Top Bar Beekeeping at Hirschbach Apiary

A biological approach to beekeeping using top bar beehives
Home
Bee Behavior
Seasonal Cycles
Honey Bee Life History
Honey Bee Nutrition
TBH Spring Management
Preparing A TBH for Winter
Feeding bees with Fondant
Key to Hive Survival
Natural Cell Size
Working a TBH
Working a TBH with Spacers
Straight Comb
Ventilation
Screened Bottom Boards
Varroa Detection and Cont
Varroa and the TBH
Treating Varroa w/o Chemi
Surviving with Varroa
The Experiment
Contingency Plan
Hive Designs
Starter Strips Made Easy
Record Keeping
Frequently Asked Question
Library
Great Links
Contact Us
Screened Bottom Boards
 
    The transformation to a ventilation device
 
     SBB's for short were developed as a means to trap and monitor mites. The idea is that you slide a screen usually #8 hardware wire under the brood nest. Below this is the floor of the hive which would also have to slide in and out. On the floor you would put sticky paper (contact paper) or just coat it with crisco so the mites that would die or fall off the bees would be trapped and could not crawl back up to the bees, then they could be counted and mite fall could be monitored. Beekeepers in some climates found that pulling the floor out and leaving just the screen in place aided in ventilation, some even are able to leave it out throughout the winter. They found thier bees to be healthier and more vigorus come spring. Others tried and were totaly devistated! Again find out what works in your area!
 
The beginning of the Screened Bottom Board and its intended use!
 
Beltsville Screen Insert Curbs Bee Mites
By Jan Suszkiw
January 18, 2000

    Beekeepers no longer have to rely solely on chemicals to battle the pesky varroa mite, thanks to a new control developed by an Agricultural Research Service scientist. Entomologist Jeff Pettis and colleagues at the agency's Bee Research Lab in Beltsville, Md., developed the Beltsville Screen Insert to help thwart the mite.
     Honey bees produce $270 million of honey, beeswax and other hive products and pollinate nearly $10 billion worth of crops annually. Varroa mites attach to bees and feed on them, reducing their population and inhibiting their productivity. The screen will be a boost to both hobby and commercial beekeepers who produce honey and rent their colonies for pollination services.
    The screen separates the mites from the bees by creating a 1.5-inch gap between the bottom board and hive bottom. When bees groom each other, they sometimes knock the mites off. Smoke and chemical treatments applied by beekeepers also help remove the mites. The insert's wire mesh allows the mites to fall through the screen and onto the hive bottom, so the mites can't reattach to bees as they enter and leave the colony.
After taking monthly samples of the fallen varroa, it was found that the screen reduces varroa populations by 15 percent.
    Varroa mite infestations have become such a serious problem that maintaining bee colonies without chemical treatment is virtually impossible. Currently, the only pesticide approved for general use for varroa mite control is Apistan, a strip that contains the chemical tau-fluvalinate. But varroa mites have begun to show resistance to the chemical, so scientists are looking for alternatives such as the screen.
    The screen reduces the reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides while still helping control the mites. Researchers are continually developing and improving the screen, but it is already being sold in the Brushy Mountain beekeeping supply catalog.

  Current studies with screened bottom boards all over the world are comming up with two common results.
 
1. The device was orginally thought to reduce the load by 15%  which was an inaccurate  estimate due to the fact there was no way to know how many dead mites on the board were due to natural causes and would not have climed back up anyway!
 
2. It makes no measurable difference what so ever!
 
    Somewhere in the beekeeping world someone pulled the bottom off for winter ventilation and had very good results. Thus the SBB was deemed a ventilation device. For you this can only be proved through experimenting or asking a beekeeper in your area. To see plans for a SBB designed for a Langstroth hive click here. If you wish to use a SBB's with your TBH simply modify the bottom of your hive, your imiagination is your only limit. I would ensure that there is a way to close it.

 
Heres something else to keep in mind:
 
If the bees are trying to maintain around 92 degrees F and it is 115 degrees F outside, do you think opening the bottom of the hive will make more or less work for them? 
 

An excerpt from the following report

(The whole report will be available shortly)

 

Experimentation of an Anti-Varroa Screened Bottom Board in the Context of Developing an Integrated Pest Management Strategy for Varroa Infested Honeybees in the Province of Quebec

 

accomplished within the framework of the program: “Appui au développement de l’agriculture et de l’agroalimentaire en region 2000-2003” of the “Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentaiton du Québec, Canada (Regional district of l’Estrie)
Final Report
by
Jean Pierre Chapleau,
March 2002
translated and revised
March 2003

 

Validation of the function principle of the anti-varroa bottom board


    The principle of the AV bottom board hinges on the hypothesis that some varroa mites are alive when they fall naturally off of adult bees. We wanted to verify the validity of this hypothesis. By sampling six hives for natural mortality during a period of 24 hours, we observed that 16% of fallen varroa mites were alive (figure 11). In his study, C. Webster (4) concluded that the percentage of live fallen varroa mites varied from 39% to 50%. The proportion of living fallen varroa mites seems to vary according to different conditions. The confirmation that a part of the falling varroa mites are still alive validates the principle behind the use of the AV bottom board and explains the positive results obtained during the 2001 trials.
 

The thermal factor and the anti-varroa bottom board

 

    The important difference in the global results obtained in 2000 (29.2% more varroa mites) and 2001 (37% less varroa mites) for sub group AV suggest a confirmation of the negative thermal influence assumed in the 2000 trials. In 2000, all of the anti-varroa bottom boards were operated with the bottom opened while in 2001, with the exception of the YBO group, the bottom boards were operated with the bottom closed. To our knowledge, this is the only operational factor that was systematically different between the 2000 and 2001 trials. The results strongly suggest a connection between this factor and the negative results obtained with the use of anti-varroa bottom boards during the 2000 trials. We can legitimately assume that the brood cluster temperature was lowered with the use of the opened anti-varroa bottom board. Numerous references can be found in scientific literature confirming that lower temperature conditions enhance the development of varroa populations. Ingemar Fries (12) states: “(…) mite population seems to grow faster in cooler climates than in warmer areas (…) it has been suggested that climatic factors are decisive in determining the mite population growth although the mechanism remains unclear.” We can believe that a longer period of time in the capped brood stage resulting from a lower temperature favors an increase in the reproductive rate of the varroa mite’s population. An increase of time in the capped brood stage enables the young female varroa mites to reach maturity before the bee emerges from its cell. Kraus and Velthuis (14) found that artificially reducing the brood temperature of colonies had the effect of doubling the mite population in comparison with control groups. Their laboratory tests allowed them to determine that 33 C was the optimal temperature for varroa mite reproduction. Kraus and Velthuis (14) suggest that beekeepers adopt practices that aid colonies in maintaining brood temperature at 35 C. The results obtained by Kraus and Velthuis were not available when planning for the 2000 trials as they were published in October of the same year. Reference to the influence of temperature on the rhythm of natural varroa drop can also be found in recent scientific literature. Thomas C. Webster (4) found that this drop is correlated to the average outdoor daytime temperature. J.T. Ambrose (13) also found (2001) that when infested adult bees were exposed to variable temperatures in laboratory conditions, the percentage of varroa mites falling from the bees increased with the elevation of the ambient temperature. Here again we can deduce that the brood chamber temperature should not be lowered.

 

RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE


 This page updated 05 Jan 08

Copyright © 2002-2007 Gary Piantanida- Free for Private Use. - All Other Rights Are Reserved.