As it is known, Varroa mites are one of the biggest problems in beekeeping today, and therefore, naturally, this area is given special attention. For beekeepers, this is a huge problem, leading to the death of bees and large material costs. For beekeeping businessmen, these are colossal profits from both the sale of low-efficiency chemicals and the sale of so-called "varroa-tolerant" bee breeds.
How are such myths formed... Let's consider this using the example of a scientific article from an Australian entomology journal, one of the authors of which is one of the most serious US scientists studying the problem of varroatosis in bees - Thomas Rinderer. The article - Responses to Varroa destructor and Nosema ceranae by several commercial strains of Australian and North American honeybees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Thomas E Rinderer,1* Benjamin P Oldroyd,2 Amanda M Frake,1 Lilia I de Guzman1 and Lelania Bourgeois1 (1Honey Bee Breeding, Genetics, and Physiology Laboratory, USDA-ARS, 1157 Ben Hur Road, Baton Rouge, LA 70820, USA. 2Behaviour and Genetics of Social Insects Laboratory, School of Biological Sciences A12, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.) is published in the Australian Journal of Entomology (2013) 52, 156–163
The article, beautifully formatted according to all the rules of scientific publications, tells us the following.... The abstract of this article summarizes the results of a well-designed and executed experiment, which compared the percentage of mite infestations in colonies of four breeds of bees - Australian natives, American Italian, Russian, and a certain VSH breed.
How beautiful it all looks! I just want to shout – Americans and Australians, buy only Russian bees and the VSH line!
But this is a complete and possibly deliberate deception!
Let's start with the fact that the initial data on the mite infestation of all experimental families were averaged, which gave some average mite infestation of 2.6%, although in reality it was from 2 to 4%%. Accordingly, the rate of growth of mite infestation could not be the same in principle.
Secondly, the results of the study indicate that during May, June and July there was practically no increase in infestation in all breed lines, and then from August to October there was a sharp jump in the growth of the mite population! Apparently, the article was written by those, who did not know that May is a winter month in Australia, and June, July and August are spring months! And September and October are the first months of summer! But everyone knows that a sharp increase in the mite population occurs precisely at the end of spring - beginning of summer!
So there is no mystery here - in winter the mite population does not grow or grows very slightly, which was demonstrated by the data for May, June and July.
What else is wrong here? Here's what - among the unfortunate Italian and Australian bees, almost half of the families died, and among Russian and VSH families, only about 4% died. From this, a far-reaching conclusion was made that, of course, Russian bees and VSH lines have a high tolerance to Varroa mites.
Unfortunately, this is another oversight of scientists, or a deliberate bluff. The fact is that, firstly, the final levels of mite infestation of all families are proportional to a slightly greater or lesser degree to their initial mite infestation, and secondly, in Australian and Italian bees they are so high that the bees died already in early to mid-summer. This is exactly what we have always claimed! If the percentage of bees infestation in the spring is more than 2%, then the death of the bees is inevitable before the end of the season. And so it happened. Russian and VSH families had a lower initial mite infestation and a slightly slower development rate, but they also came to October with fairly high percentages of mite infestation, although not lethal at the moment. Most likely, the death of families would have been just as high, but pushed back further into the fall.
Now let's look at our version of events based on the data obtained by our "respected" scientists.
As you can see from the table, the main measurements were taken in winter and early spring months. Therefore, it is natural that there are practically no changes in the mite infestation during May, June and July. With the beginning of spring, a sharp increase began, with results corresponding to the initial mite infestation of the families. However, since it was only the beginning of spring, the theoretical rate of increase in mite infestation of two times a month was not achieved in any of the families of any breed. And, oddly enough, the closest to it were the "varroa-tolerant" bees of the VSH lines. For other breeds, this coefficient was even lower. Moreover, for the Italian bee breed from the USA, it was almost 2 times lower!
And, finally, the most important thing. If we compare the growth rates of mite infestation in families of different breeds over 2 months of spring, we will see that the data will be radically different from the data offered by our "respected" scientists.
So:
The first place was taken by Italian bees with a mite growth coefficient of 1.88. The second place was taken by Russian bees with a mite growth rate of 2.44. (But it should be noted that the spring growth rate of Russian bees is somewhat lower than other breeds.) The third place was taken by Australian bee lines with a mite growth rate of 2.73. And the last place was taken by bees of the VSH line with a mite growth rate of 3.58.
The results are almost exactly the opposite!
What conclusion can be drawn from this experiment? It seems to me that the main conclusion is that there are no bees that will solve the problem of Varroa mites in their hives on their own, without our participation. Given the decreasing effectiveness of chemical acaricides, it is necessary to turn to simple and understandable zootechnical methods of combating Varroa mites. And first of all, this is to stop the reproduction and sale of bees in divisions with brood! And secondly, to create such conditions in the hives so that the rate of reproduction of mites is significantly reduced. In this case, the overall effect will be much higher than that of chemical acaricides. Moreover, simultaneously on a national scale.