Wing fray in<i>Glossina morsitans centralis</i>Machado (Diptera: Glossinidae)

Allsopp, R.

doi:10.1017/s0007485300014127

Cited by 19 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wing wear is associated with mortality in bumble bees (Cartar, 1992) and has been speculated to increase the risk of mortality in male honey bees (Rueppell et al, 2005) and tsetse flies (Allsopp, 1985). Individuals with a high frequency of wing collisions or high flight frequencies are more likely to suffer from wing wear over the long term, which could render them less manoeuvrable when escaping predators or flying between flowers in complex threedimensional environments or unfavourable weather conditions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…increases with age (Brian, 1952;Garofalo, 1978;Rodd et al, 1980;Goldblatt and Fell, 1987;Smeets and Duchateau, 2003), as it does in honey bees (Apis mellifera) (Dukas, 2008). Wing wear has been speculated to lead to an increased risk of mortality in honey bee drones (Rueppell et al, 2005) and tsetse flies (Glossina morsitans) (Allsopp, 1985). Bumble bees that either were wing-clipped or had high naturally occurring amounts of wear died earlier than did those with more pristine wings (Cartar, 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because flying workers of eusocial insect species do not compete for mates, do not mate and have few predators that might abrade wings, wing wear is most likely related to foraging activity in these individuals (Breed et al, 1990;Higginson and Gilbert, 2004;Toth et al, 2009); indeed, several studies have speculated that foraging activity leads to wing wear (Allsopp, 1985;Cartar, 1992;Higginson and Gilbert, 2004). In paper wasps (Polistes metricus), only workers that foraged exhibited wing wear (Toth et al, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What causes wing wear in foraging bumble bees?

Foster

Cartar

2011

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organisms undergo wear and tear of their bodies as they age, as illustrated by tooth erosion, hearing loss, appendage loss and ovipositor wear (reviewed by Finch, 1990;Lalonde and Mangel, 1994). An example common to many flying insects is wing wear. Insects have no mechanism to repair damage to their wings; therefore, as an insect ages and continues to use its wings, the amount of wing wear is cumulative and progressive (Alcock, 1996;Eltz et al., 1999;Hayes and Wall, 1999;Burkhard et al., 2002;Higginson and Barnard, 2004;Lopez-Uribe et al., 2008). Many studies have used wing wear to estimate relative insect age (Mueller and Wolf-Mueller, 1993;Kemp, 2000;Burkhard et al., 2002;Richards, 2003;Inoue and Endo, 2006;Peixoto and Benson, 2008). Wing wear has consequences, which include increased wingbeat frequency (Hargrove, 1975;Kingsolver, 1999;Hedenstrom et al., 2001), changed flight speed (Fischer and Kutsch, 2002), changed flight performance (Haas and Cartar, 2008;Jantzen and Eisner, 2008;Combes et al., 2010), changed foraging behaviour (Higginson and Barnard, 2004;Foster and Cartar, 2011) and increased risk of mortality (Cartar, 1992).Many eusocial insects, particularly bees and wasps, rely on their wings to defend their nest from predators (Breed et al., 1990;Kastberger et al., 2009), maintain colony temperature and assure proper larval development (Heinrich, 1979a;O'Donnell and Foster, 2001), and acquire food for themselves and their colony (Heinrich, 1979a). Providing protection, care and food for the colony's young are the ways in which a non-reproductive forager increases its inclusive fitness. Therefore, wing wear may have important consequences for both individual and colony fitness.Risk of mortality in worker bumble bees (Bombus spp.) increases with age (Brian, 1952;Garofalo, 1978;Rodd et al., 1980;Goldblatt and Fell, 1987;Smeets and Duchateau, 2003), as it does in honey bees (Apis mellifera) (Dukas, 2008). Wing wear has been speculated to lead to an increased risk of mortality in honey bee drones (Rueppell et al., 2005) and tsetse flies (Glossina morsitans) (Allsopp, 1985). Bumble bees that either were wing-clipped or had high naturally occurring amounts of wear died earlier than did those with more pristine wings (Cartar, 1992). An increase in mortality risk with wing wear could result from a number of factors, all of which are supported only by speculation: decreased manoeuvrability, making it more difficult for a bee to escape from predators or severe weather conditions (Rodd et al., 1980), increased energy expenditure (Cartar, 1992) (but see Hedenstrom et al., 2001) and/or increased wingbeat frequency, which matters if the number of wingbeats is limited over a lifespan (Higginson and Gilbert, 2004). Regardless of how wing wear is linked with lifespan, the causes of wing wear have yet to be formally investigated in any insect.Wing wear is associated with male intra-sexual competition (Alcock, 1996), mating attempts (Ragland and Sohal, 1973), failed predator attacks (Robbins, 1981) and foraging activity...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What causes wing wear in foraging bumble bees?

Foster

Cartar

2011

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Large flies usually escaped from wasp attacks without visible injury. Nevertheless, flies that escape their skirmish with predators may still experience wing fray (Allsopp, 1985) or sustain damage to sensory structures. Flies that attended late decay carcasses encountered no predation risk, but such flies are probably still at risk of contracting a disease from previous visitors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of decomposition on carcass attendance in a guild of carrion‐breeding flies

Archer

Elgar

2003

Medical Vet Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many forensically important calliphorids, sarcophagids and muscids (Diptera) oviposit or larviposit on corpses only during the early stages of decomposition, yet individuals may attend bodies throughout decay. A field study was conducted to investigate how patterns of carcass use and attendance by some fly species are affected by decomposition. Five fly traps were placed in the forest and baited with whole, fresh piglet carcasses. Piglets decomposed in traps throughout the experiment, and all were skeletonized within 6 days. Flies were trapped at both early and late decomposition stages, and the species and population structures of trap catches were compared. More flies attended carcasses early rather than late in decay. For all species, flies attending early were mainly gravid females, but few gravid females attended late in decay. No females ovi- or larviposited late in decay, whereas females of all fly species deposited offspring early in decay. The number of males trapped of each species correlated positively with the number of females with eggs at early development stages. Observations were made of fly predation by European wasps Vespula germanica Fabricius (Hymenoptera, Vespidae) and jumper ants Myrmecia pilosula Smith (Hymenoptera, Formicidae) throughout the experiment. There was a higher risk for smaller fly species of being killed following predator attack. Ants and wasps attacked smaller fly species, whereas only wasps attacked larger fly species.

show abstract

“…Tsetse flies, Glossina spp., do not form serial dilatations, but the lack of synchrony in ovariolar development and the strictly repeated pattern of ovulation may be utilized in age determination. The parity of female tsetse can be deduced with accuracy up to the ovulation of the fourth egg from the presence or absence of dilatations in each ovariole ( Saunders 1960; Allsopp 1985; Snow & Tarimo 1985). Commonly, however, tsetse are classified into eight categories, the last four of which include a proportion of flies older than eight ovarian cycles (Challier 1965, cited in Saunders 1967; Dransfield et al .…”

Section: Age‐estimation From Changes In the Insect Reproductive Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age‐grading adult insects: a review of techniques

Hayes

Wall

1999

Physiological Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.The range of techniques available for age‐grading adult insects is reviewed, with particular emphasis on species of medical and veterinary importance. Chronological and physiological age‐grading are discussed, considering the relative merits of each approach. The techniques described include those based on changes to the reproductive system, those relying on somatic changes and those dependent on cuticular degradation. The advantages and problems of each technique and the use of a number of techniques in combination are discussed.

show abstract

Wing fray inGlossina morsitans centralisMachado (Diptera: Glossinidae)

Cited by 19 publications

References 27 publications

What causes wing wear in foraging bumble bees?

What causes wing wear in foraging bumble bees?

Effects of decomposition on carcass attendance in a guild of carrion‐breeding flies

Age‐grading adult insects: a review of techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About