Small Cell Doesn’t Work (but please don’t tell my bees)

OK, here we go…Six years ago I started my blog with this statement, “I do not claim my methods are best or even correct. My hope is to provide the reader an understanding as to why I try something and to actually see the results”. Today, I’ll discuss my experience using small cell foundation, possibly one of the most divisive and controversial topics in beekeeping with the exception of treat vs no treat. Of course, if you are reading this blog, you know I do not treat with the exception of fall feeding–and then–only if needed.

Unless you have read the archives, many of you probably have no idea that I use small cell foundation as part of my IPM (integrated Pest Management) plan in all of my hives. Small cell foundation cells diagonally measure 4.9mm while conventional foundation measures about 5.4mm. The theory behind small cell foundation is the smaller cell diameter helps reduce mite load. More later…

Clinically Proven Ineffective

First, let me say every major university study comparing the efficacy of small vs standard cell foundation shows small cell is not effective and may, in fact, actually increase the number of mites in a hive. I am friends with one of the researchers who wrote the “definitive study” saying small cell does not work. Contact me and I can send you to the study.

On the other hand, many beekeepers including; Michael Bush, Dean Stiglitz (The Complete Idiots Guide to Beekeeping), Dee Lusby, etc all claim great success using small cell. The debate on http://www.beesource.com is often heated with many in the conventional cell/treat camp saying any positive results small cell/no treat beekeepers achieve means we are “very lucky” or are now told we use the “HITS” method of beekeeping (head in the sand). Why, regardless of the topic in this country, do opposing sides absolutely discount any possible potential benefit in the opposite position? I think many folks in this country–regardless of their dogma– have their collective “HUTA” (figure it out) and need to be more open minded that other opinions may have some potential merit.

The Theory Behind Small Cell

In the early 1900s, beekeepers used 4.9mm foundation as it was what the bees naturally drew out. Thinking that bigger bees would mean increased honey production, they started pressing 5.4mm cells (which we now consider conventional cell size). Sure ‘nuf, the bees grew bigger and honey production rose. Eighty years later, V. destructor comes along and almost completely devastates honeybees by laying eggs in the larger brood cells.

Varroa Gestation Cycle

To really understand how small cell may work we need to take a quick look at the Varroa mite gestation cycle. A mite that is attached to a mature bee is called a phoretic mite. These are the mites we occasionally see on a bees during a hive inspection. Phoretic refers to the relationship when one organism provides transportation to a different species of organism. Phorectic mites are female. When, in the hive they find a larvae that is about to be capped, they drop off of the bee to which they have been attached and enter the cell, hiding in the larval food at the bottom. About 60 hours after the  cell is capped, the female lays her first egg, a haploid with 7 chromosomes. This is a male mite and she only lays one. The remaining eggs laid will all be diploid and have 14 chromosomes (female). Once mature, the male impregnates the females which then attach to the larvae and feed. The male mite dies and the attached females leave the cell when the bee hatches. Females lay approx 4-5 eggs in a drone cell and 2-3 in worker cells. They are also drawn to the odor of drone brood which is why many beekeepers find drone frames to be an effective part of their IPM.

Theory of Small Cell

Someone discovered that when the mite laid eggs in a smaller cell, the male was either pinned between the larvae and the cell wall or not able to impregnate the females. To me, this effect falls apart a bit here as the size of bees become smaller when using small cell. This makes me think the mite eventually has room as the bees regress back to their original, smaller size. It also may make drone comb more effective but this is MY thought and has no back up. None-the-less, I can easily imagine not as many viable mites can develop in the  smaller cells.

The Test

Last weekend I was asked to teach my version of IPM to a class of new beekeepers. If I listen to many of the “experts” on the forums, I do EVERYTHING wrong. I use small cell, I do not treat, I use screen bottom boards, I split my hives etc. How any of my 27 hives continue to exist means I am incredibly lucky because I must be incompetent to do so many things wrong. So, I decided to really find out how effective my IPM plan was in front of an inquisitive audience rather than assume it is working.

Knowing the class was coming I did not inspect the hives for 2 weeks. Three days before the class, I randomly placed sticky boards under 3 hives. One of the other mentors brought a jar for doing a sugar role test. After explaining my techniques for raising bees and talking about the various methods one may use to treat a number of pests, it was time to see if my hives were doing as well as I said.

The Results

Envelope please…The sticky board test is supposed to measure mite drop over 24 hours. This test measured over almost 72 hours. The first board had 2 mites, the 2nd had 3, the last had 5. Over 72 hours! I’ll take that anytime! Now came the sugar roll. We estimated we had 250 bees in the jar and rolled the living daylights out of them. We then shook all of the powdered sugar into a plastic container filled with water so the sugar would immediately dissolve and show us the mites that fell off of the bees. No lifeguard necessary. The total number of mites in the water….ZERO. None. Nunca, The null set. No mites were in the water. No mites were on those bees.

I then started pulling drone larvae out of cells that were on primarily worker brood. One mite on a drone larvae…

In Conclusion…

We all know that what works for us in our exact location may very well not work for someone else in another part of the country or even across town. Certainly, if I was a commercial beekeeper, I would not be able to risk my livelihood without using some kind of treatment, however soft I may wish it to be. However, those who go onto forums and tell us we are wrong and that we need to use their methods or fail need to think again. I have no know why university level studies show opposite results. All I know is, tho’ there are mites in my hives as there are in every apiary in North America and Europe, my bees are currently handling their mite load in treatment free, small cell hives. No added expense, no making sure my honey supers are removed, no impingement to my queens and no added contamination to my comb. I must be a really lucky beekeeper, but then I’ve always thought one makes his/her own luck.

Important Note: If you wish to experiment with small cell foundation, please know that you cannot just drop it in your hive and let your bees deal with it. You have to go through a 2 month to 1 year process to regress the size of your bees . Check out Michael Bush’s website http://bushfarms.com/bees.htm, Dean’s and Ramona’s book that I mentioned above or Google “regressing bees for small cell foundation” for more information.

My sincere thanks to Michael Bush. Your website and our conversations have  shown me  there is a more humane way to raise bees than the prophylactic treatment path I was about to begin when I started beekeeping.

Any errors in the above tome are mine.

May your bees keep buzzin’.