Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia

Dinku Negash; Mekonen Debara; Bangu Bekel; Amare Aregaw

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14

| Peer-Reviewed

Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia

Dinku Negash, Mekonen Debara, Bangu Bekel, Amare Aregaw

Published in International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research (Volume 8, Issue 2)

Received: 20 October 2020 Accepted: 9 December 2020 Published: 22 December 2020

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Hive is essential for honey bees to build their nests in such a way that it is easy to manage and maintain them. This study examined three beehive types: namely Mekonen, Zander model and Kenya Top Bar Hive (KTB), based on honey yield performance and profitability under Sidama condtion, Ethiopia. A total of 9 honeybee colonies which had similar strength were selected for comparison of different beehive in Remeda and Dilla substation. Honey yield data from each hive per harvesting season was recorded immediately after harvest. The overall average annual honey yield performance clearly revealed that Mekonen hive (26.77 ± 3.25 kg/hive) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than zander hive (20.77 ± 2.33 kg/hive) and KTB hive (17.61 ± 4.20 kg/hive). While, in both sub research station there was no significant difference in honey yield among the three hives. Mekonen hive stands first due to honey yield and preference while, KTB hive was affordable to the farmers due to cost and durability of the frame and ventilation followed by improved frame hive compared to Mekonen hive. It is therefore recommended to use the Mekonen hive as an alternative technology in addition to KTB and frame hive.

Published in	International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research (Volume 8, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14
Page(s)	29-33
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Bee Hives Type, Honey Yield, Production Cost

References

[1]	Abou-Shaara, H. F., A. A. Al-Ghamdi, and A. A. Mohamed. 2013. Honey bee colonies performance enhance by newly modified beehives. J. Apicult. Sci. 57: 45-57.
[2]	Addis Getu and Maleda Birhane. 2014. Chemical analysis of honey and major honey production challenges in and around Gonder, Ethiopia. Aca. J. Nut. 3 (1)'.
[3]	Atsbaha Hailemariam, Taye Tolemariam and Kebede Debele. 2015. Assessment of honey production system, constraints and opportunities in three selected Woredas of Tigray, Basic Research Journal, 4: 304–315.
[4]	Awraris Getachew, Amenay Assefa, Hailemariam Gizaw, Nuru Adgaba, Dejen Assefa, Zerihun Tajebe and Asrat Tera. 2015. Comparative Analysis of Colony Performance and Profit from Different Beehive Types in Southwest Ethiopia, Global Journal of Animal Scientific Research 3 (1): 178-185.
[5]	Beyene, T., D. Abi, G. Chalchissa and M. Wolda Tsadik. 2015. Evaluation of Transitional and Modern Hives for Honey Production in Mid RiftValley of Ethiopia. Global Journal of Animal Scientific Research. 3 (1): 48-56.
[6]	FAO. 2012. Beekeeping and sustainable livelihoods: Diversification booklet no. 1. Rome, Italy.
[7]	Folayan, J. A., and J. O. Bifarin. 2013. Profitability analysis of honey production in Edo North.
[8]	Local Government Area of Edo State, Nigeria. J. Agr. Econ. Dev. 2: 60-64.
[9]	Gidey Y, Bethelhem K, Dawit K and Alem M 2012 Assessment of beekeeping practices in Asgede Tsimbladistrict, Northern Ethiopia: Absconding, bee forage and bee pests. African Journal of Agricultural Research Vol. 7 (1), pp. 1-5. DOI: 10.5897/AJAR10.1071. ISSN 1991-637X.
[10]	Haftom Gebremedhn and Awet Estifanos. 2013. on farm evaluation of Kenyan Top bar hive (KTBH) for honey Production in Tigray Region, Northern Ethiopia. Livest. Res. Rural Dev. 25.
[11]	Gidey Yirga and Kibrom Ftwi. 2010. Beekeeping for rural development: its potentiality and constraints in Eastern Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Agri J, 5: 201-204.
[12]	MoARD. 2017. Livestock Development Master Plan Study. Phase I Report – Data Collection and Analysis, Volume N Apiculture. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[13]	Wolaye Kiros and Teklberhan Tsegay. 2017. Honey-bee production practices and hive technology preferences in Jimma and Illubabor Zone of Oromiya Regional State, Ethiopia. 9: 31-43.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Dinku Negash, Mekonen Debara, Bangu Bekel, Amare Aregaw. (2020). Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia. International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, 8(2), 29-33. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Dinku Negash; Mekonen Debara; Bangu Bekel; Amare Aregaw. Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia. Int. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2020, 8(2), 29-33. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Dinku Negash, Mekonen Debara, Bangu Bekel, Amare Aregaw. Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia. Int J Biomed Mater Res. 2020;8(2):29-33. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14,
  author = {Dinku Negash and Mekonen Debara and Bangu Bekel and Amare Aregaw},
  title = {Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia},
  journal = {International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research},
  volume = {8},
  number = {2},
  pages = {29-33},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijbmr.20200802.14},
  abstract = {Hive is essential for honey bees to build their nests in such a way that it is easy to manage and maintain them. This study examined three beehive types: namely Mekonen, Zander model and Kenya Top Bar Hive (KTB), based on honey yield performance and profitability under Sidama condtion, Ethiopia. A total of 9 honeybee colonies which had similar strength were selected for comparison of different beehive in Remeda and Dilla substation. Honey yield data from each hive per harvesting season was recorded immediately after harvest. The overall average annual honey yield performance clearly revealed that Mekonen hive (26.77 ± 3.25 kg/hive) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than zander hive (20.77 ± 2.33 kg/hive) and KTB hive (17.61 ± 4.20 kg/hive). While, in both sub research station there was no significant difference in honey yield among the three hives. Mekonen hive stands first due to honey yield and preference while, KTB hive was affordable to the farmers due to cost and durability of the frame and ventilation followed by improved frame hive compared to Mekonen hive. It is therefore recommended to use the Mekonen hive as an alternative technology in addition to KTB and frame hive.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia
AU  - Dinku Negash
AU  - Mekonen Debara
AU  - Bangu Bekel
AU  - Amare Aregaw
Y1  - 2020/12/22
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14
T2  - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
JF  - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
JO  - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
SP  - 29
EP  - 33
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-7579
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14
AB  - Hive is essential for honey bees to build their nests in such a way that it is easy to manage and maintain them. This study examined three beehive types: namely Mekonen, Zander model and Kenya Top Bar Hive (KTB), based on honey yield performance and profitability under Sidama condtion, Ethiopia. A total of 9 honeybee colonies which had similar strength were selected for comparison of different beehive in Remeda and Dilla substation. Honey yield data from each hive per harvesting season was recorded immediately after harvest. The overall average annual honey yield performance clearly revealed that Mekonen hive (26.77 ± 3.25 kg/hive) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than zander hive (20.77 ± 2.33 kg/hive) and KTB hive (17.61 ± 4.20 kg/hive). While, in both sub research station there was no significant difference in honey yield among the three hives. Mekonen hive stands first due to honey yield and preference while, KTB hive was affordable to the farmers due to cost and durability of the frame and ventilation followed by improved frame hive compared to Mekonen hive. It is therefore recommended to use the Mekonen hive as an alternative technology in addition to KTB and frame hive.
VL  - 8
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Dinku Negash

South Agricultural Research Institute, Hawassa Research Center, Hawassa, Ethiopia
Mekonen Debara

South Agricultural Research Institute, Hawassa Research Center, Hawassa, Ethiopia
Bangu Bekel

South Agricultural Research Institute, Hawassa Research Center, Hawassa, Ethiopia
Amare Aregaw

South Agricultural Research Institute, Hawassa Research Center, Hawassa, Ethiopia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Dinku Negash, Mekonen Debara, Bangu Bekel, Amare Aregaw. (2020). Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia. International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, 8(2), 29-33. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Dinku Negash; Mekonen Debara; Bangu Bekel; Amare Aregaw. Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia. Int. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2020, 8(2), 29-33. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Dinku Negash, Mekonen Debara, Bangu Bekel, Amare Aregaw. Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia. Int J Biomed Mater Res. 2020;8(2):29-33. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14,
  author = {Dinku Negash and Mekonen Debara and Bangu Bekel and Amare Aregaw},
  title = {Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia},
  journal = {International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research},
  volume = {8},
  number = {2},
  pages = {29-33},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijbmr.20200802.14},
  abstract = {Hive is essential for honey bees to build their nests in such a way that it is easy to manage and maintain them. This study examined three beehive types: namely Mekonen, Zander model and Kenya Top Bar Hive (KTB), based on honey yield performance and profitability under Sidama condtion, Ethiopia. A total of 9 honeybee colonies which had similar strength were selected for comparison of different beehive in Remeda and Dilla substation. Honey yield data from each hive per harvesting season was recorded immediately after harvest. The overall average annual honey yield performance clearly revealed that Mekonen hive (26.77 ± 3.25 kg/hive) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than zander hive (20.77 ± 2.33 kg/hive) and KTB hive (17.61 ± 4.20 kg/hive). While, in both sub research station there was no significant difference in honey yield among the three hives. Mekonen hive stands first due to honey yield and preference while, KTB hive was affordable to the farmers due to cost and durability of the frame and ventilation followed by improved frame hive compared to Mekonen hive. It is therefore recommended to use the Mekonen hive as an alternative technology in addition to KTB and frame hive.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Comparative Evaluation of Mekonen Beehive Technology with Zander and KTB Beehive Types on Honey Yield and Cost Benefit Analysis Under Sidama Condition, Ethiopia
AU  - Dinku Negash
AU  - Mekonen Debara
AU  - Bangu Bekel
AU  - Amare Aregaw
Y1  - 2020/12/22
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14
T2  - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
JF  - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
JO  - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
SP  - 29
EP  - 33
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-7579
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20200802.14
AB  - Hive is essential for honey bees to build their nests in such a way that it is easy to manage and maintain them. This study examined three beehive types: namely Mekonen, Zander model and Kenya Top Bar Hive (KTB), based on honey yield performance and profitability under Sidama condtion, Ethiopia. A total of 9 honeybee colonies which had similar strength were selected for comparison of different beehive in Remeda and Dilla substation. Honey yield data from each hive per harvesting season was recorded immediately after harvest. The overall average annual honey yield performance clearly revealed that Mekonen hive (26.77 ± 3.25 kg/hive) were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than zander hive (20.77 ± 2.33 kg/hive) and KTB hive (17.61 ± 4.20 kg/hive). While, in both sub research station there was no significant difference in honey yield among the three hives. Mekonen hive stands first due to honey yield and preference while, KTB hive was affordable to the farmers due to cost and durability of the frame and ventilation followed by improved frame hive compared to Mekonen hive. It is therefore recommended to use the Mekonen hive as an alternative technology in addition to KTB and frame hive.
VL  - 8
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download