Skip to main content

K. D. Roeder and the History of Chemoreception

  • Conference paper
Neuroethology and Behavioral Physiology
  • 294 Accesses

Abstract

Within the past few years there have been many reviews of insect chemoreception detailing advances that have resulted from electrophysiological, electron microscopical, and biochemical analyses. Antedating these are reviews covering the morphological era of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The history of the transition period between pre- and post-electrophysiology is less well documented. This is the period during which Kenneth Roeder worked and contributed so influentially to the field of insect physiology and behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams JR (1961) The location and histology of the contact chemoreceptors of the stable fly, Stomoxys calcitrans L. Doctoral Dissertation Rutgers Univ, New Brunswick NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Adrian ED (1928) The basis of sensation. WW Norton NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Adrian ED (1932) The activity of the optic ganglion ofDytiscus marginales. J Physiol 75: 26

    Google Scholar 

  • Boistel J, Coraboeuf E (1953) L’activité électrique dans l’antenne isolée de lepidoptére au cours de l’étude de l’olfaction. CR Soc Biol Paris 147: 1172–1175

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG (1941) The function of the antennal receptors in lepidopterous larvae. Biol Bull 80: 403–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG (1947) The response of hymenopterous parasites to chemical stimulation of the ovipositor. J Exp Zool 105: 199–208

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG (1954) The physiology of olfaction in insects. Ann NY Acad Sci 58: 139–157

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG (1955) Mode of action of sugar baited fly traps. J Econ Ent 48: 235–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG (1975) The monarch revisited. J Kansas Ent Soc 48: 129–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG, Chadwick LE (1948) Chemoreception in insects. Physiol Rev 28: 220–254

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG, Crnjar R (1982) Candidate codes in the gustatory system of caterpillars. J Gen Physiol 79: 549–569

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VH, Wolbarsht ML (1956) The electronmicroscopy of chemosensory hairs. Experientia 12: 335

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Erlanger J, Gasser HS (1937) Electrical signs of nervous activity. Univ Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisch K von (1921) Ãœber den Sitz des Geruchssinnes bei Insekten. Zool Jahrb Zool Physiol 38: 449–516

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisch K von (1926) Vergleichende Physiologie des Geruchs-und Geschmackssinnes. Handb norm pathol Physiol 11: 203–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabowski CT, Dethier VG (1954) The structure of the tarsal chemoreceptors of the blowfly, Phormia regina Meigen. J Morph 94: 1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen K (1968) Untersuchungen über den Mechanismus der Zucker-Perzeption bei Fliegen. Habilitationsschrift Univ Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen K (1969) The mechanism of sugar reception a biochemical investigation. In: Pfaffman C (ed) Olfaction and taste III. Rockefeller Univ Press, New York, pp 382–391

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen K, Kühner J (1972) Properties of a possible receptor protein of the fly’s sugar receptor. In: Schneider D (ed) Olfaction and taste IV. Wissenschaftliche Verlagsges MBM, Stuttgart, pp 350–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartline HK (1928) A quantitative and descriptive study of the electric response to illumination of the arthropod eye. Am J Physiol 83: 466–483

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson ES, Roeder KD (1957) Electrophysiological studies of arthropod chemoreception. J Cell Comp Physiol 48: 51–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson ES, Lettvin JY, Roeder KD (1955) Physiology of a primary chemoreceptor unit. Science 122: 417–418

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koizumi O, Kijima M, Morita H (1974) Characterization of a glucosidase at the tips of the chemosensory setae of the fly, Phormia regina. J Insect Physiol 20: 925–935

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd DC (1940) Host selection by hymenopterous parasites of the moth Plutella maculipennis Curtis. Proc Roy Soc London 128: 451–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minnich DE (1926) The organs of taste on the proboscis of the blowfly, Phormia regina Meigen. Anat Rec 34: 126

    Google Scholar 

  • Minnich DE (1929) The chemical senses of insects. Quart Rev Biol 4: 100–112

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Morita H (1972) Primary processes of insect chemoreception. Adv Biophys 3: 161–198

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Morita H, Doira S, Takeda K, Kuwabara M (1957) Electrical response of contact chemoreceptor on tarsus of the butterfly, Vanessa indica. Mem Fac Sci Kyushu Univ Ser E (Biol) 2: 119–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfaffmann C (1941) Gustatory afferent impulses. J Cell Comp Physiol 17: 243–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Réaumur de AF (1734–1742) Mémoires pour servir a l’histoire des insectes. I. VI, Paris, Imprroy

    Google Scholar 

  • Roeder KD, Weiant EA (1948) The effect of DDT on sensory and motor structures in the cockroach leg. J Cell Comp Physiol 32: 175–186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roys C (1954) Olfactory nerve potentials a direct measure of chemoreception. Ann NY Acad Sci 58: 250–255

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salt G (1937) The sense used by Trichogramma to distinguish between parasitized and unparasitized hosts. Proc Roy Soc London 122: 55–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider D (1955) Mikro-Elektroden registrieren die elektrischen Impulse einzelner Sinnesnervenzellen der Schmetterlingsantenne. Ind Elektron Forsch Fertigung 3: 3–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth T, Roys CC (1954) Chemoreception in insects and the action of DDT. Biol Bull 108: 66–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varley GC (1941) On the search for hosts and the egg distribution of some chalcid parasites of the knapweed gall-fly. Parasitology 33: 47–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolbarsht ML (1957) Water taste in Phormia. Science 125: 1248

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolbarsht ML, Dethier VG (1958) Electrical activity in the chemoreceptors of the blowfly. I. Responses to chemical and mechanical stimulation. J Gen Physiol 42: 393–412

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1983 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Dethier, V.G. (1983). K. D. Roeder and the History of Chemoreception. In: Huber, F., Markl, H. (eds) Neuroethology and Behavioral Physiology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69271-0_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69271-0_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-69273-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-69271-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics