Re: Evolutionary biology: To work or not to work
- From: wlhunt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (William L Hunt)
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 12:27:36 -0500 (EST)
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 01:25:19 -0500 (EST), "Perplexed in Peoria"
<jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ok, I concede that eusociality is far from being the rule in hymenopteraCurrently, eusociality is thought to have independently evolved 17
or in haplodiploids. Still, I know of only four examples of eusociality -
ants, honey bees, termites, and naked mole rats. Two of those four are
haplodiploids. That says something. Nothing conclusive, but at least
something.
times. 11 times in Hymenoptera, once in termites (Isoptera), once in
gall-forming aphids (Homoptera) once in bark-nesting weavils
(Coleoptera), once in gall-forming thrips (Thysanoptera), once in
snapping shrimps and once in naked mole rats. Thrips are also
haplodiploidy, so 12/17 involve haplodiploidy genetics.
Maybe this is just a statistical anomaly but I also think it may say
something. But unfortunately the explanations usually begins with (and
sometimes ends with) the "r=3/4 for sisters" argument as if that
explains it. That argument is probably completely off target. But
there are other consequences of haplodipoidy genetics that may very
well favor it for the evolution of eusociality, such as the female's
ability to determine the sex of her offspring. Also, as John noted,
having enclosed nests is part of the puzzle.
Most people seem to look first at termites and ants for the
explanation of eusociality. But in both of these, all species are
eusocial and there is no way to observe the intermediate steps. In
bees and wasps eusociality has evolved many times. It is also in the
bees and wasps that the full range of species types can be examined
(from solitary to sub-social, quasi-social and eusocial). And it will
probably be from observing the bees and wasps that the pieces of this
puzzle will be worked out.
William L. Hunt
.
- References:
- RE: Evolutionary biology: To work or not to work
- From: John Edser
- Re: Evolutionary biology: To work or not to work
- From: Wirt Atmar
- Re: Evolutionary biology: To work or not to work
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- RE: Evolutionary biology: To work or not to work
- Prev by Date: Re: Culture is not consciously developed? Q for Wilkins
- Next by Date: RE: ESSASYS ON SCIENCE AND SOCIETY
- Previous by thread: Re: Evolutionary biology: To work or not to work
- Next by thread: Re: Evolutionary biology: To work or not to work
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|