, 1995.
     6.   Each state may submit only one entry.
     7.   Final judging and selection of the national winner will
be made by the ABF's Essay Committee, whose decision is final.
     8.   The National Winner will be announced by May 1, 1995.
     9.   All entries become the property of the American
Beekeeping Federation, Inc. and may be published or used as it sees
fit.  No essay will be returned.
                     Parasitic Mite Syndrome
     The report by James Bach on his trip to the British Isles in
the November issue of APIS provoked some feedback.  Bob Hawkes, a
beekeeper accessing the newsletter on World Wide Web, sent me these
observations:
     "Last Saturday I attended the Pennsylvania State Beekeepers
Association meeting.  The apiary inspection chiefs from
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia reported that they
no longer consider tracheal mites to be a serious problem.  But
there is serious concern about Varroa.  We have Varroa infestation
throughout much of Pennsylvania now.  And this fall many
beekeepers have seen their colonies crash--the "disappearing
disease."  Some have been wiped out, and the colonies went from
very strong to dead in a very short time.  The experts reported
finding the same [those reported by Mr. Bach] viruses (chronic
paralysis virus and Kashmir virus) in some of these dead colonies.
So they associate these viral infections not with tracheal mites,
but with Varroa mites.  Are the viruses carried by one or both?  Or
are these viruses always present and their effect associated with
stress from any source?  It's a frustrating yet fascinating time!"
     Now comes a report in the December 1994 American Bee Journal
(Vol. 134, No. 12, pp. 827-828) on what the authors (H. Shimanuki;
N. Calderone and D. Knox) call parasitic mite syndrome.  As the
they state:  "...two different parasitic mites in a colony is
especially devastating because Acarapis woodi  (the tracheal mite)
parasitizes the adult and the preferred host of Varroa is the
prepupae.  We theorize that the parasitic mite syndrome is in some
way connected to one or both of the parasitic mites vectoring the
acute bee paralysis virus (ABPV)..."  Dr. Shimanuki has
subsequently reported to me by electronic mail that 28% of the
adult bee samples with Varroa are also found to be infested with
the tracheal mite.  The authors provide a list of symptoms that can
occur at any time of year and which may not all be evident at a
given time:
Adult Symptoms:
1. Varroa is present.
2. Adult bee population is reduced.
3. Crawling bees are seen.
4. Queens are superseded.
5. Tracheal mites may be present.
Brood Symptoms:
1. Varroa is present.
2. Brood pattern is spotty.
3. Symptoms resembling the foulbroods or sacbrood may be present.
These may disappear after feeding Terramycin (R), sugar syrup or
inserting Apistan (R) strips.
4. Affected brood can be in any stage and anywhere on the comb.
5. Many symptoms are similar to American foulbrood, but there is no
"ropiness," no typical odor and resultant scales are not brittle
and easy to remove.
6. No predominant bacterial type is found and no known bee pathogen
has been isolated from samples so far.
     Although coincident with presence of mites, the use of
"parasitic mite syndrome" to characterize the above conditions is
not without complications.  As the authors state: "It is somewhat
confusing that colonies with parasitic mite syndrome benefit from
the feeding of oxytetracycline or sugar syrup, both of which are
not known to be effective against viruses.  Nevertheless they
conclude:  "The effectiveness of fluvalinate impregnated plastic
strips [Apistan (R)] strongly suggests an association with Varroa
jacobsoni."
     Until further notice, the authors report that they will begin
to use the term "parasitic mite syndrome" in routine reporting of
disease diagnosis from their laboratory.  Persons submitting brood
disease samples to the laboratory should send a piece of brood comb
and 100 adults from each affected colony.  Comb should be at least
2 inches square, wrapped in a paper bag, towel, or newspaper and
mailed in a wooden or cardboard box.  The use of plastic bags,
aluminum foil, waxed paper, tin or glass should be avoided.
Address samples to: Honey Bee Diagnosis, USDA, ARS Bee Research
Laboratory, BARC-E, B-476, Beltsville, MD 20705.
     The symptoms listed above, especially those associated with
adult bees, except for the presence of either or both mites, ring
familiar to many beekeepers.  These conditions have often been
referred to as "disappearing disease," "autumn collapse" or "May
disease."  They also remind me of those involved in the unexplained
dieoff in Florida's panhandle in 1986-1988, coincident with the
initial detection of tracheal mites in the area.  First reported in
the February, March and April 1987 issues of APIS, and later
reflected on in April and March 1988, this situation culminated in
a feeding study carried out in 1988 and 1989.  The results were
reported in Bee Science in 1991 [A Florida Honey-Bee Feeding Study
Using the Beltsville Bee Diet (R), Vol. 1, No. 2, pp 72-76].  I
will mail a reprint to anyone upon request.
     Best wishes to all for a happy holiday season!
Sincerely,
Malcolm T. Sanford
Bldg 970, Box 110620
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620
Phone (904) 392-1801, Ext. 143
FAX: 904-392-0190
BITNET Address: MTS@IFASGNV; INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU
APIS on the World Wide Web--
http://gnv.ifas.ufl.edu:7999/~entweb/apis/apis.htm
Copyright (c) M.T. Sanford 1994  "All Rights Reserved"
>>> Item number 3822, dated 95/02/25 08:58:53 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 25 Feb 1995 08:58:53 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         Kevin Roddy <kroddy@UHUNIX.UHCC.HAWAII.EDU>
Subject:      Your help needed to protect Hawai'i's honey bees
In-Reply-To:  <9502240026.AA11656@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
25 February 1995
From the volcanic Island of Hawai'i to list members of Bee-L and other
beekeepers around the world, Aloha:
We in Hawai'i need your support in helping us maintain mite free and
disease free honey bees.  Please read the letter below that was composed
by one of the Island of Hawai'i's best known beekeepers, Walter Patton,
summarizing our problem and what has happened thus far.   This letter
also appeared in the February 1995 Issue of American Bee Journal.  We
*sincerely* need your help--comments, questions are most welcome at my
e-mail address, and I will forward to Walter, or you may fax him
directly.  (we're working on getting Walter on the Internet)
If you would like to fax Walter, please do.  Telephone calls from the US
Mainland to Hawai'i are competitive, and it is not prohibitive, like it
was in the past.  Direct-dialed rates average from 30 cents per minute for
the day rate to 15 cents per minute for the night rate, so faxing is more
economical than sending letters for 32 cents per letter.
Quickly, I am sure many of you know the problems that Hawai'i has faced
with unwanted, introduced diseases and species in the past.  On a human
scale, Native Hawaiians were decimated by disease to which they had no
resistance.  Only one full-blooded Hawaiian has survived for 19 others
that have died.  We are fighting what has been introduced intentionally
and unintentionally with limited success.  Our bees are free of mites and
other diseases that have decimated colonies in other places. We want to
keep it that way for us as well as you.  In the letter below there is a
proposal that Hawai'i be designated as a repository for genetic bee
stock. Because of our distance from the US mainland there is little fear
of Africanization problems, and fortunately, Varroa cannot swim!
As a brief aside, we are also in constant fear of the introduction of the
infamous brown tree snake of Guam, which has *killed all bird life on
Guam* and is the source of constant power failures there, as the snakes
shimmy up power poles, and are electrocuted.  There have been sightings
of this snake at airports only on the islands of Kaua'i and O'ahu, and
they were quickly dispatched.
Anyway, please help us any way that you can.  I have included fax numbers
to three Federal politicians in Washington.  Their hearing from
beekeepers across the United States that oppose this new rule will be
vital to our keeping Hawai'i 's honey bee stores clean from disease,
insuring clean queens to you until we can all eliminate Varroa and other
bee afflictions.
I am a university librarian by profession, and have already conducted an
extensive literature search on New Zealand honey bee diseases (through
the DIALOG database system) and collected well over 50 articles that
discuss honey bee diseases in New Zealand, which I have forwarded to
Agriculture Professors at the Univesity of Hawai'i, Hilo, and to members
of the Big Island Beekeeping Association.
A warmfelt thank you to all!!!
Kevin M. Roddy
kroddy@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A PROPOSED RULE CHANGE OF THE HONEY BEE ACT OF 1922 TO ALLOW NEW ZEALAND
BEES INTO THE UNITED STATES.
This proposed rule, as published in the Federal Register (7/18/94 page
36773) is deceitful and misleading in the first paragraph summary where
the Animal and Health Inspection Service of the USDA states, "The
proposed actions appears warranted based on our determination that New
Zealand is free of diseases and parasites of honey bees."  This is a
lie.   As per "Honey Bee Pathology"  (Bailey and Ball, 1991) New Zealand
does have half moon syndrome, a mite Meiitiphis alvearius, Kashmir bee
virus, melanosis, chronic paralysis virus, and Malpighamoria mellificae.
This fraudulent statement was made to enlist the support of readers of
the proposed rule and now creates cause for concern regarding the
credibility and intentions of APHIS/USDA.  The proposed rule is not for
the benefit of US beekeepers; this is a political issue in the name of
free trade to facilitate the New Zealand beekeepers efforts to supply the
package and queen bee needs of Canada and possibly Korea.  Before the
1988 closure of Canadian borders to US bees, Canadians spent $12 million
annually purchasing over 300,000 packages of US bees per year.  A USDA
1993 legal opinion of the Honey Bee Act of 1922 prohibits the transiting
of New Zealand bees through Honolulu, O'ahu.
In a telephone conversation with Mark Winston, professor and bee
researcher at Simon Fraser University, Canada, the scientific and
biological soundness of keeping Hawai'i isolated as a protected gene bank
was agreed upon and Mark wondered if the New Zealand bees could be
transited through Los Angeles.  Next I called Gordon Waller, queen
breeder and researcher from Tucson, who is packing to move out of Arizona
and away from Africanized honey bee drones that are threatening his queen
bee program.  Mr. Waller also supported the idea of keeping Hawaii
isolated as a breeding sanctuary protected against any possible genetic
contamination of Africanized honey bees.   At Gordon Waller's suggestion,
I telephoned Dr. Eva Crane in the United Kingdom.  Dr. Crane, now
retired, has studied the spread of bee diseases and pests around the
world and said she would question and oppose any legislation to increase
the trafficking of bees around the world.  Dr. Crane then put me in touch
with Dr. Brenda Ball in England who took great issue with Dr. Shimanuki's
dismissal of Kashmir Bee Virus as having no economic significance and his
lack of concern about half moon syndrome because he was unable to
discover how the syndrome is spread through the hive.  Dr. Ball also
expressed concern about the lack of understanding about the compounding
effects of bee pests and diseases when multiple infestations occur in the
hive simultaneously.  Dr. Ball agreed that Hawai'i could play a VITAL
ROLE in the future of honey bees of the world if Hawai'i maintained a
strict isolation and is established as a "Repository" for US bees free of
mites and genetic contamination by AHB.
The proposed rule is not in the best interests of US beekeepers and
should be rescinded by the USDA.  Unbiased review and research directed
by a "peer review" group including members of the beekeeping industry
must be conducted to survey and assess the potential environmental impact
that any deviation from the intent of the Honey Bee Act of 1922 would
have on US beekeeping.
Act now, and call or write your US Senators and Congressmen (helpful
numbers are given below) and request that the Honey Bee Act of 1922 be
supported and that New Zealand bees not be allowed into the US.
Additionally, federal legislation is needed to support the efforts of
Hawai'i to act as a repository for the cleanest US honey bee gene bank as
a safeguard against the future spread of known bee diseases and pests and
the unknown effects of temperate New Zealand bee disease and pests on
honey bees in the tropical environment of Hawai'i.  Please *bee*
involved.  We might make a difference is enough of us speak out now.
this is not a done deal.  Handwritten letters are better than no
letters.  Write today.  if you need me to fax for you, I will be glad to
help.
Walter Patton
27-703 Kaieie Road
Papaikou, Hawai'i  96781
Ph/fAX:  808-964-5401
FAX FEDERAL LEGISLATORS!
US Senator Richard Lugar, likely Chairman US Senate Committee on Agriculture
FAX  202.228.0360
Congressman Pat Roberts, Chairman, Congressional Committee on Agriculture
FAX  202.225.5375
Congressman Tom Ewing Chairman, Risk Management and Specialty Crops
(includes honey and bees)   FAX  202.225.8071
>>> Item number 3837, dated 95/02/27 09:44:00 -- ALL
Date:         Mon, 27 Feb 1995 09:44:00 -0800
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@ALBNYVM1.BITNET>
From:         "Paul van Westendorp 576-5600 Fax: 576-5652"
              <PVANWESTEN@GALAXY.GOV.BC.CA>
Subject:      Re: Your help needed to protect Hawai'i's honey bees
    I have read the latest communication about the Hawaiian issue, and
    followed with interest the dialoque between Allen Dick and Andy.
    Notwithstanding the cynical attitudes and economic opportunism that may
    be part of the issue, perhaps it is better to focus on the question of
    diseases and pests associated with New Zealand honeybees.  Also, it is
    necessary to seperate the issue of transshipments of NZ bees through
    Hawaii, from the larger issue of the US allowing importation of NZ bees.
    1.  From a geographical perspective, it makes perfect sense for the
    Hawaiian industry to demand a ban on all importations, including
    transshipments.  When we closely examine the details of transshipments
    and assess the risks, many of the fears may be unfounded.  Transshipments
    only go through Honolulu, O'ahu, where they stay for a few hours before
    loaded up for a flight to Vancouver, BC.  The shipments must meet airline
    standards of bee-tightness, etc.  Surely, we are not talking about piles
    of bees 'bleeding' from those containers. If these containers are left in
    open areas, it is more likely that the bees buzzing around on the outside
    are genuine Hawaiian that have been attracted.  In terms of shipping
    conditions and the short time frame during which these bees stay at the
    Honolulu airport, risks are extremely low.
    2.  As far as I know, the commercial Hawaiian beekeeping industry and the
    bee breeders in particular, are concentrated on the big island of Hawaii,
    over 100 nautical miles from O'ahu.  Unless there is free movement of
    bees among the islands (by man), there is no chance of bees reaching
    Hawaii on their own.  In other words, the risks of the current Hawaiian
    commercial bee stock exposed to transshipped New Zealand beestock is
    negligible.
    3.  There is this impressive list of pathogens reported present in New
    Zealand, as stated by Bailey & Ball.  I have no cause to doubt the
    accuracy of these claims but the problem is that this valuable research
    was done in New Zealand and not in North America and Hawaii.  The listing
    of these agents have been used in this discussion as if they are unique
    to New Zealand and extraordinarily virulent.  This is simply not the
    case.  Most are of academic interest and have only been reported
    incidentally.  Part of the reason that they have been reported
    incidentally is because these agents are generally latent.  It is wrong
    to insinuate that any of these agents would upon introduction, cause
    havoc to American beekeeping.  (However, I acknowledge that in company of
    parasitic mites, some viral agents may become virulent in the future.)
    In my view, the weakness of Hawaii's arguments rest in the fact that
    no comparable scientific research has ever been applied to the Hawaiian
    and north American bee populations.  There is simply not an accurate
    inventory listing of agents associated with american bees.  Any or all
    (and perhaps more) of those agents listed by Bailey & Ball could already
    occur in the feral and managed bee population of Hawaii and North
    America.
    As long as there is no accurate listing of honeybee pathogens in Hawaii
    and North America, I believe it is wrong in portraying New Zealand as a
    dangerous source of bee stock because it is not.   I am not wishing to
    talk on behalf of New Zealand in any way, but I and others have full
    confidence in the health status and reliability of NEw Zealand bees.
    This position is based on information and experience gathered over 15
    years since Canada started importing bees from New Zealand.
    Canada assessed New Zealand (and Australia) as a source of bees in the
    early 1980's.  Ever since the initial assessment, Canada has been
    satisfied and impressed with the thorough and sound animal disease and
    pest control programs in place in New Zealand and Australia.
    In the mid-1980's, when Kashmir Bee Virus (KBV) had been reported, BC
    sent bee samples to NZ for analysis (by Anderson, who since then moved to
    Australia).  Indeed, KBV was identified in samples of BC bees but also
    from sources that had never been exposed to NZ bee importations.
    Eventhough, no further studies were carried out, it was suspected that
    bees in many parts of Canada (and presumably the US) already harbored KBV
    and other viral agents.  For the lack of funds and expertise in bee
    virology, a comprehensive survey of North America was never carried out.
    Shimanuki and others have stated that it is likely some or many viruses
    are widely distributed in the north American bee population.  With the
    recent entry of Africanized bees, additional viruses may be introduced
    into North America as well.
    Because of Hawaii's longstanding importation ban, and its opportunity to
    remain free of parasitic mites, I can appreciate the demand for some form
    of protection.  As I wrote in ABJ's january 1995 edition, the strength of
    arguments in support of protection must be based on scientific evidence
    together with risk assessment studies.  For the lack of information of
    Hawaii's inventory of bee pathogens, it is difficult to consider NZ
    transshipments as a bonafide health risk to Hawaiian bees at this time.
    To resolve the issue, a comprehensive survey may be carried out in
    Hawaii.  The results can then be compared with the New Zealand list.
    Considering the scientific information currently available, I find it
    difficult to accept the argument that New Zealand bees pose a health risk
    to the North American bee population.   But then, I do agree that perhaps
    New Zealand may pose an 'economic risk' to some American bee suppliers.
    Paul van Westendorp
    Provincial Apiarist
    British Columbia
>>> Item number 7865, dated 96/03/26 17:38:15 -- ALL
Date:         Tue, 26 Mar 1996 17:38:15 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ILHAWAII.NET>
Subject:      bee disease spread, we better think NOW
>To: scobey@MAGNUS.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
>From: hihoney@ilhawaii.net (Walter Patton)
>Subject: bee disease spread
>
>Hello Susan Cobey < bee-l readers  & bee lovers
>        V copper suggested that I write you and ask which honeybee disease
and pest might bee transmitted with seman and pollen? Here in Hawaii the
most isolated place on earth we are concerned about protecting the only U S
honeybee stocks certified to bee free of V & T mites and without Afracanized
genes. Since 1985 Hawaii has prohibited the entery  of honeybees and bee
equipment to prevent the introduction and or spread of bee disease.Hawaii
should bee declared a honeybee site sensitive location for the future
security of U S honeybee s. We lost a battle to stop N Z bees from entering
our state on the way to Canada.Thanks to free trading leaders of America and
the Gatt treaty we have to let them sit on the tar mac at Honolulu Int.
Airport and hope that no accidents occur. Accidents do occur and N Z bees
are acknowledged to bee loaded with honeybee viruses. 14  viruses/pests to
bee exact.We recently got reports that some Hawaii  bee's sent to Beltsville
were found to bee free of Kashmir, cloudy wing and black queen viruses.
Other bee research people have admitted that mites and viruses are deadly
and unable to control. The USDA has been VERY VERY slow to show concerns for
the bee viruses which only recently have been found in the mainland US. I
think the viruses have come to the North American Continent via N Z bees to
Canada and Canadian bees to the U S ,which if true will bee an example of
the complete failure by USDA to protect U S honeybee stocks from the
"Introduction and or spread of honeybee disease and pest " as per the
original intent of the Honey bee Act of 1922.
>            Regarding the HB Act 1922 .The act was gutted of it's original
intent by the last round of the Uraguy Treaty to ratify the Gatt agreement .
This all became effective 1-5-95.The original Act had a strict prohibition
against the import of Bees to the U S. That strict prohibition does not
exist any more. Now the Honeybee issue is left to the discretion of the
Secretary of Agriculture and all of these changes were done without notice
or imput from anyone.Troy Fore did sit on "the sweetners advisory board"
that was supposed to advise on the effects of the changes and HE says the
panel only addressed the issues of Honey as a sweetner and never talked
about the potential impact on honeybees. Yet another example of industry and
government officials without any true bee sensitive feelings.
            I believe that this issue is real and will get worse. A German
bee  person was brought to our Big Island Beekeepers Association meeting
several years ago by some of the local USDA people and he talked of famines
being a possibility in Europe with their more advanced problems and his
comments made a BIG impression on me . We must give our collective energies
to the honeybee which we are dependent on for our own survival.Man with his
better ideas and bigger ,faster means of transportation have already spread
honeybee problems around the world and  we may bee too late and let's hope
for the best.
>   Thank you for your time and your comments will bee appreciated
>Sincerly Walter Patton
>
Walter Patton- Beekeeper      "BEE HEALTHY EAT YOUR HONEY DAILY"
27-703 A Kaieie Rd.           "The Beehive the Fountain of Youth and Health "
Papaikou,HI. 96781            " You are never too old for a little honey "
Ph.fax 808-964-5401            " Honey Eaters Stick Together Longer "
   hihoney@ilhawaii.net
  http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney.htm
http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/beeware.htm
   http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/lamalani.htm
>>> Item number 7869, dated 96/03/27 22:44:23 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 27 Mar 1996 22:44:23 +0000
Reply-To:     nickw@wave.co.nz
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Comments:     Authenticated sender is <nickw@wave.co.nz>
From:         Nick Wallingford <nickw@WAVE.CO.NZ>
Organization: Nat Beekeepers Assn of NZ
Subject:      Kashmir bee virus...
While I have no wish to initiate another "flame session" on BEE-L, as
a New Zealand subscriber to the list I would like to make clear the
following in relation to Mr. Patton's comment that "I think the
viruses have come to the North American Continent via N Z bees to
Canada and Canadian bees to the U S":
- all viruses which have been found in NZ honey bees have also been
found in honey bees in a variety of other places in the world.
- because a particular bee virus is not listed as occurring in any
geographic location does not mean that the virus is in fact absent; it
is just as possible that the area has not been investigated thoroughly
for the presence of the virus by a scientist with the skills and
funding necessary to find the virus, especially when the virus does
not cause observable symptoms (the claim that Kashmir bee virus was
absent from the continental US until a detailed study was carried out
is a good case in point).  Absence of evidence is not evidence of
absence.
- Kashmir bee virus was identified in New Zealand by Dr. Denis
Anderson, an Australian bee virologist who worked in New Zealand for
several years as a bee pathologist.  Dr. Anderson did his Ph.D on
Kashmir bee virus and is now regarded as the preeminent scientist
capable of finding the virus.  I understand that that is why Dr.
Anderson was asked to assist in identification work on that virus for
samples from the continental US.  Dr. Anderson has been instrumental
in providing evidence that the virus is more widespread in the world
population of honey bees than was first postulated by Drs. Bailey and
Woods in 1977.
- Dr. Anderson has found that the Canadian isolate of Kashmir bee
virus is a distinct serological strain from the Australian strain,
which in turn, is serologically distinct from the isolates from New
Zealand.  The US isolates have also been found to be serologically
distinct from the Australian strain.
- Like the Americas, neither Australia or New Zealand have any native
populations of Apis mellifera.  The populations of Apis mellifera
found in New Zealand came from Europe, the US (originally from Europe)
and Australia (originally from the US and Europe).   New Zealand also
does not have any other native species of social bee.   According to
Dr. Anderson, it is therefore likely that either the virus exists in
other insect species found in a many countries, or that the virus
originated in Apis mellifera in an area in Europe which provided
stocks of Apis mellifera which were taken the countries where it has
now been identified.
For further factual information on the subject of Kashmir bee virus,
its occurrence and likely origins, I would recommend the following:
Anderson, D (1991) Kashmir bee virus - a relatively harmless virus of
honey bee colonies.  American Bee Journal 131: 767-770.
Bruce, W, Anderson, D, Calderone, N and Shimanuki, H (1995) A survey
for Kashmir bee virus in honey bee colonies in the United States.
American Bee Journal 135: 352-355.
------------------------------------------
Nick Wallingford
President - National Beekeepers Assn of NZ
home nickw@wave.co.nz
work nw1@boppoly.ac.nz
------------------------------------------
>>> Item number 7880, dated 96/03/27 18:42:49 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 27 Mar 1996 18:42:49 +0000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Gordon Scott <gordon@APIS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Kashmir bee virus...
In-Reply-To:  <199603271042.WAA15533@Axil.wave.co.nz>
Nice to hear from you Nick -- I've missed your postings.
The first person to find Varroa clearly "brought it to the area".
The same with EFB.
The same with AFB.
The same with T-Mites.
The same with Viruses.
So often we blame the messenger for bad news.
Generally, it's the concerned and observant who find and report
the problem. In the case of a virus it also takes special skills
and facilities.
Regards,
--
Gordon Scott   gordon@apis.demon.co.uk      gordon@multitone.co.uk (work)
The Basingstoke Beekeeper (newsletter)      beekeeper@apis.demon.co.uk
<A HREF="http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/apis">Embryo Home Page</A>
Beekeeper; Kendo 3rd Dan; Sometime sailor.  Hampshire, England.
>>> Item number 7886, dated 96/03/28 01:17:00 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 28 Mar 1996 01:17:00 GMT
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Andy Nachbaur <andy.nachbaur@BEENET.COM>
Organization: WILD BEE'S BBS (209) 826-8107 LOS BANOS, CA
Subject:      Re: Kashmir bee virus...
*FYI*
Last Official USDA Word on Kashmir bee virus in the US, (that I
could find), minus any data from Hawaii as it may not have been included
in this round of tests...in 1993. Have no idea if this is the same as
the INDIAN BEE Virus that is claimed to be the cause of horrendous
losses of hive and native bees in large parts of India. But it matters
not because most of these virus have the ability to change and become
very virulent without any help from man or bees'tees. And for sure
except for trying to determine if they are abundant in US bees they have
received little study here, and I fear will not receive a great deal of
attention in the near future because of the cost considerations.
Beekeepers may have to treat virus tainted bees or beekeeping
operations with a history of unexplained loss, the same as we treat AID's
patents. Give them the best care for the symptoms that are treatable. If
the beehive itself is the unit of husbandry then that beehive may need
to have a secondary unit, a nuc, available each season to maintain
itself even with the best diet, chemical treatment, and TLC by the
keeper of the bees. At least those beekeeper's who are doing this now
appear to be maintaining productive hives.
                          ttul Andy-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
09/19/94                 Agricultural Research Service
Page     8 2
                 Technology Transfer Automated Retrieval System
                                 (ARS TEKTRAN)
Title:SURVEY FOR KASHMIR BEE VIRUS IN HONEY BEE COLONIES IN THE UNITED
STATES
BRUCE  WILLIAM A
ANDERSON  D
CALDERONE  N W
SHIMANUKI  H
Technical Abstract:
A survey for Kashmir Bee Virus (KBV) in honey bee (Apis mellifera L)
colonies in the United States is reported.  Samples consisting of 300
worker bees were collected from one hived colony in each of 10 different
apiaries in California, Flordia, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Texas, and
Washington.  Extracts were obtained from each and injected into groups of
normal healthy white-eyed honey bee pupae to increase to detectable
concentrations any viruses that may have been present in the extracts in
small concentrations.  Extracts were subsequently obtained from each
injected pupa and tested for the presence of KBV and other virus particles
in serological tests. KBV was found to be present in each of the seven
States sampled.
Submitted to:                                           (approved 08/04/93)
   AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL (APICULTURAL RESEARCH SECTION)
WILLIAM A BRUCE                    301 504-8821           FTS
BEE RESEARCH LABORATORY
BLDG. 476, BARC-EAST               FAX Number:
BELTSVILLE
MD 20705
.
---
 ~ QMPro 1.53 ~ ... Where bee-hives range on a gray bench in the garden,
>>> Item number 7890, dated 96/03/28 08:06:57 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 28 Mar 1996 08:06:57 -0800
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Roy Nettlebeck <rnettleb@LINKNET.KITSAP.LIB.WA.US>
Subject:      Re: Kashmir bee virus...
In-Reply-To:  <960327221936790@beenet.com>
On Thu, 28 Mar 1996, Andy Nachbaur wrote:
> *FYI*
>
> Last Official USDA Word on Kashmir bee virus in the US, (that I
> could find), minus any data from Hawaii as it may not have been included
> in this round of tests...in 1993. Have no idea if this is the same as
> the INDIAN BEE Virus that is claimed to be the cause of horrendous
> losses of hive and native bees in large parts of India. But it matters
> not because most of these virus have the ability to change and become
> very virulent without any help from man or bees'tees. And for sure
> except for trying to determine if they are abundant in US bees they have
> received little study here, and I fear will not receive a great deal of
> attention in the near future because of the cost considerations.
>
> Beekeepers may have to treat virus tainted bees or beekeeping
> operations with a history of unexplained loss, the same as we treat AID's
> patents. Give them the best care for the symptoms that are treatable. If
> the beehive itself is the unit of husbandry then that beehive may need
> to have a secondary unit, a nuc, available each season to maintain
> itself even with the best diet, chemical treatment, and TLC by the
> keeper of the bees. At least those beekeeper's who are doing this now
> appear to be maintaining productive hives.
>
>                        >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 09/19/94                 Agricultural Research Service
> Page     8 2
>                  Technology Transfer Automated Retrieval System
>                                  (ARS TEKTRAN)
> Title:SURVEY FOR KASHMIR BEE VIRUS IN HONEY BEE COLONIES IN THE UNITED
> STATES
>
> BRUCE  WILLIAM A
> ANDERSON  D
> CALDERONE  N W
> SHIMANUKI  H
> Technical Abstract:
>
> A survey for Kashmir Bee Virus (KBV) in honey bee (Apis mellifera L)
> colonies in the United States is reported.  Samples consisting of 300
> worker bees were collected from one hived colony in each of 10 different
> apiaries in California, Flordia, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Texas, and
> Washington.  Extracts were obtained from each and injected into groups of
> normal healthy white-eyed honey bee pupae to increase to detectable
> concentrations any viruses that may have been present in the extracts in
> small concentrations.  Extracts were subsequently obtained from each
> injected pupa and tested for the presence of KBV and other virus particles
> in serological tests. KBV was found to be present in each of the seven
> States sampled.
> Submitted to:                                           (approved 08/04/93)
>
  Hello ,  Part of my learning curve over the last few months has been
seeing behavior change in the way bees die out do to Varroa. Some you
treat with still a big population of bees and they act normal for a weeh
or so and then they die off in 3 to 5 days.By using E-mail after I read
what I could out of Honey Bee Patholigy. It looked like a Virus problem.
I have contacted the people who have the greatest amount of knowledge on
bee viruses. Some of my bees will be checked.It cost a lot of money to
work on viruses. Even the testing itself.One of the reasons I was showing
a great deal of concern with Varroa. Was the fact that Varroa has been
found to spread 3 viruses.You can see by the info above that the word if
we have has been lost. We have some and as stated above we have to watch
our bees very close and keep them as heathy as we can.Healthy bees
without Varroa will have a much better chance of staying safe.
 I wish we could get one of the experts to post more info for us on Viruses.
 Thank You
Roy
>>> Item number 7897, dated 96/03/28 11:28:04 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 28 Mar 1996 11:28:04 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ILHAWAII.NET>
Subject:      In Response
Bee Friends
            Re;Nick Wallingford President. N.Z.  Beekeepers  Comments  The
suggestion that viruses  maybe present in all bees is not a reason for US
beekeepers to not be concerned about the introduction and spread of more
viruses from imports. {Note currently the only bees being imported to the US
come from Canada and Canada imports from N.Z. and N.Z. reports 12 to 14
honeybee disease and pests present on their bees. ... ABOUT D Anderson being
THE preeminent scientist on bee viruses . Does the rest of the honeybee
scientific world agree wuth this ? I would expect the N.Z. beekeepers to
think so as they pay him a lot of money to disspell the concern about bee
viruses as the N.Z. bees seem to have all the viruses known about in the bee
world and the N.Z beekeepers have lots of end of season bees they want to
sell each year before going into their winter.N.Z. beekeepers are advanced
and skilled markeeters "BUYER BEEWARE"  D. Anderson was asked to be involved
with the USDA  survey because why ? I don't know probably because the USDA
has been without a bee sensitive person in Washington ever since Dr.
Shimanuke spent his vacation (6wks) in N.Z.How shameful that the United
States of America could get so far behind in protecting the US honeybees.
Sure Gov.money is getting scarce and when has the USDA made any pleas to the
bee industry for help in getting more money for bee research. When has the
US bee keeping  industry been alerted about the eminent dangers to honeybee
populations with mites and viruses by USDA or industry associations or
publications.
          D.Anderson finds different serological strains in N.Z ., Canadian
and US bees .Well that what he was looking for. Research without an
oversight committee to keep objectivity has been proven to often have tunnel
vision.  Finally for the readers to be directed to the writtings of D.
Anderson titled "Kashmir Bee Virus a relativly harmless virus of honeybees"
should tell it all. Why doesn't Mr. Wallingford also suggest reading  the
writtings of others who feel quite strongly that Kashmir Bee virus is FAR
form being a "Harmless virus to honeybees" i.e. B. Ball, England  & T. Liu,
Canada .  When will the USDA sound the alarm that honeybees with mites and
viruses have NO chance to survive. Instead we get a decertation about
P.M.S.and our US  honeybee headaches from the US preeminent honeybee
scientist Dr. Shimanuke.
          According to the N.Z. beekeepers home page the average hive
production of honey in N.Z. in 1995 was about 40 lbs per hive . With the
majority if the beekeeping happening on the North Island in NZ with a
similar  climate as places in the US with better averages per hive Colorado
60lbs, N.Dakota 108lbs, S.Dakota 85lbs.,Kansas67lbs.,Ohio 62lbs. Michagan
92lbsWashington 60lbs., Oregon 52lbs. WHY maybe we should ponder these facts
regarding the health effects of bee viruses.
      Concerned and curious
Walter & Elisabeth Patton,  27-703 A Ka' ie'ie Rd., Papaikou HI.,96781
    Ph./fax. 808-964-5401       E-Mail  hihoney@ilhawaii
Beekeeper and Bed  & Breakfast Owner in Hawaii
  http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney.htm
http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/beeware.htm
   http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/lamalani.htm
>>> Item number 7904, dated 96/03/29 21:09:41 -- ALL
Date:         Fri, 29 Mar 1996 21:09:41 +0000
Reply-To:     nickw@wave.co.nz
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Comments:     Authenticated sender is <nickw@wave.co.nz>
From:         Nick Wallingford <nickw@WAVE.CO.NZ>
Organization: Nat Beekeepers Assn of NZ
Subject:      Re: Kashmir bee virus...
New Zealand has undertaken a scientifically sound survey (funded by
our industry) to determine what pests/diseases of bees are present.
We can speak with assurance of our relative freedom from the
pests/diseases that are causing problems in other countries.  I urge
Mr Patton to have the same sort of survey done in Hawaii.  I repeat,
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
NZ beekeepers do not 'pay him (Dr D Anderson) a lot of money to
disspell the concern about bee viruses'.  We do not pay him anything
- he works for CSIRO, I believe.  We *did* pay him as a bee
pathologist some years back - and while in that role he found Kashmir
bee virus in NZ bees!  You don't pay scientists to tell you just what
you want to hear...
NZ recognised that with the way the world markets were going, it was
sensible to *seriously* survey our bee populations to find what was
out there.  Again, I urge Hawaii and other countries to do likewise,
so these discussions can consist of facts, rather than emotive
slurs.
(Figures in next paragraph reported in pounds - sorry, most of the
world!)
Mr Paton provides figures on honey production and suggests we should
'ponder these facts regarding the health effects of bee viruses.'
The figure he quoted for NZ honey production for 1995 did not come
from the NZ Beekeeping Home Page.  Rather than 'about 40 lb' per
hive, the average for NZ in 1995 was 61 lb.  The year before the
national average was 90 lb!  The average of the previous five years
(a better method of determining crop, as it avoids over/under
reporting due to especially good/bad seasons) for NZ is 64 lb.  How
does this affect Mr Patton's ponderings that NZ production is
affected by the health effects of bee viruses?
If you want to learn more about the NZ beekeeping industry, the WWW
pages Mr Patton refers to are a good starting point.  Check out the
NZ Beekeeping Profile document!
Finally (sorry for the length of the post) I would like to thank Mr
Patton for his comments that NZ beekeepers are 'advanced and skilled
marketeers'.  We are also highly professional, consistent, organised
and honest.
------------------------------------------
Nick Wallingford
President - National Beekeepers Assn of NZ
home nickw@wave.co.nz
work nw1@boppoly.ac.nz
------------------------------------------
>>> Item number 7918, dated 96/03/29 10:31:14 -- ALL
Date:         Fri, 29 Mar 1996 10:31:14 -0800
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         "Paul van Westendorp of AGF 576-5600 Fax: 576-5652"
              <PVANWESTEN@GALAXY.GOV.BC.CA>
Subject:      Re: BEE-L Digest - 27 Mar 1996 to 28 Mar 1996
In-Reply-To:  <01I2VWM43W5UQYRXHO@saturn.gov.bc.ca>
    Re. Kashmir Bee Virus - Walter Patton
    Walter, I do not understand that when the discussion about Kashmir Bee
    Virus is presented by others in a reasoned and well-articulated manner
    but not to your liking, you chose to respond by criticizing and
    questioning the integrity of others.
    Wallingford stated (perhaps with some justifiable pride) the
    accomplishments and expertise of Dr. Anderson in the field of bee
    viruses.  It doesn't mean that everyone has to agree with Anderson on
    his scientific findings and conclusions, but there is no basis to
    question the integrity of his arguments.
    The same applies to Dr. Shimanuki.  Indeed, he did visit New Zealand and
    Australia some years ago to get a better understanding about the bee
    health control mechanisms they have in place out there.  What basis do
    you have to be so cynical in brushing off his visit as a 6-week paid
    holiday?   You probably would have been as accusatory if USDA would not
    have send a bee researcher on a fact-finding mission, and let US
    beekeepers in the dark about the situation in the southern hemisphere.
    I know Walter, that you have been bitterly opposed to the decision(s) of
    your government on its bee import policy, as it unfolded in the fall of
    1994. (Your correspondence in several ABJ issues of that time attest to
    that).  Some of your arguments have been valid.  I also remain concerned
    about the potential impact KBV (and other viral agents) might have in
    the future where Varroa acts as principal vector.  But so far, KBV has
    not proven to be the disasterous agent some have claimed it to be.
    Although here in Canada we have done surveys (indeed we have KBV which
    had been reported as far back as 1985) and further research, it remains
    a highly specialized field of research that requires very expensive
    equipment to carry out.  Without anyone claiming that KBV and others are
    harmless, the findings have so far failed to indicate that KBV is of
    comparable significance to other pests such as HBTM, AFB, Chalkbrood or
    Varroa.  You may not agree with it but that is what our experience and
    literature tell us.
    In regards to posting our utterances, lets not stand on our soapboxes
    and become accusatory; keep the discussion focused on the issue(s).
    Paul van Westendorp                         pvanwesten@galaxy.gov.bc.ca
    Provincial Apiarist
    British Columbia
>>> Item number 7930, dated 96/03/30 06:48:35 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 30 Mar 1996 06:48:35 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ILHAWAII.NET>
Subject:      Responding
To Bee Friends
         Well first of all I can see I must be faithful to quick responding
lest I get so far behind I give up, and the people who share my concerns and
perspective would be dis-appointed. Some others would be happy .
         To the people who responded with support directly to me and  not
the list I understand that the bee world is a small world and thats OK in
some ways at least there are fewer places to hide. Thanks to you secret
admirers who did send some encouraging word and some words of caution. Can I
reall be DROPPED from the bee-l list for my opinions ?  Who pulls the plug ?
Do you really think the powers that be would actually "GET" me if my ideas
hit to close to home. Well I know my feelings are pure and without motives
except to ignite the fire that maybe required to get some action going on
the honeybee problems facing Americas food producers with decling honeybees
as pollinator.I don't have anything to sell or anything to gain and I am
convinced I am on an important mission.
          TO L Conner   Excuse my emotions and after all the smoke and
mirrors I have encountered during the last several years that I have had my
mission I do sometimes resort to emotions and I totally agree that facts are
what we need in the future dealings with the honeybee problems facing the
citizens of the United States of America.   I also agree that much more
research and a lot more researchers are needed to solve the virus and mite
situation.
        One reader suggested that bee-l is not  apolitical forum and that my
slurs about about some people will turn away some who might otherwise
support me. Well folks now is not the time to worry too much about political
correctness as this as been part of the problem too long. We have had very
few facts and little research and LOTS of polittical correctness. Hell
everybody seems afraid to speak out and be heard. Plenty of examples will
follow .
        Roy  your right we would ALL like to hear from the USDA about what
they are doing and I doubt if we will hear very much.  AND I know that there
are a lot of truly dedicated researchers working at the USDA and they are
for the most part like most of us afraid to speak out. Good jobs are hard to
come by . The leadership of bee work in the USDA must be credited with this
situation where everyone is afraid to speak put and after working with the
ruthless leadership I Know why they are afraid to speak out.
       Mr van Westendorp  I have spent hours and tons of long distance calls
finding out what I could about the issues that I speak and my findings are
very disturbing. I know the NZ beekeepers have lots & lots of end of season
bees for sale and they work hard at selling them . Too many trails I have
traveled leave too much to be desired in the issue of increased movement of
bees around the world . Re; D Anderson  work the facts exists that without
peer review   research can be done and documented without total objectivity
and with too much senstivity to the clients needs. Honey bee issues are too
crtical for comments like
"Kashmir being a relativly harmless bee virus" are far too simple for such a
thorny problem. Dr M Winston wrote a super article regarding the need for
peer review.About Dr . Shimanuke holiday (6wks) several years ago regarding
bee research it was a holiday. I have had several conversations with the
Shimanuke and he did zero research on NZ bees save and except "OBSERVING"
some "Nice .gentle , little bees..." Give me a break . He has left the
American Beekeeper uninformed about NZ bees . He did not one test on the NZ
bees by his own account. I have asked him for results of his research in NZ
and he has none.. I will some times have to crawl up on my soapbox in hopes
that some one will notice. The feelings of impotence and hoplessness felt by
most when dealing with GOVERENMENTS is hard to overcome ,and I will work
hard to keep the focus on the issues.
        I must sign off for now as it is 6;45 am here in paradise and the
sun is shining and about 70 degrees. I will respond to the reportin errors
corrected by Wallingford in my next posting . Hoping some will be moved to
action.
Sincerly
Walter & Elisabeth Patton,  27-703 A Ka' ie'ie Rd., Papaikou HI.,96781
    Ph./fax. 808-964-5401       E-Mail  hihoney@ilhawaii
Beekeeper and Bed  & Breakfast Owner in Hawaii
  http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney.htm
http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/beeware.htm
   http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/lamalani.htm
>>> Item number 8010, dated 96/04/03 17:15:48 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 3 Apr 1996 17:15:48 +0000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Gordon Scott <gordon@APIS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Virus Alert
In-Reply-To:  <960403030357_504519996@emout04.mail.aol.com>
On Wed, 3 Apr 1996, Ian Clowes wrote:
> As the topic is quite serious I thought it worth repeating post
> April 1st.  It was not intended as a spoof, although I can't
> vouch for the sesitivity to modem speed!
Ian isn't the only person to point out that my response was
misplaced, and of course they're right. I hereby apologise,
however I should comment further.
Computer viruses, trojans, ansi bombs and worms are all serious
threats about which we must be aware. We should _always_ check
for and guard against them -- we shouldn't need to be warned
about them. Much as we should check for EFB, AFB, varroa and
the like.
I have over the years found several computer viruses, however
I have caught every one before it did damage to my data (so far
-- touch wood).  I have also been accused of 'having a virus',
because *I* found it (hence my sympathy with Nick Wallingford
and NZ re Kashmir). In most cases, the accusers were the
people who had passed it to me!
The increasing tendency of applications, particularly for
MS Windows, to self-install and self-run is a development
that worries me a great deal, because we are deprived of
the opportunity to virus check _before_ we run the program.
After may be too late.
I work regularly with various computers in various environments
so I am indeed cautious. I also know that there is no possibility
that a virus can do things that are sometimes claimed; Which
is why I strongly suspect that this warning was a spoof, passed
on in good faith as a perhaps wise precaution.
A virus (etc.) cannot damage your modem, processor, RAM or
almost any other part of the hardware.
A virus (etc.) cannot* damage your disc drive, but it *can*
damage the data in holds. (* Erm, well, there's a suggestion
that trying to format some older PC EIDE drives may make them
unreadable).
It's unlikely, but possible, that a virus (etc.) *could* damage
your screen on a PC if it sets the scan rate wildly wrong.
I hope that explains why I felt I could laugh.
Unfortunately, I was laughing rather than thinking.
Regards,
--
Gordon Scott   gordon@apis.demon.co.uk      gordon@multitone.co.uk (work)
The Basingstoke Beekeeper (newsletter)      beekeeper@apis.demon.co.uk
<A HREF="http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/apis">Embryo Home Page</A>
Beekeeper; Kendo 3rd Dan; Sometime sailor.  Hampshire, England.
>>> Item number 8069, dated 96/04/06 22:13:33 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 6 Apr 1996 22:13:33 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ILHAWAII.NET>
Subject:      N Z Bees
Regarding Nick"s response March 29,1996.
   Yes I did make a mistake and  I admit it. I got the years mixed up  ,I
was looking at figures
from 92-93 and got ahead of myself . Per the N Z Bee home page mentioned
earlier
     1992-93  23kg. or about 50 lb. with ranges from 1988-89 17kg/hive (
37.5lbs) to
       1991 to 92 31 kg. /hive (68lbs) So  O K , and  averaging is best say
the last 10 or 15
years.  When did the N Z government get out of the inspecting and the
supervising of the N Z
bee industry ?  Also please explain if I am correct in my understanding that
the inspection of N Z
honeybees is either done by volunteer bee keepers that Wannabee bee
inspectors or by
employees hired by the N Z beekeeping association. Lastly could you give the
exact numbers of
test and which test were conducted in 1995. Specifically mite free testing
and certification.
            Mr. Wallingford speaks of his relative freedom from the pests
and diseases of honey
bees
and I would like information presented to the group of exactly which
pests/diseases of honey
bees are known to be found with N Z honeybees.
            About Dr. D Anderson  he works for CISRO  what is CISRO and
where do the funds
come from for CISRO ? Was D Anderson the first one to find Kashmir in N Z
bees ? Has  any
thought been given to the problems that occur when honeybees have mites and
viruses at the
same time ? Probably not since your bees are reported to be mite free so you
might not care
about the problems when bees have both mites and viruses. On the net several
people have
suggested that bee viruses be treated like Aids in people well I happen to
believe that if we
accept bee viruses as being like aids that we would all very quickly agree
that until we find a
cure that we should isolate the bees known to be infested with all the
viruses known to the bee
world away from the rest of the bee populations until the men of science can
find the answers to
the P M S  headache problems with honeybees of the United States and Canada
. If the
Canadians are not afraid of the effects of the continued introduction and
spread of  pest/disease
of honeybees then the border between Canada and the U S should be closed to
stop the spread
of pests/disease from Canada to U S bees .
           All of this points to the need for multi national research teams
to assembled under the
supervision of peer review groups with members from all areas of beekeeping
keeping this much
needed work on an objective mission. Honey bees are in trouble and man's
food production is
too dependent on honeybee as pollinators for the U S to sit quietly for help
to come from
Washington. Washington does not know that U S  beekeepers have any problems
because we
do not have a true bee lover and patriot working for us in Beltsville.
         U S  D A  I know you are reading . Could some one share the
pleadings for more
research money to save honeybees  that must have been generated at budget
time ? Well thats it
for this post which has gotten to long.
             Thinking only of honeybees        PATTON    IN  PARADISE
                                   HAPPY HOLIDAY SEASON  SPRING HAS SPRUNG
Walter & Elisabeth Patton,  27-703 A Ka' ie'ie Rd., Papaikou HI.,96781
    Ph./fax. 808-964-5401       E-Mail  hihoney@ilhawaii
Beekeeper and Bed  & Breakfast Owner in Hawaii
  http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney.htm
http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/beeware.htm
   http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/lamalani.htm
>>> Item number 8165, dated 96/04/11 07:12:20 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 11 Apr 1996 07:12:20 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         "Thomas W. Culliney -- Dept. of Agriculture"
              <culliney@ELELE.PEACESAT.HAWAII.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Hawaii's mite-free status
Comments: To: Nick Wallingford <nickw@WAVE.CO.NZ>
In-Reply-To:  <199604072221.KAA16071@Axil.wave.co.nz>
On Mon, 8 Apr 1996, Nick Wallingford wrote:
> Does Hawaii have Kashmir bee virus or mites?  No one *really* knows,
> as no one has ever systematically looked.  With the small geographic
> size and relatively small number of hives involved, a survey to
> determine pest/disease status for Hawaii would be a simple thing to
> undertake.  Until the Hawaiian beekeepers are willing to do that
> there can be no *confidence* in the claims of area freedom.  Hawaii
> is not willing to take 'the test', but wants the world to believe
> that it is 'clean'.  Again, the confidence is a statistically based
> thing, not just individual reports of 'nothing found' - the
> methodology must stand scrutiny!
> Nick Wallingford
> President - Nat Beekeepers Assn of NZ      (\
> home nickw@wave.co.nz                     {|||8-
> work nw1@boppoly.ac.nz                     (/
For the record, while a survey for honey bee viruses has never been
undertaken in Hawaii, the Hawaii Department of Agriculture has been
sampling honey bees in Hawaii for tracheal mite since 1984 and for varroa
mite since 1988, i.e., since shortly after each parasite was discovered on
the U.S. mainland. Neither mite has ever been found in Hawaii. As far as
we know (and no one can be absolutely certain), Hawaii remains mite-free,
although the state's virus status remains an open question.
Tom Culliney
Hawaii Dept. of Agriculture
Plant Pest Control Branch
culliney@elele.peacesat.hawaii.edu
>>> Item number 8325, dated 96/04/19 12:32:51 -- ALL
Date:         Fri, 19 Apr 1996 12:32:51 +1200
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Cliff Van Eaton <vaneatonc@TAURANGA.MQM.GOVT.NZ>
Subject:      New Zealand Honey Bee Disease Programmes
Since New Zealand's programmes relating to American foulbrood
disease control,  exotic bee disease surveillance and exotic disease and
pest response preparedness have been mentioned recently on BEE-L, I
thought I'd take this opportunity to explain the programmes to readers:
1)  Honey bee health status - Honey bee diseases present in New
Zealand (NZ) producing identifiable symptoms are AFB, nosema,
chalkbrood, sacbrood, chronic bee paralysis, and black queen cell.  Most
of the other known bee viruses have been found in NZ, including acute
bee paralysis virus, cloudy wing virus, bee virus X, bee virus Y,
filamentous virus and Kashmir bee virus.  These viruses have only been
detected by injecting dead bee extracts into healthy pupae, and exist in
honey bees in NZ as inapparent infections.  Amoeba disease is present
in NZ, although serious effects of amoeba infestation are not known.
Several species of harmless external mites have been found.  These are
Melittiphis alvearius, Acarapis externus, A. dorsalis and
Neocypholaelaps zealandicus.
2)  American foulbrood control programme - Regulations regarding AFB
control have been in place in NZ since the enactment of the first of a
series of Apiaries Acts in 1905.   As in many other western beekeeping
countries, AFB inspection and education programmes were for many
years funded by central government.
In 1991, however, the extensive government fiscal reforms transforming
New Zealand society were also applied to beekeeping services.
Because AFB was an endemic disease, central government identified
beekeepers as the principal beneficiaries of AFB control programmes.
They were therefore asked to pay directly for these programmes.  The
National Beekeepers' Association (NBA) decided that a continuing AFB
control programme was important, and entered into the first of a
continuing series of annual contracts with the Ministry of Agriculture to
provide AFB control services.  Funding for the contract comes from a
NBA levy on beehive holdings.
The contract includes the inspection of 3.9% of NZ apiaries (on a
targeted basis) by government inspectors.  The Ministry of Agriculture
also organises a further random surveillance inspection programme
which is carried out by volunteer inspectors.  These volunteer
inspectors are trained beekeepers belonging to the National Beekeepers'
Association.  The NBA inspections are known throughout NZ as
"diseaseathons".
In the 1994-5 production year, government personnel inspected 4% of
NZ apiaries, with NBA volunteers inspecting a further 3.5%.
As well, all beekeepers in NZ are required by law to inspect all of their
beehives for AFB at least once during the spring period each year, and
to report the findings of those inspections (and any changes to apiary
and hive holdings) to the Ministry of Agriculture.  Beekeepers must also
report the presence of AFB whenever it is found.  NZ therefore has a
highly accurate record of both apiary locations and AFB occurrence.
In the 1994-95 production year, the reported incidence of AFB (from all
sources, including the AFB control programme) was 0.8% of hives and
4.2% of apiaries.  The NZ Apiaries Act forbids the feeding of drugs to
beehives for the control of AFB.  All beehives found to be infected with
the disease are destroyed by burning, with woodenware sterilised by
treatment with hot paraffin (160oC for 10-15 minutes).
3) Exotic bee disease surveillance -NZ is fortunate to be free of a
number of economically significant honey bee diseases found elsewhere
in the world.  The NZ government believes maintenance of such a
disease status is important, and therefore funds an exotic bee disease
surveillance programme.  Government personnel inspect 500 apiaries
throughout the country each year as part of this programme.  The
apiaries are chosen for their proximity to risk areas, including ports,
rubbish dumps, and tourist areas.  All hives in each apiary are inspected
for visual symptoms of European foulbrood, with any suspect larvae
analyzed (anaerobic culture) at a government bee disease diagnostic
laboratory.  At least 100 drone pupae in each hive are also visually
inspected for the presence of Varroa and Tropilaelaps mites.  A sample
of at least 400 adult bees is then taken from each hive and analyzed at
the government lab for the presence of Varroa mite and Tropilaelaps mite
(alcohol wash),  and Acarine mite (dissection).
In addition to these targeted surveillance inspections, every apiary in NZ
which supplies either queen bees or package bees is also sampled for
exotic bee diseases.  The samples (400+ bees)  are processed by the
government bee disease diagnostic lab.  In the 1994-95 production year,
a total of 542 production apiaries were sampled for exotic bee diseases.
All suspicious bee disease symptoms reported by beekeepers are also
investigated by government apiculture personnel, with samples analyzed
by the bee disease diagnostic lab.  In the 1994-95 production year, 77
such samples were analyzed, all but one for European foulbrood.  All
results were negative.
An on-going education programme is carried out with beekeepers to
explain the threats to the NZ beekeeping industry posed by exotic bee
diseases.  In 1995, a four page colour pamphlet identifying exotic
diseases was sent to every registered beekeeper in NZ.
4) Border protection - Because New Zealand is an island country, border
protection is an extremely important first line of defence against the
introduction of exotic  diseases and pests.  Agricultural Quarantine
officers are therefore specifically trained to have an awareness of the
NZ beekeeping industry and the likely means of introduction of exotic bee
diseases.  Agricultural Quarantine officers are stationed at all New
Zealand ports and airports, and also carry out surveillance of all
incoming goods, including commercial consignments and mail.
5) Honey Bee Exotic Disease and Pest Response (EDPR) preparedness -
In the event that a honey bee exotic disease or pest is found in NZ, a
response system is in place which will identify the extent of the disease
or pest and provide factual information necessary to undertake control or
eradication measures.  The system is based on similar EDPR programmes
in place in NZ for such diseases as fruit fly and foot and mouth.
A unique feature of the system is that it uses both trained government
personnel and beekeeper volunteer inspectors.  The system is
maintained by yearly EDPR exercises in various parts of NZ where AFB
is substituted for the exotic bee disease.  The exercises help maintain
both emergency headquarters and field team capabilities.  In the 1995-96
production year, EDPR exercises were carried out in three areas of NZ,
involving 90 government personnel and 110 beekeepers.
6) Improved diagnostic capability - As part of its commitment to exotic
bee disease surveillance and EDPR, the NZ government has over the
years continued to improve its honey bee disease and pest diagnostic
methods.   This commitment began with the funding of consultancy visits
in the early 1980's by Dr. Hachiro Shimanuki from the USDA, a
recognised world expert in honey bee diseases.  Dr. Shimanuki
deserves much of the credit for initiating the development of NZ's current
exotic bee disease surveillance and EDPR programmes.
One of Dr. Shimanuki's recommendations was that a full bee disease
survey be conducted in NZ (even though a variety of surveys for
individual diseases had been carried out in the past).  Acting on this
recommendation, the NZ government contracted Dr. Denis Anderson, a
honey bee pathologist from Australia, to perform this survey, and also to
develop a honey bee diagnostic laboratory.
More recent projects include adoption of FABIS technology for
Africanised honey bee genotype diagnosis (in conjunction with the
USDA), testing of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for
tracheal mites (in conjunction with Agriculture Canada), and
testing/adoption of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology for EFB
diagnosis (in conjunction with the University of Wales).
7) Reporting and further information - The NZ Ministry of Agriculture
makes quarterly reports on the occurrence of honey bee diseases to the
Office International Des Epizooties (OIE), the recognised world body for
animal disease reporting and control.  The Ministry of Agriculture also
makes government-to-government reports on honey bee diseases upon
request.  MAF Quality Management maintains integrity in all of its
programmes relating to honey bee diseases through the use of quality
systems.  The quality systems, and the programmes themselves, are
subject to independent audit by the government's Regulatory Authority.
Annual reports on the AFB control contract, and the exotic bee disease
surveillance and EDPR programmes, are included in the August edition of
the New Zealand Beekeeper.  Articles in overseas journals explaining
these programmes include Van Eaton, C. (1992) Recent developments in
the control of honey bee diseases in New Zealand. Canadian
Beekeeping 16(9): 196-198; and Matheson, A. (1991) Beekeeping:
leading agricultural change in New Zealand. BeeWorld 72(2): 60-73; (3):
117-130.
Cliff Van Eaton
Apicultural Advisory Officer
MAF Quality Management
Tauranga, New Zealand
>>> Item number 9022, dated 96/05/27 09:12:36 -- ALL
Date:         Mon, 27 May 1996 09:12:36 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ilhawaii.net>
Subject:      BEE  virus alert
Aloha Bee -L readers
   Everytime I open my e-mail and see the virus alert
 messages I get excited that maybe some one is
starting a thread about honeybee viruses. I must
 admit being a person that has been wiped out by
a computer virus before that I am glad to see
 the proper  concern about the spread of computer viruses.
         I am also very concerned about the introduction and
 subsequent spread of honeybee viruses. Does anyone
have any new information about these viruses?
Who is doing research on viruses and where ?
Why have the viruses only now been found to
be the problem on bees with mites ? Is there any hope for
bees with mites if they also viruses? What is our USDA
doing to try and find answers to the viruses problem. ?
      One leading bee research person  suggests that the
 viruses may have been introduced  by the ever popular
trade and movement of live bees around the world ?
 Kashmir Bee Virus has been detected in sufficient
amounts to have caused mortality , in extracts of dead
bees  from colonies in Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, and
Canada ,in the absence of mites.
        Where is the USDA with the mission statement
to protect American Agriculture ?Silent ! Why ? I have my ideas ,
and I would like to hear from others about this subject. I have
been given the opportunity talk at the Western Apiculture Society
conference to be held August 1996 in Kona , Hawaii. My assigned
topic is to discuss the problems with transiting of New Zealand
bees through Hawaii . My concern s are many as we in Hawaii
may not have been contaminated with viruses since our state laws
have prohibited the entry of bees or used bee hive equipment into
 Hawaii since the mid 1980's.
          Readers are encouraged to respond and share their fears
and concerns. Hawaii is the most isolated place on earth and the
bio-logical isolation should be protected. This is one of the real
major issues that must be addressed if beekeeping as we have
known in the past is to have a chance.
         Where is the US beekeeping industry at this crucial moment ?
Where are our leaders ? We need everyone to come together
with one strong voice to demand solutions from the USDA
which seems to be unconcerned with the virus issue. New leadership
is needed at the top level of honeybee research in the USDA ,
some one who is unbiased and objective with the primary goal
of protecting and improving the plight of U.S. beekeepers .
     Thanks and reply with confidence that I won't reveal my sources even if
tortured.
     Walter Patton
Walter & Elisabeth Patton,  27-703 A Ka' ie'ie Rd., Papaikou HI.,96781
    Ph./fax. 808-964-5401       E-Mail  hihoney@ilhawaii
Beekeeper and Bed  & Breakfast Owner in Hawaii
  http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney.htm
http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/beeware.htm
   http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/lamalani.htm
>>> Item number 9148, dated 96/06/06 10:57:58 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 6 Jun 1996 10:57:58 EDT
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Aaron Morris <SYSAM@cnsibm.albany.edu>
Subject:      Mites and patties
Bruce Kemp wrote:
> I'm new to the list.  There seems to be quite a few of us.  I have
> been into bees for a year now and live in Virginia in the USA.  I
> understand there is quite a varroa mite problem here they carry a
> virus that has wiped out most of the hives around here...
>
> So to summarize my questions:
>
>         1.  Is the virus wide-spread?
>         2.  Do other things cause the virus besides varroa?
>         3.  What are patties?
>         4.  What to do about tracheal mites?
>         ...
Ted Fischer responded:
> 1) I don't believe that the question is settled as to whether or not
>    the varroa mites carry a virus or they themselves cause all the
>    destructive effects we're seeing in infested colonies...
>
> 2) Virus or not, these effects are seen only in varroa infested
>    colonies.
>
> 3) Patties are made of vegetable shortening and sugar, and were
>    originally made as a vehicle for the introduction of terramycin
>    into the colony for foulbrood prevention, since terramycin breaks
>    down easily except in the presence of fats.  It was subsequently
>    noticed that tracheal mite populations were diminished in hives
>    containing these patties, and that the control patties without the
>    terramycin had the same value in limiting tracheal mites.
>
> 4) The easiest way to control tracheal mites, therefore, is to put
>    patties in the hive after the supers are removed.  This will
>    control both foulbrood diseases as well as tracheal mites.  The
>    mites are mainly a problem in the fall, when they build up and
>    adversely affect the winter bees.  Putting patties in the hives at
>    this time of year is by far the best thing to do for tracheal
>    mites.  Patties are commercially available (Terrapatties) or you
>    can make your own (a 3 lb can of shortening blended with 5 lbs of
>    sugar and a small packet of Terramycin (TM25))....
>
> Ted Fischer
Now, Aaron Morris adds way more than 2 cents worth, with apologies
in advance to those who have read it already.
At the risk of wasting bandwidth to repost recent information from
this forum and sci.agriculture.bees, I'm posting the following excerpt
from the May issue of the Southern Adirondack Beekeepers Association
newsletter (which I author and shamelessly steal from both electronic
forums information that may be of value to beekeepers who aren't
connected).  The points I want to get across are 1) mites as a vector
in spreading viruses and 2) the possibility that grease patties
(vegetable oil and sugar with no other medications) may be a deterrent
to tracheal mites and such patties (with no other medications) may be an
appropriate treatment throughout the honey producing season.  Please
note these are not my original ideas, speculation abounds, and the bee
scientists readily admit that they too do not have definitive answers to
the whys and wherefores behind these issues.
As Rod Serling would say, "Submitted for your approval..."
                   >-----------------<
     Dr. Cynthia Scott-Dupree Addresses Worcester County
                          Beekeepers
 I  had the pleasure of attending the April 13 meeting of the
 Worcester County Beekeepers Association  where  Dr.  Cynthia
 Scott-Dupree  of  the  University of Guelph in Ontario spoke
 about Canadian Beekeeping and mites as a vector in spreading
 viruses in bees.
 The "Canadian Beekeeping" presentation was very informative,
 but my main interest (and that of the more than 100  attend-
 ing  beekeepers) was in hearing what Dr. Scott-Dupree had to
 say about the mites.  The conundrum faced by bee researchers
 is that it's easy to blame bees' demise  on  V-mites  or  T-
 mites  or both, but the truth of the matter is that although
 we know mites are here, scientists aren't sure what  exactly
 is  the  cause  of  bee pathology based on the effect of the
 mites' presence.  The focus of current research  in  on  how
 the  mites may act as vectors in spreading the approximately
 twenty identified bee viruses, which are hard to identify in
 the field and whose symptoms may appear as common infectious
 diseases, hence being easily misidentified.  Studies done by
 Drs. Dupree and Brenda Ball (in the UK) have indicated  that
 with  the  stock  of bees tested in their studies, there ap-
 pears to  be  no  correlation  between  tracheal  mites  and
 honeybee  viruses.   This is the good news, which could lead
 one to conclude that although tracheal mites are  a  problem
 not to be overlooked, the threat is not as nefarious as that
 posed  by varroa mites, which did exhibit a significant cor-
 relation in the spread of chronic bee paralysis virus  types
 one  and  two,  hairless black bee virus, Kashmir bee virus,
 black queen cell virus and others.  It is important to  note
 that many of these viruses are present in a hive environment
 in  all stages of bee development as non-damaging pathogens.
 However it is perhaps the manner in  which  varroa  feed  on
 honeybees that activates the viruses, helping them to flour-
 ish to the detriment of the colony population.
 In  the meantime while scientists continue to search for an-
 swers and solutions to the mite problems we beekeepers  need
 to  manage  our bees to reduce stressors as much as possible
 to help them remain healthy.  This includes  using  approved
 medications  such as Fumidil-B for nosema and Terramycin for
 foulbrood, and approved treatments to  combat  mites,  which
 include  grease patties, menthol and Apistan.  Of course one
 must always follow the directions when  using  these  treat-
 ments  to avoid contaminating the honey to be harvested.  In
 these mite infested times a beekeeper  may  have  to  forego
 some  of the honey crop in order to treat their bees in con-
 formance with label instructions.  The mites have made keep-
 ing bees a whole new ball game and new management techniques
 need to be developed to keep beekeepers from striking out.
                   >-----------------<
 An  article  by Dr. Diana Sammataro of Ohio State University
 titled "Tracheal Mites Can Be Suppressed by Oil Patties" ap-
 peared in the  April  '96  issue  of  _American_Bee_Journal_
 (Vol  136,  No.  4).   The gist of the article was that  the
 continuous presence of vegetable  oil  based  sugar  patties
 within  honeybee  hives  can  be  an  effective  way to keep
 tracheal mites in check.  The sidebars (taken from pages 280
 and 281) are included in this issue of the BeeLine.
 REMEMBER! NO TERRAMYCIN WHILE HONEY SUPERS ARE ON THE HIVE!
 In addition to the previous ABJ article,  other  methods  of
 delivering  the  vegetable  oil  have  been discussed on the
 internet.
 * From: John Iannuzzi <jiannuzz@mail.bcpl.lib.md.us>
   Subject: Iannuzzi Method for Treating T-Mite
 1.  Since the appearance of tracheal mite, I've  never  used
     the  recommended  treatment of a 50-gram pack of menthol
     crystals applied about Sept. 1 when  it  is  still  warm
     enough to convert the stuff to gas.
 2.  Today  I  placed a paper towel saturated w/vegetable oil
     (any kind; cheaper the  better)  between  the  two  deep
     brood  chambers.    Within a week the bees will have re-
     moved it. Especially noticeable if one runs pollen traps
     as I do, on seven of my strongest colonies (only have 12
     now).
 3.  I also do this September 1st when I repeat the treatment
     a week later.
 4.  In talks w/my fellow beekeepers who use menthol, my sur-
     vival rate is as good as theirs.
 5.  Theory  is  that the oil makes mite transference between
     bees difficult.
 6.  I know that people use diluted formic acid for the  same
     purpose even though it is said to be "not approved yet."
     C'est la vie. Suum cuique.
 Jack the Bman
 Ellicott City Md USA
 * From: Allen Dick
 I  wonder  about  the paper towel method.  Is this scientif-
 ically proven to do anything related to T-mites?   It  would
 logically  seem that there would only be vegetable oil pres-
 ence in the hive for a short time using this procedure,  un-
 less the oil goes into the wax, or something of that sort.
 I  thought  that  Sammataro  et  al indicated that continued
 presence over time is the secret to measurable success  with
 grease patties, at least.  Perhaps I misunderstood.
 I would be interested to know if there is any data (measure-
 ment  compared  to controls) for rational evaluation of this
 towel recommendation or if this idea is yet unproven.
 Many of us have been getting along with no treatment for TM,
 so just simple colony survival with no controls or  measure-
 ment of mite levels is no indication of efficacy.
 The  mechanism  of  TM  control using oils and grease is not
 well  understood  (AFAIK),  so  if  this  is  scientifically
 proven, then measured and proven success with this technique
 would give some insight into the mechanism, perhaps.
 It  would  be  nice to know that there is a proven alternate
 method to putting grease patties on, but is there?
                               Regards
                               W. Allen Dick, Beekeeper
                               RR#1,    Swalwell,     Alberta
                               Canada T0M 1Y0
 * From: Franklin Humphrey Sr. <Beekeeper@worldnet.att.net>
 FYI,  Dr.  Delaplane  has been testing this method of summer
 control of T-mites for  about  3  years.    He  has  advised
 beekeepers  in  Georgia that is a very effective method when
 bees cannot be treated with menthol.
 It  is  thought  that  removal of the vegetable oil from the
 hive creates greasy bees.  This in turn hinder the migration
 of the mature mites from the older bees to the younger bees.
 The patties can be in the form of Crisco or other solid veg-
 etable oils placed directly on  a  paper  towel  or  can  be
 patties  without  the terramycin.   Some people say that the
 paper towel method is  better  and  others  like  the  patty
 method.    Personally  I  make  my patties only about half a
 pound in size and put them between waxed paper.  When I  put
 them in the hive, I tear holes in the paper so that the bees
 can  get  at it.   The waxed paper keeps it together so that
 the patty can be moved out of  the  way  to  manipulate  the
 hive.
 As  far as I know there are no official papers written about
 this method.  It is something that is being tried by  numer-
 ous  beekeepers  in Georgia and Tennessee and seems to be an
 effective method of slowing the  spread  of  V-mites  during
 production periods when the bees cannot be medicated.
                               Frank Humphrey
 * From: Allen Dick
 I  appreciate Frank taking the time to explain what he knows
 and what he has heard for our benefit.  A lot of  beekeepers
 do  things under mistaken assumptions or from misunderstand-
 ing research results or directions, but I think it's reason-
 able to ask for evidence before believing what one  is  told
 --  especially  if  new information does not agree with what
 one has heard before.
 This is a particularly intriguing matter that  affects  many
 thousands  of  dollars  in cost -- either of treatment -- or
 losses if it doesn't work, so please excuse any  scepticism.
 Non-sceptical  beekeepers  tend to lose their bees sooner or
 later.
 Since the original discussion started, I have received  some
 private  email from several researchers indicating that they
 believe these techniques merit some investigation.  One says
 that the trial he did resulted  in  no  significant  benefit
 compared  to controls, but he soaked cardboard in salad oil,
 not towels.  (Maybe it's the towel that does the trick,  not
 the oil)  And the trial was in July -- not the best time.
 There  is some speculation about the mechanisms that are in-
 volved with the grease treatments.   However, I do  not  be-
 lieve  that anyone has *proven* how it works -- only that it
 does, and that the effects seem independent of the brand  or
 source  of vegetable oil.  One particularly interesting the-
 ory is that the breakdown  of  oil  (rancidity)  produces  a
 chemical  much like a pheremone that the mite uses to detect
 young bees.  Of course a SWAG might just say that the grease
 just makes it harder to climb into a trachea.
 Now what is not clear here is whether you mix sugar into the
 patties  or  just  slice off some Crisco.  I've wondered why
 that wouldn't work, but have not heard of it being done, and
 tested against controls.  I've wondered about  spraying  the
 bees  lightly with salad oil, and I've heard of oil fogging,
 and other things too.  BUT no matter how nifty  these  ideas
 are, I for one, need someone to try them against controls to
 decide I should rely on them.  A lack of scientific measure-
 ments  is unfortunate.   Perhaps that will be remedied soon.
 Hard facts save cold cash.
                               Regards,
                               Allen
>>> Item number 9207, dated 96/06/08 23:21:05 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 8 Jun 1996 23:21:05 +1300
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Peter Bray <p.bray@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject:      Re: America's honeybees
Ted Fischer wrote:
>  REGARDING           RE>America's honeybees
>
>Walter Patton writes:
>"The big question is why H Shimunaki  U.S.D.A. did not mention the
>hopeless situation facing U. S. beekeepers when their bees have mites
> and viruses which may be being introduced to the U.S. beekeepers
>from Canadian Bees entering the U.S. after being imported and
> thus introducing and spreading honeybee pest and diseases
> with total disregard for the intent of the Honey Bee Act of 1922
>which had a strict prohibition against the import of honeybees
> to the U.S. for the specic verbadium purpose to "prevent the introduction
>and
> spread of pests and diseases to U.S. honeybees." H. Shimunaki since
> his paid consultancy and paid 6 or 8 week vacation for he and his wife to
>New Zealand has had no concern for New Zealand bees being allowed
> into the U.S. via Canada without regard for the original intent
> of the Honeybee Act of 1922. Further H. Shimunaki allowed for a
> Federal Registry notification to be published stating that the
> U.S.D.A., Secretary of Agriculture had found New Zealand
> to be free of any pests and diseases of honeybees, a fraudulent
>statement, WHY? Beekeepers of America need new leadership
>at the U.S.D.A. with peer review to solve the problems with
>honeybees in the United States of America."
>
>I have hesitated up till now to enter this fray, but I can't help it any
>longer.  Except from Mr. Patton, I have never heard that there was any
>disease or mite problem with New Zealand bees.  Just the contrary - Canadian
>beekeepers have been prohibited (until now at least) from importing American
>bees because of *our* mite problem, and have had to get them all the way from
>New Zealand or raise the bees themselves (a better approach anyway).   Why
>does Mr. Patton claim that Dr. Shimunaki's statement about New Zealand bees
>is fraudulent?  Let's have some hard *facts* about this, or otherwise drop
>the subject.
>
>Ted Fischer
> reason New Zealand is singled out in this issue is explained by the
economics of the situation rather than any danger New Zealand bees may pose
as threat to the US beekeeping industry.
New Zealand has been exporting queen bees to Canada since the late '60s.
Long before any border closures, Canadian beekeepers wanted another source
of bee stock other than the US. Some reasons for this included, some
individuals' preference for NZ beestock, price, and an alternative in case
of a disaster in the US beekeeping industry.  This disaster (Varroa and
Tracheal Mites) is now history and the border between the US and Canada was
subsequently closed.  This event put a great deal of strain on US queen and
package producers (and the recipient Canadian beekeepers not overwintering
their bees), and mounted a great deal of pressure on both sides to reopen
the border again. However the alternative beestock available from NZ and
Australia gave the Canadians the option of keeping the border closed thus
slowing the inevitable spread of the two mites.
At the point that the Canadian border closed, New Zealand queen and package
exporters started to come under increasing scrutiny from some in the US
beekeeping industry, particularly those that had a vested interest in
getting the border open again.  The clear (but hidden) strategy of making it
difficult or impossible to airfreight queens and packages from Australia and
New Zealand to Canada, was to try and force the border open again.
It all culminated a couple of years ago when right at the crucial time of
the year when all the queens and packages were due to move, Hawaii and
Continental US were closed to the passage of bees from NZ.,  completely
stopping trade through airports that had been transit points for 25 years.
This move caused a great deal of difficulty for both sides of the NZ and
Canadian trade, with many Canadians not getting NZ stock they had been
receiving annually for many years.
Hawaiian beekeepers have been trying to say for some time that because they
did not have Varroa and Tracheal mites they should be allowed to send bees
to Canada (and thereby pick up on what they see as a lucrative trade).
Hence their desire to try and prevent the passage of bees from Australia and
NZ via Hawaii thus (hopefully) force the Canadians to reopen the border - at
least to them anyway.
Much of the debate has centred around NZ having Kashmir Bee Virus (KBV) and
Half Moon Disorder (HMD) and the claim that these are "unknown" and "what
might they do in *our* circumstances".
The last importation of beestock into New Zealand was in the 1950s and it is
therefore probable that KBV was in our stock then.  With trade of bees
around the World it is probable that KBV is in the category of endemic,
relatively harmless and widespread. To date, any country that has been
examined for it specifically, has shown to have it, including the US.
HMD occurs everywhere.  How do we know?  Because it has been isolated (By
Dr. Dennis Anderson - Australia) to a lack of adequate nutrition of the
young queen prior to mating. This nutrition is directly related to the
number of correct aged nurse bees in the mating nuc/hive.  This causes
faulty development of the queen's ovaries leading to larvae that are
rejected by the feeding nurse bees whereupon they *die of starvation*.
Why was HMD discovered in NZ at such a late date?  Because we don't have EFB
here.  Larvae with EFB *starve* due to competition from bacteria in their
gut.  In HMD and EFB, the young larvae die at the same age from starvation.
Result? *Identical*  visual symptoms. Around the World it is almost certain
that HMD is routinely diagnosed as EFB and hence no further explanation is
ever sought.  Only in New Zealand with its absence of EFB did the HMD
mystery attract enough attention to enable it to be explained.
The lumping of HMD into the case against NZ beestock only serves to
highlight the weakness in the arguments to date and show them for what they
are, zoosanitary trade barriers used in an effort to gain a trade/economic
advantage.  The unfortunate aspect of this is that misrepresentation of the
many "facts" put up in these arguments tend to adversely affect the
improvement of our knowledge of our benefactor - the honeybee.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Bray, Airborne Honey Ltd., PO Box 28, Leeston, New Zealand
Fax 64-3-324-3236,  Phone 64-3-324-3569  p.bray@netaccess.co.nz
----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Item number 9212, dated 96/06/08 08:05:26 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 8 Jun 1996 08:05:26 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ilhawaii.net>
Regarding Ted Fisher request for New Zealand Honeybee health report
 Mr. Cliff Van Eaton, Agricultural Advisory Officer
MAF Quality Management, Tauranga,New Zealand
 Wrote to bee-l and reported the following list of pest and disease
 known to exist on NZ honeybees 4/19/96
  1American Foul Brood
  2 Nosema
  3Chalkbrood
  4Sacbrood
  5 cronic bee paralysis
  6 black queen cell
  7 acute bee paralysis virus
  8 cloudy wing virus
  9 bee virus X
  10 bee virus Y
  11 filamentous virus
  12 KASHMIR BEE VIRUS
  13 Amoeba disease
       Mites
  14 Melittiphis alvearius
  15 Acarapis externus
  16 A. dorsalis
  17 Neocypholaelaps zealandicus
  And not reported by Cliff Van Eaton
 18. Melanoius found to be on NZ honetbees by Dr. T.P.Liu in Canada
Note the claim that NZ is free of EFB is doubted by all old time bee
 keepers that I have interviewed.This claim that NZ is free of EFB has
  in the past been an effective zoosanitary trade barrier which has been
 an effective trade and economic tool for the NZ honeybee industry as this
 claim prevents any honeybees, honey and or used equipment from entering
 NZ . To prove a negative in science is much more difficult and under
 peer review would require extensive testing. The NZ folks know they are
weak in their claim about EFB.
     Now the NZ people will try to say many of these have no economic
 impact on honeybees and they are still called pests and disease of honeybees.
   Dr. B. V. Ball  says and I quote without permission from Dr. Ball's paper
accepted Feb. 20,1995 and printed in Great Britian "Characterisation and
 serological relationship of strains of Kashmir bee virus"
  "It has been suggested that APV and KBV occupy the same ecological
 niche (Anderson1991 ) and indeed there is good evidence that both
 viruses persist as inapparent infections in nature and are probably
 transmitted in a similar manner, via the salivary gland secretions of
 adult bees and the food to which these secretions are added
 (Baily, 1976;  Anderson, 1991). However, APV has only been found
 to be a cause of mortality in nature in honey bee colonies infected
 with parasitic mite, Varroa jacobsoni, wheras KBV strains have been
 detected directly by serology, in amounts sufficient to have been
 responsible for mortality, in extracts of dead bees from colonies in
 Australia, New Zealand , Fiji,and Canada , in the absence of the mite.
 KBV was originally isolated from Apis cerana which has a limited
 natural distribution in south-east Asia. The occurrence of strains of
 KBV has now been confirmed in Apis mellifera on the continents of
 North America, Europe and Australasia ( New Zealand included)
 but its origins in this bee species remain obsure. KBV may be more
 widely distributed than previously thought BUT ,similarly to APV
may have remained undetected in some areas of the world until the
 advent of V.jacobsoni and the consequent increasd interest in honey
 bee viruses.ALTERNATIVELY, trade in live bees may have introduced
 virus strains to new areas."
  In responce to Peter Bray posting
     When 1/2 truths and truth distortion are employed in trying to
 make ones point all of the contents become subject.Mr Bray
attempts to make my concerns sound like trade barrier issuses.
 Quite the contrary as I am only interested in the good of US and
Hawaii honeybees which because of our isolation may have
 been spared to introduction of some of the pest and disease
 listed above and in the absense of facts I tend to want to go slowly
with any movement of bees through Hawaii. I have nothing to gain
 as I am a very small time keeper of the bees. My concerns are felt
 by other Hawaii beekeepers and my  efforts are not motivatied by
 a desire to be able to sell/ship bees to Canada as suggested by
 Mr. Bray. This is by the way a complete distortion of the facts as
 Hawaii is approved to export bees to Canada and has been
 approved since mid 80's. Our bees for export are varified by
a state department of ag . entomologist with in 90 days of shipping to be
 free of V & T mite and other infectious bees disease. My concerns are
 for the protection of the bio-logical isolation that Hawaii has enjoyed
 as the most isolated place on earth.
  The facts about KBV are not clear and subject to much debate and
 until a peer review panel has sorted out the truth I vote for beeing
 careful when departing from the original intent of the
Honeybee Act of 1922 which was established to "prevent the introduction
 and SPREAD of pests and diseases of honeybees to the United States."
  The practice of shipping NZ bees through Hawaii always was a violation
 of the intent of the Act and NZ and any U.S. officals involved in the
circumvention of the law should be proscecutted. All of this has now
 changed as the Honeybee Act has been gutted of it's original strict
 prohibition against the import of bees to the u.S. by GATT
 and the World Trade Organization  and is now left up to the disscretion of
the U.S.D.A. secretary of Agriculture whose decission regarding
 honeybee issues is most influenced by the imput of the head of honeybee
 research in America H. Shimanuki who has expressed no concern and
 only support of NZ bees coming to America since his consultanting
with the NZ bee industry in the mid 80's .
 I hope this posting will wake up some of the readers that this
 is not some made up issue but a true concern for American
Beekeepers who are in need of help and protection if needed.
  The Japanese allow NZ bees to stop and refuel on the way
 to their northern hemisphere customers but they can not unload.
  Hawaii is a key break and distribution point because of the huge
 number of non stop direct flights to Canada and the United States
 to  which NZ still desire to sell their end of season bees.
   Hoping everyone a honey of a week end
        Walter Patton

Walter & Elisabeth Patton,  27-703 A Ka' ie'ie Rd., Papaikou HI.,96781
    Ph./fax. 808-964-5401       E-Mail  hihoney@ilhawaii
Beekeeper and Bed  & Breakfast Owner in Hawaii
  http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney.htm
http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/beeware.htm
   http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/lamalani.htm
>>> Item number 9539, dated 96/06/28 08:11:54 -- ALL
Date:         Fri, 28 Jun 1996 08:11:54 EDT
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Aaron Morris <SYSAM@cnsibm.albany.edu>
Subject:      Parasitic Mite Syndrome (PMS)
Adding a little more to Dave Green's description of Parasitic Mite
Syndrome (PMS): the term not only refers to the mite infestation itself
(as Dave described), but more specifically refers to the symptoms of a
heavy mite infestation which can, as Dave stated, appear similar to
American Foulbrood.  A good description regarding PMS can be found in
BEE-L LOG9602 (reposted recently, hence also in BEE-L LOG9606) in the
summary of a talk given by Dr. Cynthia Scott-Dupree to the Worcester
County Beekeepers Association.   Her talk referenced varroa mites as a
vector in spreading bee viruses.  Quoting from that post one final time:
  "The focus of current research is on how the mites may act as
  vectors in spreading the approximately twenty identified bee viruses,
  which are hard to identify in the field and whose symptoms may appear
  as common infectious diseases, hence being easily misidentified."
  "...  varroa mites did exhibit a significant correlation
  in the spread of chronic bee paralysis virus types one and two,
  hairless black bee virus, Kashmir bee virus, black queen cell virus
  and others."
  "... it is perhaps the manner in which varroa feed on honeybees that
  activates the viruses, helping them to flourish to the detriment of
  colony population."
To receive a copy of the entire log, send E-Mail to:
             LISTSERV@cnsibm.albany.edu
with a single line in the body of the mail which reads:
             GET BEE-L LOG9602
or peruse them at W. Allen Dick's web page at:
             http://www.cuug.ab.ca:8001/~dicka
WARNING! the logs have grown to be QUITE large.  It's perhaps time to
split the logs by week rather than month.
Sincerely,
Aaron Morris
>>> Item number 9919, dated 96/07/24 19:20:28 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 24 Jul 1996 19:20:28 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ilhawaii.net>
Subject:      Bleak Future ? Yes
Bleak  Yes I would agree that things do look a little bleak
 for U.S. honeybees with continued importation of Canadian
honeybees fresh off
the airplane from New Zealand with the following
 honeybee  pests and diseases known to be on the N.Z.
honeybees.
Regarding Ted Fisher request for New Zealand Honeybee health report
 Mr. Cliff Van Eaton, Apiculture Advisory Officer
MAF Quality Management, Tauranga,New Zealand
 Wrote to bee-l and reported the following list of pest and disease
 known to exist on NZ honeybees 4/19/96
  1American Foul Brood
  2 Nosema
  3Chalkbrood
  4Sacbrood
  5 cronic bee paralysis
  6 black queen cell
  7 acute bee paralysis virus
  8 cloudy wing virus
  9 bee virus X
  10 bee virus Y
  11 filamentous virus
  12 KASHMIR BEE VIRUS
  13 Amoeba disease
       Mites
  14 Melittiphis alvearius
  15 Acarapis externus
  16 A. dorsalis
  17 Neocypholaelaps zealandicus
  And not reported by Cliff Van Eaton
 18. Melanoius found to be on NZ honeybees by Dr. T.P.Liu in Canada
Granted that all of the disease's are not being introduced to the
North American Continent for the first time and they are assuredly
spreading these pests around the U.S. and no one seems to care.
The BEE RESEARCH LABORATORY  ( BRL ) a part of the USDA
seems to have no interest in the spreading of the pests to America's
honeybees from sea to shinning sea .Much information has been
released by BRL this spring and summer as more and more people
have noticed the absence of honeybees in the United States and the
increase in honey prices due in part to the stellar losses experienced
by Canadian and US bee keepers from the two blood sucking mites
and no mention of the increased incidence of  Viruses and the truth
 that honeybees with mites and viruses have no chance for recovery,
or is this what our BS bee scientist leader at BRL wants to call
l a bad case of PMS?
      What kind of disaster is going to be needed to get the American
 beekeeper to wake up  and get organized and demand a reorganization
of the BEE RESEARCH LABORATORY. Sitting back and letting the
 status quo continue into the future is only going to let the problem get
bigger and bigger . The BRL has one person working on Viruses of
honeybees andI am told that the BRL has no opinion as to the origin of KBV
and I am  referred to Dr. Brenda Ball in England. The BRL has to date no
ability to test honeybees for KBV and they refer me to DR Anderson in Australia.
    I mean wait a minute  this is the United States of America that is having
to defer me to other countries for information that should be available to
the US beekeeper. Now I hear that Australia has requested to send their
 honeybees to the U S and the BRL seems to enamored with southern
 hemisphere honeybees.
      We need to get organized.
                                           Aloha
Walter Patton
Walter & Elisabeth Patton,  27-703 A Ka' ie'ie Rd., Papaikou HI.,96781
    Ph./fax. 808-964-5401       E-Mail  hihoney@ilhawaii
Beekeeper and Bed  & Breakfast Owner in Hawaii
  http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney.htm
http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/beeware.htm
   http://www.alohamall.com/hamakua/lamalani.htm
>>> Item number 10718, dated 96/09/11 19:49:14 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:49:14 PST
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         "Steven A. Creasy" <screasy@juno.com>
Subject:      Essential Oils update
I received the following from Mr. Amerine at U of WV.  I hope it will be
of interest...
Forwarded message follows::
>
Dear Steve,
There is practically no difference between natural and synthetic
wintergreen. The natural oil is 99% the same as the synthetic. We have
tried
both, and both are equally effective; other beekeepers have corroborated=
 this.
I am attaching a file that is the basis of our web page. I hope it is
useful
to you.
File:
Preliminary Results of Research
Varroa Mite Control, 1996
http://www.wvu.edu/~agexten/varroa.htm
(Update: September 10, 1996). We are going to update this web page about
monthly as we learn more from our experiments and as we receive results from
other beekeepers. This page is designed for beekeepers; for those needing
help with terminology, please see Graham, J. 1992. The Hive and the Honey
Bee, Dadant & Sons, Hamilton IL, 1324 pp.
Eradication possible?  We believe that during the late fall and early
winter
the varroa mite is very susceptible to control by essential oils. By
treating hives with the grease patties containing wintergreen, tea tree
or
patchouli oils, and making sure the treatment is near the cluster, then
the
varroa mites will have no place to hide and all can be killed. (No brood
cells will be available as shelters.) Because most of the country has
lost
feral colonies, and only careful beekeepers now have bees, a concerted
effort by all beekeepers at this time may achieve eradication of the
varroa
mite.  We are not as sure about tracheal mite--(there are so few around
this
area that we can not find a sufficient infestation to test), but it, too,
may be susceptible to winter treatment with grease patties. Perhaps
adding
menthol to the grease patties may be lethal to them as well. This critical
opportunity in beekeeping may not come around again for some time to
come:
our scenario is that with the feral colonies gone, many new colonies will
be
established in the next few years which will have  light infestations of
mites; swarms will issue from these and begin to reestablish a feral
population--containing at first a few varroa mites. In a few seasons these
will increase and another epidemic of fatal varroa mite + PMS will occur.
As
the new feral colonies increase, it will become impossible to find  them
and
to eradicate their varroa mites. That is why now is such a special=
 opportunity.
Summary of Treatments:
We have refined our experimental treatments as follows:
1). Syrup: 25 drops (1 cc) of wintergreen or spearmint added to two cups
(about one pound or 453.6 grams) of sugar in a quart jar (0.95 liter);
hot
water added to fill jar.  Be sure to add the oil to the granulated sugar
then add the very warm water (not too hot or else the oils will
evaporate).
Feed the bees as much syrup as they will take. We have had good results
with
wintergreen, spearmint, and peppermint oils.
2). Grease patties: are made with four cups of granulated sugar, two cups
of
shortening and one of the following: 21 cc of wintergreen oil or 21 cc of
patchouli oil or 21 cc or tea tree oil or 11.5 cc of each of two oils
(eg.,
wintergreen + patchouli). (This rate is 1/4 oz. of essential oils per pound
of sugar and grease). The components are thoroughly mixed (wear gloves or
use a large spoon, as wintergreen oil in such concentrations may be
toxic;
patchouli oil is not toxic). The mixture is then made up into 4 ounce
patties (like a small, 3.5" hamburger) which are divided and  placed on top
of each brood box (about one half pound or 8 ozs. of grease patties per
hive; one batch treats 5.8 hives). We plan to make patties this fall that
also contain terramycin (TM25) to determine whether medications can be
combined for both mites and foul brood.=20
3). Tracking strips: are made by cutting sheets or pieces of 1/8 in.
plexiglass into strips 3" wide by 14" long  (7.5 cm by 35.5 cm ), and
used
as a base for holding a treated slurry containing essential oil. The
slurry
is made as follows: 17.5 ozs. (2 and 1/5 cups) of canola oil are mixed
with
6.5 ozs. (slightly more than 4/5 cup) of melted beeswax, stirred and set
on
a hot plate. To this liquid add 24 cc's of wintergreen oil (or 24 cc's of
patchouli oil or 12 cc's of each ). Stir well and pour into three  8 oz.
plastic cups. When cooled, the slurry has a shoe-polish or salve-like
consistency. Then, 2 to 3 teaspoons of the slurry are applied to the
tracking strip which is placed lengthwise just inside the front entrance
of
each colony. The bees must track through this slurry when they enter or
exit
the hive; they then clean off the slurry by eating it and feeding it to each
other. Treatments are repeated after 5 days: the old slurry, dead mites
and
dead, deformed bees are scraped off and new slurry added. Plexiglass is used
for tracking strips because it has a very smooth finish allowing an even
coverage and it is too hard for the bees to chew up or remove; masonite
or
other similar material could be used just as well.
4). Paper inserts at top of hive: For control of varroa mite on displaced
nurse bees (see below).  Use 2 cups of canola oil containing 11 cc's of
wintergreen; put some in a honey bear (as a squeeze bottle) and apply 6
lines of wintergreen oil in both directions on a paper towel so that the
towel is saturated.  The bees chew it up and remove it in a week or so.
You
should replace it as needed to treat the varroa mites trying to avoid the
other treatments.
Varroa Mite Assessment: You can place a sticky board on the bottom of the
hive in combination with both patties and a tracking strip to obtain a
good
count of varroa mites within 24 to 48 hours: in our tests the essential
oils
killed more mites than Apistan.
We use the essential oils throughout the year, either feeding syrup (when
nectar is not coming in), using patties (pretty much year around, but
bees
do not use the patties as much during honey flows), and using the
tracking
strips, which are especially useful during the honey flows.
We have found in recent months:
When nectar flows are coming in, the bees tend to ignore the syrup and
the
grease patties and the number of reproducing mites increase; that is why
Bob
developed the tracking strip, to insure that varroa mites are treated.
When
tracking strips are used, the varroa mites will enter cells being capped
in
order to escape the essential oils; drone cells are preferred. =20
Grease patties containing spearmint oil were propolized, but not those
patties made with wintergreen, tea tree or patchouli oils.=20
We recently found that the varroa mites were able to escape treatment
despite using both tracking strips and grease patties (or tracking strips
and syrup). We found that displaced nurse bees which gather under the inner
cover were used as a hiding place by the mites. We treated this group of
mites by putting a piece of paper towel treated with canola oil +
wintergreen just under the inner cover. We used 2 cups of canola oil
containing 11 cc's of wintergreen; put some in a honey bear (as a squeeze
bottle) and applied 6 lines of wintergreen oil in both directions on the
towel so that the towel was saturated.  The bees chewed it up and removed
it
in a week or so. You should replace it as needed to treat the varroa mites
trying to avoid the other treatments.
Queens: A potential problem may be that queens on mating flights may have
their pheromone masked or may become somewhat disoriented by the
essential
oils. We recommend that the treatments be removed from the hives when
queen
rearing and mating is taking place.
Drones: We found that large numbers of drone cells provide protection to
the
varroa mites and are definitely the source of most breeding varroa mites.
Consequently, we recommend that the amount of available drone cells be
kept
to a mininmum; be sure to remove and replace old comb containing lots of
irregular drone cells. (See the literature for techniques using periodic
drone removal to reduce varroa mites).=20
Large colonies: When hives have many supers, the treatment for the varroa
mites is "diluted". So, remove and extract honey supers and reduce the
hives
to two chambers or to one and a half chambers as soon as possible; in
this
way, the treatment will be more effective.=20
Note about tracheal mite: We checked Bob's colonies for tracheal mite by
collecting older foragers: those that have frayed wings and a bald
thorax.
We removed their heads and first pair of legs and examined the tracheae
visible inside the cavity where the legs were (peel off the "collar" with
forceps); infested tracheae could be seen with a hand lens and were dark
spotted or uniformly dark. Results: in control colonies (no treatments)
30%
had tracheal mites; in treated colonies, 10% had tracheal mites. Since
bees
are able to drift considerable distances, we suspect that some of those
in
our treated colonies may have come in from other, declining feral colonies
in the neighborhood (a few feral colonies still remain near Cumberland,
but
these should be gone soon). The older bees give a more reliable test for
the
presence and extent of infestation by tracheal mite.
Original page (Prepared July 1996, published in the Amer. Bee Journal,
September, 1996.):
In our opinion, Bob Noel, Beekeeper in Cumberland Maryland,  has
discovered
an effective and economical control for varroa mite (Varroa  jacobsoni
Oudemans (Acari: Varroidae)) and probably also for tracheal mite
(Acarapis
woodi (Rennie) (Acari: Tarsonemidae)).
The following is a brief account of our work and preliminary findings
during
the past 14 months.
In summer and fall of 1995, Bob fed syrups containing essential oils1 to
his
bees, specifically wintergreen oil and spearmint oil. He added 10 to 20
drops (1/2 to 1 cc, respectively) of the oils to 453.6 grams (one pound)
of
sugar in a 0.95 liter (1 quart)  jar, and hot water was added to fill the
jar. This syrup was then fed to the bees at the entrance using a standard
boardman feeder. He applied the two syrups to 14 hives as follows:
spearmint
oil to 5 colonies and wintergreen to 9 colonies beginning in July and
continuing until October. In July, 1995, many of his colonies were
heavily
infested with varroa mite displayed typical PMS (parasitic mite
syndrome):
they were suffering from mite viruses, such as ABPV, CBPV, Kashmir Virus
and
from sacbrood which was quite heavy, and the brood pattern was scattered
and
incomplete, very similar to American foul brood (AFB) (however, none of the
colonies had AFB). Many of the emerging workers were small with shriveled
wings and very small abdomens. Two of the colonies were so weak in July
that
wax moths were attacking comb and brood. Syrups were given ad lib and
topped
up daily. Bob assayed varroa mite populations by opening sealed brood
cells,
both drone and worker, by observing emerging brood and by directly
observing
varroa mite behavior.=20
Results: after using treated syrups for three weeks, Bob noticed improved
brood patterns, healthier bees, and reduced mite populations. After 30
days
of treatment (we inspected the colonies in August, 1995) varroa mites
were
definitely in decline and the bees were considerably recovered from PMS.
We
observed numerous varroa mites and PMS in control (untreated) colonies.
On
21 September, we thoroughly inspected several hives; those that were
treated
with syrups were virtually free of varroa mite, whereas untreated control
colonies in the area were heavily attacked by varroa mite, had typical
PMS,
and were beginning to die off.
In November 1995, Bob found that two of his bee yards (Oldtown, MD and
Kifer, MD) which were free of varroa mites in July and August, were
heavily
infested with varroa mites (2-3 mites per adult bee). We believe that
workers from collapsing feral colonies had joined with these colonies
bringing in enormous numbers of varroa mites. Bob treated some colonies
with
apistan strips and grease patties (without essential oils) and others
with
grease patties containing the following: four cups of granulated sugar, two
cups of shortening and 4.8 cc's of wintergreen oil. This mixture was made
into 8 oz patties and placed one per colony above the cluster. The
following
spring and early summer only a trace of varroa mite could be found in the
hives treated with the grease patties containing wintergreen oil; several
of
the colonies treated only with apistan and standard grease patties died
out.=
=20
In May 1996, Bob devised the tracking strip method of varroa mite control:
strips of 1/8 in. plexiglass, 7.5 cm by 35.5 cm (3" by 14"), were used as
a
support for a slurry made as follows: 4 parts mineral oil mixed with 1.5
parts melted beeswax; this liquid was then poured into 4 oz. baby food jars
to which 2 cc's of patchouli oil and 2 cc's of wintergreen oil were
added.
Then =BD to 3 teaspoons of the slurry were applied to the each tracking=
 strip
with fingers, which were placed lengthwise just inside the front entrance
of
each colony. He began these treatments early in May. The day after strips
were applied, dead varroa mites were found on the tracking
strips--several
dead mites per colony.=20
Bob's associate, Harry Mallow (a beekeeper for 30 years, former Maryland
bee
inspector, and former president of the Maryland State Beekeepers
Association) treated one hive (his last surviving colony at beeyard No.
2)
with the tracking strip on 31 May, 1996 (double the dose of patchouli and
wintergreen oils; i.e., 4 cc of each oil in 4 ozs. of the slurry). On
June
1st, both Harry and Bob observed several 100's of dead varroa mites at
the
entrance, on and around the strip. They returned on June 2nd to videotape
the dead mites--most had been carried off  by ants, but several dozen dead
mites still remained at the entrance. Amrine inspected this colony on 6
June, 1996, and found very few live varroa mites on workers in the hive
(two
were seen on 1000's of bees examined). About 100 sealed drone cells were
examined; several recently capped drone cells contained 18 to 25 highly
aggitated varroa mites--they ran around the larva or pupa very rapidly and
ran quickly onto and over the combs. It appears that at the time of
treatment they entered nearly capped drone cells as if they were "bomb
shelters" to avoid the tracking material. The older capped drone cells
(with
colored pupae and capped before the treatment) contained normal numbers
of
normally developing varroa mites.
On June 6, 1996, Amrine inspected 12 of Bob Noel's colonies, in three bee
yards, and collected all varroa mites that could be found. About 100
sealed
drone cells and several worker cells were opened in each colony. Four
sealed
drone cells were found infested with varroa at his "Rick's" bee yard in
Cumberland, MD: two in colony number 4, treated with a tracking strip
containing the mineral oil-beeswax slurry and 4 cc of patchouli oil in a
baby food jar (4 oz); and one each in colonies 2 and 3 which were treated
with the same slurry containing 2 cc of wintergreen oil and 2 cc of
patchouli oil (in 4 oz.). Varroa mites were not found in hive number 1
(same
treatment as hives 2 and 3). We regard these numbers as a trace
infestation
of varroa mites. (The same colonies were inspected by Maryland bee
inspector
Dave Thomas, who reported no live varroa mites on 18 May, 1996). No
deformed
bees were found; there were 12 to 14 frames of brood in each colony which
were the best looking colonies we have seen in the last three years.
Inspection of the Kifer, MD bee yard resulted in finding only two sealed
drone cells with varroa mites (one each) out of 100 drone cells examined
(hive number 3). This hive had been treated only with grease patty +
wintergreen oil in November 1995, and a tracking strip (slurry made from 4
parts canola oil + 1.5 parts melted beeswax and 2 cc of patchouli oil)
was
added 30 May 1996. The colonies had two or three mites per adult bee in
November, 1995.
Inspection of the Oldtown, MD, bee yard resulted in finding 3 sealed drone
cells containing varroa mites out of 100 cells examined in each of two
colonies. These had been treated with grease patties containing wintergreen
oil in November 1995, and had received no other treatment. In November, the
colonies had two or three varroa mites per adult bee.
Conclusions:
Bob Noel's experiments from July 1995 to the present have demonstrated
that
essential oils in sugar syrup, grease patties and tracking strips are
able
to greatly reduce populations of varroa mites in bee colonies. 1)
Spearmint
oil at the rate of  =BD to 1 cc per quart of syrup (1# of sugar) had the=
 best
results when fed in July through October; wintergreen oil was less
effective, but still highly effective, in these experiments. 2) Grease
patties containing 4.8 cc's of wintergreen oil were very effective from
November until April in reducing and nearly eliminating varroa mites in
heavily infested colonies treated in November. 3) Tracking strips
containing
2cc of patchouli oil and 2 cc of wintergreen oil (or 4 cc of patchouli
oil)
are very effective in controlling varroa mites during spring build up. 4)
In
all cases of successful treatments, the essential oils were delivered to
the
brood nest of the treated colonies. The importance of this last observation
can not be overemphasized. Two experiments of ours support the importance
of
this point.
 First, Harry Mallow began sugar syrup treatment of 16 colonies at his
bee
yard No. 1 in September, 1995. He treated 8 colonies with syrup and
essential oils only (4 with 15 drops of wintergreen oil per pound of
sugar,
and 4 with 15 drops of spearmint oil); the cans were placed at the top of
the colonies (in contrast to boardman feeders placed at the entrance by
Bob
Noel). [Nurse bees and foragers collect nectar from a boardman feeder and
the syrup and essential oils go to the brood; feeders at the top of a
hive
do not usually deliver syrups or food directly to the brood nest.] Four
more
of his colonies were given wintergreen syrup + apistan strips and the
last
four colonies were given untreated syrup as controls. Only the four
colonies
with wintergreen syrup + apistan survived. These colonies were treated
too
late and the syrup was fed in the wrong location: at the top of the
colony
instead of the entrance.
Second, Harry also treated one colony located in his beeyard No. 3 in
April
of 1996 with canola oil + wintergreen oil (4 cc of wintergreen in 4 ozs.
of
canola); a folded  paper towel with canola + wintergreen was laid on a
queen
excluder above the cluster. He got a good kill of varroa mites (many were
found dead on the bottom board). He continued this treatment for several
weeks. We inspected the colony on 6 June, 1996: a paper towel with canola
oil was on top of a queen excluder at the top of the colony (1 and =BD=
 story);
it had not been touched by the bees (in contrast, the original paper
towel
was shredded by the bees in April). [After April, the bees have little
reason to go to the upper part of the hive and will not be affected by
treatments placed there.] About 100 sealed brood cells (mostly drone)
were
examined  in this colony; about 1/4 of the drone cells contained normally
developing varroa mites. Obviously, this treatment, though effective in
April when the cluster was near the top of the upper super, was no longer
working. Thus the presence of the essential oils in the top of the hive
was
insufficient to cause reduction of varroa mite. This probably explains
some
of the negative reports we have read or heard from other researchers
using
essential oils--they apparently did not deliver the oils to the brood nest
in a way that nurse bees and foraging bees would be treated; thus the
tracking board at the entrance is highly effective, the syrup fed by
boardman feeder is highly effective, and treated grease patties above the
fall and winter cluster proved highly effective. The treatments must be
delivered to the brood nest--in such a way that nurse bees and foraging
bees
are treated.
Proposed mechanisms of action:
Our observations of Bob Noel's experiments in 1995 and 1996 indicate the
following mechanisms are probably at work in controlling varroa mites:
1)  Direct toxicity: The grease patties and tracking strips indicate that
the essential oils are able to kill varroa mites by direct contact,
within
24 hours or less. Honey bees are  not harmed by these oils at the rates
used; honey has not been found to be contaminated by any of the
treatments
used to date (taste test). The evidence to date is strong enough to prove
that this is definitely a mechanism of varroa mite control; however, no
case
has been observed where direct toxicity has totally elliminated the
mites.
For now, it can only be regarded as a partial control and effective only
at
time of treatment and for several days following.
2) Sensory disruption: it seems that the essential oils from grease
patties
and tracking strips are able to mask the normal chemosensory receptors on
the tarsi and mouthparts of varroa mites, disrupting the mite's ability
to
function normally. As a result, they are not able to properly invade
larval
cells about to be capped, nor do they seem to be able to properly insert
themselves under the sternites of worker bees and feed on bee hemolymph.
They may not be able to recognize adults and mature larvae of honey bees
because of the presence of the grease + oils on the mites' cuticle and
sensory receptors. This mechanism is hypothetical and is supported
indirectly by observations of behavior of varroa mites in treated
colonies
by Bob Noel, Harry Mallow and us.
3)  Reproductive disruption: it is apparent that varroa mites in all
three
methods of treatments are not able to reproduce normally. Examination of
cells at or near the time of emergence of bees and mites from
mite-infested
cells in treated colonies show that few newly developed females are
found;
many cells have been found containing dead immature mites and single
females
that never reproduced (so-called nonreproducing or sterile females). We
conclude that the essential oils are able to disrupt the reproductive
mechanism of the varroa mite.=20
It is known that under natural, untreated conditions, the female varroa
mite, after feeding on a larva in a sealed cell for 1-2 days, normally
becomes "gravid"--she appears swollen and the cuticular membrane between
the
sternal and genital plates becomes stretched and evident as white borders
around the plates. The so-called "eggs" deposited by the female are in
reality immature mites that are ready to emerge as protonymphs, the
embryonic and larval stages having been completed within the chorion
inside
the body of the female. Thus, the female is converting the blood of the
bee
larva and/or pupa into nutrients for each developing immature mite. This
part of the varroa's development is viewed by us as its weakest point, the
so-called "Achilles' Heel" of the varroa mite, and appears to be the
major
target of  action of the essential oils. The oils may be disrupting
enzyme
systems used to convert bee blood nutrients into nutrients for the
developing immature mites and so the females are not able to produce
"eggs".
Also, after hatching, very few of the mites in treated colonies were able
to
complete development by the time the bee emerged from the cell.=20
These mechanisms help explain observations given to us by several beekeepers
where  honey bee colonies were located in regions with blooming plants
rich
with essential oils, such as mints, melaleucas, eucalypts, etc., and
which
were often found to be free of, or not harmed by,  varroa mites. We
presume
that the bees foraged on flowers of the plants, or on the resins of the
plants for propolis, and returned to their colonies with these nectars or
resins containing essential oils. Appartently, enough of the essential
oils
reached the brood cells so that the development of the varroa mites was
disrupted in the colonies. This probably explains the failure of varroa
mites to develop in many tropical regions, such as Brazil: the large
variety
of native flora apparently produce essential oils in nectar, pollen or
propolis to the extent that normal reproduction of the mites is impaired.
We believe that these essential oils, which were originally produced by
the
host plants in order to kill, repel or prevent arthropod attack, are a very
natural means of mite control. Honey bees are not affected by the
essential
oils, especially those from Lamiaceae (the mint family), because of
concurrent evolution of the bees with these flowering plants and their
essential oils; the bees long ago developed techniques to avoid, or
counteract, the toxicity of the essential oils. However, the varroa
mites,
which were originally on Apis cerana in South and East Asia, apparently
are
susceptible to the essential oils. An important question is whether
varroa
mites will be able to evolve resistance to the essential oils; only time
will tell. However, there are so many essential oils available, that if
resistance to one appears, another oil may be substituted; the only real
fear is whether varroa mite may eventually develop resistance to the
entire
class of essential oils.
Our future research will be directed toward 1) finding an essential oil
treatment that will totally erradicate varroa mites from hives; 2) providing
evidence to elucidate and document the mechanism(s) by which varroa mites
are controlled by essential oils; 3) testing the oils at increased levels
to
determine toxicity levels to honey bees; 4) testing honey and beeswax
harvested from treated hives for the presence of residues of essential
oils.
We encourage other beekeepers to conduct research similar to ours in
order
to help find a way to eliminate bee mites. Please let us know if you have
had similar results. Our interests in this project are strictly
non-profit
and for the benefit of the honey bee industry and beekeeping in general.
Respectfully submitted,=20
James W. Amrine, Jr.,   Terry A. Stasny, and Robert Skidmore
West Virginia University
We can be reached at the following mailing addresses:
Robert C. Noel, Teacher, Fort Hill High School
   Computer Science and School Coordinator
108 Blackiston Ave.
Cumberland, MD 21502 =20
Telephone: 301-724-3529
Harry A. Mallow, Former Regional Bee Inspector, Allegheny & Garrett Cos.
    Md. Dept of Agric. (under John Lindner)
11914 Valley Rd. NE
Cumberland, MD 21502=20
Telephone: 301-724-2191
James W. Amrine, Jr.2 (Professor),  Terry A. Stasny 2 (Research Acarologist)
and Robert Skidmore
    (Apiculture graduate student)
Division of Plant and Soil Sciences,
P. O. Box 6108, West Virginia University
Morgantown, WV 26505-6108
Telephone: 304-293-6023;  E-mail: jamrine@wvnvm.wvnet.edu
1 For a source of essential oils, we recommend Lorann Oils, 4518 Aurelius
Road, P. O. Box 22009, Lansing, MI 48909-2009. Toll free number is
1-800-248-1302. Fax number is 517-882-0507. Lorann Oils will send
catalogs
to callers and will sell essential oils at wholesale prices to beekeepers
(callers must identifiy themselves as beekeepers) in quantities from 1
oz.
to 1 gallon. Beekeepers needing larger quantities should call for special
pricing.
2 Amrine has been teaching beekeeping at WVU since 1978, is past
president
of the Eastern Apiculture Society (1982) and is current president of the
Morgantown Area Beekeepers Association; Stasny is founder of the
Morgantown
Area Beekeepers Association (1977), and has been a beekeeper for 30
years;
Skidmore was a bee inspector for the Pennsylvania Dept. of Agriculture,
Erie, Pennsylvania area in 1995.
Standard Equivalents and Measures:
1 pound =3D 453.597 grams =3D .453 Kg
1 Kg =3D 2.2046 pounds
1 fluid ounce =3D 29.57373 cc
1/4 oz =3D 7.3934 cc
1 cc =3D  0.0338 oz.
       =3D  25 drops from a standard medicine dropper
10 cc =3D .338 oz or about 1/3 ounce or two teaspoonfuls
1 fluid dram =3D 3.6967 cc=20
                    =3D 0.125 ounces
                    =3D 1/8 oz.
                    =3D .75 tsp.
1 teaspoonful =3D 1.33333 fluid drams
                     =3D 4.93 cc,
        or      =3D approximately 5 cc
                     =3D 1/6 oz.
=BD tsp.           =3D 2.465 cc
           Or     =3D approx. 2.5 cc
1/4 tsp.         =3D  1.2325 cc
1/8 tsp          =3D   0.62 cc
1 tablespoonful =3D 3  teaspoonfuls, =3D 4 drams
                         =3D 14.7868 cc
          or          =3D approximately 15 cc
                        =3D1/2 oz.
1 cup =3D 8 ounces or =BD pound
          =3D  236.58984 cc
=BD cup =3D 4 ounces
          =3D  118.29492 cc
1/3 cup =3D 2.666667 ozs
             =3D 78.86328 cc
1/4 cup =3D 2 ounces
             =3D 59.14746 cc
1/8 cup =3D 1 ounce=20
             =3D 29.57373 cc
             =3D 8 drams
             =3D 6 tsp. or 2 tablespoonfulls
1 common ounce dry weight (avdp) =3D 28.34952 grams
1 cup sugar =3D 218.3 grams (by experiment) =3D 7.7 oz. Avdp.
1 cup crisco =3D 217.36 grams (by experiment) =3D 7.66 oz. Avdp.
Example, making grease patties:
A standard container of crisco weighs 3 lbs. To this add 6 lbs of sugar,
for
a total of 9 lbs. Nine lbs of grease patties requires 1/4 oz. per pound =3D
9*.25=3D 2.25 ozs or 66.5 cc of wintergreen (a little more than 1/4 cup
or=
 1/4
cup + 1 and 1/2 tsp.)
=20
Sincerely,
Jim Amrine
Division of Plant & Soil Sciences
P. O. Box 6108, West Virginia University
Morgantown, WV 26506-6108
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<> Telephone: 304-293-6023                     <>
<> Fax: 304-293-2960                           <>
<> web: http://www.wvu.edu/~agexten/varroa.htm <>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
------------------END OF FILE-------------------
>>> Item number 11918, dated 96/11/10 16:58:12 -- ALL
Date:         Sun, 10 Nov 1996 16:58:12 -0500
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         H K Johnson <hk1emtp@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Subject:      Re: Commercial Testing Labs.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
ICCI wrote:
>
> Could any body help me.
> Are there any commercial testing laboratories for Bee Products in USA ?
> Beeswax, Pollen, Propolis etc..
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> Rao VadlamudiThe Bee Research Laboratory (BRL) conducts research on the biology and
> control of honey
bee (Apis
mellifera L.) diseases and parasites to ensure an adequate supply of bees for
pollination and honey
production. Specifically, scientists are conducting research on the biology and
control of two parasitic mites, Acarapis woodi and Varroa jacobsoni, and American
foulbrood and chalkbrood diseases. Additionally, scientists conduct research on the
molecular systematics of Apis and on developing molecular methods for the
identification of Africanized honey bees. The BRL also conducts research on the
utilization of non-Apis bees for the pollination of crops of economic importance.
Because of the research specialties, the BRL scientists provide authoritative
identification of Africanized honey bees and the diagnosis of bee diseases and pests
for Federal and State regulatory agencies and beekeepers on a worldwide basis.
     History
     Staff
     Current Projects
     How to contact us
     Bee Disease Diagnosis
Staff
A staff of eight permanent scientists, two post-doctoral associates, and eight support
personnel make up the BRL.
     Shimanuki, H. - Research Leader
     Arias, M.C.
     Batra, S.W.T.
     Bruce, W.A.
     Calderone, N.W.
     Collins, A.M.
     Feldlaufer, M.F.
     Hill, J.M.
     Hung, A.C.F.
     Knox, D.A.
     Kuenen, L.P.J.
     Logan, M.C.
     Sgambati, P.
     Sheppard, W.S.
     Vincent, D.L.
     Wilcox, R.J.
     Wilzer, Jr., K.R.
     Yoo, H-R.
Current Projects
The four main research units at the BRL are:
   1.Bee Diseases and Parasitic Mites,
   2.Honey Bee Molecular Systematic and Population Genetics
   3.Pollinators
   4.Cryopreservation of Honey Bee Germplasm
Diagnosis and Control of Diseases of Honey Bees, Including Parasitic Mites
Objectives: (1) to develop the means for in vitrorearing of parasitic mites of honey
bees for use in preliminary evaluation of control technologies; (2) to conduct field
evaluations of environmentally compatible control strategies for the management of
honey bee diseases and parasitic mites; and (3) to develop new methods for the rapid
and accurate diagnosis of honey bee diseases; (4) to provide diagnostic service to
action and regulatory agencies and the beekeeping industry. Selected Publications
Dr. Hachiro Shimanuki, Research Leader
301-504-8205, hshimanuki@asrr.arsusda.gov
Conducts research on disease and pests. Specifically investigating the control of
American Foulbrood disease using fatty acids and determining the etiology of bee
parasitic mite syndrome. Responsible for coordinating Africanized honey bee research
between the ARS and other Federal agencies and Universities. In addition, oversees the
bee disease, parasitic mite, and bee identification services performed by the Bee
Research Laboratory.
Dr. William A. Bruce, Research Entomologist, Acarology
301-504-8821, wbruce@asrr.arsusda.gov
Biology of the mite parasites of honey bees. Research interests include reproductive
physiology and behavior, nutritional physiology and feeding behavior, and
host-parasite interactions. Long-term goal is to control these parasites by
non-chemical means. Current research focuses on basic biology of host parasite
interactions and the influence of water balance and temperature on the survival
ofVarroa jacobsoni
. Dr. Nicholas W. Calderone, Research Entomologist
301-504-8574, ncalderone@asrr.arsusda.gov
Major focus is on the chemical ecology and behavior of honey bees. Current interests
include identification of chemical cues involved in the regulation of pollen foraging
activity and the hostseeking behavior of the parasitic honey bee mites Varroa
jacobsoni and Acarapis woodi. Responsible for identification and evaluation of natural
products for control of honey-bee pests, parasites, and pathogens.
Dr. Mark F. Feldlaufer, Research Entomologist
301-504-8637, mfeldlaufer@asrr.arsusda.gov
Investigates the biochemical and hormonal differences between honey bees and their
parasitic mites and the inhibition of sterol metabolism in honey bee pests (i.e.
Galleria). Participates in natural products chemistry with other members of the
laboratory and research community.
Dr. Akey C. F. Hung, Research Entomologist
301-504-8749, ahung@asrr.arsusda.gov
Production of monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies and the development of enzyme
immunoassay for
field identification of honey bee viruses.
Mr. David A. Knox, Entomologist
301-504-8173, hshimanuki@asrr.arsusda.gov
In-charge of the bee disease diagnostic service and assists in the research on the
control of bee diseases.
Dr. Lodewyk (Bas) Kuenen, Research Associate, Entomologist
301-504-8574, bkuenen@asrr.arsusda.gov
Behavior and chemical ecology of arthropods focusing on stimuli and behavioral
mechanisms involved
in mate and host location. Current research emphasis is on host preference and host
location by Varroa jacobsoni in relation to physical and chemical stimuli from adult
and immature honey bees.
Ms. Michele C. Logan, Biological Aid
301-504-8749
Assists in the conduct of serological tests and bee disease diagnosis.
Mr. David Vincent, Entomologist
301-504-8097
Operates the scanning electron microscope and assists in the studies on mite biology.
Mr. Kenneth R. Wilzer, Jr., Physical Science Technician
301-504-8637
Assists in the studies of sterol and natural products chemistry.
Molecular Genetics of Honey Bee Races and Populations in North America
Objectives: 1) to establish a molecular genetic baseline for feral honey bees in North
America; 2) to characterize genetic diversity in commercial populations of honey bees
in North America; 3) to define population genetic changes associated with the process
of Africanization; 4) to develop a research program on the molecular systematics of
honey bees (Apis), that will have application to insect biosystematic research in
general; and 5) provide authoritative ID's of selected samples for APHIS and State
regulatory agencies.
Selected Publications
Dr. Walter S. Sheppard, Research Entomologist
301-504-8570, wsheppard@asrr.arsusda.gov
Molecular systematics and population genetics of insects. Research includes
systematics of the Apoidea and population genetic changes associated with
colonizations. Current research in an investigation of systematics of the Apoidea
using mitochondrial DNA analysis and RNA/dNA sequencing. Special interest is the
development of molecular identification procedures for Africanized honey bees.
Dr. Maria Cristina Arias, Research Associate
301-504-8271, carias@asrr.arsusda.gov
Employing molecular systematic techniques, including DNA sequencing of specific
nuclear and mitochondrial regions, to test hypotheses about the origin, biography and
evolution of Apis mellifera races and Apis species.
Ms. Heui-Ra Yoo, Biological Technician
301-504-8271
In-charge of the Africanized honey bee identification service and assists in the
molecular systematic
research.
Ms. Robin J. Wilcox, Biological Aid
301-504-8271
Assists in the identification of Africanized honey bees.
Utilization of Non-Apis Bees for the Pollination of Horticulture, Small Fruit, and
Vegetable Crops
Objectives: (1) to evaluate the behavioral characteristics of domestic non-Apis bees
for their ability to serve as efficient pollinators of greenhouse horticultural crops;
(2) to enhance management practices to improve the ability of endemic non-Apis bees to
pollinate small fruits; and (3) to devise efficient means for the utilization of
native, non-Apis bees for pollination of vegetable seed crops, including cucumbers and
other cruciferous species.
Selected Publications
Dr. Suzanne W. T. Batra, Research Entomologist
301-504-8384
Ethology, sociobiology and biosystematics of the Apoidea (ca. 20,000 bee species
worldwide).
Conservation, and management of native and exotic bee species for improved pollination
of fruits and vegetables. Symbioses between bees and other insects, vascular plants,
and fungi.
Cryopreservation of Honey Bee Semen
Objectives: (1) To develop methods for the in vitro preservation of honey bee
germplasm; (2) apply methods of cryopreservation and molecular analysis for the
characterization of genetic material (sperm) of honey bees.
Dr. Anita M. Collins, Research Geneticist
301-504-7299, acollins@asrr.arsusda.gov
Conducts research on cryopreservation for germplasm preservation and to develop
molecular methods
to characterize and identify honey bee sperm.
Recent Publications
Laboratory Office Staff
Ms. Janice M. Hill, Program Management Assistant
301-504-8205
Secretary for the Bee Research Laboratory
Ms. Pat Sgambati, Office Automation Clerk
301-504-8205
Serves as the laboratory Clerk/Typist
To Contact the BRL:
   1.Mail
          Bee Research Laboratory
          Bldg. 476, BARC-East
          Beltsville, MD 20705
   2.Phone: 301-504-8205
   3.Fax: 301-504-8736
   4.E-mail: a03rlbrl@attmail.com
   5.For phone and e-mail of individuals see listings under Staff
History
The Bee Research Laboratory, the oldest of the federal bee labs, is located on the
USDA's Beltsville Agricultural Research Center. Federal honey bee research in the
Washington metropolitan area had its beginning in 1891 and, except for a short break
in 1896-1897, has been continuous for more than a century.
The first Division of Bee Culture Laboratory was located in Somerset, Maryland,
presently a section of
Chevy Chase, which borders on Washington, DC. The Laboratory was relocated a number of
times until 1939 when it was moved to Beltsville, MD.
A list of scientists who have worked in the lab in the past reads like a ``who's who''
of American beekeeping research. Among them are F. Benton, E.F. Phillips, C.E.
Burnside, E. Holst, A.S. Michael, J.I. Hambleton, G.F. White, and G.F. Knowlton.
Continuity of leadership has been a distinguishing feature of the Beltsville lab. Only
five scientists have led the lab in its more than 100 years of operation: Dr. Benton,
Dr. Phillips, Mr. Hambleton, Mr. Michael, and currently, Dr. Hachiro Shimanuki.
Research on the identification and control of honey bee diseases has always been the
major thrust of the lab. For beekeepers and bee industry regulators, not only in the
United States, but around the world, ``Beltsville'' has long been designated as the
place they can send bee and brood samples for diagnoses. The bee disease diagnostic
service has been a part of the research program at the BRL almost since its inception.
Today, the BRL also provides authoritative identification of Africanized honey bees.
Selected Publications - Bee Diseases and Parasitic Mites
Bruce, W.A. and Kethley, J.B. 1993. Morphology of the gnathosoma of Acarapis woodi.
(Acari: Acarapidae). Int. Jour. Acarol. (3):243-247
. Bruce, W.A., Anderson, D.E., Calderone, N.W., and Shimanuki, H. 1995. A survey for
Kashmir virus in honey bee colonies in the United States. Amer. Bee Jour.
135(5):352-355.
Bruce, W.A. and Needham, G.R. 1995. Effects of temperature and relative humidity on
the water balance of Varroa jacobsoni (Acari: Varroidae). Proceedings, IX.
International Congress of Acarology, Columbus, Ohio. June, 1994.
Calderone, N.W. 1993. Genotypic variablity in stimulus-response relationships:
differential effect of
brood on pollen-hoarding behavior in two strains of the honey bee, Apis mellifera.
Animal Behavior 46:403-404.
Calderone, N.W., Shimanuki, H. and Allen-Wardell, G. 1994. An in vitro evaluation of
botanical compounds for the control of the honey bee pathogens Bacillus larvae and
Ascosphaera apis, and the secondary invader B. alvei. Jour. Ess. Oil. Res. 6:279-287.
Feldlaufer, M.F., Lusby, W.R., Knox, D.A., and Shimanuki, H. 1993. Isolation and
identification of
linoleic acid as an antimicrobial agent from the chalkbrood fungus, Ascosphaera apis.
Apidologie 24: 89-94.
Feldlaufer, M.F., Knox, D.A., Lusby, W.R. and Shimanuki, H. 1993. Antimicrobial
activity of fatty acids against Bacillus larvae, the causative agent of American
foulbrood disease. Apidologie 24: 95-99.
Hung, A.C.F. and Rubink, W.L. 1994. Tissue specificity and developmental expression of
hexokinase and Africanized honey bee specific proteins in Apis mellifera L.
(Hymenoptera:Apidae). Biochem. System. & Ecol. 22:221-227.
Hung, A.C.F. and Wagner, R.M. 1994. Amino acid composition of an Africanized honey bee
(Hymenoptera:Apidae) specific protein. Jour. Apic. Res. 33:113-117.
Shimanuki, H. and Knox, D. A. 1991. Diagnosis of honey bee diseases. U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook No. AH-690, 53 p.
Shimanuki, H., Knox, D. A., Furgala, B., Caron, D. M., and Williams, J. L. 1992.
Diseases and Pests
of Honey Bees. In The Hive and the Honey Bee. Edited by Dadant and Sons, Hamilton
Illinois, pp. 1083-1151.
Shimanuki, H., Knox, D.A. and Feldlaufer, M.F. 1992. Honey bee disease interactions:
Antimicrobial activity of chalkbrood fungus. Amer. Bee Jour. 132: 735-736.
Shimanuki, H. 1993. Current status and future prospects for control of bee mites.
Proc. Int. Symp. on Asian Honey Bees and Mites, 1:43-48, Wicwas Press, Cheshire, CT.
Shimanuki, H. and Knox, D.A. 1994. Susceptibility of Bacillus larvae to Terramycin.
Amer. Bee Jour. 134:125-126. Shimanuki, H., Calderone, N.W. and Knox, D.A. 1994.
Parasitic mite syndrome: the symptoms. Amer. Bee Jour. 134:827-828.
Witherell, P.C. and Bruce, W.A. 1994. Control of Varroa mites on caged honey bees.
Arthropod Management Tests 19:353.
Selected Publications - Honey Bee Molecular Systematic and Population
Genetics
Arias, M.C. and Sheppard, W.S. 1995. Molecular phylogenetics of honey bee subspecies
(Apismellifera L.) inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Mol. Phylogen. Evol. (In
Press)
Gasparich, G. E., Sheppard, W. S., Han, H. Y., McPheron, B.A. and Steck, G.J. 1995.
Analysis of mitochondrial DNA and development of PCR-based diagnostic molecular
markers for Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) populations. Insect Molec.
Biol. 4:61-67.
Meixner, M.D., Krell, R., Dietz, A. and Sheppard, W.S. 1994. Morphological and
Allozyme variability in honey bees from Kenya. Apidologie 25:188-202.
Schiff, N.M., Sheppard, W.S., Loper, G.R., and Shimanuki, H. 1994. Genetic diversity
of feral honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) populations in the Southern United States.
Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 87:842-848.
Schiff, N.M. and Sheppard, W.S. 1995. Genetic analysis of commercial honey bees
(Hymenoptera:Apidae) from the southern United States. Jour. Econ. Entomol. (In Press)
Sheppard, W. S., Arias, M.C. and Shimanuki, H. 1994. Determination of honey bee
mitochondrial DNA
haplotypes from sting remnants. Bull. Entomol. Res. 84:551-554.
Sheppard, W.S., Rinderer, T.E., Meixner, M.D., Yoo, H.R., Stelzer, J.A., Schiff, N.M.,
Kamel, S.M., and Krell, R. 1995. HinFl variation in mitochondrial DNA of Old World
honey bee races. Jour. Hered. (In Press)
Selected Publications - Pollinators
Batra, S.W.T. 1994. Anthophora pilipes villosula sm. (Hymenoptera: Anthophoridae), a
manageable Japanese bee that visits blueberries & apples cool, rainy, spring weather.
Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash. 96:98-119.
Norden, B.B., Krombein, K.V. and Batra, S.W.T. 1994. Nesting biology of Exomalopsis
(Phanamalopsis) solani Cockerell (Hymenoptera: Anthophoridae). Proc. Entomol. Soc.
Wash. 96:350-356.
Batra, S.W.T. 1994. Diversify with pollen bees. Amer. Bee Jour. 134:591-593.
Batra, S.W.T. 1994. Shaggy fuzzyfoot bees. Pomona 27:57-59.
Selected Publications, Anita M. Collins
Collins, A. M., Daly, H., Rinderer, T. E., Harbo, J. R. and Hoelmer, K. 1994.
Correlations between
morphology and colony defense in Apis mellifera L. Jour. Apic. Research. 33(1):3-10.
Pettis, J. S., Winston, M. L., and Collins, A. M. 1995. Suppression of queen rearing
in European and Africanized honey bees Apis mellifera L. by synthetic queen mandibular
gland pheromone. Insectes Sociaux. 42:113-121.
Danka, R. G., Loper, G. M., Villa, J. D., Williams, J. L., Sugden, E. A., Collins, A.
M. and Rinderer, T. E. 1994. Abating feral Africanized honeybees to enhance mating
control of European queens. Apidologie. 25:550-529.
Collins, A. M., Rubink, W. L., Cuadriello-Aguilar, J. I., and Hellmich, R. L. 1995.
Use of insect repellents for dispersing defending honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae).
Jour. Econ. Entomol. (In Press)
Rubink, W. L., Luevano-Martinez, P., Sugden, E. A., Wilson, W. T. and Collins, A. M.
1995. Subtropical Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera:Apidae) swarming dynamics and
Africanization rates in northeastern Mexico and southern Texas. Annals Entomol. Soc.
Amer. (In Press)
Rivera, R. and Collins, A. M. 1994. Sting pheromones of south Texas honey bees. Proc.
Amer. Bee Res. Conf., Weslaco, TX, Amer. Bee Jour. 134(12):835-836.
Collins, A. M. and Mbaya, J. S. K. 1994. Drone flight times in south Texas: AHB and
EHB. Proc. Amer. Bee Res. Conf., Weslaco, TX, Amer. Bee Jour. 134(12):830.
Bee Disease Diagnosis
Anyone submitting samples to the Bee Research Laboratory should understand our
priorities for
diagnosis. They are as follows:
     Priority No. 1: Brood and adult honey bee samples submitted in support of Federal
or State
     emergency programs.
     Priority No. 2: Brood samples from colonies where the results may institute
abatement action.
     Priority No. 3: Examination of adult bees to obtain moving permits.
     Priority No. 4: Examination of adult bees for information purposes.
The Bee Research Laboratory has seen an increase in the number of samples that we in
the Laboratory have chosen to call the ``Bee Parasitic Mite Syndrome.'' It is quite
likely that this syndrome is the result of a secondary infection in colonies infested
with Varroa jacobsoni. The microbial flora associated with this syndrome may require
biochemical tests. Accordingly, now more than ever, an accurate diagnosis depends on
the sample.
When examining bees for Tracheal Mites (Acarapis woodi) priority will be given to
pooled apiary samples. These bees will be examined until Acarapis woodi) is found or
until 50 bees have been scrutinized. Samples from individual colonies will be
processed only on a ``as time allows'' basis.
Directions for Sending Diseased Brood and Adult Honey Bees
for Diagnosis
Samples of Adult Honey Bees
     Send at least 100 bees and if possible, select bees that are dying or that died
recently.
     Decayed bees are not satisfactory for examination.
     Bees to be examined for Parasitic Mites should be placed in 70% ethyl or methyl
alcohol as
     soon as possible after collection and carefully packed in leak-proof containers.
     Bees to be examined for Viruses should be loosely wrapped in a paper bag, paper
towel,
     newspaper, etc. and sent in a mailing tube or heavy cardboard box. Do not use
alcohol; AVOID
     plastic bags, aluminum foil, waxed paper, tin, or glass.
Samples of Brood
     The sample of comb should be at least 2 X 2 inches and contain as much of the
     dead
or
     discolored brood as possible. NO HONEY SHOULD BE PRESENT IN THE SAMPLE.
     The comb can be loosely wrapped in a paper bag, paper towel, newspaper, etc. and
sent in a
     heavy cardboard box. AVOID wrappings such as plastic bags, aluminum foil, waxed
paper, tin,
     or glass because they facilitate decomposition.
     If a comb cannot be sent, the probe used to examine a diseased larva in the cell
may contain
     enough material for tests. The probe can be wrapped in paper and sent to the
laboratory in an
     envelope.
How to Address Samples
Send all samples to:
     Bee Disease Diagnosis
     Bee Research Laboratory
     Bldg. 476, BARC-East
     Beltsville, MD 20705
     A short description of the problem along with your name and address
     should be attached to the package.
____________________________________________________________________
Last modified: Sept. 8, 1995
D.A. ``Dave'' Knox, Entomologist, hshimanu@asrr.arsusda.gov

>>> Item number 13574, dated 97/02/01 14:49:25 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 1 Feb 1997 14:49:25 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ilhawaii.net>
Subject:      Re: Surviving Varroa
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
----------
Aloha and happy New Year to all. Seeing Roy posting caused me to think
maybe I might be able to get some curiosity aroused about the origin of
viruses now reportedly being found  by the USDA in 10 hives across the
United States Of America. NOTE & QUESTION was the  viruses testing done by
the USDA in the US or were the test samples taken back to Australia for
determination.
Aloha and happy New Year to all. Seeing Roy posting caused me to think
maybe I might be able to get some curiosity aroused about the origin of
viruses now reportedly being found  by the USDA in 10 hives across the
United States Of America. NOTE & QUESTION was the  viruses testing done by
the USDA in the US or were the test samples taken back to Australia for
determination.

Aloha and happy New Year to all.
        Seeing Roy's posting caused me to think maybe I could get some curiosity
aroused about the origin of viruses now reportedly being found  by the USDA
in 10 hives across the United States Of America.{NOTE & QUESTION was the
viruses testing done by the USDA in the US or were the test samples taken
back to Australia for determination. } I agree that varroa studies must
include the understanding of viruses present with the subject hive. Living
in Hawaii with our mite free colonies and desiring to protect this Hawaiian
resource that might play a vital role in the restocking of US. beekeepers
in the future I continue to be curious with the virus issue. Knowing that
some respected bee researchers  have speculated that the Kashmir bee virus
first attached to the honey bee in the southern hemisphere and has been
spread around by the international shipments of live honey bees, I remain
very concerned about the viruses. I sure would like to see some answers to
some of the virus questions.
        Can viruses be transmitted in semen?
             Are viruses a factor in varroa bee hive decline?
        Where do the viruses come from and how wide spread is the KBV in all areas of
the US?
        Can the USDA test for viruses in-house and in what volume?
        Does Hawaii have KBV?
        Does Alaska  have KBV?
        If honey bees known to have KBV are allowed to be imported to the USA will
this cause the          continued introduction and spread of viruses across the USA?
        Does anyone know or want to know the answers to these questions?
        Is any one listening and does anybody care?
        I do not know the answers, and I do know if Hawaii's honey bees are really of
any special importance. If Hawaii's honey bees were found to be virus and mite free it
kind of seems like the bees could bee of worthy of consideration and protection as a
natural resource of the USA Some might say this is a Hawaii issue and the issue is
much bigger then the Hawaii beekeeping industry. This is all about money the people
wanting to import honey bees to the US are big bucks folks and the big money
beekeepers in Hawaii don't want to do nothing as they say" There ain't nothin broke so
don't be trying to fix that which ain't broke". Well I agree that Hawaii beekeeping is
very  healthy  and the USA beekeeping  picture appears to be badly broken, and if the
Hawaiian honey bees prove to be important to US beekeepers US beekeepers need to
become more demanding for information about viruses. The USDA seems to have little
concern for the viruses .
        Well I've given this my best shot and I need to get out and work in my
garden with our 78 degree partly cloudy weather here in Paradise. Come
visit. All who come in peace are welcome.
                Bee Healthy and God bless the United States Honey Bee
Walter Patton-Hawaiian Honey House and
Hale Lamalani B & B (House of Heavenly Light)
A Hawaii Beekeeper's Bed & Breakfast
27-703A Kaieie Rd.,Papaikou,HI. 96781
Ph./fax 808-964-5401 or hihoney@ilhawaii.net
http:\www.alohamall.com/hamakua/hihoney/htm.
"TheBeehive,The Fountain of Youth and Health"
> From: Roy Nettlebeck <rnettleb@linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us>o:
BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU
> Subject: Re: Surviving Varroa
> Date: Saturday, February 01, 1997 7:23 AM
>
>  Hi Vince and All,  I think your on the right track with one problem. The
> Viruses are a wild card.That has to be delt with also.There is a strong
> correlation between hive death and a virus.This area is being studied so
> maybe we can get some numbers or % of bees which have a virus.When the
> USDA did a check in the USA of 10 States All ten had viruses.. Varroa is
a
> vector for the virus. At what level and what virus do the bees have? In
> the book Honey Bee Pathology by Ball and Bailey 2nd. edition it states
how
> fast a hive can die with with a virus. Of course not all viruses are the
> same. But one bee infected with a virus has enough germ plasm to kill
> 1,000 hives.That is no little problem.As I see it, to screen for Varroa
> resistance and colony motality , you have to address the problem of
> another pathogen present in the hive.
>  My own personal idea is, the better health you maintain your hives , the
> less chance that the viruses have to kill your hives.Of course that is
> using mans brain and knowing something about immune systems.I would bet
> anything on the quality of the beekeeping will have a large effect on the
> mortality of the hives.There is too big of a spred on the death of hives
> do to Varroa. Stress speeds up the death of a hive. I found that out the
> hard way.The hives that I moved died in 30 days (50 hives) and the ones
> that I left on the mountain (30 hives) had some Varroa but were in good
> shape for the winter and made it thru OK.They did not have a resistance
to
> Varroa. I agree with finding stock that shows a resistance to Varroa. I
> think that is the only real fix.We have to way out some variables and do
a
> very controled selection. I know a beekeeper that has 240 hives and has
> never used apistan but has used grease pattys. He has checked for Varroa
> with either rolls and no mites.His hives are not moved and there is mint
> in the area he has his bees.
>  We do have a problem that can be solved over time with good research.It
> will take beekeepers all over to help get to the solution.Natural
> resistance is the answer.
>  Best Regards
> Roy
>>> Item number 13869, dated 97/02/19 13:58:53 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 19 Feb 1997 13:58:53 -0500
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         James Morton <106074.517@compuserve.com>
Subject:      Help on a new subject
You might try contacting the Indian embassy in your country. Ask them to
put you in tough with someone from their Agriculture department in India.
There is a lot of silk production in India -in  Kashmir particularly, I
think.
The same applies to the Chinese, of course.
James Morton
>>> Item number 16099, dated 97/05/31 08:05:24 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 31 May 1997 08:05:24 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ilhawaii.net>
Subject:      HONEY BEE ACT 1922 STATUS
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Aloha bee-l er's
        Can any one tell me the status of the efforts by the USDA to revisit,
reject, and rewrite the HONEY BEE ACT OF 1922.
The HONEY BEE ACT of 1922 was gutted of it's original intent 1995 ? to
allow the New Zealand honey bees to enter the State of HAWAII while in
transit to Canada, Korea and places North with no benefit to Hawaii or the
United States.This illegal gutting( rule interpretation) was done at the
request / demands of the NZ beekeepers with the threat of a complaint being
filed with the GATT / NAFTA board of appeals.The rule change was effected
under false pretense when the opening paragrah of the rule making process
contained the fraudlant lie that the "Secretary of Agriculture  of the USDA
had found the NZ bees to be free of disease and pests of honey bees".See
federal registry its on the books.
        I know this is old information for some and I felt compeled to refresh
some memories and bring the new readers up to speed. Hopefully some new
young blood will boil and new advocates will be born to SAVE OUR BEES ( S O
B ).
        Earlier this year Bob Flanders top man at the USDA in quaritine area and
the guy to contact if you give a rip about this issue.
If you don't give a rip you are a part of the very silent majority of US
beekeepers. Feelings of  impotence in trying to make a difference with
Government stuff is wide spread in America. Tod bad as I think in breeds
anarchay & abusives feeling toward government.
        Bob Flanders earlier this year let a few beekeepers know of his specific
intentions and plans to revisit the HONEY BEE ACT of 1922 this year with
final rule changes and writting to be completed this 1997 year. All at the
continued request / demands of the NZ bee folks wanting to force open the
US borders to allow for export of NZ bees to the US. Again under threat of
sanctions by GATT / NAFTA police. Funny no or not many US bee keepers are
demanding access to the NZ bees. I had a telephone conversation with Mr.
Flanders about the rule changes and suggested that a peer review panel be
assembled to study the proposals and to attempt to be objective. Government
seems to resist common sence ideas about peer review or they stack the
panel to achieve their goal. I also asked Flanders to please get the word
out to the US HONEY BEE Industry with some specific notifications to
National Magazines, Univercity, Bee clubs and others and he informed me
that it would only be posted in the National Registry as required by law.
Well this is my question is any postings have been in the National Registry
about this potentially very dangerous rule making.
        Don't be lazy and dismiss this issue thinking the the USDA bee men will
surely protect the US beekeepers. It's a done deal at USDA because no one
at USDA has any concerns about the introduction and SPREAD of honeybee
disease and pest that will occur with the rule revision. Just because we
have the AIDS virus in the US population we don't have open door policy for
all the AIDS victims of the world to come to the US. The top man at the
USDA bee research center accepted paid consultancy fees and travel to NZ in
the 1980's helping the NZ bee industry get ready to export their bees to
the world. possible loss of objectiity.This person was supposed to retire a
long time ago and continues to hang in there having no fear or concern
about blanketing the US with viruses. Bees with mites have some chance
(small ) to be saved, bees with mites and Kashmire bee virus have no chance
to be saved. Now we will hear how they have found KBV in 10 places in the
US and does that make it OK to allow for a import distributuin systemto
SPREAD KBV across the US and all US bee populations.
        Hoping to start a movement by concerned US Bee Men.
Aloha Walter
>>> Item number 16102, dated 97/06/01 10:03:06 -- ALL
Date:         Sun, 1 Jun 1997 10:03:06 +1200
Reply-To:     beeman@insurer.com
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Jonathan KP Marshall <beeman@insurer.com>
Organization: Taranaki Honey Supplies
Subject:      Re: HONEY BEE ACT 1922 STATUS
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Not again Walter!
Give it a miss.
Walter Patton wrote:
> bees with mites and Kashmire bee virus have no chance
> to be saved. Now we will hear how they have found KBV in 10 places in the
> US and does that make it OK to allow for a import distributuin systemto
> SPREAD KBV across the US and all US bee populations.
I understand that Kashmire is all over the US and that its been there
for decades. The positive results obtained now have no direct link to
bees from the south pacific. I understand that Kashmere is in Hawaii
both on the Big Island were you are and also in Oahu too.
So whats the big deal, Walter? Unless you have a commercial interest in
the discussion because of the competitive edge that NZers heve.
Jonathan
>>> Item number 17921, dated 97/08/31 09:01:49 -- ALL
Date:         Sun, 31 Aug 1997 09:01:49 -1000
Reply-To:     Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Discussion of Bee Biology <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Walter Patton <hihoney@ilhawaii.net>
Subject:      Re: HAWAII honey bee concerns ALOHA
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
ALOHA
        First off let me state that I do not want the world to think that
I think that the Hawaiian honey bees are the cleanest honey bees on earth,
just the cleanest in the United States by virtue of not having mites or
AHB genes and that these colonies are the most isolated  colonies
on earth.I have always stated that Hawaii needs to be considered even
though we are small. We do not have the current survey data to claim
to be the healthiest bee hives on earth. Hawaii needs current survey data
 so that REAL risk assessment can be under taken to best protect the
Hawaiian honey bees. Because the feeling is that the "FIX IS ON " and
that no one can stop the NZ bees from being imported the testing will
have to be totally independent to assure objectivity and this will make
 the testing expensive. The Hawaii Dept. Of  Agriculture with it's budget
cuts has no money for testing and neither the USDA or anyone else has
 offered any money for the required independent testing the testing has
 not been under taken.
        I do not blame the NZ chaps for wanting to sell their tired and
 dying end of season bees to anyone willing to pay for them. I am upset
 that it appears that the USDA does not have anyone watching out for
 the best interest of the US honey bees.
        BY the way the Australian and NZ bee industries continue to
demand and lobby for the right to export their honey bees to the United
 States under the provisions of the GATT and NAFTA International Free
 trade agreements. They do so without any demand from US bee
 keepers for the bees. The USDA is right now revisiting the all ready
gutted HONEY BEE ACT of 1922. The act was changed without
 proper notice or any valid risk assessment to allow the NZ bees the
 right of entry to Hawaii in violation of a Hawaii State law that prohibits
the entry of honey bee to Hawaii to protect our mite free bees. This
 action was started while "on the take" ESPY was the USDA chief.
The top honey bee researcher and protector of US honey bees was
hired in the 80's to help the NZ bee industry prepare to export their
honey bees around the world. Objectivity is usually lost when a
person tries to work both sides of the fence, and yet the USDA
 does not see the need to use a peer review group when
contemplating the NZ bees for  import into the United States.
        Regarding the NZ claims about their bees I 'm sure that
they truly believe what they preach. I do question if their process
would be adequate to truly PROVE a negative. When I inquired
 around the world about the requirement s to test our Hawaiian bees
I was told repeatedly that to prove a negative we would
 have to test 100% of our Hawaiian bee colonies. This is the point
 of this posting. WHAT IS REQUIRED under GATT and NAFTA
to prove a scientific negative?? Can any one tell me and would the
same requirements be applicable to NZ with their claims of no
mites, AHB, or EFB. For what it's worth most bee science people
that I have questioned find it hard to believe that EFB could be
totally absent in NZ. and the claim of the eradication AFB in
 NZ bee colonies hardly believable.
        NICK are you still with me since the questions that follow are for
you the UN official PR and industry representative for NZ bee keepers
and the owner of two bee hives. I get the numbers sited below from the
NZ honey bee Industry profile from 1994. Is there a more current
 edition and how would I get a copy? For the record one more time
since you all ways want to mention the disease and pest of honey
 bees not found in NZ I will again print the list of disease and pest of
honey bees that you do have in NZ most of which  and we have NEVER
experienced in Hawaii. Granted there is no scientific data available to
prove that we do not in fact have some of the pests and diseases
 of honey bees.
LIST of pests and diseases found on NZ honey bees
        1. American Foul Brood
        2 KASHMIR BEE VIRUS (deadly to bees with the mites)
        3 Nosema
        4 Chalkbrood
        5 Sacbrood
        6 Cronic BEE Paralysis
        7 Black queen cell
        8 Acute bee paralysis
        9 Cloudy Wing Virus
        10 Bee Virus X
        11 Bee Virus  Y
        12 Filamentous Virus
        13 Amoeba Disease
        14 European foul brood (maybe)
        15 Melittiphis Alvearius
        16 Acarapis externus
        17 Acarapis dorsalis
        18 Neocypholaelaps zealandicus
        19 Melanoius
The NZ folks will quickly want to dismiss me and say that these pests
 and disease are of no economic consequence and their knowledge is
only with bees that are not suffering already with the two blood
sucking mites currently causing stellar losses across mainland USA.
The lobbyist for NZ bees being exported to the USA will also point
to the results of recent testing done by an Australian bee researcher
that most of the virus have been found on USA honey bees, which is
 possible from the honey bees from Canada that the USDA allows to
be imported from Canada. NOTE Canada imports NZ bees and after new
source of origin papers are prepared are then shipped to the USA. Is this
a reason to allow for the continued introduction and spread of these
pest and diseases across the USA? I think not.
        About testing.
NZ reports 25,124 apiaries ( sites where bee are kept) Nick reports that
491 ( 2%) apiaries were inspected in 1995-96 from areas around
dump sites, ports and tourist areas what about way out back
where some of the beekeepers think they have seen EFB? The
reference is made to visual inspections. What does this mean?
Looking at bees as they come and go on the landing board or does
this mean a close brood inspection of every hive in the chosen apiary,
or do you check say 2 % of the hives in the particular apiary? Then we
 are told about testing every queen bee shipper. What percentage of
the hives were inspected in the 509 apiaries? How are feral bees tested?
        These questions are asked with a sincere desire to understand
what will be required for Hawaii to make claims of negative findings if we
are ever able to survey our bees? Sorry for the implications of doubt and
after watching how easily US officials can be BOUGHT by special interest
 groups and being aware of the smoke and mirror techniques available for
clever salesmen to use when trying sell their goods to unsuspecting buyers,
I tend to practice BUYER BEWARE  attitudes when some one is trying to
sell me something that is unsolicited and without any benefit to the buyer.
Wishing you the best in your relentless efforts to peddle your bees and I
do
not want them passing through Hawaii for even one minute until the results
 are determined regarding any threat to Hawaii honey bees. Maybe some day
we will know the answers and I doubt the likely hood of the truth ever
being known.
I realize that this is a big money issue for you guys and it is a big
concern
of mine that we protect the Hawaii honey bees.
        Aloha and SOB, SAVE OUR BEES in Americafor the future.
                                Walter
>>> Item number 23339, dated 98/06/11 20:15:44 -- ALL
Date:         Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:15:44 -0700
Reply-To:     Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Andy Nachbaur <andy.nachbaur@CALWEST.NET>
Subject:      kashmir virus
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>RR>Is here anyone who nows somthing abut "kashmir virus".We have heard
here in
        Denmark , that in Australia is wery manny
        bees dead of virus, that is infektet whith the varroa mite.
>RR>Reagards F.Rasmussen."
A message from the beekeeping news group from Denmark asking about a bee
health problem which sounds serious in Australia. Anyone else have any
direct news on this loss?
>>> Item number 23350, dated 98/06/13 13:23:32 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 13 Jun 1998 13:23:32 EDT
Reply-To:     Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         David Morris <Beefriend@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: kashmir virus question
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 98-06-13 09:49:11 EDT, you write:
<<
 >RR> Is here anyone who nows somthing abut "kashmir virus".We have heard
 here in Denmark , that in Australia is wery manny bees dead of virus,
 that is infektet whith the varroa mite.
 >RR>Reagards F.Rasmussen."
  >>
Contact Dr. Hachiro Shiminuki hshimanu@asrr.arsusda.gov  at the
Beltsville Bee Lab
Bldg 476 BARC-East
Beltsville, MD 20705
phone 301-504-8205
FAX 301-504-8736
Their Web site is:
http://sun.ars-grin.gov/ars/Beltsville/barc/psi/brl/brl-page.html
Regards,
David Morris
Laurel, Md
>>> Item number 23354, dated 98/06/12 21:45:29 -- ALL
Date:         Fri, 12 Jun 1998 21:45:29 +0800
Reply-To:     Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Alan Norris <anlec@IINET.NET.AU>
Subject:      Re: kashmir virus
In-Reply-To:  <199806120320.UAA09825@pop.thegrid.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 20:15 11/06/98 -0700, you wrote:
>>RR>Is here anyone who nows somthing abut "kashmir virus".We have heard
>here in
>        Denmark , that in Australia is wery manny
>        bees dead of virus, that is infektet whith the varroa mite.
>
>>RR>Reagards F.Rasmussen."
If we have this virus is in Australia I have'nt heard of it, it is certainly
not over here in the West.
Nor do we have that bloody varroa mite and we dont want it.
Alan Norris
                    ANLEC PTY LTD
      Project Electrical Inspection and Supervision
  ,-._|\  Alan Norris           Tel: 08 9448 7471
 /  Oz  \ anlec@iinet.net.au    Mobile:041 791 7144
 \_,--._/ Perth Australia       Fax: 08 9448 5014
       v
>>> Item number 23358, dated 98/06/06 14:32:32 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 6 Jun 1998 14:32:32 GMT
Reply-To:     Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Peter Hutton <peter.hutton@ZBEE.COM>
Organization: Amigabee computer networking for beekeepers
Subject:      kashmir virus
 CHRS: IBMPC 2
 CODEPAGE: 437
 MSGID: 240:244/116 394da91e
 REPLY: 240:44/0 a4fc7633
 PID: FDAPX/w 1.12a UnReg(322)
Hi
Dr Bailey at Rothampstead Experimental Research Station in England isolated
Kashmir virus in some Apis cerana bees. At a later stage he found it in a
sample of Apis mellifera sent to him from Australia. Rothhampstead has a very
good website http://www.res.bbsrc.ac.uk/entnem
Hope you can pick up the information you require otherwise tri I.B.R.A. whose
website you can connect to from the Rothampstead site, you can then look for
Dr. Baileys book or the present book by Dr Bailey and Dr. Ball on viruses.
Costs something over sixty pounds to buy I believe.
Best wishes from the Gatrden of England.
Peter.hutton@btinternet.com
---
 * Origin: Kent Beekeeper Beenet Point (240:244/116)
>>> Item number 23373, dated 98/06/16 12:30:23 -- ALL
Date:         Tue, 16 Jun 1998 12:30:23 +0000
Reply-To:     Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Sender:       Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
Comments:     Authenticated sender is <sabpam@soda.cf.ac.uk>
From:         IBRA <MunnPA@CARDIFF.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: kashmir virus
In-Reply-To:  <07211711814439@systronix.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
> Hope you can pick up the information you require otherwise tri I.B.R.A. whose
> website you can connect to from the Rothampstead site, you can then look for
> Dr. Baileys book or the present book by Dr Bailey and Dr. Ball on viruses.
> Costs something over sixty pounds to buy I believe.
IBRA's web address is:
    http://www.cardiff.ac.uk
Our library has many papers on Kashmir virus (and any other subject
to do with bees of course!) - if you want a search done, please just
contact Salma by email (ibra@cardiff.ac.uk). We have to charge for
this service - but fees are very reasonable (members pay 50% less) -
and Salma will give you an idea of cost before you decide to go
ahead.
===================================================
Dr Pamela Munn, Deputy Director and Editor
International Bee Research Association
18 North Road, Cardiff CF1 3DY, UK
Tel: (+44) 1222 372409
Fax: (+44) 1222 665522
Email: munnpa@cf.ac.uk
===================================================
>>> Item number 23395, dated 98/06/17 00:08:13 -- ALL
Date:         Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:08:13 -0600
Reply-To:     Allen Dick
Sender:       Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology
              <BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU>
From:         Allen Dick
Subject:      Re: kashmir virus question
In-Reply-To:  <a64c7b7.3582b595@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>  Is here anyone who nows somthing abut "kashmir virus".We have heard
>  here in Denmark , that in Australia is wery manny bees dead of virus,
>  that is infektet whith the varroa mite.
Everything discussed on BEE-L re: Kashmir virus is listed for your
convenience at http://www.honeybeeworld.com//Kashmir.htm
Articles can be retrieved at
http://www.beekeeping.co.nz/beel.htm
Allen
>
>