Abstract
Understanding the circadian timing of eclosion in insects is a pretty big undertaking. A lot of technical detail is essential and a lot of close reasoning from meticulous experiments stands in the place of direct observations on the “clock’s” unknown physiological mechanism. In that respect clockology has some of the intellectual delight of the earlier years of genetics. However, (as of the 1978 writing) the whole argument has never been spelled out for publication in one place. This chapter once again attempts only an outline of the essentials. The story presented here seems to be generally valid for butterflies and moths, flies and mosquitoes, wasps and bees (i.e., Lepidoptera, Diptera, and Hymenoptera), but I emphasize my own experimental beast, the fruitfly. For a review of insect eclosion systems from the viewpoint of physiology and ecology, see Remmert (1962).
... indeed what reason may not go to Schoole to the wisdome of Bees, Aunts, and Spiders? what wise hand teacheth them to doe what reason cannot teach us? ruder heads stand amazed at those prodigious pieces of nature, Whales, Elephants, Dromidaries and Camels; these I confesse, are the Colossus and Majestick pieces of her hand; but in these narrow Engines there is more curious Mathematicks, and the civilitie of these litde Citizens more neatly sets forth the wisedome of their Maker.
Sir Thomas Browne, physician, regular correspondent of Henry Power
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
In 1967, I was using ethyl methane sulfonate, a gift from Seymour Benzer, to make mutants, but never found an interesting one. Ron Konopka (1972) produced per s and others, and kindly provided them to me for pupal eclosion experiments.
Chandrashekaran and Engelmann (1973) suggested replacing this smooth function by a stepwise increase in photosensitivity with steps at each T*. That would produce a tear in the resetting surface, an edge dislocation in the time crystal. I see no such tear in my Figure 5.
In the more recent notation of Pittendrigh and Daans’ five major papers of 1976, “continuous action” equals “parametric” and means duration has a continuing conspicuous effect on the phase shift, while “differential response” equals “nonparametric” and means that beyond a short time after abrupt light onset duration has little further consequence.
As with most other innovations, one could point to earlier independent discoverers: Kalmus and Wigglesworth (1960); Wever (1962–3-4); Moshkov et al. (1966) applied the same ideas in the same format to circadian rhythms in general, but they failed to pin this model explicitly to one data set. Strahm (1964) (cited only in Pavlidis, 1967a) had all the essentials, applied specifically to D. pseudoobscura but he neglected to publish after submitting his thesis (see Chapter 7, Box A).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Winfree, A.T. (2001). The Circadian Clocks of Insect Eclosion. In: The Geometry of Biological Time. Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics, vol 12. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3484-3_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3484-3_20
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-3196-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-3484-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive