Behavior Genetics

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 281–290 | Cite as

Genetic and light intensity effects on the activity and emigratory behavior of the house fly,Musca domestica (L.)

  • P. C. Chabora
  • M. E. Kessler
Article
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The emigratory behavior and locomotor activity of yellow-eyed (y/y), wildtype (+/+), and heterozygous (+/y) house flies was examined at 8 fc (86 lx) and 1600 fc (17,223 lx) light intenstities. At 8 fc, emigration rate and activity of the y/y flies was similar to that of the +/+ and +/y flies. However, at 1600 fc, the y/y flies emigrated at twice the rate and showed an activity of about one-third that of the other genotypes. The behavior of the +/+ and +/y flies remained similar regardless of the experimental design or light intensity. The excessive neural stimulation by high-intensity light resulting from reduced shielding pigments led to behavioral modifications in the visual and tactile responses of the y/y flies.

Key Words

Musca domestica (L.) emigration locomotor activity behavior genetics light intensity 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bastock, M. (1956). A gene mutation which changes a behavior pattern.Evolution 10:421–439.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, F. A., and Hall, V. A. (1936). The directive influence of light onDrosophila melanogaster Meig. and some of its eye mutants.J. Exp. Zool. 74:205–220.Google Scholar
  3. Chabora, P. C. (1967). An autosomal recessive mutation in the blow fly.J. Hered. 58:87–88.Google Scholar
  4. Chabora, P. C. (1969). Mutant genes and the emigration behavior ofPhaenicia sericata (Diptera, Calliphoridae).Evolution 23:65–71.Google Scholar
  5. Collier, B. D. (1966). Some experiments of emigratory behavior usingMusca domestica in a laboratory model. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., 151 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Ehrman, L., Omenn, G. S., and Caspari, E. (1972).Genetics, Environment, and Behavior, Academic Press, New York, 324 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Grossfield, J. (1972). The use of behavioral mutants in biological control.Behav. Genet. 2:311–319.Google Scholar
  8. Horridge, C. A. (ed.) (1975).The Compound Eye and Vision in Insects. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 595 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Kessler, M. E., and Chabora, P. C. (1977). Light intensity and phototaxis in the house fly: Photonegativity in a yellow-eyed mutant.Behav. Genet. 7:129–137.Google Scholar
  10. Kirshfeld, K., and Franceschini, N. (1969). Em Mechanismus zur Steuerrung des Lichtflusses in den Rabdomeren des Komplexauges vonMusca.Kybernetik 6:13–22.Google Scholar
  11. Manning, A. (1965).Drosophila and the evolution of behavior.Viewpoints Biol. 4:125–169.Google Scholar
  12. Parsons, P. (1973).Behavioral and Ecological Genetics: A Study in Drosophila, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 233 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Pimentel, D., Nagel, W. P., and Madden, J. L. (1963). Space-time structure of the environment and the survival of parasite-host systems.Am. Naturalist 97:141–167.Google Scholar
  14. Rockwell, R. F., Seiger, M. B. (1973). Phototaxis inDrosophila: A critical evaluation.Am. Scientist 61:339–345.Google Scholar
  15. Scott, J. P. (1943). Effect of single genes on the behavior ofDrosophila.Am. Naturalist 77:184–190.Google Scholar
  16. Streck, P. (1972). Screening pigment and visual field of single retinula cells ofCalliphora.In Wehner, R. (ed.),Information Processing in the Visual System of Arthropods, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 128–131.Google Scholar
  17. Wehner, R. (ed.) (1972).Information Processing in the Visual System of Arthropods, Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. C. Chabora
    • 1
  • M. E. Kessler
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyQueens College of the City University of New YorkFlushing

Personalised recommendations