BEE-spoke-data/bees-v0 huggingface dataset:
**THE BEE-KEEPERS' MAGAZINE.** _to the larvae._ While in the intestine, red and dark-colored excrement, mixed with pollen-hussels of the lily, were plainly evident. _Many bees were caught, just about to feed the larvae, and the chyle was found in each case._ [This, of course, is crucial. Not finding chyle, like larval food, in the stomach, does not prove its universal absence. Finding it once, proves its existence. Granting the fact, the conclusion must follow.]
**SAILVARY GLANDS OF BESES.**
All mature bees--workers, drones and queens--possess--I. The upper head salivary glands, and--II. The thoracic salivary glands. Besides these the worker-bees have--III. The lower head salivary glands. Glands I. and II. have a common ending at the base of the ligula, in the groove formed by the paralogosse. This secretion can, as the tongue is extended, flow into the grove and wet the ligula, but can go no further, because the ligula, or sucking-tube, is no fountain-pump, and the larvae has no sucking arrangement to draw this out.
[A stronger argument, perhaps, lies in the fact that drones and queens also have these glands, and surely they do not feed the larvae. No one can think that these are the milk-glands, even if milk-glands exist.]
The secretion from glands I. is oily ; that from glands II. watery, which would indicate that they possess a different function.
The function of the sucking apparatus will show that the saliva is necessary to wet the ligula, and to make it possible that the nectar can ascend. It would require too much space here to explain the function of the sucking apparatus, which is a misnomer, as bees never suck nor lick.
[Very likely the saliva, like our own, may serve to aid in keeping parts moist ; but from the size of the glands, and quantity of the secretion, this, as is our own case, must be incidental. I think our friend is surely mistaken in his last assertion. I think I haveshown that bees do both suck and lick.]
If bees do change nectar more than to evaporate it--that is, if they change the kind of sugar (I am not sure that they do), then it is probably done by gland II. Such a change could be due only to a ferment, and could come only from the saliva.
[I know that bees change cane sugar to reducible sugar, both when fed cane syrup or nectar. I have had analysis made in both cases. While not all came sugar would be reduced, most would be. That the saliva from glands I. and II, does this there can be no doubt. Honey is digested nectar, the digesting ferment being this saliva. While the drones and queen are fed in part by the workers, yet they take honey ; and unless this is fully digested by the workers, the drones and queen must finish the work, and so must have glands I. and II.]
The most important purpose of glands II., or their secretion is for the test-organs which are in the groove at the base of the ligula.
[I do not understand this point.]
Very likely the secretion from glands I. may be used to wet and smooth the newly formed cells. Thus these secretions are true saliva, and cannot belar-val food. This is without doubt true. Yet organized liquids do often have a double use. The pancreatic juice in the higher animals digest starch, fat and may digest the albuminoids--will in an alkaline liquid.
THE LOWER HEAD GLANDS.
The ducts from the lower head-glands open into the lower part of the mouth, between the muscles of the mouth. If the bee chews, this secretion must surely empty and be mixed with the chewed material. This, then, is mixed with the pollen. This is certainly true ; for the pollen in the honey stomach shows some of its caps open or elevated ; and as no gastric juice is secreted in the honey-stomach, this partial digestion is accomplished by the saliva, and presumably that from the lower head-glands. Further, this saliva is used in kneading the wax by the walls. F. Huber (_New Observations_) says that the fresh wax scales and the chewed wax are chemically different ; and Eulenmayer and Von Planta found in the wax scales 0.5977 per cent. nitrogen, while in the chewed wax there was 0.95 per cent. This must be due to this saliva. So we see that these glands secrete true saliva, and so cannot be organs to secrete bee-food.
[I have relied to the last argument before. The above positions are well taken. Is it not quite likely that these serve merely to mix with and partially digest the pollen, and that Wolff's glands at the base of the mandibles are the glands that moisten the wax?]
The large size of these glands is no argument favorable to the gland theory, if we take it into consideration that the saliva is very important in digestion, and in part takes the place of the gastric ferment of higher animals. Surely a large quantity of saliva is added to the pollen food of bees, and so this saliva is indirectly a part of the clyle and larval food.
[This is surely a powerful argument. We secrete saliva almost entirely to moisten our food, and the daily quantity is estimated at three pints. If this saliva in bees is to moisten the pollen, and the position of the duct adds powerfully to the argument, then much would certainly be needed. The fact, too, that drones and queens do not have these glands, and do not prepare their own nitrogenous food, is in harmony with, and, in fact, lends support to this view.]
We can find the same glands in other insects which do not feed the larvae at all, as _Eristalis tenax_, which has these glands fully as large as those of the bee; and _Nepa cinerea_, which has these glands, and they are very similar to those in the bee.
[This is surely a very strong argument.]
The product of these glands cannot be spit into the cells, for bees never spit. Nor is it at all likely that this secretion is swallowed to be regurgitated into the cell. Nature always empties her products where they are to be used ; so if there were milk-glands they would
This is also true of color when colored honey is fed.
[This is very interesting, and bears the impress of truth. This chyme is fed to the larvae of workers always, and sometimes, not always, I think, to the larvae of queens.]
The defenders of the gland theory say that it is impossible that bees regurgitate any material from the true stomach in the cells ; for, as Schiemenz has shown, the stomach-mouth is prolonged into the true stomach, and so would act as a valve, and prevent any of the contents of the true stomach from passing back into the honey-stomach and mouth. But Schonfeld has shown that this is a mistake. The muscles are so arranged that this prolongation can be drawn up, and so in nowise prevent regurgitation. The bee itself proves that it can, for the full-grown larvae does receive chyme, the product of the true stomach, and not of the honey-stomach. If the bees can regurgitate chyme or partly digested food, they surely can chyle, or that which is fully digested. This is chyme and not pollen, as the huks show.
Why should we surprised that the bee does this? It is a master of regurgitation, vomiting up all its honey, and some of it several times. A full understanding of the stomach-mouth enables us to understand how it regurgitates its chyme and chyle.
L. Stachelhausen.
From the Australasian Bee Journal.
ADULTERATION OF HONEY.
Some short time ago Major Shallard, an extensive bee-keeper in New South Wales, felt convinced that a great deal of adulterated honey was being sold in that colony to the injury of the legitimate honey producer. After drawing attention to the matter through the press he was instrumental in getting the New South Wales Bee-Keepers Association to take it up. This body instructed one of its members--Mr. Hamer, an analyst--to examine several samples of suspected honey, and report the result. On the 8th of March last, Mr. Hamer submitted his report, pre-facing it with an interesting paper on the constitution of honey, which we now publish. For the copy we are indebted to the kindness of Mr. J. R. Dibbs, Honorary Secretary New South Wales Bee-Keepers' Association. It is gratifying to know that adulteration is not carried on to the extent that was supposed.
Before attempting the subject of the adulteration of honey it will, perhaps, be best if we have first a clear idea of the nature and composition of the genuine article. To gain this we must go to the beginning of things, and trace its origin, for we shall then see that more than one branch of science must be entered upon before we can adequately appreciate the labors of th.
wonderful little insect that furnishes us with the product we so much esteem, and which is so often used in the poetic sense to denote the riches and abundance of a favored country when we speak of such and such a land as " flowing withmilk and honey."
One of the lessons that a science student soon learns when brought face to face with the facts of Nature is, that all the branches of knowledge commonly called "' the sciences," are dovetailed, as it were, into each other, and any particular department of science is very much better understood if the borderland of the next adjoining science is carefully surveyed too. Such is the case with regard to the subject now before us; and without more pre-face let us commence with the
ANTECDENTEDENTS OF HONEY.
An unpalatable gas exists in the vast ocean of air above us called carbon dioxide, or carbonic acid gas. This substance, although existing as an invisible gas, is of the greatest importance to plant life, and serves, amongst other things, in the air, the soil, and the water, as an indispensable food to the living plant.
One of the most graceful and beautiful parts of the plant is its leaf, and whether from the poetic, artistic or utilitarian point of view, the study of the leaf alone will amply repay one's time and study. Microscopic study of
a leaf; its form, position on stalk, toothed or plain edge, texture, surface, smell, smooth, woolly, or venations, are each worthy of note. But we are more particularly interested in the under side of the leaf--the stomata or mouths. 100,000 of them are often to be found on a single leaf; size of one --so to inch ; their use, the absorption of CO, (carbonic acid) and OH, (water). Presence of chlorophyll (the coloring matter in plants). Water -- chlorophyll -- CO, (carbonic acid) -- sunlight, produces starch. Product of life--Atoms, raw materials -- COH (carbon, oxygen, hydrogen). Honey, the finished product. Steps : CO, (carbonic acid), OH, (water), C,H,O, (Starch), C,H,O, ( dextrose, main constituent of honey). Example of the work of a living plant, formation of starch--1. Afternoon ; 2. morning ; 3. midday ; 4. evening. etc. The work does not stop here. Another agent, diastace, converting starch into sugar, and C, --H,O, (starch) into C,H,O, ( dextrose), in some plants stored up as sugar ; other as starch. Examples--Vine, passion fruit (sugar); maize, potato (starch). Plants are hard workers, and know no eight-hour movement. The most wonderful of all is that these large stores of starch or sugar are not available to the bee in making its honey. A portion of the sugar is diverted to the nectaries of flowers, generally known as nectar, and this sugar is placed in such a position that the bee fertilizes the flower in the very act of obtaining it. The fertilization of flowers is a most interesting subject, which, however, I must pass by. The greatest naturalists who ever lived have devoted their lives to this branch of science.
quantities of sugar in certain flowers.
Common garden pea, one flower, '153 grains sugar ; vetch, 'co2 grains sugar ; red clover, 'co3 grains sugar ; fuchsia, '117 grains sugar. In the bee's honey sac an acid converts the cane sugar of the plant into a variety of sugar called dextrose by the time it is deposited in the cell. Honey consists chiefly of dextrose and levelulose.
compposition of honey.
Water, 14 to 23 per cent.; a variety of sngar called dextrose, a variety of sugar called levelulose., cane sugar, traces, in new honey, but is converted into dextrose by the acid in the honey, mannite, 67 to 75 per cent.; wax. pollen, mineral matter (ash) '15 to '3 per cent.' phosphate of potash, '03 to '03 per cent.; bitter principle, alkaloid ; formic acid, organic acid not yet isolated ; dextrose, C,H,O, ; levelulose C,H,O, ; levelulose C,H,O,.
adulteration of honey.
Obviously the cleverest, would be the mixture of these two kinds of sugar in about the proportion found in genuine honey. This is both theoretically and practically possible, and the most difficult cases to detect sophistication are just those in which such proportions have been used. But the most valuable and most reliable tests are those based upon the presence of what I may here term the minor constituents, namely, the wax, pollen, organic acids, and ash.
Tests adopted until very recently : A solution of pure honey in water precipitate. 1. Fehling's mixture in the following proportion--100 parts honey give 137 parts Cu,O (copper oxide) ; 2. Alcohol should give no precipitate ; 3. P, (lead) acetate -- no precipitate ; 4. Ba Cl, (barium chloride)--no precipitate ; 5. Pure honey is entirely fermentable into C,H,H,O, (alcohol and carbonic acid); 6. A ten per cent. solution should have no action on polarized light, but if any to the left.
In 1884, Messrs. Abram, Lyle & Co., Mincing Lane and North Woolwich, brought out their artificial honey or honey substitute. Now, as this was. entirely manufactured from molasses and converted cane sugar, the preceding tests (many of them) were useless. Entire absence of P,O in ash of artificial honey, in genuine honey, '01 to '035 per cent. P,O, Possible adulteration : 1. Corn or starch syrup ; 2. Converted cane sugar ; 3. Molaess or cane sugar syrup. Curiously, American artificial honey made from glucose
The Bee-KeeperS' MAGAZINE. 243
When the honey harvest is about closing, and work on sections is so slow that the loss is becoming greater from dis-coloration than is gained by completion, they are at once removed. Those completed are put in crates ready for market. Those almost finished are sold to any who may wish to buy them, at a little less price. What are not disposed of in this way are cut out, put in pans, filling the interstices with extracted honey taken from the poorer finished sections. The pan and all is sold for about full price of nice sections, and no trouble to do it. The partly filled sections, after being nicely cleaned of wax and propolisis, are run through the extractor, after which they are returned to cases as before, and stacked up in short tiers. These are placed over or near hives at night, to be cleaned up. They are then stored away in a mouse-proof place until the next season.
Previous to placing these again over the bees, the combs are reduced in thickness so that the depth of the cell is not over one-fourth of an inch. To do this nicely and speedily I got out a piece of sheet iron, smoothed on one side, and just large enough to easily go inside the sections. To the four corners of this are fastened small rods of iron, of a suitable length to permit a small lamp to go under the plate. A good heavy block of wood, having holes to receive the legs of this small table, makes all solid and a nice place for the lamp to rest. Now, by turning on or off the flame, the plate is kept at such a degree of heat that the comb is quickly melted away to the desired thickness. They are now placed in the cases, and when the surplus room is needed by the bees, these sections are given to the strongest colonies, and at once they go to work on them. After the bees have worked on these combs a few days I examined all other colonies ; and where any are found slow about starting, I take four or five of these sections, bees and all, and place them in the center of the case, which will usually start them at once ; but if any colony, for lack of bees or other cause, still refuse to go to work, I exchange a full case, which never fails. By melting away part of the length of the cells the bees are compelled to add new wax in lengthening them out, which, when finished, will be as fine in texture as though no old comb had been used. If the honey taken from the unfinished sections is not rip enough to be nice, it must be placed in open vessels in a dry warm airy place, where it will soon become "'orthodox " honey. Some advise giving the unfinished sections to light colonies. As long as I can get ten to fifteen cents for this honey, and granulated-sugar syrup for five cents a pound, the latter will be used to supply colonies deficient in stores.
_Holliday's Cove, W. Va., Nov. 21, '87._
From the British Bee Journal.
**Bee-Keeping in Russia-A Floating Exhibition.**
Bee-keeping in Russia is making great strides. The committee of the bee department of the Imperial Society of acclimation in Moscow is taking the most worthy and effectual steps to make known and encourage a taste for this science, particularly in the country. From a return made up by this Society it would appear that in the district commonly known as the "Moscow Government " there are no less than 3148 agriculturals owning, among themselves, 5100 stocks of bees, and yet this district is not one of the most favorable for apiculture. Instruction in bee-keeping has been very limited in this district. Bee shows are rare and not at all within the reach of the people living in the country. It is, therefore, mostly with the object of remedying this state of things that the Committee of the Imperial Society has organized, at Mr. Nassonow's suggestion, a free, floating show, which has effectually excited the curiosity and interest of the inhabitants of the villages through which it has passed. Prince W. Dolgoroukow, the Governor-General, who was good enough to become honorary chairman of this Exhibition, and which had already been patronized by Mr. Podgorozky, President of the Committee, Professors Bogdanov, Krasnoeshow, honorary members, aud other members of the bee committee. Mr. Nassonow and Mr. Krotkow, Russian ecclesiastics, have more than any other occupied themselves with the bringing together of the necessary exhibits of the show, which was brought before the public tor the first time last year, when it consisted of only one ship, towed by a steamer.
Narrow as the space was on board this boat the collection of the different styles of hives left nothing to be desired. Some of these hives were stocked with bees, and there was a good assortment of diagrams and engravings explanatory of the natural history of the bee as well as an interesting collection of literature on bee-keeping. The collection contained, moreover, a complete assortment of utensils most useful and simple of construction. There was also a laboratory on board, specially fitted up for the collection and preservation of any bee flowers to be met with along the banks of the Moscow river. The deck of the ship was converted into a garden, and numerous were the choice flowers and rare plants which were to be seen among the displayed bee-hives.
The exhibition left Moscow on the 14th of July, and in the course of its journey stopped at Bronniog, Perera, Ougrecha, Kalomensko, Ostrow, Mjatschkowo, Rogestweno, Markowo and Lophjenock. Wherever it stopped visitors, about \(6,000\) in number, gave every evidence of feeling very interested in the various articles brought under their notice, and listened with the greatest attention to all explanations given. Besides the means of familiarizing the country people with bee-keeping, the members of the exhibition gave a series of lectures in the various village school-rooms, in the course of which the best works on bee-keeping were freely recommended. For this latter purpose the Committee had printed Mr. Nassonow's book, _Des Abelles de la maniere de les gouverner_.
Whilst staying at villages, Messrs, Nassonow and Krotkow, were in the habit of visiting apiaries and giving to their proprietors, who as a rule, were necclesiastics, their best advice. This seed has been sown on good ground, and there is no doubt but that it will soon bear fruit. The good lessons given to these owners are certain to find their way to their friends and neighbors.
The floating show returned to Moscow in August, and it was kept open for some time afterwards for the benefit of the public ; but it finally closed on the zoth of the same month. The steps taken in this direction by the Moscow Committee is sure to be of great service and to it a considerable portion of the progress which Russian apiculture has made of late is to be attributed.--]. Grisard (_Ball. de la Societe d'Accimatation._) From _L'Apiculture_, of Paris.
From the American Bee-Journal,
The New Heddon Hive Conidered and Criticised.
Dr. G. L. Tinker.
In the controversy with Mr. Heddon I have had no ill-will towards him, nor cause for it. My course has been prompted wholly by a desire to forewarn the public against a recognized wrong. Mr. Heddon charges that I have done him an '' injury," In reply I will say, that it is better that he should suffer injury than that the bee-keepers of America should do so by the introduction of such a hive.
Mr. Heddon devoted a chapter in his book, '' Success in Bee-Culture," to the claims for his new hive, alleging that he had used it two years, and that it had been fully tested by himself and '' students."
The '' new principles '' set forth were new indeed, and would no doubt have caused a revolution in bee-culture had they proved in practice what they were represented to be. But they did not so prove, and it now remains to be seen if they were not wholly theoretical from the beginning. They were captivating and plausible, and bee-keepers generally accepted them as established facts on Mr. Heddon's statements.
The feature above all others that was heralded in advance of the issue of his book, was the alleged fact that we could "handle hives" if rightly constructed, instead of many frames in all needful work in an apiary. It was confessed at the outset that it would cost about twice as much as other hives, but the advantages were such that the extra cost was a small item in summing up results, for "success in bee-culture " was over assured to every bee-keeper!
Many bought rights, and many more bought hives with genuine Yankee enthusiasm. Mr. Heddon says over goo got the hives. At last it appeared that the hive was not what it had been represented to be, that it was in fact a fraud. Then reports were called for, but only 58 bee-keepers out of the goo made favorable reports. Over 400 were silent as a tomb! Had the hive been the great success it had been represented to be, can any one believe for a moment that all these men would have remained silent?
The hive must stand or fall on the claims that have been made for it. First, Mr. Heddon's new super is not a success. If it was we would find that all who use his divisible brood chamber also using his new super. But all do not. A large number of bee-keepers use and prefer Mr. Heddon's old super on his new hive. That "settles the merits" of the new super.
There remains only his divisible brood-chamber to be considered, and every bee-keeper must now see that it is a failure, if it cannot be handled as represented ; for if it cannot be, why handle 16 brood-frames when 8 can be handled just as quickly, and answer the same purpose ; why be to the extra cost? It was claimed to be an easy task to shake out the bees and queens from the cases, discover queen cells, etc. But the bees and queens cannot be shaken out as represented. It can neither be done readily nor easily, and if it could be, we are often unable to see all the queen-cells, as I have found in many instances. As well try to shake the bees out of a case of sections. It can be done but it is a laborious undertaking.