Cornell University Library

HINA
3 1924 003 267 527

mann

SOME RESULTS

OF

CO-OPERATIVE EXPERIMENTS

ON

RACES OF BEES

TO DETERMINE THEIR POWER TO RESIST

EUROPEAN FOUL BROC

BY
MORLEY PETTIT

Provincial Apiarist, Guelph

(PRINTED BY AUTHORITY OF THE MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE)

ONTARIO

TORONTO g
Printed by L. K, CAMERON, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty
1915

SOME RESULTS

OF

J

a Co-operative Experiments on Races of Bees

33 8 TO DETERMINE THEIR POWER TO RESIST

oa European Foul Brood.
PSs | i.

| q iSO Moriey Pettit, PRovIncrIAL APIARIST, GUELPH.

In combating the disease of bees known as European Foul Brood, the resist-
ing power of the bees is an important factor. This power has been found to
vary in different colonies and is generally considered to be a question of the;
race of bees, and probably the “strain” within the race. Common black bees:
are usually poor resisters, Italian bees are generally accepted as the best, and
Carniolans are favored by some. ,

Since the year 1910, the writer has, under the auspices of the Ontario}
Agricultural and Experimental Union, been directing co-operative experiments,
and has also corresponded and conversed with independent experimenters with
a view to securing answers to the following questions :—

1. Are Carnolian bees as good resisters of European Foul Brood as Italians?

2. What strains of Italians, if any, are better resisters than others? -

3. After this disease has been in a neighborhood a few years, is it mor¢
easily controlled?

4. Does it become less virulent or is a strain of better resisters developed?

The co-operative experimenters are beekeepers located in the European Foull
Brood districts of Ontario. As the Ontario Agricultural College is not shee
‘in that district, experiments could not be conducted at the College apiary. Th
New York State Apiary Inspectors have also very kindly contributed results o
their investigations dating back to 1897. The queens sent to experimenters fron}.
year to year are untested queens secured from well-known breeders whose bees
are reported to be good resisters. The experimenter is left largely to his o
devices as to the methods of test, being merely told to “introduce the queen t
a good average colony that is affected with European Foul Brood. Sometimes
there are colonies that seem to be immune to European Foul Brood for a whilc.
Do not use these for experiment. If you have treated your bees by the shaking
method introduce the queen to a good colony that was diseased before treating.

There is probably no better way of presenting the results of this investigation.
than to quote from letters.received, then draw conclusions. As queens from
only a few of the well-known breeders in America have been under observation
the names of breeders are not published, but are designated by letters of the
alphabet. :

Perhaps the first important letter came from Chas. Stewart, J ohnstown, N.Y;
a State Apiary Inspector. He wrote Jan. 16, 1910: “Of all the races of bees
the Italian resists disease the best, but we do not regard them as immune, although
some strains are more nearly so than others. I would not say a man with Italian.
bees in a diseased locality would have no trouble, but that he would have less than
others. When the disease breaks out in a new locality it is much harder to
cure than after it has run for a time, when it yields to treatment more readily.

2

H
le

are

’

3

He wrote on Feb. 20, 1911, that he had one yard of bees’ which had not
been affected, “although the disease had passed all around him. He was rearing
queens for sale from that yard, and we shall call his stock D.

On Feb. 18, 1911, N. D. West, Middleburg, N.Y., another State Apiary -
Inspector, wrote: “The very yellow strains of Italians. do not seem to stand the
disease like some of the three-banded race.” On Mar. 16, 1911, in reference
to Carniolans he wrote: “Capt. Hetherington thought well of them when he was
alive. He thought they were good to’resist European Foul Brood; but he had
passed over the worst of European Foul Brood before he tried them, As I find
them in my inspection work a good strain of pure Italians is better to resist-
European Foul Brood.”

On Mar. 22, 1911, Wheeler D. Wright, of Altamont, N.Y., another New
York State Inspector, wrote: “I have found by practical experience that the
following strains of Italians resist the disease well, namely: A, B, C. My pre-
ference is the A stock.

In Oct. 1911, A. T. Brown, of Castleton, Durham County, Ont., wrote that .
a queen of the D stock proved to be a good layer, but failed to rid, the colony
of European Foul Brood. He continued by saying, “I have just one out of
fifty colonies that kept clear of European Foul Brood, after one shaking, and
made a nice lot of honey. Jé was a black colony.”

The following correspondence was received during the winter of 1912 and
1918:

“The Carniolan colony was not any better if as good as the blacks to resist
European Foul ‘Brood.”—W. T. Kinscella, Cumberland, Russell ‘County. ;

“In the latter part of the summer some disease cells developed in the Carniolan
colony. She was the best colony I had for honey gathering so I was quite
disappointed. The Italian queen I received from F has shown no signs of Foul
Brood whatever, though not so good as the Carniolans for honey gathering she
did good work.”—Hector M. Wood, Crookston, Hastings County.

“The Italian queen you had sent to me by F was received in fine shape.
This year I got four natural swarms from it. All went in cellar in good shape.
I examined them at least ten times and no signs of E. F. B., and I have five
colonies from that queen.”—Wm. Peck, Rt. No. 1, Murray, Prince Edward County. ©

“Qur queen came from E. We introduced it on June 13th, 1911, into two
colonies which had been treated_for. European Foul Brood. On Tune 21st, we
found Foul Brood again, but a month later and also when we put them in’ the
cellar we could find no trace of the disease. In‘1912, we found several cells
diseased, but they disappeared in a week or two afterwards.. We have other
colonies which made more honey, but few with finer combs of brood or less
disease.”—The Scott Sisters, Meyersburg, Northumberland County.

“T have learned more about bees in the past year than all I have learned in
all the years I have kept bees. They have always paid me very well, but I
knew very little of what their ability was to make money until you proposed
to let me experiment in regard to the mastering of European Foul Brood. ‘I
think I have been most successful. I never saw a finer lot of bees than I have
produced in one year, and I had plenty of Huropean Foul Brood. I have none
now, my hives are clean. All Italians are not proof against it, but I have some
that, are. Within two weeks after the queen you sent began to send out her
brood there was no trace of Foul Brood. She filled the hive with brood, every
card was filled up. This was in 1911. My bees came out fine in the spring of
1912, but it turned out to be one of the worst springs I ever saw. Three of

‘

4

them dwindled down badly and a trace of E. R. B. could be seen. They made’
no honey as long as the Foul Brood was in the hive, but as soon as the bees
‘increased, the Italians cleaned their hives. JI can say that the best Italians are
masters of E. F. B.” He further states that his Italian bees of the A- strain
which was sent him-for testing have. completely mastered European Foul Brood
although it was very bad in every one of his black colonies before he introduced
them. The above letter was from J. B. Stone, Norham, Northumberland County.

The following extracts are taken from some letters received during the winter
of 1914 and 1915, with reference to queens sent out for testing in’ 1913.

“T never had anything like the I strain of bees. They beat any black or
hybrid bees I ever had. I consider them practically immune to E. F. B., prolific,
non-swarming, gentle enough, good honey gatherers, cap comb honey all right.
Tf I could have had such queens 25 years ago at $10.00 each I would have been
away ahead now. The G stock has proved to be absolutely worthless to me.”—
R. Lowey, Woodrows, Prince Edward County. : ;

“The queen I received from J in 1913, was_successfully introduced into
a colony with European Foul Brood. They cleaned it out and were well prepared
for winter. Wintered in fine condition, and did well as honey gatherers in 1914.”
—G. M. Hern, Niagara Falls, Lincoln County.

“The queen you sent me in 1913 from A was introduced and did well. I
raised some nice queens from her; some of them were dark, although one of’
the dark ones was the cleanest and best to gather honey I had in 1914.”—T. W.
Frood, Renfrew, Renfrew County.

“Re queen received in June, 1913, from E for testing—may say that her
colony has so far resisted European Foul Brood and are excellent honey gatherers.”
—J. R. Mills, Richmond, Carleton County.

“In reference to the queen sent me in June, 1913, will say that I successfully
introduced her, built up a strong colony and they came through the wiuter in
first class shape giving me in 1914 about 40 lbs. of first class section honey.

“You will remember about four years ago Foul Brood was the nightmare
of the bee-keeper. Since then by tests and observations it has practically become
the safety valve of the beekeeper. For the simple reason that if any beekeeper
allows his queens to become degenerate the disease appears. I claim that you
have done more to promote beekeeping in the past two years by the distribution
of queens than was done in 20 years before. It gives any man, especially a
beginner, such a demonstration of facts that if he does not heed it, out he goes.”—
John Ray, Fort Erie, Welland County.

European Foul Brood was first reported in Ontario in 1907 in the aplary
of Warrington Scott, of Wooler, Northumberland County. About the same time
the disease was also reported in Carleton County. The spread has béen from
those two centres of infection, and no isolated outbreak has been discovered, with
the exception of Welland County, where the disease is known to have come
across the Niagara River from New York State. In Northumberland and
Carleton the apiaries were practically all black bees, not very carefully kept,
and it was found to run its course and destroy an apiary yery rapidly. For
example, one apiary of 112 colonies was reduced to 23 in two years. Another
apiary of 180 colonies was reduced to 21 in one year. Another apiary of 60
colonies was reduced to 44 in one year and the balance all diseased the second year.

In 1910, the local inspector, Warrington Scott, reported; “I travelled over
the same ground as last year and found that all the bees had heen treated except
one apiary, but very little Italianizing had been done, and. consequently. the

.

5

disease returned in every apiary and destroyed some of them completely. I found
the disease spreading very rapidly. Jt has more than doubled since last year.
I think if the Department could encourage the beekeepers to Italianize ahead of
‘the disease it would prevent a great deal of loss, as the disease does not affect
the Italians nearly so badly as the blacks.” |

In the Canadian Horticulturist and Beekeeper, for June, 1914, Mr. Scott
writes: “If the disease returns in an. Italian colony to such an extent that the
half of the brood is dead, I have found that removing the queen for five days
before introducing a new one works well, as. it gives the bees a chance to clean
up the combs before the new queen has a chance to lay. If more than. half the
brood is dead I would treat the colony by the shaking method. The best advice I
can give to all beekeepers is to Italianize. ‘You will be able to save considerable
loss by doing so if you use Italian queens raised from vigorous stock. I have
used the Golden bee with good results, but I cannot say that the three-banded
or leather-colored Italians will not do as well under the same conditions provided
they are of a vigorous strain. Vigor seems to count more than color. The
successful honey producer of the future must keep his queens young. That is, he
must not keep the queen longer than two seasons for the best results, and I am
not sure but it would be well to requeen every year. It is very important when
combating the disease to see that all queens are young. The remedy for the
disease is exactly in line with the system of beekeeping that must be followed
in order to obtain the highest success even if Foul Brood never existed. Keep
your bees up to a high standard of vitality and it will make but little difference
whether your neighbors are careless or not.”

In March, 1915, O. L. Hershiser, of Kenmore, N.Y., told the writer that
when European Foul Brood reached his apiary he found that some of his colonies
resisted the disease, and he requeened the rest of the apiary from them, thus
developing a resisting strain by selection. He did not know the origin of the
stock and -is not selling queens.

W. A. Smith, Wooler, had his first outbreak of European Foul Brood in
1907, the same time as his neighbor, Mr. Scott.

In Jan. 1918, Mr. Smith wrote: “I received a queen from D about July 1st,
1911. I introduced her into a colony I had treated for E. F. B., and the disease
did not. appear again that season, but in the spring of 1912 her colony showed
-the disease in all stages. I let them go and they cleaned house and threw off
a good swarm in clover flow and another in buckwheat. I would consider one
strain of Italians as good as another as far as fighting disease is concerned, but
J am certain the three-banded Italians are by far the best honey gatherers. Most
of my bees are of H stock.”

In Jan. 1914, Mr. Smith wrote again: “I have had experience with several
different strains of Italians, namely: B, D, G, H, and we need not expect any
of them to fight off the disease in every case the first year that they contract: it.
I inoculated a colony of pure bred H stock with E. F. B. in 1912, and it stayed
with them the season through. In 1913, they were completely rid of it, so I
would not advise turning any strain of Italians down if they do not fight off the
disease the first season. =

“Probably it would not be out of place if I would give you the results of an
experiment which I carried out-in 1912 and 713. I-had several colonies with
disease in. 1912 which I treated. I selected the weakest one to stack the brood
on, I placed three brood nests on this one with the diseased combs which were
‘taken from the other three. J left them there for two weeks, then took the

6

brood nest which was on top and placed it on the stand, shaking the bees into

- it and leaving them on the diseased combs from which the brood had hatched.
I watched them and they built up to a good strong colony by the end of the
season of 1912,,and in 1913 they did not show any disease and were among the
best colonies in the yard, so I do not think it is necessary to destroy the diseased
combs if you have pure-bred Italian stock.” ,

In March, 1915, the following questions were sent to Warrington Scott: “I
wish you would take the time to let me know how you feel now about the different
races of Italians and their immunity to this disease. Who are ‘the breeders whose
queens you would recommend most highly at the present time? Do you consider
that European Foul Brood becomes less virulent after it has been in a neigh-
borhood for a few years? In other words, do you feel that it is necessary for a
beekeeper after having Italianized his bees in advance of the disease to have loss of
any account when the disease reaches him? From your knowledge of how this
disease has operated.in other parts, do you consider that the variety which you
have had experience with is the same as what they have in New York State and
elsewhere? ”

Mr. Scott replied as follows: “I have used the G strain with good results.
Mr. Chisholm, of Wallbridge, requeened all of his colonies with the @ strain
in hopes that he could avoid treating them when the disease arrived, and it worked
out very well. I examined his bees the following spring after Italianizing them,
and although the disease had been present about a year I found that the well-
bred goldens were quite free of the disease, while the dark-colored bees were
quite badly affected, but there were none of the colonies which I thought it ad-
visable to treat. JI have always thought that the golden strain was more immune
from E.F.B. than the darker strain, and am still of that opinion.

“Yes, I feel sure that the disease is much less virulent after being in an
apiary a few years. I have always thought when reading a description of E.F.B.
in the United States, that the disease there is much less virulent than what
we have here.

“Since the disease has become less virulent in this locality I have changed
to the H strain of dark or three-banded Italians, as I thought this strain suffi-
ciently immune and believe they live longer than the golden strain, which of
course is a benefit during the honey flow as well as in wintering. European Foul
Brood is still among my bees, and there were quite a few cases last year which I
believe was due to the poor and adverse year mostly.”

U. H. Bowen, of Niagara Falls, is one of the most successful comb honey
producers in the Province. Having his apiary of 200 colonies well in hand when
the disease came along, his loss has been very slight. -

In March, 1915, he writes: “In 1911 we purchased a number of Italian
queens from C, and in 1912 we received 75 more queens from C, and a few from
H. In 1913, we received 50 from I. I do not think any of these strains can

_~ be said to be strictly immune, but I would have no hesitation in saying that there
is very little fear from the disease with either H or I strains, We have had

quite a number of cases in colonies with C queens, but I would not say that they
are of no value in eradicating the disease.

“T would like to give you a few extracts from my note-book, and you can
judge for yourself as to the results:

“Hive No. 51 was given a C queen, Sept. 18th, 1912. Examined on May
16th, 1913, and founfl a lot of E.F.B. May 24th, 1913, took away all brood—-

vd

left 2 combs honey and 3 foundations, gave 8 frames healthy brood. On June
17th, 1913, a httle E.F.B—caged queen, June 21st, gave queen cei! from No.
125, C stock, and took away old queen. August 16th, queen laying—brood O.K.
Examined June 6th, 1914, and found no disease.

“No. 19%, May 15th, 1913, black queen—one year old—brood 4 frames—
some H.F.B. June 15th, dequeened ; July 21st, gave queen cell from No. 125;
July 24th, queen laying—some E.F.B. May 19th, 1914, no disease noticed ; July
2nd, 1914, a lot of E.F.B. July 11th, gave queen just hatched No. 242,.a ‘daughter
of a C queen; July 31st, queen laying. I am not positive, but think this colony
had no more disease. ~

“No. 118, Sept. Vth, 1912, black bees with-some E.F.B. gave a O queen; June
2nd, 1918, a lot of E.F.B.; June 21st, dequeened and gave a queen cell from
No. 125; July 16th, queen laying; August 1st, brood apparently 0.K.+ August
27th, brood 0.K.; May 19th, 1914, brood O.K.

“You will notice that two of these colonies, No. 51 and 113, had C queens
given them in September, 1912, and both had the disease quite bad in 1913. Three
of them were dequeened in June, 1913, and on the same day, June 21st, each was
given a queen cell from the same hive, No. 125, and two, Nos. 51 and 113, were
cured and showed no signs of the disease in 1914.

“No. 60 was given an H queen October 5th, 1912. On May 16th, 1913, a fow
cells E.F.B. were found. They were given no treatment at all, but cleaned it all
out themselves and are now free.

“No. 103 had some E.F.B. May 19th, 1914. On June 3rd, 1914, E.F.B. in
every frame of brood; dequeened. June 12th, gave laying Italian queen from
K stock. July 3rd, queen 0.K., a few cells of E.F.B. July 22nd, brood 0.K.

rs Owing to unfortunate eicanie ances was not able to follow up the disease
closely in 1914, but I am satisfied that we have it well in hand, and we are not
losing any sleep over the E.F.B. problem.”.

CoNncLUSIONS.

The conclusion reached by the writer with reference to races and strains of

bees is that resistance is more a matter of vigor than of race or strain. Results
of tests show, however, that common black bees are exceedingly poor resisters, and
that Carniolans are not generally as good as Italians.
. Of the eleven strains of Italians tested none have been entirely condemned.
All have been found able to resist European Foul Brood under careful manage-
ment. Evidence in favor of leather-colored Italians is perhaps stronger than that
for the yellower strains, and as we are coming more and more. to the conclusion
that the former are better as honey producers, they should probably be given: the
preference.

It is almost amusing to see occasional instances where black bees stand out.
as good resisters, as in the case of the one colony owned by Mr. Brown, of Castle-
ton. At least two other similar cases have come under the observation of the
writer, and in both cases they were small apiaries given very little care,-but re-
maining free of disease, when larger apiaries all around were badly affected.
It would be a matter of interest, if not of any great profit, to attempt to develop
a strain of black bees resistant to European Foul Brood.

“The successful honey-producer of the future must keep his queens young
and-his colonies strong and vigorous. The remedy for the disease is exactly in
line with the system of beekeeping that must be followed in order to obtain the

8

highest success even if Foul Brood never existed. Keep your bees up to a high
standard of vitality, and it will make but little difference whether your neighbours
are careless or not. With vigorous stock and careful attention, it is not necessary
to destroy combs in the treatment of this disease.”

The above words of Warrington Scott cannot be too often repeated.

So far as it can be seen -by the careful observer who is not a bacteriologist,
the disease diminishes in virulence after it has been in a particular locality for a
few years. It is also true that the resistance of the bees increases as a result
of natural selection or “ survival of the fittest,’ On the other hand, apiaries pre-
viously Italianized and carefully watched when the disease arrives are not 60
badly affected.

In 1910, West, of New York State, wrote favoring both reduced’ virulence
and increased resistance. “European Foul Brood is not so virulent after it has
been in a colony for two or three years as it is at first. Many weaker colonies

die off and some do not, and from such, a race more immune to the disease starts
”

up.

‘ The fact that Stewart’s “D” stock from an apiary of good resisters.in New
York did not resist in Brown’s apiary in Ontario, indicates greater virulence in
the newer disease district. This is further supported when: it is considered that
Brown’s case of disease was of recent origin, while Smith, who ‘thad the disease
for five years, found the D stock to be good resisters. Scott’s statement that he
now considers it safe to introduce a less resistant race and West’s statement that
Capt. Hetherington’s success with Carniolans may be accounted for by_the fact
that “he had passed over.the worst of E.F.B. before he tried them, * indicate
diminishing virulence. Scotts further statement: “I feel sure that the disease is
much less Teutew after being in an apiarv a few years,” and the fact that the
it was heard from
in Ontario—probably accounts for certain marked differences in symptoms. of the
disease as reported in New York and in Ontario.

One fact is clear, that, from whatever cause, European Foul ‘Brood is more
easily controlled after it has been some vears in a- locality.

The educative value of this work is very gratifving. For instance, the ex-
perimenter at Fort Erie, who pavs such a hich tribute to the distribution of
queens, was just three or four years ago violently opposed to apjaty inspectors: and
all their deeds.

Cornell University

Library

The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924003267527