Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by JohnF

  1. Ahh, so is much of people's beekeeping? Otherwise you tick yourself as 'hobbiest' here
  2. Ha ha, true Tristan ! D’oh - didn’t check the date
  3. Historically this has been put down to Nosema apis. . . . but not when the hive dies from it. I would suggest getting 30-50 bees chucked into a ziplock bag and sent to @hpra at MPI Interestingly Randy Oliver heard that the dysentery was due to a yeast, rather than N. apis
  4. Dead bees are fine to test Kevin. But usually with the Cororapa issue (not saying it is, mind) then there are few/nil dead bees seen - just a handful of brood bees and often a queen. No dead bees out the front that might be seen with poisoning/karaka
  5. dnature.co.nz/bees We've just heard of over 50 hives on the East Coast with similar symptoms and received samples this afternoon. They'll get the Nosema duo assay run on them (both nosema ceranae and nosema apis, as well as Lotmaria passim). The same bee DNA extracts can also be tested for AFB and we'll rule this out. As @fieldbee said earlier, these hives tend to have plenty of stores that don't get robbed out. Also typically no dead bees seen (on baseboard or out front) If you're debating whether to test or not, chuck 20 bees into a ziplock bag and lob in the freezer . . .and then you've got time to decide. If you suspect poisoning then good to get a fresh nectar sample around the brood as well. On the ApiNZ conference website, you can see a talk that Richard Hall (MPI Bee pathogen program) and I gave on viruses and nosema pathogens
  6. Ping @AFB PMP Management Agency Great to talk with you Trev and glad that things are underway with dealing with a few issues As of at this time? I'd also-respectfully-say 'you're wrong'. But of course in time videos etc will be on-line. . .for free. And therein much of the issue with the beekeeping industry. . .
  7. There are lots of bee meetings now it seems - of different sizes. The fact is that the ApiNZ conference now has about 1000 people at it. With the requirement for multiple seminar rooms (of varying sizes), exhibitor space (near the presentation rooms to get people through), poster space etc. Come along to the conference @ChrisM and then see if you can think of other venues to accommodate all the different facets of this meeting. I say this as both a presenter and a trade exhibitor at this year's meeting. . . the Rotorua venue really is very good. A few years ago it was at the Whanganui racecourse. It was small, cramped and I would not go back as an exhibitor. One of the common issues is that attendees never give to much consideration to the trade exhibitors and their requirements. They pay far more money than attendees do and if you're complaining about conference costs then check out what they'd cost *without* the exhibitors sponsorship. I used to help run a meeting in Taupo. Was difficult for South Island as flights were difficult. I believe they're even more limited now ?
  8. Or just above the contact us is ‘Report this listing’ Which I’ve done
  9. I don't know Phil . . the 'freebie' business model has always been short-lived ! The conference is at the Energy Events Centre - no locked gate. You'd probably get into the trade stands inside even ( but not sure on that) - neck lanyards checked for the presentations though I reckon.
  10. Yep, will have a dnature stand there Trev. I’ll apologise to anyone in advance - you’ll be sick of me. I see I’m MC’ing the first session , I’m convening the science session, talking in the AFB session (with @Rene Gloor and @AFB PMP Management Agency) . . . and then talking viruses on the Saturday with the most excellent bloke Richard Hall from MPI and the Bee pathogen program.
  11. I detect a hint of humour in Dennis' response, Trevor.
  12. All conferences have costs. Why not invite @AFB PMP Management Agency team to your next meeting then? Hmmm. . . sort of. Maybe. Dogs, discussion, disease, DNA. . . but wait there's more !
  13. Alison Mercer has retired @tommy dave. As Dave says above, best bet would be the Plant and Food team based in Hamilton. Or else Phil Lester at Victoria University, who does a lot on bee/wasp viruses and pathogens
  14. Can anyone report on this meeting? I hope they had good attendance . . .
  15. My personal view (ie not speaking for @ApiNZ Science & Research or anyone else) - dogs are and should be part of a solution. I think @Philbee has an interesting thought on a different way to approach AFB. But bear in mind that the agency is tasked under the Biosecurity act to act as a compliance agency. Futility is asking or expecting Clifton, Marco and team to do things or deliver things that that just cannot legally do. I also agree with Dave that there is appropriate information in the Australian report - especially around the sensitivity (how many confirmed AFB hives did they find) and specificity (how many hives without confirmed AFB did they indicate on). I don't know whether Rene, Richelle, Jan and others have run their dogs through apiaries that have also been 100% visually inspected?? Or is the trial that needs to be done. Such a trial is not the sort of thing we do (we operate at a . .literally. . .smaller level ). But if there are members of the forum who want to form a research group, then come to conference and I'll introduce you to James and Ashley at Plant and Food - right up their alley
  16. Has something similar been written up for NZ dogs? e.g. the sensitivity and specificity of detections of clinical AFB? (and yes, bearing in mind that some of the 'false postives' will be sub-clinical detections, or just cases missed by human eyes). Such a report could go in the NZ Beekeeper journal
  17. Doesn't have to be just on NZ dogs. The main issue as you know is that what the dog can detect, can be ascertained as being correct immediately. Harder to do that for AFB especially when the dogs or a test are detecting pre-clinical levels. But here's a paper on dogs - and yes, there are a lot: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24631776 Rene could probably confirm but I bet every dog has test results on their detection rates, false positives etc before they go into service? Rene, sorry but in this case you're not special. There are a number of AFB-related projects going on in NZ. One is funded by Australia, a couple are funded by MPI via Sustainable Farming Fund and one is a mixture of private and small level commercial funding. None of them are funded by the AFB PMP - as we've seen from their financial statements, it has no additional funds currently and its a compliance agency, not a research one. From the press, the non-compliant people they go after don't need the dogs, DNA or sub-clinical tools. . .the raging clinical AFB can be spotted a mile off !
  18. Frazz, I'm not going to bang on more about the value of science, I'm done with that. Everyone thought science was valuable and needed to be realised - and yet, research donations to the @ApiNZ Science & Research don't seem to have materialised. To my mind, the trial of the dogs would have seemed a no-brainer and a relatively easy one to do. No. A lot of what we know about AFB and how it travels among hives is from exactly that route - and done in NZ by Mark Goodwin and team. Everyone takes the knowledge for granted - but have think about where that knowledge originally appeared. You can whinge about it or get on and apply for a SFF grant. We have a little local funding to part-fund a trial we're running currently on our DNA methods. Come to conference and hear about it !
  19. I am convening the science session - and talking in the AFB session on emerging technologies. I also hope that there will be someone there talking on the dogs and I am discussing this further with organisers to see what can be done to get either @Rene Gloor or Rob/Jan to speak there - but conference organisers are also working on this. However, I disagree with your statement Frazz - if you look in the papers you'll see the effects that the agency is having with Marco and Clifton chasing beekeepers not reporting AFB: namely hundreds of hives being burnt in what is reported in the press as outbreaks in both South and North Island. The agency is on the forum and as they have posted previously, they are not there to do the beekeepers' job re: AFB, they are there for the non-compliant ones:
  20. Really? I thought they specifically -*had* been asked to contribute? I’ll look into this @jamesc
  21. There will also be a number of posters presented after the science session as well - the chance to ask some tame scientists questions about their work !
  22. Lincoln advised NZ hive numbers are 934,147 registered ! Plus . . ? ? We must be over a million hives
  23. I wouldn’t call it type 2 CBPV. It causes a number of symptoms that may exisit together or individually. The virus is the same in any case. Seems it might be a bad season for it. Other countries are showing increased prevalence of this virus as well
  24. JohnF


    Tell them to collect your multiple samples Rob, as viruses are tested in Wellington and tracheal mites are done in Auckland. Good job calling the hotline If I had to bet, I would say it is high levels of CBPV. The good thing is that we - and MPI lab - use the qPCR method so yes, like a manuka honey sample, these bees will generate a Cq . . . and I predict it will be about 17 ( viral load in the millions).
  • Create New...