Comparative analysis of queen rearing methods shows Doolittle method yields higher quality traits in Apis Meliifera queens.
The present investigation was undertaken to assess the quality traits of Apis meliifera L. queens raised through standard queen rearing methods namely Doolittle, Miller, Smith and Swarming instinct during the spring breeding season 2016-17 at the Experimental Apiary located at Bee Research Station, Nagrota Bagwan, CSK HPKV, Himachal Pradesh. A fixed number (n = 24) and age (d” 24 hours) of either larvae (Doolittle) or eggs (Miller and Smith) were used to rear the queen cells. The significantly highest acceptance was recorded for Doolittle method (13.50 ± 1.44; 56.25%) followed by Miller method (11.25 ± 1.31; 46.88%), while the acceptance was least for the Smith method (10.25 ± 1.31; 42.71%). The maximum number of sealed queen cells colony-1 (9.00 ± 1.22) and neonate queens colony-1 (6.00 ± 0.91) were also witnessed in the Doolittle method followed by the Miller method (8.00 ± 1.08 sealed queen cells colony-1; 4.25 ± 0.85 queens colony-1) and Smith method (7.75 ± 0.85 queen cells colony-1; 2.75 ± 0.62 queens colony-1). The Doolittle method also produced the largest queen cells (25.86 ± 0.89 × 12.11 ± 0.23 mm) followed by the Miller method (25.00 ± 0.33 × 11.93 ± 0.44 mm), whereas the smallest queen cells (21.12 ± 0.24 × 10.23 ± 0.75 mm) were witnessed in the colonies with Swarming instinct. The newly emerged queens from Doolittle, Miller, Swarming instinct and Smith methods had the mean body weights of 201.75 ± 10.06, 191.00 ± 8.82, 186.75 ± 6.54 and 184.00 ± 7.73 mg, respectively. The queens raised using the Doolittle method, initiated egg laying 3-4 days earlier (18.75 ± 0.48 days) compared to other methods (22.00 ± 0.41 days in Miller; 22.25 ± 0.48 days in Smith and 22.50 ± 0.87 days in Swarming instinct method). Overall, the Doolittle method produced the highest quality queens and Miller method was the next best. The Doolittle method could be used for mass rearing of high-quality queens on a commercial scale.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kamboj et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: