American Bee Journal • October 2019 Vol. 159 No. 10 • Honey Bees Never Cease to Amaze: Buttress Combs

Honey bees construct buttress combs to prevent vertically upright comb from collapsing

During the spring of 2019, while working on an experiment at our private research facility in Bethlehem, Connecticut (latitude 41°N, longitude -73°W, elevation 1050 ft above sea level), we witnessed honey bees constructing what appeared to be wax comb buttresses (not brace comb) that were being implemented to stabilize a much larger, vertically upright wax comb (Figure 1). Even more remarkable was the fact that two of these comb buttresses were semi-circular in form (Figure 2). The comb buttresses and the larger upright comb that they were supporting had as their base the top bars of frames which were located in a deep Langstroth hive body; these combs extended from the top bars into a second empty deep hive body.

According to a 2012 article in the online version of the Encyclopedia Britannica, a buttress is defined architecturally as “an exterior support, usually of masonry, projecting from the face of a wall and serving either to strengthen it or to resist the side thrust created by the load on an arch or a roof.” Buttresses, including supports known as flying buttresses, have been used in construction for centuries, particularly in many of the world’s magnificent cathedrals. To our astonishment, the honey bees seemed to be relying on this ancient, time tested technology to support their larger upright combs.

We have all witnessed bridge, brace, and burr combs in our colonies as well as the more natural comb construction that starts from the ceiling of a tree cavity downward or from other locations such as on the surface of a wax foundation, but to discover bees erecting combs in an upward direction and then supporting them with what we perceive to be comb buttresses was truly amazing.

On March 30, 2019, four colonies were installed using three-pound packages, each containing a queen; on April 6, 2019, two additional colonies were installed for a total of six colonies. The first five contained Italian queens; the sixth had a Carniolan queen. The hive furniture for each colony consisted of a solid board above which was placed an empty shallow super. Above this super a standard screened bottom board was placed. Above that was a deep Langstroth brood box containing ten frames with black foundation, double-waxed. Packages were hived using the Hansen Method for installing packaged bees.1 The only exception to this method was that the inner cover was not placed above the frames over the first set of deep hive bodies. Instead, it was placed above the second deep hive body that enclosed a sugar-water container. Each of the six packages received a standard one-gallon paint can filled with a 1:1 sugar-water mix. Sugar-water feed was added on a weekly basis throughout the seven-week experiment, and the amount consumed by each colony was recorded.

In addition, the shallow supers of colonies One, Three, and Five that were located beneath the screened bottom boards each contained a 25- watt light bulb painted red. A thermostat would turn these bulbs on when the temperature dropped below 45°F and off when ambient temperatures exceeded 45°F.2

Our experiment was initially intended to determine if the three colonies with the red light bulbs would increase their populations at a faster rate than the three colonies without any supplementary heat, given the fact that cold periods during the spring are not uncommon in New England. Our hypothesis was that if we supplemented the heat required to maintain adequate brood temperatures with the red light bulbs, it would free up an unknown number of bees from their thermo-regulating duties for other chores such as constructing more comb that would provide additional cells for the queen to lay eggs in. If this hypothesis proved correct, packaged bee colonies would build up at a faster rate, giving them a head start over packages installed in hives without added warmth.

But on April 24, 2019 — three weeks into the experiment — while inspecting the hives, we discovered in Colony Two (which did not have additional heat) the truly remarkable construction of a comb rising vertically upward from the top bars of the deep of this colony into the empty space within the second deep hive body — space that was originally serving only to house its sugar-water can. This larger upright comb appeared to be stabilized/supported by two semi-circular combs and two linear combs. We are convinced that the semi-circular and linear combs were functioning as buttresses.

So much for the heat experiment; we will revisit that question next year. Our attention quickly turned to the unusual positioning of the larger upright comb that, to our eyes, was supported by comb buttresses.

In the initial Langstroth deeps, each with ten frames of foundation, the bees drew out approximately half of the wax foundation into combs, but rather than confining themselves within these deeps (still with ample room for brood rearing), drawing out remaining foundation, and storing pollen and honey, they began to expand their wax combs into the empty deeps that were housing the sugarwater cans. We asked ourselves these questions: Why did the bees not rise up to the inner covers that were positioned above the second deep brood boxes and festoon there as they often do when constructing comb? Why did they not begin constructing vertical combs downward from under the surface of the inner covers instead of from the top bars upward? Was the distance between the bottoms of the inner covers and the top bars of the frames in the first hive bodies too great a distance to bridge, or by starting from the top bars in the first set of deep hive bodies, were the bees able to maintain some degree of comb continuity? No matter the circumstances, the bees clearly demonstrated the desire to fill with comb(s) the vacant areas created by the hive bodies containing the sugar-water cans.

These vertically upright combs and their accompanying buttresses contained sealed and unsealed brood as well as either stored sugar-water, nectar or a combination of both. In addition, it is important to note that under the circumstances presented to these colonies, the bees were unable to maintain the requisite threeeighths of an inch between and among combs.

Of course, we have no way of proving what the intentions of these comb builders were, but we believe these comb buttresses were placed and attached to the single larger vertically upright comb for the specific purpose of providing support to prevent it from bending or collapsing. For example, Colony 6 failed to buttress their initial larger upright comb and it collapsed (Figure 3).

So how these comb builders understood the need for this type of support remains a mystery. Is it possible that the idea for using buttresses to strengthen walls was first observed by humans examining a nest of honey bees and then adopting their use to support vertical walls, e.g., the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris? Or is it equally possible that two separate species, namely Apis mellifera L. and Homo sapiens L., independent of one another, recognized the need to support certain structures that would otherwise become unstable without additional support, in this case buttresses? In the case of humans, one can more readily understand that we might recognize such a need, but for an insect, in this case a honey bee, to arrive at a similar conclusion certainly leaves us scratching our heads in bewilderment.

The reader may also be interested to see the progress made in comb construction in Hive 2 from April 24 through June 5, 2019. Colony 2 extended its comb from the first empty deep super into a second deep super (Figure 4).

In closing, we would like to introduce a new definition to comb vocabulary: buttress comb, comb that serves to strengthen and stabilize freestanding vertically upright comb(s).

P.S. When examining your colony, do not be too quick to remove your hive tool from its holster and start scraping comb. Pause first to observe what the bees are doing when placing wax in unusual places.

Figure 1 photo by Mike Campion; all others by Hiro Itoh. The authors wish to extend their appreciation to Dave LeBlanc for assisting them with the various chores connected to maintaining the apiary and protecting it from bear attacks, and to Peter Borst for providing clarification of the terms bridge, brace, and burr combs.

1.Avitabile A. (2015) The Hansen Method: An Easy and Efficient Way to Install a Bee Package Into a Hive. American Bee Journal 155 (2): 155-157

2.Avitabile, A and Campion, M. (2015) A Different Approach to Overwintering Honey Bee Colonies in Northern Climates. American Bee Journal 155 (1): 55-57

Al Avitabile, professor emeritus, became acquainted with honey bees in 1965 when a swarm clustered in a forsythia bush near his campus office. He continues to teach beekeeping short courses, lecturing and mentoring new beekeepers. He is past president of The Connecticut Beekeepers Association and co-author with Diana Sammataro of The Beekeeper’s Handbook, Cornell press, 4th edition.

Mike Campion: Treasurer, Connecticut Beekeepers Association; B.S., M.S., FOA (Friend of Al); eight years of beekeeping and happy to know the learning will never end.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM THE BEEKEEPER’S DICTIONARY, ABC AND XYZ OF BEE CULTURE, 1917 EDITION

Definition of brace comb: The terms “brace-comb and “burrcomb” are often used indiscriminately as meaning the same thing. More exactly a brace-comb is a bit of comb built between two combs to fasten them together or a comb and adjacent wood, or between two wooden parts, as or upon a wooden part in a hive, seeming to have no object but to use up wax. Our interpretation is that bridge comb and brace comb have the same meaning.