Small Cell Foundation with larger cell in the Brood Box

[vincent]

Hi all,

I managed to get a good deal on some medium plastic frames/foundation from Mann Lake. It turns out that these are 4.9cm small cell. The rest of my apiary is on 5.3 Pierco for Brood and Honey supers. Wondering if this will be possible or do the bees have to "regress" to be able to draw out the new small cells?
thanks

[Perry]

I don't think the bees need to regress to draw out the foundation, but given that the brood chamber comb is a larger size they may be reluctant to do so. They will obviously draw larger cells (drone) but I am not so sure they would draw out smaller ones unless forced to do so.

[LazyBkpr]

My experience with that exact scenario is that if you go directly from large cell and install small cell, they will draw a really messed up looking frame. They will TRY to follow the small cell pattern, but then also try to enlarge the cells after they are JUST started..   Some of them will simply ignore the small cell and draw what they want irregardless of the printed pattern underneath. If you have a hive that has some foundation-less frames in it, then use the small cell in those hives and they are much more likely to make it right.

[tecumseh]

I am guessing by your picture that you know something about horse and the breeding of horses.  Try to regress the size of the horse you are riding to that of a pony.  Now doesn't that idea sound silly?  You could of course over several generation breed a horse that was smaller until eventually by careful SELECTION produce a horse the size of a pony but the various offspring would still show show some variation in size.  Regression of bees is likely the silliest idea I have ever heard and runs totally counter to the ideas of animal selection and breeding.

I would either sell the stuff to someone that has bought into the idea of small cell or send the items back to the supplier.

[vincent]

Thanks for the comments everyone. This was pretty much what I figured. Ultimately I don't want to try anything too unusual next year, so small cell would be an experiment maybe for a later time.

[LazyBkpr]

  Unfortunately, i have to very reluctantly disagree with Tec. Not an easy thing to do when your up against the wisdom and knowledge he has in comparison to my own.
   Having seen it MANY MANY times, I know regression happens. Using mostly foundation-less frames, allowing the bees to build what they want, they most certainly DO build smaller cells..   I will not argue that smaller bees cant carry as much honey etc..  But I do know for a fact that they build smaller cells if you allow them to make their own foundation. I do KNOW that they emerge earlier from those smaller cells, because I have timed it in my OB hive that is filled with foundation-less comb. While I will not even begin to spout virtues of any cell size for Varroa control or any other benefit. I do know it happens if they are allowed their own choice. My OB Hive is into its third round of frames, and in the center of those frames the cell size can be as small as 4.5 mm, and as those cells near the outer edges of the frames they can be as large as 5.1 mm
    Putting a frame of small cell (4.9 mm) in this hive they will draw that frame very well. Bees that run commercial cell size frames (5.4mm) MAY draw a small cell frame correctly, but the odds are they will make a very weird pattern of cells over the small cell foundation print.

   I have read a post, where a beekeeper tosses the bees a foundation-less frame, and then reports that regression is garbage because his bees didnt build 4.9mm or smaller cells...  I have seen it several times, and was even banned from a forum for providing pictures and facts that the poster was incorrect. it takes two or three generations for them to become what they wish to be. Giving them a single frame in a standard cell hive will NOT regress the bees.
  Let them build what they want, and they do become smaller over time. Regression? I am not so sure I like the word. Natural seems better.

[vincent]

I am guessing by your picture that you know something about horse and the breeding of horses.  Try to regress the size of the horse you are riding to that of a pony.  Now doesn't that idea sound silly?  You could of course over several generation breed a horse that was smaller until eventually by careful SELECTION produce a horse the size of a pony but the various offspring would still show show some variation in size. 

That is indeed true. We have a 4 year old mare who is currently 16.3H but dam and sire we both in the high 15s, who knew!

[iddee]

Apples and Oranges, Lazy. The discussion is on preformed small cell, not natural cell. TWO DIFFERENT animals entirely. Not even comparable.

[Ray]

I have never had a problem with putting package bees on 4.9 plastic.
I have never given them the option of choosing, so I can't answer that part.
I do not claim any advantage to small cell beekeeping. I just like'em that way.
 
* It ain't the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.
* dynamite comes in small packages
* Banty rooster

[LazyBkpr]

Apples and Oranges, Lazy. The discussion is on preformed small cell, not natural cell. TWO DIFFERENT animals entirely. Not even comparable.

 Tec;
   Regression of bees is likely the silliest idea I have ever heard and runs totally counter to the ideas of animal selection and breeding.


   I was not comparing the two, with the exception of HOW you get from one to the other without a mess. Regressing, or allowing the bees to go "natural" will allow them to use the small cell, and allowing the bees to regress is something they DO on their own if allowed to. I am no expert on regression, but early on, I thought it might be the best thing since peanut butter, until I still had mites and mite related problems, so I did use small cell, and still have some of it. MY experiences in getting them to use small cell are a small book in trial and many errors....

[tecumseh]

a lazybkpr snip..
 But I do know for a fact that they build smaller cells if you allow them to make their own foundation. I do KNOW that they emerge earlier from those smaller cells, because I have timed it in my OB hive that is filled with foundation-less comb.

and a Vincent snip...
We have a 4 year old mare who is currently 16.3H but dam and sire we both in the high 15s, who knew!

tecumseh...
well your observation of time to emergence* lazybkpr is in disagreement with what at least one academic beekeeper has observed and recorded and published < have not seen his data set but I am guessing what he has documented is in total disagreement with what you think you KNOW.  feral bees will create smaller cells..... but if you had little resources to build a house would the house you did build be larger or smaller?  quite overlooked by the small cell proponents is that nutrition has more to do with the eventual size of the bee than does the size of the cell.

the larger offense (have not seen this here) is the tendency of small cell promoter in their attempt to sell this idea is to totally revise and invert the story of the early development of foundation.  this revisionist story telling has been exposed by at least one european academic beekeeper in a letter to the editor in the ABJ.   

known breeding regimes normally require the breeder to select individuals with traits they think are worthwhile.  the idea that you can take one member of a species (with no real desirable traits) and create something with these desirable traits is a bit over the top to my way of thinking.  call me conservative in this matter but my bet will always go to any system with a known record of success when compared to a non system with results that have NO HISTORY of success.

obvious to me one of these programs requires effort and a lot of thought and the other requires that you do nothing.

and to Vincent comments... any and all biological measurements are subject to natural variations with some mean measurement and some variation.   for a 'normal distribution' the mean measurement is surround by three standard deviation on each side of this 'average' measurement.... no one size fits all.  in this 'statistical think' there is a concept called 'regression to the mean' which suggest that over time breeding of animals at the extremes of the distribution will produce individuals with measurements that 'regress to the mean' < basically you cannot breed shorter and shorter folks (or taller and taller) by continuing to breed short people (and the same goes for tall folks).

I would guess the fact that these ideas originated in a place which have largely been overrun by africanized bees (which are smaller) does not effect some folks as a curious component of the discussion on 'small cell'.

ps... this does not mean that I think you or anyone for that matter should not try small cell.  trying things that look promising is always something that makes beekeeping more alluring and there is (imho) no need to toss out idea simply because they don't conform to known systems (even if these systems have been know to work time and time again).  exploring the possibilities is always good exercise for the gray matter and these are normally much easier to do with bees than with any other biological specimen that I know of..

* anyone that has reared queen cells comes to know pretty quickly that temperature and nutrition play a large roll in how long it takes a queen cell to emerge.  long long ago I learned that 'the book' may tell you to pull cells 10 days after grafting but episodes of early emergence has taught me to pull cells on day 9 < at this point they are transferred into home made curler type cages and then after emergence are transferred to mating nucs.
   

[LazyBkpr]

tecumseh...
well your observation of time to emergence* lazybkpr is in disagreement with what at least one academic beekeeper has observed and recorded and published < have not seen his data set but I am guessing what he has documented is in total disagreement with what you think you KNOW.  feral bees will create smaller cells..... but if you had little resources to build a house would the house you did build be larger or smaller?  quite overlooked by the small cell proponents is that nutrition has more to do with the eventual size of the bee than does the size of the cell.


  Then how do you explain smaller cells with exactly the same nutrition? I can point to quite a few different places where you can see pictures of natural cell compared to commercial cell foundation, and the difference is quite obvious. I have measured them myself and confirmed all of those findings.  I am somewhat confused, because I thought this was generally accepted knowledge by anyone that had kept bees on natural comb.  OR, wanted to use small cell, so used natural comb to allow their bees to build smaller cells and regress.


   Tec;
the larger offense (have not seen this here) is the tendency of small cell promoter in their attempt to sell this idea is to totally revise and invert the story of the early development of foundation.  this revisionist story telling has been exposed by at least one european academic beekeeper in a letter to the editor in the ABJ.

   Then we need to go through all the old books and have them revised. i have read at least a couple different books written in the late 1800's where they talk about foundation and using larger cell size. Off the top of my head I do not recall the names, Wagner, Root, and Weed come to mind. i think it was Weed that made the first machine that could print the foundation in a continuous roll, cell size not withstanding, i dont have the dates etc stuck in my mind...
   A link to Michael Bush's site, the only relevance is the excellent pictures of natural cell with a tape measure next to them.
     http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm
   I have confirmed those measurements in my own hives, again, with all hives getting good nutrition. I am always up for being proven wrong! but having seen it myself it will take some convincing.

   Tec;
   known breeding regimes normally require the breeder to select individuals with traits they think are worthwhile.  the idea that you can take one member of a species (with no real desirable traits) and create something with these desirable traits is a bit over the top to my way of thinking.  call me conservative in this matter but my bet will always go to any system with a known record of success when compared to a non system with results that have NO HISTORY of success.

   Completely lost me with where that is going? Simple mind cant condense complex theory.

   Tec;
   I would guess the fact that these ideas originated in a place which have largely been overrun by africanized bees (which are smaller) does not effect some folks as a curious component of the discussion on 'small cell'.

ps... this does not mean that I think you or anyone for that matter should not try small cell.  trying things that look promising is always something that makes beekeeping more alluring and there is (imho) no need to toss out idea simply because they don't conform to known systems (even if these systems have been know to work time and time again).  exploring the possibilities is always good exercise for the gray matter and these are normally much easier to do with bees than with any other biological specimen that I know of..

* anyone that has reared queen cells comes to know pretty quickly that temperature and nutrition play a large roll in how long it takes a queen cell to emerge.  long long ago I learned that 'the book' may tell you to pull cells 10 days after grafting but episodes of early emergence has taught me to pull cells on day 9 < at this point they are transferred into home made curler type cages and then after emergence are transferred to mating nucs.


      No AHB in this area that I am aware of, and as for the est, I cannot disagree.
   I have removed feral swarms, and hived them on natural comb. Again, feeding them as well as all of my bees were fed, they built cell sizes not exceeding 5.1mm. Hives I have been rotating comb through, for the specific purpose of making new comb, by giving them foundation - less frames, also built cells that did not exceed 5.1mm.
   Giving a hive loaded with commercial 5.4mm frames a few frames of foundation-less, they built cells smaller than the 5.4, once they were done making drone comb.... Continuing to rotate new foundation-less frames into those hives over the course of a couple years resulted in them also building cells that ranged from....  4.6 to 5.1mm Just as I have read in numerous places.  I am not trying to compare a Percheron with a purebred mini. i understand the difficulties and concept. If it is a fact that bees do not regress, or that it is not possible, how can it be explained? Why is it a drone that emerges from a worker cell, laid by an infertile queen is not as large as a Drone that emerges from a full size drone cell?
   I do not now or will I ever say your wrong Tec, I have been wrong WAY too many times, and it is my best method of learning so that i will remember. I just disagreed...  remember, when you respond, use layman's terms for simple minds!
   Scott
   

[iddee]

The Japanese bind, or bound, if they don't do it any more, the girl's feet. Yes, it kept them small.
Put 2 fish from the same eggs in different size water tanks, say a ten gallon and a 200 gallon tank. The one in the 200 gallon tank will get much larger.

Neither of the above is regression. It is simply restricting growth. Yes, bees will grow to fill, but not burst, the cell walls. Small cell or large cell, both are dictating the size of bee. Again, apples and oranges. The foundation grows bees to the size beekeepers dictate. Natural cell grows bees to the size bees dictate. Have you measured the cells built in spring for foragers to cells built in fall when winter bees are being raised? Do they do it the same or differently? Are the forager bees the same size as winter bees when grown on natural cell? How about in the tropics and in the colder regions? Is natural cell the same world wide? If you are talking small cell or large cell, let's stick to foundation. Natural cell is not comparable.

[LazyBkpr]

Iddee;
   The Japanese bind, or bound, if they don't do it any more, the girl's feet. Yes, it kept them small.
Put 2 fish from the same eggs in different size water tanks, say a ten gallon and a 200 gallon tank. The one in the 200 gallon tank will get much larger.

Neither of the above is regression. It is simply restricting growth. Yes, bees will grow to fill, but not burst, the cell walls. Small cell or large cell, both are dictating the size of bee. Again, apples and oranges. The foundation grows bees to the size beekeepers dictate. Natural cell grows bees to the size bees dictate.

   I agree completely!


  Iddee;
  Have you measured the cells built in spring for foragers to cells built in fall when winter bees are being raised?

   NO! Mostly because they dont usually build much comb in the fall, So I would "guess" that they use the same cells for spring, summer, fall and winter. All usually built in the spring during the major flow.

   Iddee;
    Is natural cell the same world wide? If you are talking small cell or large cell, let's stick to foundation. Natural cell is not comparable.
   Actually, as I understand it, it is, with the AHB actually building slightly smaller cells on average. The discussion was about regression, which, to me means going from the commercial sized cells which are usually around 5.4mm, to the small cell wich is 4.9mm. A few commercially available foundation is as large as 5.6mm. Part of the regression to actually use small cell, is allowing them to build natural cell, which if allowed of their own free will, will progressively get smaller. That is why it was brought into the discussion.
   Your explanation of WHY those bees may be smaller, IE the binding of feet or smaller fish tank is dead on the money as I see it, in that they are smaller because the cell size they build is smaller.
   SOME, claim that bees on small cell emerge two days earlier than those on large cell commercial foundation.. THen they go on to say that because of this the mites in those cells do not have the time they need to mature.....     I have never seen that, but I have seen, and marked times and dates of the cells being capped in the Observation hive thats right here in my living room window, and watched them emerge between fourteen and sixteen hours earlier than those on the frames that still had the larger cells..   I have the times and dates written down, but that does not mean I was vigilant enough to give what I observed as proof positive, only that it was enough to convince me that there is a difference.

  Regression;
 noun
1.
the act of going back to a previous place or state; return or reversion.
2.
retrogradation; retrogression.
3.
Biology. reversion to an earlier or less advanced state or form or to a common or general type.


   I do not now, and will never claim that the bees are smaller because they are BRED to be smaller. My observation is just as you posted. Breeding has nothing to do with it. Thank you, that was the link I needed to explain more clearly.
   The bees make smaller cells, so they are smaller bees that emerge. Or, Reversion to a common or general type.  In this aspect, I have to step back and agree with Tec. The bees breeding smaller is not what is happening. Now I understand he horse reference.

[vincent]

and a Vincent snip...
We have a 4 year old mare who is currently 16.3H but dam and sire we both in the high 15s, who knew!


and to Vincent comments... any and all biological measurements are subject to natural variations with some mean measurement and some variation.   for a 'normal distribution' the mean measurement is surround by three standard deviation on each side of this 'average' measurement.... no one size fits all.  in this 'statistical think' there is a concept called 'regression to the mean' which suggest that over time breeding of animals at the extremes of the distribution will produce individuals with measurements that 'regress to the mean' < basically you cannot breed shorter and shorter folks (or taller and taller) by continuing to breed short people (and the same goes for tall folks).
   

Thanks for this information, I very much enjoy the topic of genetics, but am learning. . Now I guess my next question then is how would you create a breeding regime to move the mean height of a horse, say from 15.2 to 16.1? I always imagined that there is a certain amount of randomness in the way genes are inherited, but they would fall within the bell-curve you are mentioning.

[Ray]

Now that everybodies fired-up.
Would somebody walk me through this?
A swarm populates an empty cavity. The bees start drawing comb. These should be sized for larva (correct?)
The bees continue producing comb and eggs and stores. What size are the cells and where are they in relation to each other? Bees do build a storage size cell (correct?)
The wax hardens and the nursery cells are reinforced with silk. These cells are permanent and will survive until the colony fails (correct?)
Natural size cells range from too big to too small (correct?)
The bees produce cells, as they need them, in the area available. The bees build outward and downward and then work there way back upward and inward (correct?)
The following season, what happens? Do the bees use the cells that fit there needs or do they use the cells willy-nilly?

[LazyBkpr]

Not fired up at all. I dont know enough to get fired up. 

RAY;
   A swarm populates an empty cavity. The bees start drawing comb. These should be sized for larva (correct?)

   No, they are sized for the bees they were designed for, workers or drones, the larvae grows to fill the cell.

   Ray;
   The wax hardens and the nursery cells are reinforced with silk. These cells are permanent and will survive until the colony fails (correct?)
   Pretty close, the bee pupae coats the cell with silk after its been capped. Yes the bees would normally use this cell until it becomes contaminated or unusable because of the many layers of cocoon.

   Ray;
   The bees continue producing comb and eggs and stores. What size are the cells and where are they in relation to each other? Bees do build a storage size cell (correct?)

   This depends on what the frames have in them. Standard commercial foundation is usually 5.4mm. Small cell foundation is usually 4.9mm Drone cells are ? 6.4 to 6.6mm If I remember correctly.. Allowed to build natural comb when taken OFF of commercial 5.4mm cells they will typically build 5.1mm cells, give or take a mm. Allowed to continue to build their own comb, mine typically build cells that average 4.8 to 4.9mm with cells around the outer edges of the natural comb nearing 5.1mm and the cells in the center of the frames closer to 4.6mm.
   Some folks claim that the bees build their honey comb to a larger cell size, but when I did measure mine they were within a mm or two of the standard foundation - less comb they had built.

   Ray;
   Natural size cells range from too big to too small (correct?)
   
   I suppose it depends on the individual bees thoughts as to if the cell they were raised in was too big or too small??   

   Ray;
   The bees produce cells, as they need them, in the area available. The bees build outward and downward and then work there way back upward and inward (correct?)

   Usually they build down and out if allowed to do it their way. Making new comb from the top down and spreading it outward as they go. They dont usually build upwards, though I have had weird bees that tried. Ted can verify this.   They will start another comb besie the first and again build it down and out.   We provide frames and encourage them to keep their combs lined up neatly, where as in a cavity they will build some interesting patterns.

   Ray;
   The following season, what happens? Do the bees use the cells that fit there needs or do they use the cells willy-nilly?

   The queen typically starts in the center and lays eggs in a concentric pattern spiraling outward. A fully developed brood chamber would look like a soccer or basketball if we could cross section it. the bees will store pollen and honey around the brood area for use. As the top of the hive is filled with stores, the queen and brood area are forced lower in the hive..
  Using frames, and adding supers means they dont always get forced down because they have room above for all those extra stores. They use the frames/cells they have available in the brood chamber, and will re purpose them as needed. If storing honey in them they will often draw them out longer, though not necessarily wider.
   Scott
 
 
   

[apisbees]

When foundation presses were invented 1857 in Germany, to 1876 when Root patented the foundation roller, This all happened shortly after Langstroth's removable frame in 1851. At this time in beekeeping history the bees that was being kept by beekeepers were the German black bee. To any that have seen them and worked hives with this type of bees knows they are one of the larger bees of the different races. Just as the smaller African bee produces a smaller cell size, the Original cell size I believe was  taken from the bees being used at the time. Other than beekeepers own personal biases on cell size bees will use whatever cell size they are put on. Even African colonies will take over managed colonies that have the larger cell size comb.
The first brood emerges from a 6 sided cell, as subsequent generations of bees emerge the cell insides become rounder and smaller with each bee emerging.

[tecumseh]

a lazy beekeeper snip..
Then how do you explain smaller cells with exactly the same nutrition? I can point to quite a few different places where you can see pictures of natural cell compared to commercial cell foundation, and the difference is quite obvious. I have measured them myself and confirmed all of those findings.  I am somewhat confused, because I thought this was generally accepted knowledge by anyone that had kept bees on natural comb.  OR, wanted to use small cell, so used natural comb to allow their bees to build smaller cells and regress.

tecumseh < with a lot of time on his hands and recouping from a brown recluse bite...
if there is a good resource to understand the primary variable in the size of a honey bee and I suspect the size of comb bees will build then I suggest you first take a look at the publication 'fat bee, skinny' bee which is a publication that you can download from the net.  It is an Aussie publication, is NOT short and should take you some time to digest that text but first and foremost is it is good view of honeybee nutrition and how you can rear large or small bees from exactly the same hive < in the 'natural world' a seasonally driven variable.  It provides some basic understanding the importance of nectar/sucrose and pollen in the bees diet.   most beekeeper should be quick to recognize that variation in quantities and quality of both of these food stuff varies greatly over the season.   you may also note in the analysis of pollen (all from Australia) the number of pollen types that were deficient in quality.  Note... since the Aussie have no program to subsidize corn production there is not price advantage to feed hfcs so they largely feed sucrose in the form of syrup.

an apisbee snip..
This all happened shortly after Langstroth's removable frame in 1851. At this time in beekeeping history the bees that was being kept by beekeepers were the German black bee. To any that have seen them and worked hives with this type of bees knows they are one of the larger bees of the different races. Just as the smaller African bee produces a smaller cell size, the Original cell size I believe was  taken from the bees being used at the time. Other than beekeepers own personal biases on cell size bees will use whatever cell size they are put on.

my reply...
Some details here Apis  :'(  don't recall in exactly the same fashion but you do kindly bring up the second variable which is genetics.  it should be recalled that at that time a.m.m. (ie the german black bee) was not only the dominate form in northern europe it also was the dominate kind of bee here.  a bit later Italian and Carnoilan stock would enter the picture (but really much after the commercial production of foundation).  The detail I have that differs from your is yes the german black bee was larger that the africanized bee but it was morphologically smaller than either the Italian or Carni.... both are somewhat larger and had a somewhat longer probiscus and part of the thinking in term of importing them here was they could access deeper flowers (this of course was all quite speculative in terms of a longer probiscus equating to the capacity to harvest more of a honey crop).  Once introduced both breeds were consider superior in production and disposition to the previously dominate a.m.m.

beyond the small details the larger message here is we have a great variation in the genetic origins of managed honeybees here in the US and Canada (all of differing size originally).  so what 'one size' fits all bees under all situations?