Queen longevity and hive size

[Bumble]

Is the useful lifespan of a queen affected by the size of the brood box she's expected to fill?

Any thoughts?

[Jon]

Hi Bumble.
I doubt that is a factor. I have heard people argue the opposite, claiming that keeping them confined too long in apideas where they lay very little is bad for them but I haven't found that to be the case myself. More likely longevity has to do with other factors - how much sperm she stored from the drones she mated with, avoiding nosema which affects the ovaries, and avoiding the beekeeper who accidentally squashes her during an inspection. Any little defect or a poor mating and the bees will supersede her. There is some discussion whether queens from some races live longer than others but I suspect that is anecdotal. There is also speculation about agricultural pesticides and beekeeper chemicals used for varroa treatment affecting queen lifespan but again I don't think there is any hard evidence.

[Rosie]

According to Beowulf Cooper native bees regulate their laying rate to match the cavity they find themselves in. By putting them in a small hive they thus lay fewer eggs and their sperm stock lasts longer. That can lengthen their useful life.

Rosie

[mbc]

I dont know about the size of the brood box being an important factor in queen longevity, but I'm convinced from my own observations having to re-establish a brood nest ( either after swarming or a shook swarm ) seriously shortens a queens life. I've looked for published corroborative evidence for this theory but with no luck so far.

[susbees]

Putting an excellent breeder queen in a nuc is supposed to lengthen her life. Figures.

[Bumble]

It was a rainy day question that, at the time, made perfect sense. I assumed that a queen has a finite number of eggs and if she has a large space to fill she will use them up more quickly.

[Rosie]

Bumble, I agree except that I would expect her to run out of sperm rather than eggs.

Rosie

[Rosie]

... I'm convinced from my own observations having to re-establish a brood nest ( either after swarming or a shook swarm ) seriously shortens a queens life. I've looked for published corroborative evidence for this theory but with no luck so far.

That's an interesting and plausible theory. I'll try to keep it in mind when monitoring my colonies.

Rosie

[gavin]

Me too ... hadn't thought of that one.

We usually talk of queens running out of sperm rather than eggs, anyone know whether or not this was guesswork?

[Adam]

Brother Adam kept breeder queens in small hives with the view that a lot of egg laying would result in weaker queen daughters. In this case he would not know if the queen was actually any good?
Bigger queens can presumably store more sperm and last longer than smaller ones before they run out of sperm and the more eggs laid per month must result in a shorter productive life.
Whether this affects queen pheromone levels and the desire of the colony to swarm I dunno; if apparently (to us) decent queens are regularly superceded before their tanks are empty.

[prakel]

In 'The Behaviour of Bees and of Bee-Keepers' Wadey wrote the following:

"....There is one feature about it (supersedure) that never seems to have attracted any attention: the fact that when it happens the eggs of each queen may be easily distinguished by their size.

The old lady who is being superseded is found to be laying eggs which are noticeably attenuated in comparison with those of her daughter, which would appear to be some fifty per cent heavier. Quite often at the end of the summer one finds the two sizes of egg in a hive, and a short search then always reveals the new queen and her mother.

Observation of egg sizes has indicated that the eggs of a newly mated queen are always much larger than those of a failing queen. Several bee-keepers to whom I have pointed out these variations have agreed, after several seasons observation, that they could often detect a supersedure in a hive in late summer by finding large eggs in the brood combs. A search always revealed a new queen in possession. (This was in cases where there were not two queens present)....."

He went on to suggest research into whether larvae from smaller eggs are distinguishable from those of larger eggs and also whether a lay off through the winter or (to a lesser degree) swarming could result in an increased egg size once laying had resumed. I don't know if anyone ever did research these things but it would be interesting to see any such work if it is available.

[Bumble]

That's interesting, thanks.

[Adam]

yes, interesting, I'll have to keep my eye on the eggs. My buggers never seem to supercede - just swarm!

[Neils]

I've had a few supersedures, but I've never had the courage to just let them get on with it and see what happens just in case I have misread it and turns out to be (late) swarming so I've generally reduced to a single cell and popped the existing queen into a nuc just in case.

[Rosie]

I have one colony that supersedes well but it's not very pure so I have not done much breeding with it and so have not produced another quite like it. It's superseding now and if the Queen cell is still there on Friday I plan to steel it to start a new colony and let the old one produce another. I would have taken it today when I discovered it but I did not have time. The queen was merrily laying away with a single sealed queen cell at the other end of the box. She is marked blue and produced no queen cells at all last year despite the colony filling 2 brood boxes and producing loads of honey. The bloodline used to supersede when they were fairly pure but over the generations they have turned partly yellow and lost their wing score but in other respects are still the same.

Rosie

[prakel]

this one is off topic but prompted by Rosie's post...


According to Beowulf Cooper native bees regulate their laying rate to match the cavity they find themselves in. By putting them in a small hive they thus lay fewer eggs and their sperm stock lasts longer. That can lengthen their useful life.

Rosie

Open question to anyone that knows....

Are there strains of amm extanct which perform well in hives larger than the usual single brood National/Smith configuration? I've seen various references to strains of amm which were able to produce large colonies but so much of what is being written these days seems to suggest that selecting for the less prolific strains is 'truer' to what the native bee should be. I'm not too bothered about whether individuals think such a trait is positive or not, but whether such selection is actually having a visible effect on the way the native bee is evolving.

[Rosie]

Robert Jones of South West Wales has some native stock dating back many years and has supplied other breeding groups from the early year's of BIBBA. He likes to keep 2 separate native stains in apiaries many miles apart. He tells me that each strain is contained in single national hives but the deliberate crosses (or within-race hybrids) that he produces between these strains require double brood boxes and are the ones that get him the bulk of his honey. Because these hybrids are still pure AMM they do not suffer from the defensiveness that most other hybrids do.

Rosie

[prakel]

Hi Rosie, thanks for the reply; an interesting illustration.

[prakel]

Taken from post number 11.


He went on to suggest research into whether larvae from smaller eggs are distinguishable from those of larger eggs and also whether a lay off through the winter or (to a lesser degree) swarming could result in an increased egg size once laying had resumed. I don't know if anyone ever did research these things but it would be interesting to see any such work if it is available.

A gentle bump incase anyone is interested in observing/comparing for themselves at this time of year.