Behavior Genetics

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 291–302 | Cite as

Foraging strategies ofDrosophila melanogaster: A chromosomal analysis

  • Marla B. Sokolowski
Article

Abstract

Two larval foraging strategies inDrosophila melanogaster were identified, “rover” and “sitter.” “Rovers” traverse a large area while feeding whereas “sitters” cover a small area. The difference between “rovers” and “sitters” was analyzed genetically by chromosomal substitutions between isogenic stocks. Differences in larval locomotor behavior (“crawling behavior”) can be attributed to the second chromosome, the “rover” strategy being dominant over the “sitter” strategy. Differences in feeding rate (“shoveling behavior”) are affected additively by both the second and third chromosomes. Natural populations ofDrosophila larvae were sampled three times over a 2-month period; “rovers” and “sitters” were at constant frequencies in these populations. The two foraging strategies are discussed in the light of resource utilization in environments where food is distributed continuously or discontinuously.

Key Words

foraging strategies chromosomal analysis Drosophila melanogaster larvae feeding-locomotor behavior 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ayala, F. J. (1970). Competition, coexistence and evolution. In Hecht, M. K., and Steere, W. C. (eds.),Essays in Evolution and Genetics in Honour of Theodosius Dobzansky, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, pp. 121–159.Google Scholar
  2. Bakker, K. (1961). An analysis of factors which determine success in competition for food among larvae ofDrosophila melanogaster.Arch. Neer. Zool. 14:200–281.Google Scholar
  3. Bakker, K. (1969). Selection for rate of growth and its influence on competitive ability ofDrosophila melanogaster.Neth. J. Zool. 19:541–595.Google Scholar
  4. Burnet, B., Connolly, K., and Mallinson, M. (1974). Activity and sexual behavior of neurological mutants ofDrosophila melanogaster.Behav. Genet. 4:227–235.Google Scholar
  5. Burnet, B., Sewell, D., and Bos, M. (1977). Genetic analysis of larval feeding behavior inDrosophila melanogaster. II. Growth relations and competition between selected lines.Genet. Res. Camb. 30:149–161.Google Scholar
  6. Connolly, K. (1966). Locomotor activity inDrosophila. II. Selection for active and inactive strains.Anim. Behav. 14:444–449.Google Scholar
  7. Demerec, M. (ed.) (1950).Biology of Drosophila, Wiley, London.Google Scholar
  8. Futuyama, D. J. (1970). Variation in genetic response to interspecific competition in laboratory populations ofDrosophila, Am. Nat. 104:239–252.Google Scholar
  9. Gibo, D. L. (1972). A stabilizing interaction between the founder effect and interdeme mixing in competing populations ofDrosophila melanogaster andDrosophila simulans.Can. J. Zool. 50:325–331.Google Scholar
  10. Godoy-Herrera, R. (1977). Inter- and intra-populational variation in digging inDrosophila melanogaster larvae.Behav. Genet. 7:433–439.Google Scholar
  11. Hedrick, P. H. (1972). Factors responsible for a change in competitive ability inDrosophila.Evolution 26:513–522.Google Scholar
  12. Lindsley, D. C., and Grell, E. H. (1967).Genetic Variations of Drosophila Melanogaster, Carnegie Institute of Washington Publication 627, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  13. Miller, R. S. (1964a). Interspecies competition in laboratory populations ofDrosophila melanogaster andDrosophila simulans.Am. Nat. 98:221–238.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, R. S. (1964b). Larval competition inDrosophila melanogaster, andDrosophila simulans.Ecology 45:132–148.Google Scholar
  15. Muller, H. J., and Oster, I. I. (1963). Some mutational techniques inDrosophila. In Burdette, W. J. (ed.),Methodology in Basic Genetics, Holden-Day, San Francisco, pp. 249–278.Google Scholar
  16. Ohnishi, S. (1979). Relationship between larval feeding behavior and viability inDrosophila melanogaster andDrosophila simulans.Behav. Genet. 9:129–134.Google Scholar
  17. Parsons, P. A. (1975). The comparative evolutionary biology of the sibling species,Drosophila melanogaster andD. simulans.Q. Rev. Biol. 50:151–169.Google Scholar
  18. Parsons, P. A. (1977). Genes, behavior, and evolutionary processes: The genusDrosophila.Adv. Genet. 19:1–32.Google Scholar
  19. Parsons, P. A. (1978). Habitat selection and evolutionary strategies inDrosophila: An invited address,Behav. Genet. 8:511–526.Google Scholar
  20. Rapport, E., and Sing, C. F. (1971). The genetic basis of a specific phenocopy response.Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 13:822–833.Google Scholar
  21. Sewell, D., Burnet, B., and Connolly, K. (1975). Genetic analysis of larval feeding behavior inDrosophila melanogaster.Genet. Res. Camb. 24:163–173.Google Scholar
  22. Sewell, D. F., Hunt, D. M., and Burnet, B. (1975). Biogenic amines inDrosophila melanogaster selected for differences in larval feeding behavior.Behav. Biol. 15:213–217.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marla B. Sokolowski
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations