Nice video Ashby, thank you for being willing to share your findings, I really appreciate the hard work you put in to this, and congrats on the nice score increase in your F1s. Your findings are similar to what has been reported for Harbo and FKB tests - hygiene seems to vary quite a bit even in the same colony, and we still have a lot to learn about why that is. I have heard some similar results from others using UBeeO - scores can fluctuate over the season in some colonies, yet in other colonies the scores remain consistent. You only shared results from 8 of the 35 colonies that started high - I know you said a couple swarmed or had issues, but I'm curious, were the other 25 or so relatively consistent over the two tests (as in, tested high both times)? We have found that colonies that score high once are reliably Varroa resistant (ie: it seems to be that there are sometimes false negatives, but there don't seem to be any false positives). There seem to be two main reasons for within-colony variation: application inconsistency and environmental effects. I think environment is the most influential of the two, but to address any effect of application variation, we've made two applicator improvements this year - a guide that standardizes the distance and angle of application, and a test ring that prevents run-off of any UBeeO that hits the inner sides of the ring during the application process. As for environmental effects - there are so many variables. So far we have found that colony size and screened/solid bottom board don't seem to have an effect, but smoker use and nectar flow do. I have a lot of questions remaining, like how do exposure to stressors (a "priming" effect), effects of mite treatments, pollen and nectar quality / availability etc etc affect test results. And there may even be other factors, like semen mixing, that we haven't tested at all yet. Like you said this is a new technology so there are still a lot of research questions to be answered - funding permitting, we are working to improve our scientific understanding of hygiene, these pheromones, and how they work. (As we've increased production we have also been able to lower the price substantially. Our primary goal is to improve honey bee health, and we believe the best way to do that is not to keep UBeeO locked up in university labs, but to get it into the hands of beekeepers. So we are trying to make it as affordable as possible...). Mondet's group in France has done some really interesting work with Varroa-associated odors but I don't think they've had much success in developing an assay that elicits a hygienic response. Hopefully they will come up with something that works, though I think there are advantages to using general stress odors rather than Varroa-specific odors... recent results out of Mississippi State, the University of Vermont, and Australia show that UBeeO scores are correlated not only to Varroa populations, but also virus levels (including DWV), Nosema levels, and Chalkbrood levels (publication submitted, hopefully it will be out soon).There's a lot to left to learn, but also a lot to gain from selecting for resistance, no matter which method folks choose to use. I'm just glad folks are moving towards breeding for resistance. Ten years ago almost no one was talking about hygiene. It's catching on, but the industry really needs more breeders like you that are focusing on moving things in the right direction. Keep up the great work, and thanks again for sharing your results! The more we share the more we know, and the more we know the better. =) Kaira
We had 35 colonies that were all candidates for testing based on other selection criteria. Of those 35, only 13 scored above 60 the first go round in April. If all conditions were the same, I re tested them in May. I showed the results that they all fell significantly. The remaining 22 colonies scored low the first go round, and the ten we tested again in May remained low the second go round. I showed a few of those for example, but no need to show every one. Those remainders started and ended low both times. I’ll be following along as more info is learned about UBeeO for sure!
@@Ashby_Farms_NCok I understand now. Yes if all of the colonies drop that much there had to be something environmental going on - that’s certainly not normal for May. I think you said the nectar flow during the second set of tests was primarily from crops, is that right? Do you mind sharing what crop? Were colonies moved or treated between tests? I’m very interested to learn what caused the drop in scores that time of year. Usually I don’t see significant drop-off until late summer or fall. Also, how did the colonies that tested high and low initially compare later on in terms of mites? That’s the real test…!
Thanks for sharing this, Ashby. Breeding for varroa resistance and enhancing hygiene is definitely a challenging task. I'm curious if you retested the 2023 colonies and how those results compare to 2024. In Australia, there’s a significant privately funded initiative where beekeepers and breeders are using ubeeo as a primary tool to boost hygienic behavior, even though there are some inconsistencies. We're seeing promising improvements in bee health. Early results with F1 open mated queens show an ability to maintain low mite levels. Our conclusion so far is that while results can be variable, colonies with high test scores can increase their defensive behavior when necessary.
I didn’t retest the 4 2023 colonies that made it through winter untreated. I’ve funded as much as I’m going to. At this point I’m going to follow others doing their own experiments. I hope they pick up the ball where I left off.
Also watching Bob Binnie and Greg Rogers most recent video. Gregg remarked how the Asheville area is awith bee keepers. Looking for property closer to west of Charlotte probably not much further.
Thank you for taking the time to work on this project. It’s certainly produce some interesting test results for sure. Did you happened to take mite washes pre and post test for each tested hive to see what their respective mite counts where for each hive? My thinking is even though there are inconsistencies in the percentages from when the first and second test were done did the hives still show consistent hygienic behavior by keeping the number of mites at or under the recommended thresholds between the first and second tests periods.
I don’t do mite washes because they’re not an accurate tool for assessing mite resistance. We use OAV heavily in winter, so by April/May mites haven’t had a chance to build up yet.
I have done a few hundred tests now. On the same and differing colonies. You had one special breeder in there with more recombination in the 65535 possibilities. Remember you havent been breeding for ubeeo but your traits have increased positively, and it will increase in subsequent generations more in my experience as we have gone through generations the trait has increased positively but needs to be selected for - i guess thats much like the harbo version of mite resistance. I have colonies that consistently score the same no matter what and others that fluctuate more - to me thats a recombination thing. The colonies that scored high all scored 3 or 4 or multiple harbos at different times too - genuine question as i have seen many do harbos multiple times with a few weeks and go from 2 to 4 or vice versa? I have heard of much fluctuations happening with harbos assays at different times too which input down to recombination - which is why cory stevens inseminated lines have more consistency if that makes sense. Bees are complicated and variations exist in colonies but there is no doubt through my observations that this breeds a new or different level / type of pest and disease resistance.
For now, we’re going to continue to stick with Harbo Assays in August. It’s been the gold standard for years for a reason. I think with more time and research we will certainly learn more about UBeeO
I appreciate you showing us this, you are one of the few YT beekeepers that has followed up well with this. There was all the HYPE about UBeeO tests and then a bunch of the YT Beekeepers Testings it out.🤨Then everyone stopped talking about it and showing videos of results. 🤔The lack of Excitement made me wonder, why all the talk about UBeeO testing and then not so much after trying it out? Sounds like it's not ready for market as it was described. At the end of the day, from your tests it doesn't really appear to be giving you an consistent information. Same queen and bees yet different results, a single hive should not have that much in score swing in results. I'd be interested in 2 tests done on the same hive at the same time yielded the same results. If they differ there is to much inconsistencies in the test for it to be very useful in my opinion.
Thanks for the follow up. I have a couple that tested high this spring. Did you do mite washes on any of your high scoring colonies? Mine did pretty good with those counts as well. I haven't graduated to the Harbo assay yet, but that would be my next step.
Are you still doing the Harbos? I was gonna do some of the UBO tests this year but decided not to. I did end up doing some Harbo tests & had some good results from those. Better yet, I'm finding the high scoring harbos make very good mite resistant daughters but it's a small sample size so far, will have more data next year. I think it's worth noting the pheromones in the UBO are associated with generally unhealthy brood signals and are not specific to varroa parasitization. The Fannie Mondet et. al group in europe have quite a bit of research out on this topic & are apparently working on a similar test that is specific to varroa parasitization.
Interesting, though not surprising to those of with some genetics experience. Perhaps put some of Randy's Golden West queens in that he has done many years of selection on?
This issue isn’t having VSH queens. We’ve got plenty. The issue was high scores the first time, and low scores the second on the same colonies, 37 days later.
Great information, a quick question, do you know if during the second testing on May 29 you still were in a nectar flow and if that could have played a part in the difference? I know that here in central GA we get a few weeks gap between a couple of flows in the spring.
I understand there was a flow going on with both tests. I wonder if the second test, maybe there was a heavier flow? Which might have had the bees more occupied with stores and less on vsh.
The other way around. The main flow had stopped. Some nectar source coming from the produce/area still had a nectar flow when everything else had stopped.
Nice video Ashby, thank you for being willing to share your findings, I really appreciate the hard work you put in to this, and congrats on the nice score increase in your F1s. Your findings are similar to what has been reported for Harbo and FKB tests - hygiene seems to vary quite a bit even in the same colony, and we still have a lot to learn about why that is. I have heard some similar results from others using UBeeO - scores can fluctuate over the season in some colonies, yet in other colonies the scores remain consistent. You only shared results from 8 of the 35 colonies that started high - I know you said a couple swarmed or had issues, but I'm curious, were the other 25 or so relatively consistent over the two tests (as in, tested high both times)? We have found that colonies that score high once are reliably Varroa resistant (ie: it seems to be that there are sometimes false negatives, but there don't seem to be any false positives). There seem to be two main reasons for within-colony variation: application inconsistency and environmental effects. I think environment is the most influential of the two, but to address any effect of application variation, we've made two applicator improvements this year - a guide that standardizes the distance and angle of application, and a test ring that prevents run-off of any UBeeO that hits the inner sides of the ring during the application process. As for environmental effects - there are so many variables. So far we have found that colony size and screened/solid bottom board don't seem to have an effect, but smoker use and nectar flow do. I have a lot of questions remaining, like how do exposure to stressors (a "priming" effect), effects of mite treatments, pollen and nectar quality / availability etc etc affect test results. And there may even be other factors, like semen mixing, that we haven't tested at all yet. Like you said this is a new technology so there are still a lot of research questions to be answered - funding permitting, we are working to improve our scientific understanding of hygiene, these pheromones, and how they work. (As we've increased production we have also been able to lower the price substantially. Our primary goal is to improve honey bee health, and we believe the best way to do that is not to keep UBeeO locked up in university labs, but to get it into the hands of beekeepers. So we are trying to make it as affordable as possible...). Mondet's group in France has done some really interesting work with Varroa-associated odors but I don't think they've had much success in developing an assay that elicits a hygienic response. Hopefully they will come up with something that works, though I think there are advantages to using general stress odors rather than Varroa-specific odors... recent results out of Mississippi State, the University of Vermont, and Australia show that UBeeO scores are correlated not only to Varroa populations, but also virus levels (including DWV), Nosema levels, and Chalkbrood levels (publication submitted, hopefully it will be out soon).There's a lot to left to learn, but also a lot to gain from selecting for resistance, no matter which method folks choose to use. I'm just glad folks are moving towards breeding for resistance. Ten years ago almost no one was talking about hygiene. It's catching on, but the industry really needs more breeders like you that are focusing on moving things in the right direction. Keep up the great work, and thanks again for sharing your results! The more we share the more we know, and the more we know the better. =) Kaira
We had 35 colonies that were all candidates for testing based on other selection criteria. Of those 35, only 13 scored above 60 the first go round in April. If all conditions were the same, I re tested them in May. I showed the results that they all fell significantly. The remaining 22 colonies scored low the first go round, and the ten we tested again in May remained low the second go round. I showed a few of those for example, but no need to show every one. Those remainders started and ended low both times. I’ll be following along as more info is learned about UBeeO for sure!
@@Ashby_Farms_NCok I understand now. Yes if all of the colonies drop that much there had to be something environmental going on - that’s certainly not normal for May. I think you said the nectar flow during the second set of tests was primarily from crops, is that right? Do you mind sharing what crop? Were colonies moved or treated between tests? I’m very interested to learn what caused the drop in scores that time of year. Usually I don’t see significant drop-off until late summer or fall. Also, how did the colonies that tested high and low initially compare later on in terms of mites? That’s the real test…!
Thanks for sharing this, Ashby. Breeding for varroa resistance and enhancing hygiene is definitely a challenging task. I'm curious if you retested the 2023 colonies and how those results compare to 2024.
In Australia, there’s a significant privately funded initiative where beekeepers and breeders are using ubeeo as a primary tool to boost hygienic behavior, even though there are some inconsistencies. We're seeing promising improvements in bee health. Early results with F1 open mated queens show an ability to maintain low mite levels. Our conclusion so far is that while results can be variable, colonies with high test scores can increase their defensive behavior when necessary.
I didn’t retest the 4 2023 colonies that made it through winter untreated. I’ve funded as much as I’m going to. At this point I’m going to follow others doing their own experiments. I hope they pick up the ball where I left off.
Also watching Bob Binnie and Greg Rogers most recent video. Gregg remarked how the Asheville area is awith bee keepers. Looking for property closer to west of Charlotte probably not much further.
I’ll have to watch that one
Thank you for taking the time to work on this project. It’s certainly produce some interesting test results for sure. Did you happened to take mite washes pre and post test for each tested hive to see what their respective mite counts where for each hive? My thinking is even though there are inconsistencies in the percentages from when the first and second test were done did the hives still show consistent hygienic behavior by keeping the number of mites at or under the recommended thresholds between the first and second tests periods.
I don’t do mite washes because they’re not an accurate tool for assessing mite resistance. We use OAV heavily in winter, so by April/May mites haven’t had a chance to build up yet.
I have done a few hundred tests now. On the same and differing colonies. You had one special breeder in there with more recombination in the 65535 possibilities. Remember you havent been breeding for ubeeo but your traits have increased positively, and it will increase in subsequent generations more in my experience as we have gone through generations the trait has increased positively but needs to be selected for - i guess thats much like the harbo version of mite resistance. I have colonies that consistently score the same no matter what and others that fluctuate more - to me thats a recombination thing. The colonies that scored high all scored 3 or 4 or multiple harbos at different times too - genuine question as i have seen many do harbos multiple times with a few weeks and go from 2 to 4 or vice versa? I have heard of much fluctuations happening with harbos assays at different times too which input down to recombination - which is why cory stevens inseminated lines have more consistency if that makes sense. Bees are complicated and variations exist in colonies but there is no doubt through my observations that this breeds a new or different level / type of pest and disease resistance.
For now, we’re going to continue to stick with Harbo Assays in August. It’s been the gold standard for years for a reason. I think with more time and research we will certainly learn more about UBeeO
I appreciate you showing us this, you are one of the few YT beekeepers that has followed up well with this.
There was all the HYPE about UBeeO tests and then a bunch of the YT Beekeepers Testings it out.🤨Then everyone stopped talking about it and showing videos of results.
🤔The lack of Excitement made me wonder, why all the talk about UBeeO testing and then not so much after trying it out?
Sounds like it's not ready for market as it was described.
At the end of the day, from your tests it doesn't really appear to be giving you an consistent information.
Same queen and bees yet different results, a single hive should not have that much in score swing in results.
I'd be interested in 2 tests done on the same hive at the same time yielded the same results. If they differ there is to much inconsistencies in the test for it to be very useful in my opinion.
Still a very new product for sure. I tried to be as positive, fair, and factual about my results as possible.
Thanks for the follow up. I have a couple that tested high this spring. Did you do mite washes on any of your high scoring colonies? Mine did pretty good with those counts as well. I haven't graduated to the Harbo assay yet, but that would be my next step.
I don’t do any mite washes. Ever. Harbo assays only.
Are you still doing the Harbos? I was gonna do some of the UBO tests this year but decided not to. I did end up doing some Harbo tests & had some good results from those. Better yet, I'm finding the high scoring harbos make very good mite resistant daughters but it's a small sample size so far, will have more data next year.
I think it's worth noting the pheromones in the UBO are associated with generally unhealthy brood signals and are not specific to varroa parasitization. The Fannie Mondet et. al group in europe have quite a bit of research out on this topic & are apparently working on a similar test that is specific to varroa parasitization.
I am still doing Harbo Assays, and I didn’t know about the European Group! Thanks!
Interesting, though not surprising to those of with some genetics experience. Perhaps put some of Randy's Golden West queens in that he has done many years of selection on?
This issue isn’t having VSH queens. We’ve got plenty. The issue was high scores the first time, and low scores the second on the same colonies, 37 days later.
Great information, a quick question, do you know if during the second testing on May 29 you still were in a nectar flow and if that could have played a part in the difference? I know that here in central GA we get a few weeks gap between a couple of flows in the spring.
As I mentioned, we were still in a nectar flow at that location for the re-test in May.
Did you cross reference the ubo scores with Harbo scores on any of these colonies you already tested twice?
I didn’t
@ I think that would be very interesting data.
I understand there was a flow going on with both tests. I wonder if the second test, maybe there was a heavier flow? Which might have had the bees more occupied with stores and less on vsh.
The other way around. The main flow had stopped. Some nectar source coming from the produce/area still had a nectar flow when everything else had stopped.
@Ashby_Farms_NC I usually get things backwards.
@@arnoldfarmsbeesandhoneylol
How's them NQI queens doin? :D