The Ohio naturalist, Vol. 1, No. 8, June 1901 — John Shaqi
The Ohio naturalist, Vol. 1, No. 8, June 1901Ohio State University. Biological Club
History
The Ohio naturalist, Vol. 1, No. 8, June 1901
Ohio State University. Biological Club
Natural history -- Ohio -- Periodicals; Natural history -- Periodicals; Science -- Periodicals
The wings of the bee are undoubtedly more efficient for being
closely attached to each other. The life of the workers is so short,
being only about three weeks, and their activity so great that any
increase in efficiency, especially in the organs of flight, must
have a very direct influence on the welfare of the whole swarm. So
far as the well being of the swarm depends upon nutritive processes
the efficiency of the hive is equal to the average efficiency of the
workers. Now, if the increase in number of hooks and the consequent,
firmer attachment of the wings is compensated for by a smaller wing,
there is much less opportunity for the operation of natural selection
on the individual bees than if the greater number of hooks is always
associated with a broader or longer wing.
This selective process might occur either in the hive or between
hives. If it occurs in the hive it would increase the efficiency of
the hive somewhat; but if it occurs between hives it finally means
the elimination of the weaker hive and the consequent increased
efficiency of the species.
In order to find out the real conditions, one of the students, Mr.
J. N. Frank, took twenty-five workers from each of four hives and
counted the number of hooks on each wing, right and left, and also
measured the width of the anterior and posterior wings on each side,
The width only was taken on account of the difficulty in finding a
good point at the base of the wing from which to measure the length.
The results are so uniform that the width probably gives sufficient
data from which to draw conclusions.
Of the four hives studied, numbers one and two were very weak. Number
three was a strong hive which made forty (40) pounds of extra honey
in the summer of 1900. Number four was weaker than number three and
made only ten (10) pounds of extra honey.
The complete measurements are too long to give in detail, and the
averages only will be offered here.
AVERAGES OF TWENTY-FIVE MEASUREMENTS FOR EACH HIVE TAKEN WITH AN
EYE-PIECE MICROMETER, EXPRESSED IN MM.
HIVE NUMBER ONE.
------------------------+-----------------------
Average Number of Hooks.| Average Width of Wing.
-----------+------------+-----------+-----------
Right wing.| Left wing. |Right wing.| Left wing.
| | Ant. Pos.| Ant. Pos.
21.3 | 20.9 | 4.21 3.61| 4.28 3.55
-----------+------------+-----------+-----------
HIVE NUMBER TWO.
------------------------+-----------------------
Average Number of Hooks.| Average Width of Wing.
-----------+------------+-----------+-----------
Right wing.| Left wing. |Right wing.| Left wing.
| | Ant. Pos.| Ant. Pos.
19.2 | 18.8 | 4.14 3.48| 4.16 3.48
-----------+------------+-----------+-----------
HIVE NUMBER THREE.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account