Shropshire Beekeepers' Association

 

 

Newsletter : November 2007

 

1.      Editor's Notes

I recently attended the BBKA Annual Forum Meeting, which is where representatives from Associations meet together to discuss topics of interest to beekeepers and to help shape the agenda for the decision making ADM next January. The agenda included:

Research Funding: Following on from the Research Colloquium (reported in detail in BBKA News last August, the Executive has been developing further a detailed strategy for generating funding to support research into issues affecting bees and beekeepers. When this is sufficiently clear there will be reports to members, together with details of how we can help bring pressure to bear on the government to make it happen.

Varroa: There was interest in the continental use of Apivar for treating varroa (not yet licensed here). At one time this could be bought over the counter in France and some British beekeepers would bring it back for use here. Now it is only available on licence and access is strictly controlled and monitored. BBKA is trying to obtain the dossier that was developed in the licensing process in the hope that it might then enable an application for approval for use in the UK. Watch this space. N.B. Apparently a Danish Beekeepers’ website provides good information on non-chemical control techniques. Does anyone here know more?

Spring Convention: On behalf of our committee I asked whether or not the cost of the spring convention should not be fully underwritten by the participating commercial companies, thus making it free to the public. (Currently about half the cost is covered by charges to the exhibitors). There was no support for this suggestion. The general view was that :<(a) the convention has proved to be hugely popular as it is - there is no impetus to change it; (b) virtually all ‘trade fairs’ charge admission so this follows common practice; (c) the cost can be recouped by buying goods at preferential prices; (d) many participating organisations are actually small, or educational, or charitable but provide extra interest for visitors; (e) the full cost of providing lectures would fall upon those wanting to attend them. A quick estimate was that this could be up to £30 per lecture, which would effectively stop them from happening.

 

2.      October Meeting Report

The October meeting was our AGM so the first part of the evening was spent working our way through the business of the Association, with reports from the secretary, chairman, treasurer and apiary manager. (The last two are available here). The Treasurer’s Report included a proposal to raise the membership subscription to £22 for full members and £8 for Associate members in recognition of an increase in the precept due to BBKA. The proposal was agreed by the members present.

The next item was the election of the officers for the coming year. The following existing officers were re-elected:
Brian Goodwin (President) Ray Green (Chair)
Tony Little (Vice Chair) Roger Evans (Treasurer)
Peter Hampson (BBKA Rep.)
Penny Carkeet-James did not wish to continue as secretary though, happily, she will remain on the Committee. She has been our secretary for many years and the Association owes her a great debt of gratitude for looking after our affairs so well in all that time. She will be a hard act to follow. The new secretary, who will take on that task, will be John Perkins. John is well known to members as an expert queen breeder and is also responsible for organising our annual programme. You will see his contact details on page 8 should you need them. Penny will be handing her papers over to John at the next Committee meeting on November 20th.

Other elections to the Committee included:
Peter Bound Robert Higginson Joan Higginson
Ivor Huckin Mike Jones Steve Jones
Maxie Sinclair Robert Swallow David Tuckley
Anne Tuckley Glyn Williams Graham Roberson


 

3.      November Meeting

The November meeting will be at 7.30 p.m. on the 14th November at Shirehall. The speaker is Dr. Steve Martin, who is a member of the Animal & Plant Sciences Research Department at Sheffied University, which is the foremost bee research group in the country. He will be updating us on the latest findings to do with controlling varroa.

 

4.      Western Region RBI Report from Dave Sutton.

After the business items of the October AGM meeting were concluded, or RBI, Dave Sutton, gave us a report on some of the activities of the Inspection team this season. To date, in the Western Region, they have made 429 apiary visits and 1857 colonies have been inspected. No Shropshire colonies were found to harbour brood diseases, though AFB has been found in colonies in Wrexham. Given the concern over Colony Collapse Disorder this season, it was interesting to note that the number of colonies found to have died out over the winter comprised just over 11% of the total, which is more or less the same as last season (though this percentage has increased steadily since 2001). Honey sampling has been a regular feature of the Inspectors’ task with 120 samples being collected. Dave reminded us that we can no longer use PCB crystals (or mothballs) to kill off waxmoth in our stored frames. It has been found to create a very persistent and carcinogenic residue in wax. Even allowing the chemical to be stored in the vicinity of frames that are later used in the hive can cause the honey to be tainted with the taste and smell.

Increasingly the Inspectorate is being directed to prevention rather than cure, with an emphasis on providing training in disease recognition and good husbandry for beekeepers and tighter controls on the importation of goods that might lead to further pests and diseases becoming established. For example, we saw some statistics relating to the importation of queens - almost 2000 from EU countries (particularly Cyprus, Italy and Slovenia) and many more from outside the EU, e.g. 2000+ from Hawaii and almost 700 from New Zealand. All these imports have to be monitored and a significant sample inspected. Dave concluded his talk by describing the measures being taken to monitor imports of other goods that could lead to the accidental introduction of such apiary pests as the Small Hive Beetle. Airports, docks, zoos, fruit and vegetable markets and even some garden centres are being ‘risk-assessed’ and subjected to trial operations when the Inspectorate go through their plans for the containment and eradication of various threats to our beekeeping.

 

5.      How do Drones find Queens?

The mating ritual of the honey bee is a mysterious affair, occurring at dizzying heights in zones identifiable only to a queen and the horde of drones that court her. Now a research team led by the University of Illinois has identified an odorant receptor that allows male drones to find a queen in flight. The receptor, on the male antennae, can-detect an available queen up to 60 meters away. This is the first time an odorant receptor has been linked to a specific pheromone in honey bees.

The “queen substance,” or “queen retinue pheromone” was first identified decades ago, but scientists have only recently begun to understand its structure and role in the hive. The pheromone is a primary source of the queen’s authority. It is made up of eight components, one of which, 9-oxo-2-decenoic acid (9-aDA), attracts the drones during mating flights. It also draws workers to the queen and retards their reproductive growth. The principal investigator was Professor Hugh Robertson, a professor of entomology, who was among the research group that last year published the entire honey bee genome, a feat that allowed his lab to identify 170 odorant receptors in honey bees. Robertson and his colleagues knew that male drones probably had little use for most of these receptors. The drones don’t forage and so do not need to detect the subtle scents of flowers. Their social role within the hive is virtually non- existent. They have only one task: to find and mate with a queen. Once they have accomplished this, they die.

Researcher Kevin Wanner was able to determine which odorant receptors were more dominant in males than females. He found four receptors that were expressed in much higher quantities in males than females. He explained that “a neuron goes all the way from the receptor to the brain. Now the brain gets a signal that says, ‘I’ve smelled this chemical.’ If the chemical is 9-aDA, for the drone that means one thing and one thing only: ‘There’s a queen somewhere! Go get her!’” To identify which of the four primary receptors in males was actually responding to 9-ODA was a formidable challenge.

“That’s where we were very lucky,” Robertson said. By chance, at a conference on the science of olfaction, Wanner met Charles Luetje, a neuroscientist at the University of Miami who had expertise with precisely this type of problem. Luetje had perfected a technique for testing odor-sensing receptors to see which compounds activated them. When he heard of Wanner’s work in honey bees, Luetje offered to use this technique to test the four primary odor receptors of honey bee drones. After refining and testing the technique in insects, Luetje’s graduate student Andrew Nichols exposed each of the drone odorant receptors to 9-ODA. Only one of the four receptors responded. When it found 9-ODA, the protein receptor’s conformation changed in a measurable way. None of the four primary male odorant receptors responded to the other components of the queen pheromone. Only the 9-ODA elicited a response and then only in one of the four receptors.

“Scientists have spent decades exploring the mysteries of insect smell, but the newest tools make such research much more promising”, Professor Robertson said. “Like so many biologists, we are wonderfully caught up in the genomic revolution, which has opened up this black box of the molecular biology of insect smell. Finally now we can peer inside.”

The findings appear in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. A longer version was reported by Jemima Watson in The Scottish Beekeeper, October 2007.Committee Report.

 

6.      Myanmar — Oldest bee-fossil

The discovery in northern Myanmar (formerly Burma) of a bee embedded in amber proves that bees have been around for a long time. The fossil is dated at around 100 million years ago—65 million years older than any previous bee-fossil discovery. The discovery, reported in the US journal Science, was made by Bryan Danforth, Cornell Associate Professor of Entomology, and George Poinar from Oregon State University.

The 16000 bee-species that exist today are grouped into seven families, but experts are not sure which of them came first. The latest discovery suggests that the Melitidae family was the first to emerge. Because bees and flowering plants are so closely linked, scientists believe that bees must have evolved about 120 million years ago, in parallel with the evolution of flowering plants.
Reported in The Cheshire Beekeeper Autumn 2007 (Courtesy BEES)

 

7.      Hebrew University excavations reveal first Biblical period beehives.

Eleazar L. Sukenik Professor of Archaeology at the Hebrew University, revealed that the first apiary dating from the Biblical period has been found in excavations he directed this summer at Tel Rehov in Israel’s Bet She’an Valley. This is the earliest apiary to be revealed to date in an archaeological excavation anywhere in the Ancient Near East, said Prof. Mazar. It dates from the 10th to early 9th centuries B.C.

The beehives there were found in the center of a built-up area that has been excavated since 1997 by Dr. Nava Panitz-Cohen of the Hebrew University. Three rows of beehives were found in the apiary, containing more than 30 hives. It is estimated, however, based on excavations to date, that in all the total area would have contained some 100 beehives.

Each row contained at least three tiers of hives, each of which is a cylinder composed of unbaked clay and dry straw, around 80 centimeters long and 40 centimeters in diameter. One end of the cylinder was closed and had a small hole in it, which allowed for the entry and exit of the bees. The opposite end was covered with a clay lid that could be removed when the beekeeper extracted the honeycombs. Experienced beekeepers and scholars who visited the site estimated that as much as half a ton of honey could be culled each year from these hives. Prof. Mazar emphasizes the uniqueness of this latest find by pointing out that actual beehives have never been discovered at any site in the Ancient Near East. While fired ceramic vessels that served as beehives are known in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods, none were found in situ and beekeeping on an industrial level as the apiary at Tel Rehov is hitherto unknown in the archaeological record.

Pictorial depictions of apiaries are known from Pharaonic Egypt, showing extraction of honey from stacked cylinders which are very similar to those found at Tel Rehov. Cylindrical clay beehives placed in horizontal rows, similar to those found at Tel Rehov, are well-known in numerous contemporary traditional cultures in Arab villages in Israel, as well as throughout the Mediterranean. The various products of beehives are put to diverse use: the honey is, of course, a delicacy, but is also known for its medicinal and cultic value. Beeswax was also utilized in the metal and leather industries, as well as for writing material when coated on wooden tablets.

While the Bible tells us nothing about beekeeping in Israel at that time, the discovery of the apiary at Tel Rehov indicates that beekeeping and the extraction of bees’ honey and honeycomb was a highly developed industry as early as the First Temple period. Thus, it is possible that the term “honey” in the Bible indeed pertains to bees’ honey.
(Thanks to Mike Jones for sending in this item. Further detail, with photographs, is available here.

 

8.      A Super Idea?

Graham Roberson comments: I have several supers in which the honey has crystallized and I do not have the facilities to melt it down. Talking to a colleague recently he commented that he had heard somewhere that if you placed the super under the broodbox in early spring the bees disliked it so intensely that given access to a supply of water nearby they would move it up into a honey super, thus giving you a second chance to extract in the normal manner. Has any other member heard of this method of liquefying crystallized honey, and more to the point, does it work?

 

Return to Newsletters Menu