From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 10:54:28 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-87.2 required=2.4 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,AWL, MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Delivered-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Received: from listserv.albany.edu (unknown [169.226.1.24]) by metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FFAD49088 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1SFkpIp016612 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:17 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0709B" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Message-ID: Content-Length: 150881 Lines: 3361 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 23:38:59 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: 'Dr Eva Crane' Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit More about Eva Crane for the Newbees out there. Eva Crane was the director of the International Bee Research Association for 35 years, Bee Scientist and beekeeping historian. In the course of her many travels she has obtained first-hand knowledge of traditional and modern beekeeping in some sixty countries, and also honey hunting in places where it was still practiced. She encouraged museums to collect and preserve beekeeping artifacts; honey vessels, ropes, ladders and other materials still being used in honey hunting in some parts of Africa. The publication of her book The Archeology of Beekeeping, stimulated a number of readers to search for possible hives among excavated material, and also for relics of traditional beekeeping that still survive. Dr. Crane has encouraged the recording and publication of such finds, and since 1985 has been especially interested in rock art related to bees and honey hunting. Her books include Bees and Beekeeping: The World History of Beekeeping and Honey Hunting, Practice and World Resources, and From Where I Sit: Essays on Bees, Beekeeping, and Science (with Mark L. Winston). Here is a BBC interview with Eva Crane http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/2001_31_thu_02.shtml If anyone can convert this file to the more popular ‘windows media player’ please post a link or send me the file. Thanks! Joe Waggle http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/HistoricalHoneybeeArticles ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2007 21:52:21 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus paper MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike wrote: >Is this paper supposed to be a conclusive statement? No, it wasn't. However, the way in which it was released lent itself to being misrepresented by the press, and many beekeepers (I'm hearing the chatter starting already among beeks who have heard about it, but haven't read it). I spoke for some time today with lead author, Dr. Cox-Foster, and plied her with questions. You are absolutely right, this paper raises more questions than it answers. The complexity of the bee/multiple virus/double nosema/mite/nutrition/immune response interactions is staggering! There's a ton of research yet to be done, data to be confirmed, and contrary data to be reconciled. I applaud the herculean efforts of those many researchers who are putting in long hours on minimal budgets! Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 04:55:21 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>> Australia got a bum rap. <<<< Below is an excerpt from the multi-page article that appears in October's Bee Culture, on the Bee Culture website, and in a serialized form on the Hearst Newspaper website "The Daily Green". My hope in posting the excerpt here is to stop any possible fistfights from breaking out at Apimondia before they start. Ironically, Apimondia is being held this year in Australia. Now, in fact. I've read the full paper. I've read multiple versions of the paper as it slogged its way through review, a process that took all summer. I've also participated in the press conference, where the authors presented a VERY different view of their results than one might gain from merely reading the full paper. The short version of all this is: a) The Mainstream Press, As Usual, Got It All Wrong. b) The Conclusions Drawn In The Paper Are Not Supported By The Actual Work Described in The Paper, The Supplement, and The Press Conference Audio Transcript c) As I Said, Australia Got A Bum Rap. d) This paper may be long remembered as beekeeping's "cold fusion", even overshadowing the 2004 claims made by USDA researchers that a fungus had been found that killed 100% of varroa in hives. (Remember "Metarhizium anisopliae"?) Don't get me wrong here - I STILL want to see all imported bees sampled, tested, and inspected, as I have been saying since 2002. Betcha the Aussies now agree that this should be done, if for no other reason than to protect their reputation on the world market for bees and honey. But a "ban" on bee imports might be counter-productive. We may NEED bees from Oz (and NZ) if CCD gets out of hand. Where else might we get replacement packages EXCEPT from overseas in the scenario where we start taking casualties among the US queen and package producers? There may even be bans on Australian honey as a result of the heavy-handed attempts to implicate a virus and the Aussies in CCD. While the paper stopped short of saying it outright, they did everything but put up billboards accusing Australia, without even a shred of solid evidence that the virus at issue has anything to do with CCD. Read the analysis. The first group to try to ban Australian honey did not even wait for the ink to dry on the paper. Shame on the NZ National Beekeepers Association! Withdraw your call for a ban on honey from Oz! Its not that NZ imports any significant amount of honey from Oz, so its not about money or honey prices or the usual agricultural protectionism. And it is not about "biosecurity", since honey from Oz would be waaay more expensive than HFCS as bee feed, so the honey would not be fed to bees and perhaps "transmit" the virus. Assuming that NZ doesn't already have IAPV in their hives, of course. Its all about disparaging both Australian export honey and export bees in an attempt to get OTHER countries to ban honey from Oz, where NZ and Oz compete for market share. I humbly apologize on behalf of the US to every beekeeper in Australia for the baseless accusations and unjustified disparagement leveled in your direction as a result of a research project where the wheels came completely off. (This problem seems to be related to the size of the wheels, as big wheels are much more problematic than little wheels in this regard.) Bottom line, any analysis of samples that were not first properly classified as to their "CCD" or "Non-CCD" status is meaningless. But don't trust me if I am telling you to not trust a paper published by the journal "Science", read the paper yourself. Fact-check my critique. Here's the excerpt that I think you might want to read if you haven't time to slog through everything else. Beekeepers are uniquely qualified to understand the exact nature of the fatal flaw described. The entire paper, as a result, is much worse than merely "wrong", it is a deliberate attempt to declare some sort of "success" in diagnosing CCD using sampling methodology that wouldn't get past a Junior-High School science fair judge. ============================================== Were Diseased Samples Consistently Classified? ============================================== One basic step that can skew results is how one classifies the samples as being from "diseased" or "disease-free" colonies. If samples are labeled "diseased" when the specific colony is not diseased, the result is a misleading sample, and the results are much less accurate. Given that a total of only 30 "CCD Samples" were analyzed, a single misclassified sample could make a difference of 3% in the "CCD Samples" results. The paper says: "Diseased apiaries were selected based on evidence of recent collapse of some colonies within the apiary and a lack of dead bees in collapsed colonies. Up to three dead, collapsing, or stronger colonies were selected for sample collection in each diseased apiary." So, if only some of the colonies in an apiary had collapsed, samples were collected from any colony in that apiary, as if all colonies in the apiary were certain to be "diseased". This implies that some of the samples called "CCD Samples" could actually be "Non-CCD Samples". There's no way to tell, as there is no fool-proof test that confirms the presence of CCD. The best that could have been done would have been to only use samples collected from hives that showed obvious symptoms of CCD. That wasn't done, so the results attributed to the "CCD Samples" are questionable as to their accuracy. With so few samples, there isn't a lot of room for any of them to be misclassified. The assumption that all colonies in a yard will have CCD when only some of the colonies are showing symptoms is clearly a guess. The resulting data is dependent upon those guesses, and cannot be said to be any better than those guesses. Were Healthy Samples Consistently Classified? ============================================= While it may seem simple to tell a healthy colony from a colony suffering from CCD, it would be premature to call the samples taken from such colonies "disease free" unless the colonies were inspected again at a later time to verify that they had remained disease-free. No one knows what a colony about to collapse from CCD looks like, but it is reasonable to conclude that there aren't any obvious symptoms, or the many highly trained and experienced people investigating would have noticed something unusual. The paper did not mention this aspect of the sample collection process, so we asked Dr. Jeff Pettis of the USDA Beltsville Bee Lab about it during the press conference where the paper was announced to the press. He answered "No, we didn't have the luxury of going back to those same colonies." At risk of sounding flippant, couldn't someone at least have called the beekeepers who owned the hives, and asked "how are the hives that were sampled doing right now"? They didn't even do that, so it is impossible to know if the samples classified as "non-CCD" were taken from hives that collapsed from CCD soon after, and thus should have been classified as samples from "CCD" colonies. Each misclassified non-CCD hive would result in a 4.7% error in the "Non-CCD Samples" results. Chance, Luck, Statistics ========================= If you think that I'm being unreasonable here, understand that being pedantic and picky about sample collection is central to being certain about the results. Given the lack of certainty about the samples, NOTHING can be said about the results with any certainty. The results could only be accurate by chance! All sorts of statistical analysis was done, but we can ignore it all, as the samples can only be properly classified if everyone was very lucky. I'm surprised that something this basic slipped by the reviewers. The problems with sample classification invalidate the entire paper in my view. But we won't abandon the slog here, as there are other problems to consider in this paper... (continues) Here is the full text of the "Science" paper (watch that line wrap): http://lists.sonic.net/pipermail/pollinator/attachments/20070906/2a8e96c 8/attachment.pdf Here are the details - the "supporting materials" for the paper: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/1146498/DC1 Here is the press conference audio transcript: http://bee-quick.com/reprints/ccd_aaas_news_conf.mp3 (WARNING: 7 megabyte mp3 file) The full Bee Culture coverage and analysis consists of: The introduction, on the "Daily Green" website: http://www.thedailygreen.com/2007/09/06/bee-disease-study-offers-nothing -that-is-both-new-and-compelling/6251/ This page will have links to more stuff, as it happens. (As of 09/08/07, the links are not working) The rest of the segments are here: http://beeculture.com/content/CCD_Analysis.cfm Which will also have links to further breaking news "Practical Implications For Beekeepers" http://beeculture.com/content/PRACTICAL%20IMPLICATIONS%20FOR%20BEEKEEPER S.pdf "A Beekeeper Reads The Paper" http://beeculture.com/content/Reads_The_Paper.pdf "World Trade" http://beeculture.com/content/World%20Trade.pdf ADDENDUM: Maybe you got down to here, and don't see just how faulty the sampling process was. Let's replace "apiaries" with "apartment buildings", "hives" with "humans", and "CCD" with "sudden unexplained death of humans". Now, let's summarize the sampling protocol: "DISEASED" SAMPLES a) Find a building where a few or many people have died from this strange disease. b) Take samples from anyone in the building, dead or alive, apparently healthy or not, long-term resident, or someone who just walked in the door to deliver a pizza. c) Don't be consistent in your approach, be "random" in your selections. "HEALTHY" SAMPLES a) Find other buildings where no one is sick yet, and take samples. b) Don't bother to check back after a bit to see if they stayed healthy, or started showing symptoms later. Don't even check to see if anyone died in those buildings before you publish your paper. c) Recall that the disease in question has no "early symptoms". I hope that makes things a bit more clear. :) LEGAL MUMBO-JUMBO FOR THE ANALYSIS AND COVERAGE: Copyright 2007 James Fischer, All Rights Reserved. First print publication rights granted to Bee Culture magazine for 10/01/07 issue. Unlimited rights are hereby granted for all non-commercial uses. Commercial rights available. Contact author. PLAIN ENGLISH TRANSLATION: Giving away copies for free? - Go for it! Charging or making money? - You can't run, you can't hide. We will find you, and you won't like it one bit. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 05:27:13 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Honey Antioxidants May Lower Risk of Atherosclerosis, Diabetes, Cancer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Honey Antioxidants May Lower Risk of Atherosclerosis, Diabetes, Cancer Antioxidant and Radical Scavenging Activity of Honey in Endothelial Cell Cultures Planta Medica, 2007 Sep 7 http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/09/honey-antioxidants-may-lower-risk-of.html …These results provide unequivocal evidence that, through the synergistic action of its antioxidants, honey by reducing and removing ROS, may lower the risks and effects of acute and chronic free radical induced pathologies IN VIVO. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 08:49:08 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" In-Reply-To: <000001c7f1f5$fe560400$0201000a@j> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James Fischer wrote: Exactly what he warned us about many moons ago and got a ton of flack. The problem with CCD is succinctly described in Jim's post and one I have continually come back to, which is there is no good before (and even after) set of data. All good real time experiments need to have the before/during/after data to arrive at any decent conclusions. Controls have to be established and variables controlled. Even worse, let us look at just what is implied and see the logical outcome. IAPV is the primary culprit. As a virus, we should see it fairly wide spread just because of the movement of migratory beekeepers through almonds and blueberries. You have beekeepers from all over the country participating so contact and spread of the virus is certain. Transit conditions mean the virus should spread within colonies and you should see CCD at the end of the transit. But we in Maine did not. I have not heard reports from Florida about returning colonies and CCD. However, if we look at what will happen in a few months, you should see Varroa and Tracheal mite caused loss going into the fall and winter. It does not matter if the virus is IAPV, KBV or anything else that may live in bees. The combination of high mite load and virus are well documented and are seen every year. Some beekeepers understand what they see and some do not. We will see CCD reported this fall but will it be CCD or normal mite kills? Good luck. I also feel a bit vindicated, but for the wrong reason. The study does implicate Varroa (and Tracheal is also a culprit) as a factor in CCD. Nice to have that, but I am still in Jerry B's camp in that actual CCD is not necessarily related to Varroa. It is Disappearing Disease or something very akin to it and that disease was here long before the mites. CCD is out there, but it is ill defined since many things can yield the same symptoms. As I noted, CCD was reported by one beekeeper coming into Maine but it was not. The symptoms were the same. Mites and virus also give CCD like symptoms, but you need to know what you are looking at. Not enough beekeepers do. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 08:50:25 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dick Marron Subject: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>>We have not proven a causal relationship between any infectious agent and CCD;<<<<< What do you want from them, Jim? Now we know IAPV is there. Sure it's a small sample. Sure the follow up may not have been excellent. While I thank you for your tenacity I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bathtub. I was in on the FL sampling group. We took samples of honey, brood and comb from: Dead -sick and dying-sick and recovering and recovering colonies. We mapped these categories as to where in the yard they appeared. Bees were saved in alcohol or frozen. When you condemn the "sampling" it casts a pall over the entire sampling process. A lot of hard work went into the bitter end. I suspect IAPV, like Nosema Ceranae, may have been there all along. If so, we have advanced our knowledge base. If it's a new addition there is a lot more work to do. I too feel badly for our friends down-under. We may need their bees for a reason not mentioned. Their bees may have learned to live with this pathogen. I understand there are genetic changes that occur in the bees in response to IAPV. They may have already done this in AU. Dick Marron ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 10:27:58 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Russ Dean Subject: this ones for George MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _Memorial Obituaries Pumphrey Funeral Home Imirie, Jr., George _ (http://obit.pumphreyfuneralhome.com/obit_display.cgi?id=455601&clientid=pumphreyfuneralhom e&listing=Found) Telling the Bees, by Whittier Here is the place; right over the hill Runs the path I took; You can see the gap in the old wall still, And the stepping-stones in the shallow brook. There is the house, with the gate red-barred, And the poplars tall; And the barn's brown length, and the cattle-yard, And the white horns tossing above the wall. There are the beehives ranged in the sun; And down by the brink Of the brook are her poor flowers, weed-o'errun, Pansy and daffodil, rose and pink. A year has gone, as the tortoise goes, Heavy and slow; And the same rose blows, and the same sun glows, And the same brook sings of a year ago. There's the same sweet clover-smell in the breeze; And the June sun warm Tangles his wings of fire in the trees, Setting, as then, over Fernside farm. I mind me how with a lover's care From my Sunday coat I brushed off the burrs, and smoothed my hair, And cooled at the brookside my brow and throat. Since we parted, a month had passed,-- To love, a year; Down through the beeches I looked at last On the little red gate and the well-sweep near. I can see it all now, - the slantwise rain Of light through the leaves, The sundown's blaze on her window-pane, The bloom of her roses under the eaves. Just the same as a month before,-- The house and the trees, The barn's brown gable, the vine by the door,-- Nothing changed but the hives of bees. Before them, under the garden wall, Forward and back, Went drearily singing the chore-girl small, Draping each hive with a shred of black. Trembling, I listened: the summer sun Had the chill of snow; For I knew she was telling the bees of one Gone on the journey we all must go! Then I said to myself, "My Mary weeps For the dead to-day: Haply her blind old grandsire sleeps The fret and the pain of his age away." But her dog whined low; on the doorway sill, With his cane to his chin, The old man sat; and the chore-girl still Sung to the bees stealing out and in. And the song she was singing ever since In my ear sounds on:-- "Stay at home, pretty bees, fly not hence! Mistress Mary is dead and gone!" ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 08:18:46 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well done, Jim! I largely agree with most of your points. In an ideal world, the paper would have been released as a preliminary report to the CCD group for quick corroboration during the summer. Unfortunately, the long review process, and associated secrecy now puts us close to fall, and close to the potential market for Aussie imports for almond pollination. Management and import decisions will now need to be made with inadequate, and possibly misleading, information. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 18:09:26 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >What do you want from them, Jim? Now we know IAPV is there. "The authors themselves recognize it's not a slam dunk, it's correlative. But it's certainly more than a smoking gun — more like a smoking arsenal. It's very compelling," said May Berenbaum, a University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign entomologist who headed a recent examination of the decline in honeybee and other pollinator populations across North America. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 18:16:10 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Peter L. Borst" Subject: Pettis: likely that more than one factor MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline "I hope no one goes away with the idea that we've actually solved the problem," said Jeffrey S. Pettis. Dr. Pettis said that even if the virus was involved, it was likely that more than one factor had to align for a hive to collapse, with another possible influence being poor nutrition. Most of the colonies that had big losses last winter were in areas that experienced drought a few months beforehand, and thus a lack of nectar in flowers, he said. Another factor, Dr. Pettis said, could be the stress that comes from the increasingly industrial-style beekeeping operations in the United States, in which truckloads of hives crisscross the country to pollinate California almonds or Florida orchards each season. But the virus stands out as a top suspect. While seven viruses and a host of bacteria and parasites were identified in the genetic screening, only the Israeli bee virus, first identified in 2004, was strongly tied to the samples taken from keepers who reported the collapse disorder. -- NY Times ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 18:49:50 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Honey Antioxidants May Lower Risk of Atherosclerosis, Diabetes, Cancer In-Reply-To: <20070908052713.84d281a5f2f7df0ef38485a84124037d.8ecd9a5edf.wbe@email.secureserver.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nice caveat, "may". However, the whole anti-oxidant thrust that more is better is going through a hard look. Reductive stress is now the new buzz. Of all the sciences, food science is probably the one still mostly in the black art stage. Today's wonder food is tomorrow's carcinogen. Even vitamin C is getting dinged since fat cells in the stomach can make it a carcinogen. Moderation in all things. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 22:43:54 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter Borst quoted the press, who has consistently "gotten it wrong" in nearly every story they write about CCD: > "The authors themselves recognize it's not a slam dunk, > it's correlative." Sorry, there is no correlation. There may not even been any actual IAPV virus at all. The classification of samples into "CCD" and "Non-CCD" groups was faulty. Therefore any claimed correlation is inherently bogus. Read my analysis. I explain it in excruciating detail. > "But it's certainly more than a smoking gun - more like > a smoking arsenal." I agree that there is much smoke. There is the smoke and mirrors of PCR, Sequencing, and "Metagenomics". There is the smoking ruin of a paper that will be laughed at for decades. There may be the smoking ruins of multiple careers. But there's no smoking gun. Listen to the press conference - the backpedaling was deafening. > "'It's very compelling,' said May Berenbaum, a University of Illinois > at Urbana-Champaign entomologist" What is compelling is that no one has read the paper, and realized that basic assumptions were made without any basis. 1) The assumption "irradiation killed the pathogen, therefore we can assume we are looking for a pathogen" is bogus. Bayer Cropscience, who would have every reason to dodge the question, states clearly that a mere day's sunlight breaks down their sprayable Imidacloprid pesticides. The EPA tests for this as a part of their "environmental fate of pesticides" testing, so the pesticide companies DESIGN their products to break down in sunlight. Not all neonicotinoid pesticides break down like this, but Bayer's do. 1a) So, let's think about sunlight versus gamma radiation sufficient to kill foulbrood spores. Which might be stronger? :) 2) The assumption that any/all samples from a yard where CCD had been detected in SOME hives would be "CCD" samples was also bogus. Despite the efforts of Dick Marron and the others who took samples, the paper clearly states that the folks doing the analysis divided samples into two categories - "CCD" and "Non-CCD", ignoring the more subtle classifications assigned by those who examined the hives and took the samples. 3) The assumption that samples from a yard apparently free of CCD was not cross-checked later to verify that the hives remained free of symptoms. So, there was no way to confirm that the "Non-CCD" samples were valid "healthy bee" samples. There is a difference between "precision" and "accuracy". The data is very precise, I'm sure. But it is not at all accurate. It is precisely useless as a result. One can make no conclusions at all from samples that were apparently misunderstood as to their classification. Up above, I suggested that there may not even been any actual IAPV virus detected at all. This is a complex point, but the process used may have detected genetic evidence of PRIOR IAPV exposure, rather than the evidence of an actual virus. Prior exposure that may have been multiple bee generations ago. (See my analysis for the details) Understand that "metagenomics" is the equivalent of running a bookshelf worth of books through a shredder, taking only a few scraps of the shredded paper, and then looking at the scraps and trying to match the scraps to an author. The problem here is that one can shred a Kurt Vonnegut book in which he quotes Shakespeare, and end up thinking one had evidence of a book of Shakespeare. Wrong. It was just a quote in a Vonnegut book. There was no Shakespeare book on the shelf. Speaking of Shakespeare, in the "race" to publish before those who actually found all the same stuff back in April had a chance to do so, it appears that the team used the same reasoning as Macbeth: "If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well If it were done quickly. If one could trammel up the consequence, and catch with his surcease success, that would be the be-all and the end-all here..." And we all know how things went for Macbeth. Badly. Somehow, I DO see a correlation in that. :) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 06:54:36 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus In-Reply-To: <064501c7f165$99a951f0$6bab5142@MyPC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit randy oliver wrote: > > Note the explanatory regression for CCD prediction: > IAPV (96%), KBV (65%), N apis (73%), N ceranae (63%) > Total 88.2% explanatory power! > Note that *all* samples positive for IAPV contained KBV--could there > be a synergy? > Note that N apis, which is becoming uncommon, had slightly higher > score than N ceranae! Surprise! > > That said, the Army/Bromshenk data do not support the universality of > IAPV in CCD colonies. I agree that there definitely could be a synergy, but KBV may be a larger factor than IAPV. The problem is that other things can cause CCD like symptoms, so it could be KBV that is the larger factor, especially after Jim's analysis. From what has been seen so far, it appears that Jerry is looking at CCD and the team is looking at virus and mites. The actions of bees under a high Varroa/Tracheal and virus load are like CCD. Plus, it appears that the bees are mostly eastern US, where, in my opinion, the sources are suspect. There is a big difference between experienced field people who see bees from a variety of sources and locations, and lab bound people who see them mostly under a microscope. Some in the lab will even agree with that. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 06:00:38 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Propolis Has 'Potentially Useful' Role in Treatment of Periodontal Disease MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Propolis Has 'Potentially Useful' Role in Treatment of Periodontal Disease Periodontal Disease Therapy Pharma Investments, Ventures & Law Weekly, 9/16/2007 http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/09/propolis-has-potentially-useful-role-in.html New research, "Semisolid systems containing propolis for the treatment of periodontal disease: in vitro release kinetics, syringeability, rheological, textural, and mucoadhesive properties," is the subject of a report. .. The researchers concluded: "The data obtained in these formulations indicate a potentially useful role in the treatment of periodontitis and suggest they are worthy of clinical evaluation."… ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 09:26:38 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >Peter Borst quoted the press, who has consistently "gotten it wrong" in nearly every story they write about CCD: >> "The authors themselves recognize it's not a slam dunk, it's correlative." I did NOT quote "the press". I quoted Dr. May Berenbaum, Professor and Entomology Department Head at the University of Illinois; also, the editor of the Annual Review of Entomology 2007. And, while she could be wrong on this, I doubt she has "consistently gotten it wrong". pb ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 09:44:55 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I agree that there definitely could be a synergy, but KBV > may be a larger factor than IAPV. The problem is that > other things can cause CCD like symptoms, so it could be > KBV that is the larger factor, especially after Jim's analysis. Actually, its worse than that. It helps to read the "analysis" itself. http://beeculture.com/content/CCD_Analysis.cfm The admissions of the researchers themselves undercut/contradict the what is claimed in the paper. Multiple parties (Jeff Pettis, Diana Cox-Foster, Edward Holmes...) have all stressed in the press conference, and in follow-up interviews that they think (and/or believe) they are dealing with "Multiple Factors" here. Despite saying what they think, they did no multivariate analysis. Weird. Would have been easy to do, even with an Excel spreadsheet macro, for Pete's sake. They used the mighty SAS Institute statistical software, even easier to use. Heck, anyone who can get a copy of the data can do the multivariate analysis on the entire bestiary of pathogens they detected, and compare the levels of infection between the samples, and publish a better analysis of the data. Its just math! If everyone agrees that dealing with "Multiple Factors", and they find 10 different pathogens and varroa, and even bother to quantify the relative amounts of each found in each sample (see Table S1 in the supplemental materials) and then DON'T compare combinations of things to see if multiple factors might show a higher correlation with the powerful statistical software they had at their fingertips, what can we say? I'm struggling here, as I don't have anything nice to say about the lack of such analysis. Yet the paper still tries to call "IAPV" a "marker" for CCD, and does everything but buy a full-page ad in the New York Times to imply that this is the "cause of CCD", and to accuse Australia of being the "source of the problem". All this from mere comparison of single-variables, one pathogen at a time, and pathogens only, not even pesticide residue analysis thrown in. But that's not all, it gets even worse. Dr. Edward Holmes said in the press conference (37 mins into the audio): "As for IAPV itself, again, the big unknown that comes out is 'what is IAPV?'... Is this a distinct virus in itself, is it a distinct lineage of an another virus called KBV? We really don't know that yet." If they aren't sure they found IAPV or KBV, why did they make such a big deal about saying that IAPV was "strongly correlated with CCD", where KBV was not? The key word is "distinct". They are convinced that IAPV is different from KBV, even if it is nothing but a variation of KBV. But it gets still worse than even that. Dr. Holmes went on to say: "We know from other viruses, like West Nile. that very small genetic changes I mean, one amino acid change, can turn a benign virus into a very virulent one... it is quite possible that very small genetic changes... may make this virus behave differently in Israel, Australia, and the USA." So, it just doesn't matter which virus is which, or which one is found where. If very small and sudden changes can turn a benign virus into a virulent one, and tiny changes could appear in local populations of viruses in different countries, the names of viruses are meaningless, and utterly useless. We had better start numbering them, so that next year's IAPV is not confused with this year's version. One could be deadly, and the other harmless. Same thing with location, as viruses can change in one place and not another. So, we had better start adding zip codes onto the end of the "names", to track where they were found. We need to also recall that pointing to "IAPV" as somehow significant allowed them to publish at least one arguably NEW finding, something that no one else had yet mentioned. Finding something arguably "new" is what gets a paper published. Finding something with international implications is what gets the paper noticed. What was announced in April was "an unknown Iflavirus". Note that the difference between an "Iflavirus" and any of the "Dicistroviruses" is so insignificant that "Dicistroviruses" are not even recognized as distinct from "Iflaviruses" by the taxonomic authorities who name and classify viruses. Now, lets cut everyone some slack here. In April, the team that openly announced their findings to the entire so-called "Working Group" classified the virus they found as an "Iflavirus". This was the only name they COULD use, and stay within the taxonomy that was "approved" on the official taxonomic lists. The genetic sequences for "IAPV" did not become available until after April, so, in April there was no way to match an unknown virus to IAPV. So everyone could be "right" about which virus is which, depending on what they compared it to. But does it matter? Edward Holmes described the difference between KBV and IAPV, both now considered "Dicistroviruses" as "a moot point". I agree, but not for any taxonomic reason. Its a moot point because it is quite possible that what has been found is the equivalent of finding maggots on the bodies of victims of gangland slayings. Yes, the maggots certainly do "correlate" to death, as you won't find them on the bodies of healthy living people, but the maggots are not the cause of death. The cause of death in the case of a gangland slaying is the gunshot wound to the back of the head. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 12:53:41 -0400 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I did NOT quote "the press". Yes, you did. :) The quote you lifted was from an Associated Press wire service story written by a reporter named Andrew Bridges. If you run the phrase: "it's certainly more than a smoking gun -- more like a smoking arsenal." through Google, you'll find several copies of the complete article. > I quoted Dr. May Berenbaum, Nope, you never heard her say that - you merely quoted an AP story, written by Andrew Bridges. The story was edited by Lord only knows who or how many people. The story quoted May Berenbaum, and may or may have not even gotten the quote right. Given the accuracy of the reporting to date, they might not even have put the right name on the quote - they might have been quoting Mae West! That's why they are called "stories". Some are fact, some are unintentional fiction, most are a mix. Regardless, listen to the press conference audio. The actual authors of the paper openly and overtly deny that they have found any sort of "smoking gun". Now, regardless of the many fine qualifications that May Berenbaum lists on her CV, she was not an author of the paper, so if the authors themselves disagree with her characterization of the paper they wrote, and she does not offer any basis for disagreeing with them, then it is reasonable to say that (if the quote was accurate) she "got it wrong". If May wants to support her divergent view with some factoids, then maybe we can consider her argument. But she offered no argument to contradict or reinterpret the paper or the verbal statements of the authors, so she merely offered a cutesy comment, a turn of phrase. No smoke. No gun. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 10:48:41 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Jim said: This is a complex point, but the > process used may have detected genetic evidence of PRIOR > IAPV exposure, rather than the evidence of an actual virus. I asked Dr Cox Foster about this point, and it appears from her detailed answer that they addressed this issue by looking for entire copies of the virus, rather than a few fragments. I'd give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. The case that IAPV was present, and likely strongly associated with CCD is strong, as are KBV, and the nosemas. IMHO, far more sampling needs to be done to see just how long the virus has been in the US, how widespread it is, whether it was spread much through the use of priming queen cells with royal jelly, or by Aussie imports, or indirectly from Canada. We also need to explain why Canadian bees with varroa aren't crashing. I'm not about to write off the importance of this paper, although there are the questions of methodology that Jim points out that need to be confirmed. I don't like how it was released, nor the politics involved. I look at it as a good starting point, and now we need to surge ahead with more sampling. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 11:49:11 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, Re: the Cox-Foster paper. Jim eloquently points out several of the problems with this paper, and I'm in agreement with him. Despite the disengenuous caveat that "We have not proven a causal relationship between any infectious agent and CCD," the authors should have forseen the brouhaha that it would cause in the industry. Far better that it had been circulated as a preliminary report within the Working Group. Unfortunately, it was released (prematurely, IMHO), raising a great number of questions, and now beekeepers want answers. Any answers will require far more data collection to confirm or deny the implications of the paper. The type of data needed can be obtained slowly by PCR amplification used by the authors, or far more quickly with the IVDS machine that Dr Bromenshenk and the Army used. The bee industry should be pounding on Dr Bromenshenk's door right now, with money in hand, asking how soon he can resume testing. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 15:56:58 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Rip Bechmann Subject: CCD & IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oz shows no sign of CCD, Oz has IAPV but no varroa. Canada has Oz bees, = varroa and shares a long border. This begs some questions, if I'm any = judge. Canada has had bees from Oz longer than US why didn't CCD show = up in Canada first? Are varroa less widespread in Canada than in the = US? Are commercial Canadian beekeepers more stationary than their US = counterpart? Are Canadian bees less "stressed"? (i.e. more into honey = production and less into pollination and hence less miles trucked less = frequently, less pesticide exposure, etc., etc. Has anyone "sliced and = diced" the data to reflect (confirmed) CCD in stationary versus = migratory outfits? Pettis is telling you something, is anyone listening? You should be = looking for the whole "chain", not the "weak link du jour"=20 I haven't been reading my "mail" as often as I should so this may be a = dated rehash, if so, sorry =20 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 16:02:08 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I said: >> may have detected genetic evidence of PRIOR IAPV exposure, >> rather than the evidence of an actual virus. Randy said: > I asked Dr Cox Foster about this point, and it appears from her detailed > answer that they addressed this issue by looking for entire copies of the > virus, rather than a few fragments. I'd give them the benefit of the doubt > on this one. That makes zero sense. If they had sequenced the full gene of the virus they said they had found, they would have crowed about it in the paper, as that WOULD have been as good as a mug shot and fingerprints. "Full sequencing of a hitherto unknown exotic invasive pathogen of US bees" would have been a major finding. It might have even been the title of the paper! What was in the paper was talk of segments "averaging 150 base pairs long" and such. Talk of which end of the gene the fragments might have come from. There also wouldn't have been quite so much qualification and backpedaling in the news conference. I call specific attention to what Dr. Holmes said: "As for IAPV itself, again, the big unknown that comes out is 'what is IAPV?'... Is this a distinct virus in itself, is it a distinct lineage of an another virus called KBV? We really don't know that yet." If they had the virus they think they found fully sequenced, they could have compared that full sequence to the existing full sequence for the IAPV found in Israel. They would have said if it matched perfectly or not. They also could have compared it to KVB. They would KNOW what "IAPV" was, and know if ours was the same as Israel's. They also would have uploaded a reference copy of what they found to the genbank and/or NCBI. I've never found any genes, so I don't know the exact protocol, but the usual reference found in papers is something like: "The GenBank accession number of the sequence reported upon in this paper is XY1234567." So, no new genbank citation, no full sequence found. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 16:39:21 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jim probably won't approve of this quote also: "The paper is a model of careful investigation," says entomologist Gene Robinson, director of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's bee research facility, who was not involved in the study. IAPV seems to be either a cause of or a marker for the disease, he says. "Either way, it's the first big breakthrough in the CCD story, so it's very exciting and very encouraging." Pete ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 14:23:12 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit While I'm at it, a few more thoughts come to mind. I want to focus on the science, and leave the ugly politics out of my discussion--we all know that smart people can do dumb things, and there have been enough dumb things done to give Jim fodder for plenty of articles. : ) First, re Bill Truesdell's references to mites being the main problem: I've asked the researchers about the genesis of DWV, which we associate with varroa mite, and which varroa mite is infected by, and vectors. No one knows whether this was originally a bee virus, or mite virus. Researchers are hoping to test bees that have yet to be exposed to mites for any sign of DWV. I'm also not sure if anyone knows whether the virus also kills the mite at high levels. Ditto with IAPV, which appears to be universal in Israeli mites, and infects both mites and bees. Clearly, the mite/virus association is a strong one--lending support to Bill's contention. However, some colonies with apparently very low mite levels appeared to collapse from CCD (note all the qualifiers in that sentence?) DWV has been shown to infect bumblebees. As far as I know, no one has screened other insects as reservoirs for DWV or IAPV. Jim's point should be well taken that we don't know whether CCD-collapsing colonies died from the viruses, or whether the viruses were opportunists that became active once the bees' immune systems were suppressed. Dr Sela in Israel confirmed for me, however, that IAPV there really tears up the bees. Further screening of colonies is necessary to determine if there are widespread latent infections of the virus, or viral genes incorporated into the bee genome in North America. Ditto for Jim's point that viral immunity is conferred by incorporation of portions of the viral genome into the bees' DNA. As Jim says, that may, ironically, lead us to seek out breeder stock from Australia or elsewhere where the bees have been exposed to IAPV! Jim's point about a tiny change in the viral genome having potentially major effects on its virulence is also well taken. Note that in the paper the authors claim to have identified 22 different "strains" (my word) of IAPV. I've asked about this, and an author stood behind their analysis, although other experts that I've spoken with question their ability to determine variations with such precision. In any case, perhaps some forms are far more virulent, and will eventually "burn out." And what's up with the nosema twins? Large differences in relative species composition operation to operation. And how did N. ceranae, which is supposed to be 10x more virulent than N apis, sneak into our bees over the last decade without us even noticing? Another question: a common factor with CCD was nutritional stress 2-3 months prior to collapse. Why so long a delay? Look at the photos of the CCD colonies with all that sealed brood. How the heck could a colony suffering from nutritional stress two months prior rear all that sealed brood? Again, to me, the paper brings up far more questions than answers. The value of the paper may be more in the elimination of some suspects, rather than the conviction of a perpetrator. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 14:29:27 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > If they had sequenced the full gene of the virus they said they had > found, > they would have crowed about it in the paper, as that WOULD have been as > good as a mug shot and fingerprints. Good point, Jim. I've been reading virus papers these last few weeks until my head spins, and still get boggled by all the jargon. Since the researchers currently are trying to culture the virus in test colonies, shouldn't be hard to confirm soon. Randy ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 18:42:13 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit right on man i can't help but wonder what US beekeeping would look like with no almonds or commercial feedlot beekeeping. i doubt CCD would even be in our vocabulary. these are man made problems. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 17:37:43 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian: With no almonds or commercial feedlot beekeeping how many other problems do you think would disappear also we all have to put up with? Dee A. Lusby ____________________________________________________________________________________ Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:58:52 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Steve_Noble?= Subject: IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit “IMHO, far more sampling needs to be done to see just how long the virus has been in the US, how widespread it is, whether it was spread much through the use of priming queen cells with royal jelly, or by Aussie imports, or indirectly from Canada.” Randy Oliver Randy, could you shed some light on how sampling at this point could help determine how long the virus has been in the US, or for that matter how it could help determine anything that happened in the past? I don’t see, for example, how sampling bees now could determine the means by which the virus was spread a year or more ago. Steve Noble ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 07:36:02 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian Fredericksen wrote: >i can't help but wonder what US beekeeping would look like with no almonds or commercial feedlot beekeeping. I don't even bother to wonder what US beekeeping would be without such pioneers such as A. I. Root, C. P. Dadant, G. M. Doolittle, Brother Adam and Eva Crane, to name a very few. These people all championed large scale modern beekeeping. Pete ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:46:22 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>Unfortunately, the long review process, and associated secrecy now puts us close to fall, and close to the potential market for Aussie imports for almond pollination. Does anyone know - especially the subscribers in Australia - if there are or have been CCD-like cases in Australia related to IAPV. Has anyone also identified IAPV presence in Australia? This is understandting that the key difference bet. Australia and N. America is the varroa vector. Another question that comes to mind: do any of the beekeepers who have confirmed CCD run mostly Australian bees? This could help answer if Assie bees exposed to varroa are resistant to IAPV (and other viruses). This is all assuming that IAPV MAY be ONE of the factors contributing to CCD. Rather than cutting funds for CCD research on this preliminary finding, Congress should be asking the CCD team to include the possible Aussie - IAPV cause in their eval. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:25:15 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit waldig wrote: >Does anyone know - especially the subscribers in Australia - if there are or have been CCD-like cases in Australia related to IAPV. >From Scientific American: > Lipkin and co-workers found that seemingly healthy Australian bees were infected with the virus and point out that all of the CCD hives they examined included or spent time near imported Australian bees. Beekeepers from Down Under have reported a "disappearing disease" but not on the scale of CCD, Pettis said during a press conference Wednesday. > One difference, he said, could be parasitic varroa mites, which suppress bees' immune systems and have driven down the U.S. bee population by 30 percent in the last 25 years, but are not found in Australia. "We know it's a primary stressor," he added. "I still believe that multiple factors are involved in CCD and we must test [them] in a more rigorous fashion." > "I was told by the Israeli [beekeeping] extension people that there are some recent indications for a small-scale CCD-like phenomenon in Israel," [says Ilan Sela]. > IAPV could in theory be causing CCD by inserting its genetic material into bee genes for pheromones or other molecules that coordinate hive behavior, thereby disrupting those genes, a possibility that he and the CCD working group plan to test. > Until researchers have cracked the CCD mystery, Cox-Foster advised beekeepers Wednesday to keep their bees well fed and free of mites. Pete ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:45:37 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: IAPV In-Reply-To: <090201c7f327$a1714e60$6bab5142@MyPC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit randy oliver wrote: > > Clearly, the mite/virus association is a strong one--lending support > to Bill's contention. However, some colonies with apparently very low > mite levels appeared to collapse from CCD (note all the qualifiers in > that sentence?) The whole virus/mite/bee interaction is interesting because it is not what you might think. Bob and those from GB can help me out here, but Carriak (sp?) in the UK showed that Tracheal were not the "virus spreader" as a carrier but the synergy of Tracheal/close quarters/virus did lead to massive infection and colony death. So the mite weakens the bee. The virus can take hold. From there, you do not necessarily need more mites, just close proximity (winter or flatbed truck confinement) and the bees will spread the virus between each other. It is interesting that these are the exact thing necessarily to precede CCD as we have seen it. Another interesting aspect of this. Say you have a high mite load, as described for some who reported CCD later. You treat with a strong mite dropper/killer and now have low mite counts. But the bees are weakened, virus is present, confinement happens (truck to Florida, for example) and Shazam (that dates me), CCD on arrival. But is actually was all mites and virus. With that scenario you certainly do not need a new, improved virus to kill off the bees. KBV will do just fine. What is a bit disconcerting about all this is that there seems to be a solution to the problem which is that virus are at fault. So what! We know virus and mites are the major problem for US beekeepers. So maybe the reason that Canadian beekeepers do not have a problem is that they only have IAPV to worry about while we have a new improved KBV. I wish I had thought of that, but I heard from reputable source that this is the probable reason that Canadian beekeepers do not have the losses of the US. It is all in the virus.But they have Aussie Bees with IAPV. So maybe IAPV is not the real problem but our own virus are. Or maybe Aussie bees are more virus resistant. So buy Aussie, the virus resistant bee- which will be counter to the "ban the Oz bees" crowd's mantra. Bill Truesdell (Who has been to Oz and loved it there. Needed the "Aussie English" book for translation since they do not speak English.) Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:17:54 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >“IMHO, far more sampling needs to be done to see just how long the virus has been in the US, how widespread it is, whether it was spread much through the use of priming queen cells with royal jelly, or by Aussie imports, or indirectly from Canada.” Randy Oliver Big waste of beekeeping research funds! New virus are found all the time. The only issue is if there is any effect on honey bees when varrroa is under control in the beekeepers hives. If not then a non issue with many commercial beekeepers. The only answer to PMS is to control varroa in your hives. Or as the researcher said to buy queens from Isreal. I like option one best. Of course if it is proved that IAPV kills the hive without varroa present then we need to take a closer look at the situation ( and possibly consider option one above) but without varroa issues virus problems have always been a very minor issue with commercial beekeepers. If Bailey could have shown virus was a big threat to commercial beekeeping his research would have been put on a front burner years ago instead of a beekeeping back burner. In fact the two best virus researchers in the world in my opinion (following the Bailey research ) in the U.K. Brenda Ball and Norman Carrick were let go last year and the research stopped. Until the last two decades of mite issues and seeing PMS symptoms (in high varroa load colonies )in the U.S. the virus work of Bailey and others has been of only minor interest. Until we have further research and proof IAPV has *any* connection to the *so called* CCD loss last fall then only of minor interest except for the virus researchers wanting research funding. My own opinion (and of many others) points to systemic pesticides as last falls problem. The recent earth shaking minor discovery (our opinion) has not changed our position. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 08:47:55 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Another question that comes to mind: do any of the beekeepers who have confirmed CCD run mostly Australian bees? The two largest commercial operations reporting CCD did not run Australian bees. Both are friends of mine. >This could help answer if Assie bees exposed to varroa are resistant to IAPV (and other viruses). I run Aussie bees along with 4-5 of the top commercial lines and all my bees look great. Of course varroa is well under control. Best looking bees in three years. We have had a strong honey flow all year and especially a strong wildflower fall flow. The last two years the bees were into corn pollen as corn pollen was all there was. This year the bees are leaving the corn pollen alone so I scrapped my plans of moving away from imadicloprid treated corn. I checked the corn fields every three days all season. My conclusion is that in areas of drought (last two years Midwest) you need to avoid corn pollen in fall if all the pollen there is for the bees. Letting your bees gather imidacloprid treated pollen should be avoided as the chemical *is* in the corn pollen. At *the very least* the pollen sets the hives growth back and in many cases *some of us* believe will cause CCD type symptoms! Both drought ( the last two year drought in our area was only bested by the dust bowl drought of 1936 in our area) & systemic treated seed pollen caused some of the CCD reports from my area in my opinion. In fact it was not until late spring when all the fall befores corn pollen was gone that those hives started returning to normal but most did by middle May. The situation would have improved quicker (my opinion) if we had not had the prolonged ice storm and killing freeze which forced the bees to return to using the stored corn pollen from the year before. Hives raising brood last fall on the contaminated pollen had symptoms famliar to Midwest beekeepers on BEE-L. 1. would not brood up last fall. 2. would not take syrup 3. wintered poor with small clusters 4. slow to take syrup last spring 5. slow to build until May 6. Splits from those hives were slow to build. If you are from the Midwest and had bees in areas of corn last fall and saw those symptoms please say so as I have put weeks into the above research and conclusions. I would like conformation of my conclusions. Lurkers please comment on what you saw with your bees! >This is all assuming that IAPV MAY be ONE of the factors contributing to CCD. I think Jim Fischer covered the above nicely! Until proof is made of IAPV being a serious problem then will be on a back burner for me. Also the farm bill only funds the bee labs basically so future funds for CCD seem in doubt at this time. "Bees get no respect!" Jim Fischer 2007 bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:00:27 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "deknow@netzero.net" Subject: Re: IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ...someone else also alluded to migratory practices as a possible contributor. i believe gas prices in canada are almost double that of the u.s....and also higher in austrailia (i think...didn't do research on this). is it possible that the higher gas prices put enough of a damper on migratory practices that the stress on the bees overall is lessened enough to change the impact of this (or other) viruses? deknow ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:27:49 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>Lipkin ... found that seemingly healthy Australian bees were infected with the virus and ... all of the CCD hives they examined included or spent time near imported Australian bees. Sounds like there may be a level of IAPV tolerance in the Australian bees in the US [probably obtained after years of exposure & selection in Australia]? I found interesting the reports that in Canada, despite years of Australian imports, CCD is much lesser than in the US. Makes me think that the commercial Canadians practice their beekeeping sufficiently different from our so that their *less stressed* bees are able to take the virus better. Stress in humans causes a drop in the presence of natural killer cells that eliminate a lot of viruses and tumors. A similar event could be happening in bees. The above is based on my speculation that there may be something to this IAPV thing. I tend to think like Pettis that CCD is multi-factorial. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:05:01 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: "IAPV" SHOULD Stand For: "I Am Proposing Vindication" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Beekeepers from Down Under have reported a "disappearing disease" but not on the scale of CCD, Pettis said during a press conference Wednesday. The above was traced back to a pollen issue and the symptoms were not a hive full of brood and no bees. Have I got it wrong Trevor? " he added.( Pettis) "I still believe that multiple factors are involved in CCD and we must test [them] in a more rigorous fashion." I noticed by Mid afternoon of the first CCN bee reports the bee report had been dropped. Hmmm. > IAPV could in theory be causing CCD by inserting its genetic material into bee genes for pheromones or other molecules that coordinate hive behavior, thereby disrupting those genes, a possibility that he and the CCD working group plan to test. Lots of hypothesis with CCD. Add the above to the list! > Until researchers have cracked the CCD mystery, Cox-Foster advised beekeepers Wednesday to keep their bees well fed and free of mites. The above goes without saying. What commercial beekeepers are trying to do. The above is not the information we are looking for but at least we are getting some "bang for our beekeeping research bucks". Like I said last fall. Beekeepers may have to figure this thing out ourselves with little help from the government. Like Jim Fischer said " Let a cow drop dead and see the reaction" " National guard & Boy Scouts sent to help". Looks like CCD funds might not be coming partly with help from the Science article. Also finger pointing solves nothing! Look at Washington! bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:27:58 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Steve wrote >I don’t see, for example, how sampling bees now could determine the means by which the virus was spread a year or more ago. If the virus is widespread in the US, then we wouldn't obtain much info, unless we can track the different "strains." But if its distribution is still limited, we could determine if it spread from imports only from certain areas of Australia, or from queen operations that used Chinese royal jelly, by doing standard epidemiological detective work. Sampling could also let us know how quickly the virus spreads between operations, and whether we're all going to get it in almonds. Right now, only the few beekeepers tested know whether or not IAPV is in their operation. It would be of great interest for the rest of us to know whether it is in our bees. For all we know, as Jim has pointed out, IAPV could already be widespread in the US and lying latent most of the time. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:57:26 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 07:36:02 -0400, Peter L. Borst wrote: >I don't even bother to wonder what US beekeeping would be without such >pioneers such as A. I. Root, C. P. Dadant, G. M. Doolittle, Brother Adam and >Eva Crane, to name a very few. > >These people all championed large scale modern beekeeping. Yes I agree they made great contributions. Its sad that its now all about money, pollination and massive unsustainable monocrops. While a small number people represented by almond growers and migratory beeks benefit monetarily from this bizarre situation, the rest of American beekeepers are subject to the outcomes with no voice or no idea of what is happening. Who annointed these few people to make decisions affecting many of us? Aside from the almonds there is no good reason to import bees. Its all about the short term balance sheet. I grow apples in the Midwest. I am self suffiicient, I don't expect others to be indrectly affected by my needs. If there is not enoiugh bees to cover future almond needs too bad, so sad for them eh? Its not how much money you make its how you make it that lives on. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:58:56 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>i believe gas prices in canada are almost double that of the u.s....and also higher in austrailia (i think...didn't do research on this). We had a successful Australian commercial beekeeper speak at our Long Island bee club a couple of years ago. He practices several migratory moves a year chasing the flow from one plant species to another. His bees would not make surplus honey if they were kept in just one location. Waldemar PS. It was a challenge understanding the beekeeper - he called bees what sounded like 'baaays,' for instance. :)) One catches on after a while but it did make me wonder if this was a particular Australian dialect or if all Australians speak the same way... ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:14:20 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >If the virus is widespread in the US, then we wouldn't obtain much info, unless we can track the different "strains." Over 2 million hives (how many strains?)and no funds. Good luck with that! >Sampling could also let us know how quickly the virus spreads between operations, and whether we're all going to get it in almonds. "whether we're all going to get it in almonds?" Give me a break! Aren't we being a bit naive here? Close the border would be Carla M's solution! Burn hives! >Right now, only the few beekeepers tested know whether or not IAPV is in their operation. Who's going to pay for these IAPV tests? I know the cost of virus testing in Florida years ago and only the largest beekeeper could afford the cost. Why spend precious resources to DOCUMENT a virus which we have found but have no proof is even a problem. Aren't we getting the cart in front of the horse? >It would be of great interest for the rest of us to know whether it is in our bees. Only if the virus kills bees when not in the presence of a high varroa load in my opinion. Is the virus more dangerous that KBV? >For all we know, as Jim has pointed out, IAPV could already be widespread in the US and lying latent most of the time. I agree and we will most likely never know for sure. We will never know if IAPV had any effect on CCD. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:08:57 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bob: >Who's going to pay for these IAPV tests? The Army's IVDS machine is ready. They will pick up the bill, and can perform multiple tests quickly. Without data on the distribution of the various viruses, and correlations with CCD, we are forced to make management decisions blindly. I like to make my decisions based upon good data. > Only if the virus kills bees when not in the presence of a high varroa > load > in my opinion. Is the virus more dangerous that KBV? Bob, we still don't know if IAPV or KBV is doing the killing, if either. Only more testing will tell. Colonies with very low mite levels apparently collapsed from CCD. So that should answer your question. Beekeepers are already questioning whether we should cut off Aussie imports. Only testing will tell us if there is a scientific justification. >We will never know if IAPV had any effect on CCD. That's a self-fulfilling prophecy if we don't get more data! The means are available for confirming or discounting the IAPV connection to CCD. I'm damn curious to find out what is causing CCD. I know that you have made up your mind that it is pesticides, or was that mites? : ) There are currently colonies apparently collapsing from CCD as we speak. I suggest that we try to figure out what the cause is. The IAPV hypothesis is intriguing, but the authors make clear that they do not feel that they have solved the mystery. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:21:54 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Wallace Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >or from queen operations that used Chinese royal jelly I am really surprised to hear that queen operations in the US would use Chinese royal jelly after all the issues with regards to imported Chinese honey. Logically, it would seem to me to present the same type of issues as feeding honey of unknown origin. Why would a reputable breeder take that kind of risk monetarily or operationally? For that matter, why couldn't IAPV have arrived in a container of imported honey that was inadvertently or purposely fed to honey bees here in the US. I'm very doubtful all honey that arrives on our shores has undergone a complete filtration or heating process to remove pathological impurities. I've looked at the labels on Walmart's honey and it lists 4-5 different countries of origin. ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:33:11 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >I grow apples in the Midwest. I am self suffiicient, I grow apples also ( my crop was about fifteen apples I pulled off the trees and tossed on the compost heap this year !). Will take a few years to make up the money lost for this years freeze as the trees will need extra pruning and still needed care. How was your crop this year Brian? The one constant in agriculture is change. If you can not adapt to change then you go under or have got city income(wife or city employment to support your farming) and beekeeping or apple growing is really a overgrown hobby. I do beekeeping for a living and am successful. Apples (all fruit in our area in fact ) were a 90% complete loss due to the late freeze. We still got paid (were worried for awhile)for the hives placed into apple pollination (we do the largest number in the state of Missouri) but they report only a 10% crop from the late blooming varieties. Bankruptcy might be in their future. When I relocated into this area there were 17 commercial apple orchards and now there are only four. Four large commercial beekeepers have went bankrupt since then also. Most farming runs a loss three out of five years. I would not stay in beekeeping if I ran a loss three out of five years. My secret is I treat each year different. What I did last year has no bearing on the current year. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:44:05 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Eric_Brown?= Subject: Re: AND NOW? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I'm with Nick, I think. The mere speculation of a link between Aussie imports and CCD leads me, first and foremost, to fear further unanticipated problems from imports from Chile, for example. Global trade in general has enough problems. Global trade in live organisms is even worse. I say close the borders, especially to commercial imports, especially from Chile. Here's a question for the list: if Australia had had small hive beetles prior to the arrival of small hive beetles in North America, and if small hive beetles hadn't been any worse for Australian beekepers than they are for South African beekeepers, would Australian imports still have been approved? Being cynical as I am toward the system, I'm inclined to think yes. How many hypothetical failures do we need to "realize," so to speak, before we learn our lesson? ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:41:49 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >The Army's IVDS machine is ready. They will pick up the bill, and can perform multiple tests quickly. Please post the place to send samples. Ready to ship! >I know that you have made up your mind that it is pesticides, or was that mites? : ) I know mites and pesticides are a problem just not sure how important or solvable virus is. Just how are beekeepers supposed to solve aaaaaa IAPV problem? What is your solution? That's right! Let it run its course and breed from survivors! >There are currently colonies apparently collapsing from CCD as we speak. In our area we are not seeing any hives crashing with the documented CCD symptoms. Best hives in years. Where are these hives crashing? In California? bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:08:19 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, I want to make clear that I do not have any authority whatsover to volunteer the Army's or anyone else's services. What I meant to say was that the Army has offered to perform enough sampling to clarify some issues. There are other IVDS machines available, which the industry could also access. Dr Bromenshenk has taken the lead on this issue. Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:19:26 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob wrote: > Just how are beekeepers supposed to solve aaaaaa IAPV problem? What is > your > solution? > That's right! What's right? No one has claimed that the virus alone is the killer. Researchers are suggested that a combination of factors is necessary. Perhaps you should take the time to read the paper. If a combination is necessary, we can address the other treatable problems, e.g., nosema or nutrition. > Let it run its course and breed from survivors! This is obviously the long-term solution. However, rapid DNA screening would allow us to identify queens carrying resistance to a virus. > >Where are these hives crashing? Montana, Canada, California are reports I've heard. Perhaps elsewhere. I'm not interested in arguing, Bob. There's a problem out there with CCD, as you've clearly stated previously. Normally you are a facts and data guy. Indeed, I remember you recently suggesting that we distribute electron microscopes nationwide. Why the sudden adversity toward identifying pathogens? Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:33:07 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This was a tough year too on my apples.. We had severe drought and 2 hail storms here at the home orchard. The U/MN honeycrisp apple was created here and has been a real pluis for the orchards. A 1/2 peck 5 pound bag is going for $10-$12 at most orchards. That apple is now taking over red delicous acreage in WA, Upstate NY and all over the world. Other heriloom and specialty apples also command a decent retail price. This region is big on fall orchard family tours etc. It seems to be a regional thing. Many beeks make good by selling their honey at orchards. My strategy is I have 5 orchards (1800 trees total) spread out in a 5 mile area. I only own one of them. Likewise my bees are spread out in 18 yards, the furthest a 3 hour drive and all but two of them year around locations . I make my entire living off my operation. By spreading my risk around it looks like I'll skate through one of my worst years. We had a spread of above average to below average rain across the area I keep my yards. The honey crop here varied from average to below average as did the moisture levels across our state. After severe drought all summer in the Northern region, August was a flood state wide with ten inches of rain on the average and some areas saw 17 in one storm! I'm already looking forward to next year! ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:57:25 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Should we use IVDS for screening for IAPV and other viruses? Comments: cc: mrwick@montana.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 Integrated Virus Detection System (IVDS)=20 Bee-L Members=20 I=E2=80=99ve been deliberately staying out of the IAPV discussions, but giv= en some=20 recent statements to the list, I see a need to clarify some points. The=20 authors of the Science paper published their preliminary results and presen= ted=20 their conclusions. Unfortunately, we question the association between IAPV= and=20 CCD, and we disagree with comments implying a link to Australian imports.=20= =20 Any talk of banning imports from Australia seems premature.=20 As noted by Erik Stokstad, who wrote an overview article that was published= =20 in the same issue of Science, our data (Bee Alert, BVS, working with the AR= MY=20 ECBC laboratory in Aberdeen, MD) does not implicate any one virus as being=20 associated with CCD, not even as a biomarker.=20 We have looked at bee samples from across the county. In these samples, we= =20 have detected more than a dozen different viruses with as many as 4-6 new,=20 heretofore unclassified and unnamed viruses. =20 In every bee operation, we see combinations of viruses, usually 2-3. But,=20 we have not found a common virus or assemblage of viruses among and across=20= CCD=20 operations, regardless of the origin of the bees (i.e., U.S., Australian,=20 intermixed). =20 We have looked at some Australian imports, and we did find viruses, but=20 again, the data does not support a link between a virus in Australian bees=20= and=20 CCD colonies. In one Australian sample, we found yet another unknown virus= ,=20 maybe even two, but these did not show up in any CCD colonies.=20 If CCD is associated with a virus, we would expect to see the same virus=20 showing up in a consistent manner and to see a pattern to emerge, as projec= ted=20 for IAPV by the Science article. However, as stated, our data does not=20 corroborate this finding.=20 To sort all of this out is going to take a better sampling strategy and mor= e=20 samples than the limited sampling being done (by all parties combined). We=20 have been advocating that many samples from many beekeepers and from many=20 different areas need to be screened for a common connection. We have propo= sed to=20 USDA a national survey and CCD screening program. =20 The Army has provided methods development and initial Integrated Virus=20 Detection System (IVDS) screening. However, the Army does not have unlimit= ed=20 resources and can not continue to provide this as a free service to every=20 beekeeper (as implied by a previous post to Bee-L). =20 The Army has indicated to us a willingness to continue to assist, especiall= y=20 with respect to the issue of risk from imported bees and emergent cases of=20 CCD. But large scale sampling and analysis, in a production mode and on a=20 national scale, is beyond their capability and is not part of their mission= .=20 We (Bee Alert and BVS) have proposed placing a priority on obtaining sample= s=20 from Australia, taken according to a rigorous sampling scheme, and sent=20 directly to the Army lab for screening. That step needs to be done before=20= any=20 decisions are made regarding restricting bee imports from Australia.=20 We (Bee Alert and BVS) also have recommended that funds be made available t= o=20 purchase 1-3 IVDS instruments that could be used to screen bees from CCD=20 colonies, from nutrition experiments, entering the country, etc. for viruse= s. =20 Initially, screening would be provided to beekeepers as a free service in=20 exchange for samples and survey data from the beekeepers themselves. =20 In 12-24 months, assuming that this approach proves out to be useful to bee= =20 management, we recommend that virus screening be provided as a fee-based=20 service (less than $50 per sample). We see this becoming a service, much l= ike a=20 veterinarian provides lab services for disease diagnosis. In that way, vir= us=20 screening would no longer depend on public funds.=20 Finally, mention has been made in this post and others about the IVDS=20 technology (Integrated Virus Detection System). IVDS was developed by the=20= Army for=20 inexpensive and rapid screening of viruses, especially new and unknown=20 viruses. It is a unique and relatively recent technology. It does not nam= e=20 viruses, like PCR, but it separates them out by physical size. It also pro= vides=20 the titer or concentration of each virus in a sample. =20 Sample processing consists of blending bees in sterile water, centrifuging=20 and filtering, and then introducing the sample into a column using an=20 electro-spray system. A laser sizes and counts all virus sized particles i= n each =20 sample. Instrument time is less than 5 minutes. From start to finish, a=20 sample can be prepped and analyzed in about 2 hours.=20 IVDS can separate viruses by a 4 nm difference. The viruses we have=20 detected range from 20 nm to 39 nm in size. Some of the bee virus literatu= re reads =20 that all the bee viruses are 30 nm in size, an out-dated concept based on=20 IVDS technology. =20 Finally, although IVDS does not identify specific viruses, IVDS can be used= =20 in conjunction with sequencing and protenomic GC/MS data to put a name on=20 each virus detected by its size. Of course, if a detected virus is unknown= ,=20 that will take additional work. But if it has been characterized (sequence= d),=20 we can look for it with IVDS.=20 So, IVDS provides a way of looking at all viruses, regardless of whether th= ey =E2=80=99ve ever been seen before, and does so at a fraction of the cost an= d time of=20 more traditional approaches such as sequencing. In addition, the=20 instruments and sample processing equipment are small enough that they coul= d be put=20 into a van. We'd like to see transportable labs that could be driven to w= here=20 ever these are most needed (e.g., CCD outbreak, backup to a research projec= t=20 such as evaluating diets, meet imported bees at the dock, screen queens and= =20 bees for breeders, etc.).=20 Our proposal to USDA was that the initial screening would be provided to =20 beekeepers as a free service in exchange for samples and survey data from th= e =20 beekeepers themselves. Obviously, our ability to provide a free service =20 depends on on obtaining external funding. Funding is needed to acquire an =20 instrument for production scale testing, whether the funds come from USDA,=20= from=20 beekeepers, from growers, from foundations, or even public interest groups.= =20 If this is the direction that the beekeepers want to go, we could=20 immediately start providing services through Bee Alert and BVS using the IV= DS=20 technology, but we would need to charge for the services (in the absence of= any=20 external funds such as a grant from USDA). =20 Our services would provide a screening for all viruses in the samples and=20 would be coordinated with the national effort, when and if it ever happens= . =20 We think that virus screening is needed and overdue, but if we wait for=20 federal funding, we may very well be waiting a long time. Give us your fee= dback =20 and suggestions. We=E2=80=99d like to get started. Perhaps it is time for=20= a new=20 research arrangement =E2=80=93 one in which the bee industry plays a more di= rect role=20 in research, both in its direction and funding. We'd envision a close =20 partnership with the bee industry and the grower community, possibly as a r= esearch=20 consortium?=20 Thank you for your assistance.=20 Jerry J. Bromenshenk, CEO=20 Bee Alert Technology, Inc.=20 406-541-3160=20 Dave Wick, CEO=20 BVS, Inc. (Biological Virus Screening)=20 406-369-4214=20 Disclaimer: The opinions stated in this correspondence are those of the=20 stated authors. Although we work closely with the Army laboratory, we can=20= not=20 speak for them.=20 ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:00:28 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Stoops Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian Fredericksen wrote: Its sad that its now all about money, pollination and massive unsustainable monocrops. While a small number people represented by almond growers and migratory beeks benefit monetarily from this bizarre situation, the rest of American beekeepers are subject to the outcomes with no voice or no idea of what is happening. Who annointed these few people to make decisions affecting many of us? Who anointed.....? American entrepreneurship did. Why do we have so many illegal aliens? Money opportunities - American entrepreneurship. Don't complain about big business situations. Find your niche and go for it. I'm trying to get to 300 hives and my own distribution system so I can bypass the wholesale buyers. It's hard going but I'm not complaining. I have the means through "American Entrepreneurship", it's getting the muscle, time, effort behind it to get it going the way I envision. If I don't make it, it's my fault, not big business, nor the honey importer importing "cheap" foreign honey. I find my niche and fill it to the best of my ability. Mike in LA --------------------------------- Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 19:43:34 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: AND NOW? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > if Australia had had small hive beetles prior to the arrival of > small hive beetles in North America, and if small hive beetles > hadn't been any worse for Australian beekepers than they are for > South African beekeepers, would Australian imports still have > been approved? Strictly speaking, if the US was SHB-free, it could have refused to allow bee imports from the areas of Oz infested with SHB, but not from any area quarantined off from the SHB infested area. But do quarantines work? No, they never have, not with any invasive species or pest. So, it would have been a losing battle. The SHB would have spread, and forced an honest party to admit that SHB had spread across all of Oz. > How many hypothetical failures do we need to "realize," > so to speak, before we learn our lesson? To me these types of events are not hypothetical failures. They are real and tangible. But it is premature to think that "IAPV" is a failure of anything other than a research project where the wheels came off. It cannot be said for certain that IAPV was even found. Fragments of genes do not a virus make. Could be, but not for certain by any means. By the way, the paper, the supplement, the press conference audio, and play-by-play commentary and analysis are now in one place: http://bee-quick.com/reprints ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:27:29 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:00:28 -0700, Mike Stoops wrote: >Don't complain about big business situations. Find your niche and go for it. I'm trying to get to 300 hives and my own distribution system so I can bypass the wholesale buyers. I'm pretty much there with 300 hives and my own distribution. We rely heavily on Farmers markets too with the honey apples and candles. I get top dollar for my raw varietal honey. My beef is that this nonsense which has evolved with migratory pollination and huge monocrops threatens the livelihood of the rest of us. The system is becoming clearly not sustainable. I predict a never ending stream of hive crashes and bee shortages which has now become the norm. The fed's should not be bailing out or assisting this nonsustainable madness. Maybe some of the authors of the paper have a hidden agenda and beleive something similar? My experience in industry taught me that issues like this get resolved in an indirect way with policy changes. I sense a battle unfolding with common sense and sustainable farming on one side and greed and Industrial farming on the other. This battle is not confined to the pollination and almond arena either. People are getting sick and tired of a small number of Agri-business interests shaping the rural landscape and the environment. Descsions should be made that include all interests not exclude the small farmer who is trying to do something more sustainable. Look over in the EU and you find more thriving small producers that are embraced by their community or region as an important asset. We have this goofy notion over here that nobody counts in farming except the big guys and big Ag. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:34:36 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian Fredericksen wrote: >Its not how much money you make its how you make it that lives on. I have spent most of my working life around beekeepers, large scale and small. I have never taken sides with either group. There are good ones and bad ones in both categories. The large scale beekeepers are responsible for countless discoveries and innovations that benefit us all. Small timers too have come up with plenty of good ideas. It is very easy to picture the world as Them and Us. I suggest: Go a little further and picture the whole world as Us. -- Peter L. Borst Danby, NY USA 42.35, -76.50 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:46:59 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Steve_Noble?= Subject: Should we use IVDS for screening for IAPV and other viruses? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I think Dr Bromenshenk’s proposals for more and better screening for honeybee viruses across a broad geographical and operational range make a lot of sense. It’s obvious just from the discussion that happens on this list that the broader beekeeping community, including hobbyists like myself, big commercial operations and everyone in between could use more factual information to base their judgments on. In terms of understanding the relationship of viruses to the overall health of honeybees, a substantial database of highly cross referenced, screened samples, meticulously gathered and catalogued, could be of tremendous value. Such a program, if conducted consistently over a long period of time, would surely enable scientists to identify some of the most important patterns, relationships, and real and potential problems. I can however see a problem with getting beekeepers to pony up 50 bucks for a test, at least until it can be shown to them; a) that viruses in and of themselves pose a real threat to the overall health of colonies to the extent that they are the cause of something as attention getting as CCD, and b) that something can be done about it. So far as I can tell from my limited knowledge, viruses are almost always present in colonies and not necessarily very often to the detriment of colonies. Certainly a virulent strain could pop up anywhere, anytime. And if one of these viruses that are out there spreading like the common cold does turn nasty, what are you going to do about it. That is not a rhetorical question, by the way. You could have screened the Australian imports and found any number of viruses present. Since the bees appear healthy you might not be particularly alarmed because, what the heck, viruses are everywhere. Please correct me if I am wrong on this. Then a virus gets over here, mutates a base pair, or encounters a special set of circumstances, and all of a sudden it’s a different beast and you own it. Too late to blame the Aussies. My point is that to be of real value to beekeepers you have to solve the problem of shooting at a moving target when it comes to viruses, but first you have to show that viruses are a real problem, or in the case of CCD, THE problem. But I believe in science just for the sake of gaining knowledge, and I think more screening, if done right, is a good thing for this reason. We all stand to benefit from more knowledge. Steve Noble ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 05:09:56 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Honey Useful for Treating Wounds in Earthquake, War Zones MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Honey Useful for Treating Wounds in Earthquake, War Zones A Cheap Fix in a War Zone By Karen Dente, Los Angeles Times, 9/10/2007 http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/09/honey-useful-for-treating-wounds-in.html Honey is cheap, making it potentially useful for treating wounds in earthquake-stricken and war-torn areas where running water is scarce and often contaminated. It is being used in Iraq to treat burn wounds in children… ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:41:54 -0400 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: IAPV MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Randy told Bob: > No one has claimed that the virus alone is the killer. While getting between Randy and Bob on an issue is somewhat like finding yourself sitting between Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala on a cross-country flight, YES!!! they have claimed >>exactly<< that, in a paper published in the journal "Science". And don't claim that "we aren't reading the paper properly". The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) who publishes both the journal "Science" and "Science Magazine" published the following in "Science Magazine", which is their magazine for the layperson, which exists solely to explain things clearly and accurately to a non-technical audience in non-technical terms: "Science 7 September 2007: Puzzling Decline of U.S. Bees Linked to Virus From Australia Erik Stokstad Researchers report online in Science this week (www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1146498) that they have found an imported virus that may be associated with the sudden disappearance of honey bees in the United States, known as colony collapse disorder." Now, if the publishers of the Journal in which the paper was published, also the publishers that held the press conference about the paper, wrote the headline and the summary above, what can we expect from anyone else in the media? What can we expect any other reasonable person to conclude from the paper? "Science Magazine" did not say (nor did the authors of the paper say in the paper itself) that their were any other possible factors involved at all. Yes, these other factors were mentioned in the press conference, but, to my knowledge no one has picked up on those qualifiers. ('Cept us!) > Researchers are suggested that a combination of factors is necessary. Not in the paper! Not a word was mentioned about any "combination" of factors. In fact, the authors of the paper went out of their way to diss the work openly presented to the Working Group as a whole back in April, even though the actual results of the paper confirmed what has been said in April at the USDA Beltsville meeting. I was there, I remember exactly what was said, and so does my little digital recorder. > Perhaps you should take the time to read the paper. Well, I certainly took the time to read the paper, and I agree with the characterization to which you object. I'm not sure what the point was here, but I'm sure that anyone who reads the paper takes away the same impression that the press did, which is that the virus, because it has "strong correlation" to CCD, and nothing else is mentioned as being a factor, is the sole and proximate cause. Sure, the authors didn't come out and say it in so many words, but the paper was crafted to give the impression that the authors were merely being "modest". The pre-announcement of the paper by several of the authors, such as this "leak", to "Lancaster Farming": http://www.lancasterfarming.com/node/722 were even more clear in giving the impression that it was considered to be the "sole cause". Why else would they attempt to "simulate" CCD on healthy hives with only this one pathogen, if they thought that a "combination of factors" were necessary? The paper says what it says, and all the verbal equivocation and qualification in the world won't change a word of it. What we have here is the closest thing to "cold fusion" beekeeping has ever seen. An utterly bogus piece of work, defective on its face, and obvious to even the casual observer as such. It was an insult to us all, a blatant attempt to grandstand while we all waited for something akin to actual progress. Anyone who wants to protect their reputations should request that their name be removed from the paper, as was done with the Hwang Woo Suk paper in "Science" back in 2005. There's no fraud in this case, merely shoddy work, unable to support a single one of the claims made. (See http://bee-quick.com/reprints if you want to slog through the whole paper, the supplemental material and the press conference.) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:01:28 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Eric_Brown?= Subject: Re: AND NOW? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit What I meant to ask is whether we would have, prior to the arrival of SHBs in the US, recognized and considered SHBs enough of a problem to think to exclude them. In other words, if something is a very minor or non-issue in another country (IAPV in Australia, as another *hypothetical* example), are we going to even think or try to protect ourselves from such things? Are the costs of unknown, unanticipated problems factored into the cost- benefit analysis of importing bees from other parts of the world, or would that be considered unfair protectionism? In order to be "fair," must we turn a blind eye to the unknown risks we take by importing bees from other parts of the world? If so -- and I fear it's the case -- I think that's just really stupid. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 10:45:33 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Nick S Behrens Subject: Re: AND NOW? In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Wow, I helped start a small fire. And I think some people are going in the right and wrong direction from what I thought it would go. I agree with Eric, interstate commerce has issues. Good and Bad. But going back to the importation of bees from other countries, what is the true need for pollination (can anyone say (on/off list)) how many packages they need to fulfill pollination contracts? If you were *NOT* allowed to import honeybees in "pinches" what would the loss in pollination be? Millions, billions? Can US beekeepers provide enough pollinators period even? The point is, we need outside bees often to meet pollination needs for the US as well as exports. But the question associated with that is this, what is the economic, dare I say political, and dietary effect of not having sufficient pollination? Are the risks as a society (as a whole) worth it to import bees, even though you may not know their bagage? Are consumers willing to have *cheap* apples, almonds and so fourth for the next ten years, while people import random bees with random or unknown diseases and problems? These are questions we as beekeepers and US consumers need to start a discussion on, what is the societal costs associated with importing bees. I am not against importing bees, but know you have to assume the worst. Nick >****************************************************** >* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * >* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * >****************************************************** Nick Behrens Entomology Graduate Student Iowa State University ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:59:43 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD & IAPV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit good point as always Peter, clearly though the non commercial interests are never considered. they are treated as a joke. i beleive that 1000's of small beeks can provide regional markets with a high quality product and do it more profitably then selling honey in a drum. there is alot more positive for local benefits to consider in that scenario then large migratory operations. i do not beleive that our government should allow imports of bees, lets solve our problems internally and work towards a sustainable honeybee industry thats all inclusive. i hear nothing but band aid fixes being floated to address the migratory and pollination concerns. Does anyone else here beleive we owe a almond grower help if he over planted and has no plan for pollination? come on where is the self responsibility? if that indudstry is anything like our apple industry here its all about relationships. most growers here have relationships with beekeepers and consider that when they add acreage. over planting is not the nations problem. i don't think any children will be dying from starvation if CA almond production drops. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:34:15 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: AND NOW? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>If you were *NOT* allowed to import honeybees in "pinches" what would the loss in pollination be? Millions, billions? Can US beekeepers provide enough pollinators period even? I think there would be a tighter supply of bees for one or two years while beekeepers expanded their holdings to meet the pollination demand and earn some attractive pollination fees. [I might be tempted to quit my daytime job and go into beekeeping full time. :)] There is no real reason (only excuses) for a country like the US to be short on American bees, (cars, clothes, electronics, etc.). [It all takes responsible adult citizenry and visionary leadership.] Beekeeping used to be sustainable in the US and can still be sustainable if things are not done on the brink. I don't think there is anything wrong with occasional supplementation via imports but this should not be the regular practice. >>Are consumers willing to have *cheap* apples, almonds and so fourth for the next ten years, while people import random bees with random or unknown diseases and problems? If accounts don't get balanced on all levels, consumers will not be able to afford even the *cheap* apples, almonds etc. Why does everything have to be cheap, disposable, worthless and paid for with money most folks don't have? Is this the life we want? Where are our values? The baby boomers have lost it. >>These are questions we as beekeepers and US consumers need to start a discussion on, what is the societal costs associated with importing bees. Discussions and a change of course would be good but on what forum? As long as you have 40-50,000 lobbyists in Washington, the country will stay on a short-sighted, special interests' course. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:33:04 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: AND NOW? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Nick S Behrens wrote: > people import random bees with random or unknown diseases and problems I think that a lot of thought went into the decision to ease the import restriction against honey bees. Bees were imported only from Australia which has perhaps the most well-developed and healthiest bee industry in the world. Many other countries would also like to sell bees here; Chile and Argentina come to mind. We don't even know at this point where the Israeli virus came from, how long it has been here or what it even does. At this point there is no real reason to conclude that bees from Australia are anything but healthier than the bees in the USA. Officials met more than a month ago to discuss a study linking Australian bees to a die-off of bees in North America. Jeff Pettis: "The misconception is that we're in active discussion about closing the border to Australian packaged bees. We had begun to discuss what the paper said, that's it. We didn't go as far as to say that means we're moving towards a ban of Australian bees." I am personally surprised at the number of knee-jerk responses and counter-responses. Certainly, if one wishes to have an informed point of view on the current situation, one must first become informed and secondly develop an opinion. Not just spew out whatever pops into one's head. Pete ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:56:24 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: MRH Subject: Dancing bees emit scents MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Journal article--discovery that waggle dancing bees emit scents (not just the scent picked up from the flowers) to communicate with the other workers. http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0050249&ct=1 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:08:19 -0400 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Dancing bees emit scents MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, now the never-ending "Dance Versus Odor" discussion is going to get really complicated. Might I suggest some standardized terms to differ between which "odor" is which? 1) "Flower odor" 2) "Bee dance pheromone" Tedious arguments start in 5... 4... 3... ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:21:08 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Associated Press Wire Service Report: "Senator Wants to Stop Bee Imports" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Bob Casey, a member of the Senate Agriculture committee, has asked the Department of Agriculture to temporarily ban the importation of honeybees from Australia...." http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/09/11/ap4107018.html I'm putting this in the 'Whiskey Tango Foxtrot' category myself. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:01:33 +0200 Reply-To: olda.vancata@quicknet.se Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Olda Vancata Subject: Re: Dancing bees emit scents In-Reply-To: <000201c7f55f$84f73440$0201000a@j> > Well, now the never-ending "Dance Versus Odor" discussion > is going to get really complicated. Even people who dance emitate odor. :-) \vov ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:22:54 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: 'Dr Eva Crane' Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Eva Crane obituarie from 'The Independent' http://news.independent.co.uk/people/obituaries/article2961245.ece =====START====> Eva Crane Authority on the history of beekeeping and honey-hunting who travelled the world in pursuit of bees Published: 14 September 2007 Ethel Eva Widdowson, beekeeper, physicist and writer: born London 12 June 1912; Lecturer in Physics, Sheffield University 1941-43; Director, Bee Research Association (later the International Bee Research Association) 1949-84; OBE 1986; married 1942 James Crane (died 1978); died Slough, Berkshire 6 September 2007. The name of Eva Crane is synonymous the world over with bees and beekeeping. She was at once author, editor, archivist, research scientist and historian, and possibly the most travelled person in pursuit of bees that has ever lived. She was a noted authority on the history of beekeeping and honey-hunting, including archaeology and rock art in her studies. She founded one of the leading institutions of the beekeeping world, the International Bee Research Association (IBRA), and ran it herself until her 72nd year. And yet her academic background was not in apiculture or biology, but in nuclear physics. She possessed "an intellect that took no prisoners", said Richard Jones, her successor as director of the IBRA. Always precise, her maxim was "observe, check the facts, and always get your research right". Yet she was a modest person with a piercing curiosity. She insisted that she wasn't at all interesting; that it was the places she went to, and the people she met, that were. For that reason, though a clear, intelligent and most prolific writer, she never wrote a memoir. The nearest she came was a book of travel writings, Making a Bee-line (2003), written near the end of her long life. Crane has been compared with Dame Freya Stark in her willingness to travel to remote places, often alone and at an advanced age. Her aim was to share her beekeeping knowledge with farmers, voluntary bodies and governments, but, typically, she claimed to have learned far more than she taught. Between 1949 and 2000 she visited at least 60 countries by means as varied as dog-sled, dugout canoe and light aircraft. In a remote corner of Pakistan, she discovered that beekeeping was still practiced using the horizontal hives she had seen only in excavations of Ancient Greece. Another place that intrigued her was the Zagros mountains on the borders of Turkey, Iraq and Iran, where rich local traditions and an unusual variety of hives suggest that it was here that the age-old association of man and bees first began. She was born Eva Widdowson in 1912, the younger daughter of Thomas and Rose Widdowson. Her elder sister was Elsie Widdowson, who became a world- famous nutritionist. Eva was educated at Sydenham Secondary School in Kent, and won a scholarship to read mathematics at King's College London. A brilliant student, and one of only two women then reading mathematics at London University, she completed her degree in two years. An MSc in quantum mechanics soon followed, and she received her PhD in nuclear physics in 1938. An academic career at the cutting edge of quantum science seemed to beckon. Eva Widdowson took up the post of Lecturer in Physics at Sheffield University in 1941. The next year she married James Crane, a stockbroker then serving in the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve. Among their wedding presents was a working beehive. The idea had been for the couple to use the honey to eke out their wartime sugar ration, but Eva quickly became fascinated with bees and their ways. It led to a radically different and unexpected turning in her life, from the arcane study of particles and energy to the lively, buzzing world of the hive. She took out a subscription to Bee World and became an active member of the local beekeepers' association. Later she became secretary of the research committee of the British Beekeepers' Association (BBKA). However, convinced of the vast potential of beekeeping in the tropics, her outlook was international. In 1949 she founded the Bee Research Association, dedicated to "working to increase awareness of the vital role of bees in the environment". The charity was renamed the International Bee Research Association (IBRA) in 1976. The rest of Eva Crane's life was devoted to building the IBRA into a world centre of expertise on beekeeping. Based in her front room at Chalfont St Giles in Buckinghamshire until 1966, the association eventually found an office in the village and since 1985 has been based in Cardiff. Her work as an editor and archivist was prodigious. From its outset in 1962 until 1982 Crane edited the association's Journal of Apicultural Research. She also edited Bee World from 1949 until her retirement in 1984 (the two journals were united in 2006). Another major activity was compiling and publishing regular research abstracts, Apicultural Abstracts, which she also edited from 1950 to 1984. It is now one of the world's major databases on bee science. She assiduously collected and filed scientific papers, which eventually resulted in an archive of 60,000 works on apiculture. It includes a unique collection of 130 bee journals from around the world, including perhaps the only complete runs of some of them. The archive is now so large (and in need of professional management) that it is housed at the National Library of Wales at Aberystwyth. In support of the IBRA and its work, Crane also established the Eva Crane Trust. Its aim is to advance the science of apiology, and in particular the publication of books on the subject, and the promotion of apicultural libraries and museums of historical beekeeping artefacts throughout the world. Eva Crane was a prolific writer, with over 180 papers, articles and books to her name. Her broad-ranging and extremely learned books were mostly written in her seventies and eighties after her retirement in 1984 from the day-to-day running of the Association. A Book of Honey (1980) and The Archaeology of Beekeeping (1983) reflected her strong interests in nutrition and the ancient past of beekeeping. Her writing culminated in two mighty, encyclopaedic tomes, Bees and Beekeeping: science, practice and world resources (1990; at 614 pages) and The World History of Beekeeping and Honey Hunting (1999; 682 pages). These distilled a lifetime's knowledge and experience and are regarded as seminal textbooks throughout the beekeeping world. Peter Marren ======END=====> Best Wishes, Joe ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 19:45:13 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Erin Martin Subject: Honeybees and Climate discussion from WashPost MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi all-- This past Monday, Washington Post Online had a discussion about the relationship between honeybees and weather trends. I haven't investigated the claims here yet, but it might prove interesting nonetheless. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/09/07/DI2007090701749.html ____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ******************************************************