https://vital.seals.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index ${session.getAttribute("locale")} 5 https://vital.seals.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:10956 Thu 13 May 2021 06:39:37 SAST ]]> https://vital.seals.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/vital:10952 0.5) in honey production (24.66 ± 1.19 kg and 26.53 ± 1.31 kg), worker brood area (1967.3 ± 258.61 cm2 and 1085.4 ± 312.99 cm2) and frames containing bees (10 ± 1.13 frames and 9.8 ± 1.2 frames) between the hives with traps and hives without traps. However, propolis production was significantly influenced (p < 0.01) by the propolis traps, with the hives containing traps producing 361.87 ± 8.78g propolis compared to 38.2 ± 2.17g propolis in the control group. Propolis production in both control (28 g) and treatment groups (260.2 g) was significantly influenced by honey flow (p = 0.027). From December to March the production of honey was 22.12 (control) and 24.25 kg (treatment). A positive correlation was also found between frames containing bees and worker brood area (R = 0.73). Hives containing propolis traps were more profitable than the control group when honey and propolis income were pooled (467.17 ± 19.47 Rand vs. 353.8 ± 17.03 Rand). Therefore, the increased propolis production significantly improved profitability of the hive without affecting overall hive productivity.]]> Thu 13 May 2021 06:22:21 SAST ]]>