|
|
Post by rbz on Jun 1, 2011 22:16:11 GMT -7
Honeyb-snakeoil (i get a laugh every time I read that).
Who actually use it and does it really work?
|
|
|
|
Post by alisafaulk on Jun 2, 2011 13:22:05 GMT -7
I've used it in both my spring and fall feeding and as a spray drench, used as an alternative to smoke when it's hot and I'm worried about setting my parents yard on fire with my smoker.
In my experience I think the bees take in more syrup with it vs. without, and the spray, while not nearly as effective as smoke, works OK.
Alisa
|
|
|
|
Post by rbz on Jun 2, 2011 16:26:15 GMT -7
So it's more for a calming use and to get bees to take syrup faster? I ask cuz I visited an Apiary where the beekeeper used it in the syrup and you can actually smell the lemon grass in the frames and as with you claimed the bees took syrup faster.
Other than that does it have other effects?
|
|
|
|
Post by beehaver on Jun 2, 2011 22:05:32 GMT -7
read read read, tons have been written about it on beesource, and Randy Oliver has a bunch about it  |
|
|
|
Post by drew on Jun 3, 2011 12:32:34 GMT -7
read read read, tons have been written about it on beesource, and Randy Oliver has a bunch about it beesource blah  Yep the latest study that was done, showed that it did as well as fumgalin in killing nosema.  If that is true yaaaaaa, way cheaper. PLUS syrup will not start to ferment as fast with it in... |
|
|
|
Post by rbz on Jun 3, 2011 14:45:46 GMT -7
Yep the latest study that was done, showed that it did as well as fumgalin in killing nosema. Yeah...and small cell is the magic bullet for mites  If you could point to a study that suggest that I'd like to read it. |
|
|
|
Post by drew on Jun 3, 2011 16:23:43 GMT -7
24. Rhoades, P.R., & J.A. Skinner - EFFECTS OF TREATMENT WITH THYMOL, FUMAGILLIN, HONEY-B-HEALTHY, AND NOZEVIT ON CAGED HONEY BEES INFECTED WITH NOSEMA APIS AND N. CERANAE
Prospective treatments for Nosema disease were evaluated by examining both mortality and spore production in caged honey bees infected with either Nosema apis or N. ceranae. Treatments used were thymol, fumagillin, Honey-B-Healthy, and Nozevit. Bees used in the study were shaken from frames of uncapped brood taken from hives visibly free of Nosema infection. These bees were chilled with ice water, placed in cages (180 bees/cage) and immediately infected with either N. apis or N. ceranae through gravity feeders at a rate of 40,000 spores/bee. Treatment began 3 days after inoculation. Dead bees were removed and counted every subsequent day. Twenty-three days after inoculation, 10-15 bees were removed, abdomens were crushed individually in water, and spores were counted using a hemocytometer.
Although treatment greatly affected mortality, no difference was noted with respect to the species of Nosema. Bees treated with thymol and Honey-B-Healthy were found to have rates of mortality similar to uninfected bees. Bees treated with Nozevit had rates of mortality similar to untreated bees. Fumagillin improved mortality, but not to levels of uninfected bees (Table).
Honey-B-Healthy had no effect on spore production; therefore, the reduction in mortality displayed under treatment must be attributed to positive effects on the bee itself rather than to an antagonistic effect on the pathogen. Fumagillin was the only compound to significantly and consistently reduce spore production. The failure of fumagillin to reduce mortality congruently is unexplained. Thymol and Nozevit had some effect on spore production but it was unclear how significant this effect was.
Table. Spore production and mortality of caged bees that received different treatments being investigated for potential control of Nosema. 1. Bees infected with N. ceranae did not have significantly different mortality than those infected with N. apis; results were pooled for the two species. 2. Mean ± standard error
|
|
|
|
Post by drew on Jun 3, 2011 16:33:34 GMT -7
While on the subject you can't go wrong to feed protein.
28. Smart, M. & M. Spivak – LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION: THE LANDSCAPE AND HONEY BEE HEALTH
The flow of protein from the external environment to the colony is integral to the survival and productivity of honey bees. Foragers collect pollen and bring it back to the hive where it is packed into cells and fermented through the assistance of beneficial microbes. Upon fermentation, the raw pollen is rendered more digestible for nurse bees that consume this “bee bread” and incorporate its protein into the development of their hypopharyngeal gland (HPG), a paired gland located in the head of the adult bee. Hypopharyngeal gland secretion, a major source of protein for developing worker brood, is then progressively fed to larvae as they develop inside their cells. Thus, the ability of bees to provide adequate nutrition to meet the demands of a growing colony is critically tied to the availability of pollen in the landscape. However, not all landscapes are equal and the overall quality of a particular environment for honey bees depends on many factors, including the diversity and abundance of floral resources, the nutritional quality of those resources, and the persistence of quality resources throughout the season. Various pollens differ in both their protein content and amino acid makeup, resulting in particular plants being more nutritionally complete for honey bees than others. Furthermore, diverse sources of pollen have been shown to have a positive effect on honey bee immune function when compared to single source pollens.
For these reasons we hypothesize that apiaries located in landscapes composed of a diverse and abundant range of forage (diverse sites) will be healthier and have greater survival throughout the season and into the following winter for pollination services than colonies located in areas primarily composed of non bee-friendly crops (poor sites).
Three diverse and three poor sites located in the Prairie Potholes Region of North Dakota were chosen based on historical honey yields, satellite imaging of crop coverage, and on-the-ground surveys of landscape floral composition. At each site, 24 colonies were sampled every six weeks for measures of colony strength, development, productivity, and stress levels (including pest, parasite, and pesticide levels). Furthermore, within each site, half of the colonies received additional protein supplementation while the other half do not, resulting in colonies within each landscape (diverse or poor) that were with and without an additional protein source.
Individuals were sampled to determine their nutritional status (HPG size and protein content, fat body lipid levels) and immune function (expression of anti-microbial peptide gene transcripts). Currently data is only available on HPG protein. Hypopharyngeal glands were larger (p<0.0001) in bees residing in diverse landscapes than those at poor sites. Additionally, diverse site bees with and without protein supplementation had significantly larger glands than bees at poor sites both with (p<0.05) and without (p<0.05) protein supplementation. Hypopharyngeal gland protein content was greater in diverse site bees, though not significantly. However, diverse site and poor site colonies that received protein supplementation had greater HPG protein content (p<0.05) than bees at poor sites with no protein supplementation. Gland size and protein content had a significant positive correlation (Pearson=0.6228, p<0.0001) indicating that bees with larger glands also had higher levels of protein in their glands.
Future work includes continued analysis of protein, lipid, and immune function to further discern physiological differences of honey bees in varying landscapes. Additionally, study of the biological and colony relevance of varying HPG and size and protein content, and other physiological measures will be further pursued and studied
|
|
|
|
Post by rbz on Jun 3, 2011 17:24:16 GMT -7
Interesting..It does nothing to lower the spore count...just survivability of the bee
|
|
|
|
Post by rbz on Jun 3, 2011 18:18:36 GMT -7
OK...This is odd...HBH feed bees had an over all..INCREASED level of spores than infected non treated bees. *however, it is within the margin of error so...*  yet they lives longer than fumagillin feed bees? I wonder if Fumagillin has a negative affect on health of the bee itself? |
|
|
|
Post by columbiacritter on Jun 3, 2011 18:54:20 GMT -7
I like it, I use a sugar sprayer exclusively rather than a smoker because of the fire danger where my hives are. I also use it in my syrups and they definitely take the feed much better with it in it. My husband also thought the syrup with HBH in it made tasty pancake syrup. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by toddbalsiger on Jun 4, 2011 22:24:07 GMT -7
Thanks for your posts Drew! I realize I do not read enough lit anymore to keep up on changes. Sounds like feeding both fumigillin and HoneyBhealthy would be a great combo.
Good sites, protein, got it...
|
|
|
|
Post by rbz on Jun 5, 2011 14:01:56 GMT -7
Thanks for your posts Drew! I realize I do not read enough lit anymore to keep up on changes. Sounds like feeding both fumigillin and HoneyBhealthy would be a great combo. Good sites, protein, got it... It would be an interesting study to see if that would indeed be the case/ |
|
