Fly science

At long last, years of hard work in the field of Drosophila research has met with the fruition of this publication…maybe one day I will blog about the challenges of associated with this field of research.  Now is not the time, but suffice to say, I will say this….if a paper on fruit fly phenotype is published and nothing about the husbandry, nutrition, and rearing conditions are provided, the research should be taken with huge grain of salt.  Context is everything.

http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/aw3qyesUcwvAMzixIzbS/full

 

Effect sizes of the influence of diet on developmental, behavioural, and physiological parameters

Comparison Phenotype Hedge’s g (± 95% CI) r Significant
Larval wet mass Morphology 32.66 ± 10.16 0.99 Yes
Larval dry mass Morphology 10.60 ± 3.40 0.98 Yes
Larval width Morphology 3.53 ± 0.63 0.87 Yes
Adult wing length Morphology 1.30 ± 0.48 0.55 Yes
Larva Emergence Fecundity 0.80 ± 0.64 0.36 Yes
Pupa Emergence Development 2.09 ± 0.99 0.70 Yes
Adult survivorship Lifespan 0.70 ± 0.13 0.32 Yes
Larva Thermotaxis Sensory 0.80 ± 0.64 0.36 Yes
Adult Thermotaxis Sensory 0.38 ± 0.66 0.18 No
Larval Thermal Retreat Neuromuscular 0.73 ± 0.39 0.34 Yes
Adult Geotaxis Neuromuscular 2.49 ± 1.01 0.77 Yes
Muscle Basal Tonus Neuromuscular 2.51 ± 1.17 0.77 Yes
Muscle Maximum Neuromuscular 0.23 ± 0.88 0.11 No
Learning Index Neurological 0.34 ± 0.88 0.16 No

 

FlyLifespan.png

Survivorship Curves depend on the type of diet

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s