Povezave do NARAVNEGA ČEBELARJENJA

SUBTILNI ASPEKTI ČEBELARSTVA... nov pogled....
volk
PrispevkovCOLON 2074
PridruženCOLON Če Apr 10, 2008 2:18 pm
KrajCOLON Zemlja

OdgovorCOLON # 38694Odgovor volk
To Feb 02, 2010 12:06 pm

sem videl tisto raziskavo,naj jo en napopa tu
Narava je dekle lepotica,
Ko je voljna,
sama se preda,
ko jo posilis,
Ubiti te da!

cebelar_novinec
PrispevkovCOLON 1006
PridruženCOLON Če Jun 14, 2007 8:08 pm

OdgovorCOLON # 38695Odgovor cebelar_novinec
To Feb 02, 2010 12:13 pm

Pol maš še eno raziskavo :
Wilson, M. W.r, J. Skinnerr, & L. Chadwells –

MEASURING THE EFFECTS OF FOUNDATION ON HONEY BEE COLONIES: A SARE PRODUCER GRANT PROJECT -

Some beekeepers have proposed that 5.4mm foundation alters the biology of honey bees in a way that increases Varroa mite populations (Beesource.com). As a part of the idea, termed ‘natural cell beekeeping’, it is reported that bees build smaller cells when managed without foundation. To test this idea, beehives were managed with starter strips by turning the wedge of a ‘wedge top’ frame on its side and applying a bead of wax.

In 2007, ten colonies were started from splits of natural cell colonies. Five control colonies used standard wax foundation and five natural cell colonies used wooden starter strips. In 2008, these ten colonies were observed another year, while ten new colonies were made from splits. Five control and natural cell colonies were split from their respective groups. The ten group 2007 hives and ten group 2008 hives were allowed to build up to 3 medium boxes. When applicable, honey supers were provided above a queen excluder with drawn comb and foundation.

Mite populations were recorded as 24hr natural mite fall averaged over 3 days. During colonies’ first year, mite levels did not significantly differ. However, during the second year of group 2007 colonies, mite levels were significantly lower in natural cell hives (60 ± 11, mean ± s.e.) than in control hives (114 ± 22; P = 0.0004). Despite these lower numbers, hives in both groups surpassed economic thresholds and experienced colony death.

The reason for the lower mite levels appears unrelated to worker cell size. Control colonies had a worker cell size of 5.3mm ± .004 (mean ± s.e., n = 493) while natural cell colonies had a worker cell size of 5.4mm ± .008 (n = 381, P ? 0.0001). Cells of natural cell colonies did not decrease in size between 2 years (2007) and 3 years (2008) of management without foundation.

The average strength of group 2007 colonies did not significantly differ when measuring the rate of comb building in spring 2007, the hive weight in summer 2007, and the area of bees, brood, pollen and honey in the brood chambers during spring, summer, and fall 2008. However, there was significantly more surplus honey produced by control colonies (25.4 frames ± 3.9, mean ± s.e.) over natural cell colonies (5.4 frames ± 3.5; P = 0.0052).

This difference may be related to the greater amount of drone comb produced by natural cell colonies (33% ± 3.5%, mean ± s.e.) as opposed to control colonies (1% ± 0.2; P ? 0.0001). Plentiful drone production was evident in the second year of group 2007 natural cell colonies, as opposed to controls.

Timijan
PrispevkovCOLON 868
PridruženCOLON Po Okt 20, 2008 9:13 pm
KrajCOLON BELA KRAJINA

OdgovorCOLON # 38696Odgovor Timijan
To Feb 02, 2010 1:29 pm

Pike, kar se mene tiče, in tako pišem že eno leto tukaj in drugod in bom še tudi naprej, ne obstajajo samo čebelarji, kot ne obstajajo le avtomobili, ampak tudi znamke in tipi, kot ne obstajajo le čebele, ampak tudi vrste čebel in kot ne obstajajo le ljudje, ampak tudi nacije. Pri čebelarjih pa je takole, tako to jaz vidim, ti pa le daj drugače:

- Profiji (preko morda 80, 100, 200, 1000 panjev, prevozi, rezanje kril maticam, velika prodaja medu, od česar je kar precej zaslužka ...).

- Industrijski čebelarji (satnice, pretirano jemanje medu, preprečevanje rojenja vedno in povsod, industrijski panji, kemija, kisline ...) Ti čebelarji (vsi mi razen Čebelar novinec) s čebelami delajo podobno ali enako kot profiji, le v manjšem obsegu.

- Naravni čebelarji (naravno satje, brez kemije, večkrat kot ne primitivni panji = Nova pot prihodnosti),

- Tisti nekje vmes (bio, eko, organični, a še uporabljajo kisline in morda satnice ...).

Tako to vidim, tudi mnogi drugi, ni pa nujno, da se strinjaš s tem. Smešno pa je, da bi se nekdo, ki dela po industrijskih principih, panje nataplja z kislinami, smatral za naravnega čebelarja, ker to ni. Niti njegovi pridelki niso.

Lep dan vsem, t

Timijan
PrispevkovCOLON 868
PridruženCOLON Po Okt 20, 2008 9:13 pm
KrajCOLON BELA KRAJINA

OdgovorCOLON # 38697Odgovor Timijan
To Feb 02, 2010 1:53 pm

Iskanje novih frankensteinov?

Volk, le kdo komu kaj pridiga? Tu le zbiramo podatke o uspehih naravnih čebelarjev, o preživelih družinah na naravnem satju v naravi, sam delam TBH panje in koše za naslednje sezone, z eteričnimi olji sem izvedel precej poučne poskuse, ki se bodo nadaljevali s čebelami na naravnem satju i boš o njih še dosti slišal (a timol je pa zobna pasta?), v Sloveniji pa je najmanj eden že kar precej dokazal, pa ga hočete po vsej sili sesuti, so pa še drugi, ki so prestrašeno tiho. V naši soseščini slišim že za par ljudi, ki ne uporabljajo več kislin, dobro si preberi tudi Brndušičevo stran, katere linke sem parkrat dal zgoraj. Če ne prebereš, blefiraš.

Gre se za to, da nekateri iščemo nekaj, nad čemer ste večina že obupali. In smo našli, dokazi bodo v naslednih letih kar deževali. Kar je za vas nemogoče, je za Čebelo mogoče, seveda, če začnemo z njo delati malo drugače. Ali si prepričan, da je vse, kar počneš in še druge navajaš na to, tam v daljnih deželah, res pametno, smiselno, mogoče, naravno? Si prepričan, da se tvoja karma s tem čisti? Saj veš, kaj je karma, tam ni skoraj nikogar, da ne ve tega. Praviš, da mora vse znanost preskusiti, a negiraš (pametno) kar čebelja znanost govori danes, oziroma želiš neke stvari izboljšati. Si prepričan, da bo Alpska Kranjica v tropih dobro živela? Če ne bo, tudi ti ne boš. Si prepričan, da nositi matice po svetu in delati poskuse ni prepričevanje drugih v nekaj, o čemer še sam nimaš jasnega pojma, kaj bo izpadlo? Saj vendar rabiš nekoga v projekte spraviti, da dobiš pomoč, kaj pa lahko en sam človek naredi? Veš kaj, kar ti v globalu počneš je veliko večje neznanje, kot to, kar tukaj pišemo o naravnem satju, oziroma je veliko manj dokazano in preskušeno. In zapomni si, prihodnost bo jasno pokazala, kdo ima prav: naravno satje in primernejše delo s Čebelo, ali to, s čimer se ti nevarno igraš.

Vseeno pa cenim tvoje znanje in izkušnje, zelo. Le žal mi je, da gredo v napačno smer. Zelo. Take care, t

FRANK IZ KANADE
PrispevkovCOLON 1484
PridruženCOLON Pe Apr 23, 2004 11:18 pm
KrajCOLON Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

Re: "Klein aber nicht fein"

OdgovorCOLON # 38703Odgovor FRANK IZ KANADE
To Feb 02, 2010 6:35 pm

Hello Ivan !

Jaz bi tukaj samo malo razjasnil da, ce me moj spomin ne vara, nisem nikoli, pri trezni in zdravi pameti, nikomur svetoval da je zadeva z varojo resena samo z uporabo malih celic!
Tu je se veliko stvari katere je treba poslihtati preden se resite varoje in ena najvecjih napak ki se pocenja so pa prav industrijske satne osnove.

Zakaj pa si mislite da prav iz Afrike ze nekaj let uvazajo cisti vosek in da se ze zelooo dolgo prodaja valje in tudi kompleksne stroje za izdelavo SC satnih osnov?

Ve se kaksen drek je u vosku in je tudi u lesu panjev! Osebno, jaz sem vse pokuril in naselim moje druzine u nove in ciste panje. Ne more se ziveti u hisi ki je z vsemogocimi strupi prepojena? Tako je pac z nami, ljudmi - in ni nic drugace z zivalmi.
Ko pa je vse reseno - potem pa se mora tudi doziranje, pobijanje varoje in cebel, prenehati.
Cebele se ne bodo, se ne morejo, se ne znajo same varoje iznebiti, ce jih ze desetletja treniramo da zavisijo na naso vsemogocno roko z katero jim zadeve resujemo.
Treba jim je dati zadovoljiv in cist dom, ter jim dati sans da se spet same sebe rihtajo, tako kot se spodobi in tako kot so se, preden smo jih zaceli zalivati z kislinamo ali pa jih dimili.
(oprostite pa ce se nepravilno izrazam, saj jaz nimam nobenih izkusenj pri takem poseganju u cebelje druzine.)

To je pa bosa Ivan, tisti ki se z nami ne strinjate ne morete priti do besede?
Heee, pa se kako glasni ste! Saj prav obratno bi lahko bilo res, mar ne?
Ja, "bullshit' je tako thick da bi se ga zlahka dalo rezati da bi se brebilo do resnice. . .
Tukaj se nekako takole pravi: "It's eazy to do the talk, but not many are able to do the walk!"
Prevod:
Je lahko govoriti, toda malotezje pa je hoditi? Ali pa: Vsakdo lahko klepeta ni jih pa dosti ki so zmozni da to actualno prehodijo?
(neke pomembne reci se vcasi izgubijo u prevodu?)

Tele nemske raziskave so Ti pa res zelo pri srcu Ivan, kako to? Jaz se jih se ogledal ne bi, saj norci se ne zmorejo navesti resnico o stevilu ameriskih cebelarjev?
Nimajo pojma koliko cebeljih druzin je u ZDA?
Madonca, da privlecejo 5 milijonov druzin na polinacijo u Kalifornijo?
Kdo pa polinira vse drugo u drugih 49 drzavah amerike?
Pa saj u ZDA je od leta 2006 samo okrog 2.5 - dva in pol milijona cebeljih druzin?
Kaj ne vidis Ivan, da so tukaj kar 100% usekali mimo?
So lagali u dejstvih katere vsak tukajsnji otrok ve ali pa si jih vsaj zna poiskati, preden bi kaj tako neumnega u javnost dal.
To pa se u svetovno javnost?
Saj se vidi da je ta usrana nemska raziskava posnemana in vzeta kot nekasno Sveto pismo?
Tudi ta raziskava ki je bila pred nekaj letih tukaj narejena je tukajle veliko kritizirana tudi iz strani industrijcev saj tako pocetje meclje slabo lic tudi na raziskave ki so lahko merodajne. Tale raziskava tukaj ne drzi nobene vode in zakaj bi se ji pa prav nemci tako priljubili.
Pa se svoje - francoske, spanske, italijanskih - izogibajo kot Hudic kriza?
Mar se vam doma vsaj malo ne posveti da je verjetno tukajle nekaj narobe?
Madonca Ivan, kaj si mislis da so pa z raziskavo samo popacili ko ze ne znajo dobiti preprostih podatkov kot so: stevilo cebelarjev, stevilo druzin u USA in tudi stevilo druzin potrebnih za poliniranje mandeljnov?

To je tudi malo grdo in preceej pod popek udarjeno: Da u ZDA nimajo nobenih predpisov glede cebelarjev, cebelarstva in medu. Si drznejo celo rect da bi se ameriski med u EU zavrnilo ker ni cist?
Pa se to: da tukaj smo nekaki neizsolani, nepismeni bedaki ki se moramo sami zase po kanalih brskati da si kaj izvemo.
Ivan, tukaj se lahko na vseh univerzah studira cebelarstvo, apiterapijo in kaj se ne... Celo vasi profesorji in doktorji iz univerzitet prihajajo sem da si pod pas nabasejo doktorate katerih se pri vas ne da dobiti.
Mar ne poznas dr. Janka Bozica, Ivan? On je prisel prav u ZDA na njegovo studiranje. Zadnji krat si je celo celo druzino sabo privlekel.
Zakaj????

To o nasem usranem medu?
Ne ga srat, saj prav nemcija uvaza najvec ameriskega medu. Tukaj se se zdalec ne pridela dovolj medu da bi se zadovoljilo potrebo za izvoz!
Imate in prodajate pa Kitajskega Indijskega in Argentinskega - za katere cel svet ve da vsebujejo vse mogoce snovi najmanj pa medu - kar ta rec ki jo vasi kupci po stacunh kupujejo.
(Sem tudi bral u Delu da se celo doma malo med ponarejuje? Kj ga, delajo iz cukra? Sirupa?
Ja, pol pa se greste kamenje metat u stekleni hisi?
Kako to Ivan da se to pri vas u EU dogaja ze precej casa, tukaj pa, kjer nimamo nobenih pravil in se cebelarji morajo samega sebe kaj nauciti in se sami zase brigati, ker NIMAMO NOBENIH PRAVIL - ZAKONOV - tukaj se pa tak med ne uvaza, se manj se ga pa prodaja!

Ne boj se Ivan, jaz bom osebno obvestil amerikance kaj se pri vas skozi blato vlece? Ce bo komu kaj mar u ZDA, bodo pa verjetno tele nemske raziskovalce malo obelodanili da ne bodo vse zivljenje po temi zgubljeno in neumno tavali.
Jaz nisem noben raziskovalec, niti nisem prevec brihten, me pa bega da bi nekdo, ki se ima tako brihtnega, bil u taki temi da se foundamentalnih osnov ne ve? Potem pa naj komu soli pamet?

Tako Ivan, upam da nisi tole vzel kot kaksno osebno napadanje?
(si to tako videl vceraj?) Sem si samo vzel malo casa da Ti - tipke do tipke - povem za kaj se gre? Tako da ne bos kaj dobil "iz druge roke" ker take informacije so veckrat kot ne "malo dvomljive" najveckrat pa niso fer.

Tako Ivan, upam da se ne bova sedaj gledal navskriz? Jaz nimam nic proti tebi osebno. celo imam mnenje da si fejst mozakar samo si pa malo trmast in noces izpustiti iz rok to kar si zmotoma zagrabil. Ni pa se vse izgubljeno, saj jaz z veseljem opazam da kljub vsem kar se tukaj ali pa drugje dogaja, cebelarji se vseeno zavedajo da jim in njihovim cebelam nekaj zadnje case zelo fali!? Stvari se pa premikajo u tapravo smer saj tudi slepa koklja dnevno dovolj zrn najde za prezivljanje in ni hudi da nebi uspelo tudi vam?!

Tole je samo obrazlozitev nekaj osnovnih tock, tako da bodo vsaj tisti ki niso prevec oslepljeni videli da je vse skupaj malo zgreseno, morda celo nekaksen blef.
Najpreje sem si celo mislil da je to Davca nastimala? Sedaj pa imam SC in sem na svoje oci videl in se ji opravicujem ce sem kaj "grdega" imel u mislih.

Zakaj pa se to dela?
Jaz nimam odgovora na to vprasanje.
To pa vedo samo vasi, EU politiki in zafrknjeni ptici ki so u tole rec ukljuceni. Menda imajo neko svojo agendo? Saj za poznavalce svetovnih zadev u cebelarstvu - posebno nemskih, mislim da tudi EU - vsi niso tako slepi da nebi videli da je na svetu ze na tisoce, na desettisoce cebelarjev z okrog enim milijonom cebeljih druzin, u ameriki alone, ki niso ze par desetletij nic - niti enkrat svoje cebele tretirali/zdravili!
Skoraj vsi niti ne uporabljajo sladkorja, ker tudi to ni za cebele zdravo. Med in pelod je njihova hrana in mi jim pa tudi vse to ozvzemamo in jim silimo to kar jim ne pase.
Kot sem ze veckrat rekel da ta kateri hoce to res videti to lahko, brez skrbi...
Tako da Ivan, ni Ti treba po nobenih drevesih ali pa mostovih plezati. Je tam ta juznjak ki te divje druzine stalno opazuje in si vse belezi. Je samo treba njega poklicati, poslati e-posto ali ga celo obiskati in o marsicem bi se dalo pokramljati in se tudi kaksno rec nauciti. Saj pozna leta ne smejo biti nikomur u breme ali pa zapreka preko katere nebi mogel stopiti in se kaj novega naucil.
Prepreke so u vecini slucajev samo mentalne in ne fizicne. . . .
Celo ce se malo pogugla, ti/vam tale kista vrze pred nos toliko strani da jih clovek ne more odpreti vse, ce bi zivel za par sto let - kaj sele da bi jih prebral?

No, pa bom sedaj prenehal z tole zadeevo, saj ce se gremo kosat, pa tukaj res nikoli ne bo nobenega konca?

Pa lep dan Ti zelim Ivan. Enako tudi vsem ostalim.
Regards,
Frank

Timijan
PrispevkovCOLON 868
PridruženCOLON Po Okt 20, 2008 9:13 pm
KrajCOLON BELA KRAJINA

OdgovorCOLON # 38705Odgovor Timijan
To Feb 02, 2010 7:16 pm

Hvala Frank, v imenu vseh, za tole krasno sporočilo. Le kaj bi mi vedeli o teh stvareh po svetu in onega konca luže, brez tebe? Manj kot pol ali še manj. Najbolj pa me veseli tole:
Saj za poznavalce svetovnih zadev u cebelarstvu - posebno nemskih, mislim da tudi EU - vsi niso tako slepi da nebi videli da je na svetu ze na tisoce, na desettisoce cebelarjev z okrog enim milijonom cebeljih druzin, u ameriki alone, ki niso ze par desetletij nic - niti enkrat svoje cebele tretirali/zdravili!
Ko bom tole videl še v Sloveniji, v vsaki vasi vsaj po enega, potem bo v Sloveniji spet raj pod soncem.

Best regards, pozdrav vsem, t

Uporabniški avatar
Kočevski med-ved
PrispevkovCOLON 3212
PridruženCOLON Pe Apr 02, 2004 9:18 pm
KrajCOLON KOCEVJE - KOSTEL
CONTACTCOLON

OdgovorCOLON # 38707Odgovor Kočevski med-ved
To Feb 02, 2010 8:49 pm

Saj za poznavalce svetovnih zadev u cebelarstvu - posebno nemskih, mislim da tudi EU - vsi niso tako slepi da nebi videli da je na svetu ze na tisoce, na desettisoce cebelarjev z okrog enim milijonom cebeljih druzin, u ameriki alone, ki niso ze par desetletij nic - niti enkrat svoje cebele tretirali/zdravili!

Mislim, da v Sloveniji ni čebelarja, kateri si ne bi želel takega čebelarjenja.
In takrat bo res raj po slovenskih vaseh.
Lp
LP
Koèevski med-ved

Fizikalec
PrispevkovCOLON 6493
PridruženCOLON To Feb 03, 2004 9:35 pm

OdgovorCOLON # 38708Odgovor Fizikalec
To Feb 02, 2010 8:51 pm

Ja samo noben od naju tega ne bo doživel sma že oba mal v letih Branko :shock: :D :D :D

Uporabniški avatar
Kočevski med-ved
PrispevkovCOLON 3212
PridruženCOLON Pe Apr 02, 2004 9:18 pm
KrajCOLON KOCEVJE - KOSTEL
CONTACTCOLON

OdgovorCOLON # 38709Odgovor Kočevski med-ved
To Feb 02, 2010 9:09 pm

Fizikalec napisal/-aCOLONJa samo noben od naju tega ne bo doživel sma že oba mal v letih Branko :shock: :D :D :D
Danilo, posebno jaz. A veš, da nisem na to pomislil....pismo, ej... :shock: :lol: :lol:
Lep pozdrav vsem
LP
Koèevski med-ved

volk
PrispevkovCOLON 2074
PridruženCOLON Če Apr 10, 2008 2:18 pm
KrajCOLON Zemlja

OdgovorCOLON # 38712Odgovor volk
To Feb 02, 2010 9:45 pm

:Hrana
Narava je dekle lepotica,
Ko je voljna,
sama se preda,
ko jo posilis,
Ubiti te da!

Timijan
PrispevkovCOLON 868
PridruženCOLON Po Okt 20, 2008 9:13 pm
KrajCOLON BELA KRAJINA

OdgovorCOLON # 38728Odgovor Timijan
Sr Feb 03, 2010 9:22 am

Upajmo fantje, upanje umre zadnje, so rekli Stari. Kaj pa nam drugega preostane; da upamo in poskušamo? Zdajšnja znanost me spravlja v žalost :smesno .

Raje imam tisto: Sanjaj svinjo o koruzi. Ali pa: Nikoli ni prepozno.

Lep dan, t

imker
PrispevkovCOLON 580
PridruženCOLON Ne Dec 05, 2004 5:12 pm
KrajCOLON Ljubljana
CONTACTCOLON

OdgovorCOLON # 38736Odgovor imker
Sr Feb 03, 2010 10:35 am

[quote=.

g. Jurkovič, jaz pa sem vas tudi osebno že kontaktiral in se podpisal z imenom in priimkom in to DVAKRAT. Prvič Čet Sep 06, 2007 8:58 pm in drugič Sre Sep 19, 2007 2:37 pm
Niste mi pa odgovorili seveda na niti eno privatno sporočilo. No hvala bogu, da se mi takrat pač niste oglasili, mogoče bi pristal na GJ panjih in satnicah ter vašem izumu za pozimi, kar pa bi bilo zelo slabo za moje čebelarstvo in čebele.
Kar poglejte si sporočila za nazaj. Imate točen datum in uro in moje ime in priimek v teh sporočilih. Malo vas pozabljivost daje izgleda.... ;) Toliko o vaših trditvah, da se kdo ne predstavi....[/quote]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ne vem kdo je bolj pozablčjiv, vi ali jaz.....res ste me kontaktirali! Toda kam naj bi vam poslal načrt GJ panja, če je bil vaš naslov samo :ebelar_novinec? Naslov ste pozabili napisati! Ce bi napisali vsaj se poštno številko, bi morda prišlo! Evodijo sem poslal vsem, ki so mi poslali naslove! Za eno kuverto je še semena. Če napišem "čebelar_novinec, bo prišlo?

davca
PrispevkovCOLON 550
PridruženCOLON To Okt 16, 2007 6:13 pm
KrajCOLON Ljubljana

OdgovorCOLON # 38738Odgovor davca
Sr Feb 03, 2010 10:54 am

Tudi meni se GJ panji ne obnesejo. Naklade so pretežke in delo z njimi lahko opravljam le kot v AŽ panjih - s posameznimi sati. :(
Visoka podnica ne odtehta vsega drugega, kar je zame slabo (uporabljati moram matično rešetko, sicer se od donosa medu lahko kar poslovim; posledično čebele preveč rojijo)
Najbrž ta panj ni primeren za kraje, kjer ni zelo intenzivnih paš, npr. akacija.
Unus pro omnibus et omnes pro uno - Eden za vse in vsi za enega

Fizikalec
PrispevkovCOLON 6493
PridruženCOLON To Feb 03, 2004 9:35 pm

OdgovorCOLON # 38752Odgovor Fizikalec
Sr Feb 03, 2010 4:44 pm

Saj medu je v panju zmeraj enako, če je matična ali je ni, če ni matične pač treba med po panju "iskat" kar pa ni za vsakogar opravilo oziroma se vsak v tem ne znajde. Meni osebno bi volja minila, da to basam sem pa tja zato je matična rešetka zmeraj boljša rešitev.

Fizikalec
PrispevkovCOLON 6493
PridruženCOLON To Feb 03, 2004 9:35 pm

OdgovorCOLON # 38753Odgovor Fizikalec
Sr Feb 03, 2010 4:49 pm

Timijan napisal/-aCOLONUpajmo fantje, upanje umre zadnje, so rekli Stari. Kaj pa nam drugega preostane; da upamo in poskušamo? Zdajšnja znanost me spravlja v žalost :smesno .

Raje imam tisto: Sanjaj svinjo o koruzi. Ali pa: Nikoli ni prepozno.
Se čisto strinjam z tabo problem je samo, da počneš točno tisto kar nam enim očitaš-uničuješ čebele, sesuvaš njihov sistem in jih skušaš preobračat, da bi delale tako kot bi TI hotel.
Na žalost ne bo šlo (en del bo) vse pa ne še nikomur ni uspelo pa tudi tebi ne bo čeprav bi bil zelo vesel, da bi ti. Verjetno bi obogatel kot nekdo, ki bi izumil kaj za lase zrast, kopal bi se v denarju.

Moje mnenje je, da je povsem nesmiselno odkrivat toplo vodo, pipo obrneš proti rdečemu in teče :wink:

davca
PrispevkovCOLON 550
PridruženCOLON To Okt 16, 2007 6:13 pm
KrajCOLON Ljubljana

OdgovorCOLON # 38762Odgovor davca
Sr Feb 03, 2010 6:34 pm

Fizikalec napisal/-aCOLONSaj medu je v panju zmeraj enako, če je matična ali je ni, če ni matične pač treba med po panju "iskat" kar pa ni za vsakogar opravilo oziroma se vsak v tem ne znajde. Meni osebno bi volja minila, da to basam sem pa tja zato je matična rešetka zmeraj boljša rešitev.
Res je tako. A ti panji, pa še z matično rešetko, so bolj za močne možakarje in ne za "švohne" čebelarke. :(
V zgornjem postu sem hotela povedati, da niti medu nisem sposobna iz teh panjev spraviti, kaj šele čebelariti.
Unus pro omnibus et omnes pro uno - Eden za vse in vsi za enega

Fizikalec
PrispevkovCOLON 6493
PridruženCOLON To Feb 03, 2004 9:35 pm

OdgovorCOLON # 38765Odgovor Fizikalec
Sr Feb 03, 2010 6:41 pm

Ja sej vem je že 2/3 LR naklado dvignit več kot preveč, če jih treba ene 200 ali več dvignit. AŽ satnik pa za to sploh ni primeren mrbit kot plodišče medišče bi moralo imati niski satnik kr je spet en kup krame pa delaaaa...

imker
PrispevkovCOLON 580
PridruženCOLON Ne Dec 05, 2004 5:12 pm
KrajCOLON Ljubljana
CONTACTCOLON

OdgovorCOLON # 38776Odgovor imker
Če Feb 04, 2010 12:25 am

...meni (pri 80.) pa začne srce hitreje biti šele,ko se začne tehtnica dvigati nad 80-do takrat mi je vse pretežko in ko se teža GJ panjev v 4 nakl. pokaže 140kg, mi ni nič več težko...bi gore prevračal !
l.p.

FRANK IZ KANADE
PrispevkovCOLON 1484
PridruženCOLON Pe Apr 23, 2004 11:18 pm
KrajCOLON Sudbury, Ontario, Canada

OdgovorCOLON # 38777Odgovor FRANK IZ KANADE
Če Feb 04, 2010 4:03 am

Tukajle je en koment na raziskavo g. J. Berry o kateri smo pred par dnevih debatirali. To je od Erik Osterland-a iz Svedske. . .





You asked for a comment to Jennifer Berry's article on small cell i Bee Culture Nov-09 issue. I have read it now, as well as the tests behind it. The comments below is a little bit lenghty, but hope you get something out of them. And you other readers too of course.

Erik
------
Response to J Berry on small cells:

In the November issue of Bee Culture 2009 there is an article by Jennifer Berry with the message that there is no value in small cell size as a tool against Varroa mites.
As I live in Sweden and mail is taking extra long time during Christmas I got my Nov issue of Bee Culture late in December. (The new option of subscribing on a digital copy of the magazine is really great!)

I read the article of Jennifer Berry about three investigations of small cell
size (SC) effect on varroa population build up during a short period of time,
half a year to a year. The end of the article is highlighted. She there clearly
gives the message that her article is kind of the final word, through
unforgiving objectivity of the scientific method, demolishing and ship-wrecking the idea that small cell size foundation, which is an arm-chair science presupposition, will reduce Varroa mites.

I strongly defend her right to have and to argue for this opinion. But mine is closer to the opposite.

All three tests described in her article were not focused on colony survival,
but on development of the varroapopulation during a relatively short time. This is of some interest of course. But the results from all of these three tests give in no way ground for the bold statement at the end of the article. This statement gives the impression that the tests show that small cell size gives no advantage in the fight against varroa, BUT, that is not the conclusion in any of the tests. They only talk about varroa population build up during a restricted period of time. There are more factors to colony survival than mite population build-up during circumstances that is not a natural situation for the bee colony, or rather a natural situation for a population of bee colonies.

The first test described is her own, published in different journals. She began the test with bees from a beekeeper succesfully keeping bees on 4.9 mm cell size without using treatments. That is note-worthy. She kept the test (SC) and control colonies (LC=large cell) in the same yard. The resulting mite population was too small to give any real figurers able to show reliable eventual differences in varroa population growth. This test is comparable with the first year result presented in a small cell size test by Prof Fries in Sweden (see the small upper left part of graph showed in the jpg-file on this url:http://alturl.com/d5f8 – The urls given here are made short through the help of www.shorturl.com ) It's in the file section of Organicbeekeepers discussion group on Yahoo , named Two cellsize tests.jpg.

ONE THING that is never talked about in any of these (and other) tests is which precautions were taken to avoid drifting and robbing during taking the measures to get all these figures in tables and graphs! I know through experience (when nectar flow is low) that if these kind of thorough lifting up of combs and measures taken in a yard is done continously during more than half an hour, it doesn't take long before you have a robbing going on, which makes any measures of mites more or less worthless. And once the bees have learned this, the next day (if nectar flow is low) the bees come even quicker in a robbing mode.

ALSO, we don't know anything about the chemical residues in the wax combs.
Recent tests of wax in combs have shown alarmingly high quantities in brood nest combs. We know too little about the effect of this on the immune system and defense system in the bee colony. We do know that a test made by Randy Oliver with HSC (fully drawn plastic small cell combs), which have no such residues, gave a much lower varroa buildup than large cell size bees did. See the lower graph on the above mentioned url: http://alturl.com/d5f8

The second test (by Ellis/Hayes/Ellis) described can be found through this link:http://alturl.com/7abz It is the best designed scientific test I've seen so far on this subject that have negative conclusions against small cells. The test had the major fault of being performed during too short a time too. Why should modern scientific tests almost always just run one season at the most?

Was enough precaution made to avoid robbing and thus averaging out the mite populations? We don't know that. The test and control apiaries were located 700m from each other (quite good), but during a period without flow, which they had, and if you work through the apiary measureing all these figures in one colony after the other till all are done, then enough stirring up is made to make 700 m no hindrance at all to cross for robbers.

And what about chemical residues in the waxfoundation used? We know nothing about that.

They say mite load was big. At the end of the test it was about 3000 in total. Maybe today with more viruses in the mites this is big. Ten years ago and more it wasn't a big load, especially when mites first arrived to a location. Then 10-20,000 was a big mite load.

ONE resistance factor not taken in account is virus resistance with the bees.
This is a very important factor for the bee colony to be able to survive a high virus- and miteload during an initial time of mite infestation when the most susceptible colonies in a population of colonies will die. Before they die they spread a lot of mites and viruses to neighbour colonies, which then have to be able to survive this until natural selection has gone through its first steps.
Today we know there is a difference in virusresistance among individual bees. This is neccessary for selection to be possible. At least one reason for this resistance is the existence of peptides. These are short chains of amino acids.
Proteins are also chains of amino acids, but longer, containing more than 50 amino acids.

THE OTHER important resistance factor was already presented as probable in 1996 by Remy Vandame in his doctorate thesis "The Importance of Hybridization in Host-Parasite Tolerance" (translation of the title from French by Malcolm T. Sanford). A graph is included in it showing the varroa population dynamics in susceptible EHB and tolerant (resistant) AHB colonies. (AHB:s live normally on small cell size.) The AHB phoretic mites (mites on the bodies of bees) being stable in number with about 500 during a year, while mites in brood varies a lot with a maximum of about 2500. (In total at most about 3000 mites in a colony then, this being about the same as the end population in the test of Ellis, Hayes and Ellis, so their test was too short for testing suvivability.) The Vandame thesis tells us the bees in AHB-colonies must have been doing something
about the mites in the brood before it emerged, or soon after. The AHB:s were most probably what we today call VHS bees, which identify brood with mites and disturb the mite reproduction through opening the brood capping and maybe also clean out the puppea.

The Ellis2/Hayes test talks about total amount of mites. But that is not totally fair, as the final bee population differed in the groups, being almost the double in the SC-group. Almost certain due to more compact brood nest because of smaller cell size. The varroa population in relation to bee population is a much more relevant figure. At the end of the test mites on adault bees were 35% lower in SC-colonies (about 9% and about 14% respectively). Mites in brood were 23% lower (13% and 17% respectively). There is then a tendency for a similar situation as in the thesis of Vandame, thus a probable occurance of more VHS in SC, which then would mean SC stimulates VHS. But to make such a conclusion this test is not enough.

Actually, if survivabilitty is interesting, a test for virusresistance when
selecting varroaresistance would be most valuable. I myself work with
observations on the occurence of (or abscence of) bees with crippled wings,
being a sign of DWV-virus, probably the most devastating of varroa related
viruses. None of these two tests described here have ben going on long enough to observe DWV-bees(?).

The third test is originally a report to the beekeeper association in New
Zealand from HortResearch by M.A. Taylor and R.M. Goowin in 2001, recently published in IBRA publications. It is not a research done 2008, but 2001. It's easily understood through correspondingly exact number of data points, 1636, in both publications. The original report, a pdf-file, can be found through this url: http://alturl.com/7uyx
It's enough to quote from the introduction in the test report: "Ten nucleus colonies were established with mosaic frames containing five different cell sizes and sister queens." – LC-bees drew out all sizes in the same colony, no wonder the resulting combs looked so miserable.
"Because the smaller sized cells were drawn out unevenly, with the base of the cell sometimes larger than the top, the trial should be repeated using 4.8 mm foundation that has been drawn out in hives that have undergone a step-down process from the standard 5.4 mm sized cells." – The authors here stating that if another test were to be made it should be made with 4.8 mm foundation correctly drawn and tested in a colony of 4.8-bees.

Why make the test situations so unnatural. Why not make an apiary with SC-bees and another one two miles away with LC-bees and run them separately for survival, taking out the loosers before they infest the other colonies too much.
Keep the number by making splits of the best ones and let these make their own queen which mate in the apiary. The apiaries then being placed in as remote an area as possible.
Regards,
Frank

BUTTON_POST_REPLY

Vrni se na

Kdo je na strani

Po forumu brska: 0 in 0 gostov