Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 7 Nov 2006 01:12:38 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I'm not Dee but the question tickles my fancy:
>>>>>>>>>>>What personal experience have you had with this. How many times
in how many years have you seen this?<<<<<<<
I suspect that this is something that won't be readily seen. For one
thing there are estimates that 6% of the eggs laid in any colony are laid by
workers. These are cleaned up by the "egg-police." I think I'm quoting some
NZ researchers. (too lazy to look it up). Who's to say how many of those
eggs would have resulted in female adults. For that matter, how would one
ever know that it had occurred in any apiary that was not inspected often
for queen loss?
Incidentally, a better word would be parthenogenesis, partly because
one can actually spell it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis
Thelytoky seems to be the way that it happens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelytoky
I am reminded of something I learned in biology class a long time ago. It
was said that if you touch a frogs egg with a platinum needle-it would
operate as a fertilized egg and grow a frog. (Remember frogs eggs, and
collecting them?)
It appears to me that this trait is a hangover from an earlier evolutionary
stage that is extant to a small degree. This seems likely since sister
species to the honey bee have this trait and we assume that all these bees
spring from a common ancestor. It has the obvious advantage of allowing a
colony to survive the loss of a queen at least in some cases.
One could wonder why this trait disappeared (almost). Could it have
something to do with the need for cooperative behaviors and the need to
genetically pass those behaviors on? Would those genes be better protected
in the absence of parthenogenesis?
I'm so glad there are better minds than mine on this site. (Unless they've
been discouraged by the nonsense)
Big time lurker,
Dick Marron
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info ---
|
|
|