scholarly journals Coloured and Toxic Nectar: Feeding Choices of the Madagascar Giant Day Gecko,Phelsuma grandis

Ethology ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 119 (5) ◽  
pp. 417-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid A. Minnaar ◽  
Angela Köhler ◽  
Cromwell Purchase ◽  
Susan W. Nicolson
2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred C. Dyer ◽  
John Townsend-Mehler
Keyword(s):  

1979 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 544-548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis A. Magnarelli ◽  
John F. Anderson ◽  
John H. Thorne
Keyword(s):  

2009 ◽  
Vol 179 (5) ◽  
pp. 553-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Ayala-Berdon ◽  
Jorge E. Schondube ◽  
Kathryn E. Stoner

1982 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W. Haiduk ◽  
Robert J. Baker
Keyword(s):  

Science ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 373 (6551) ◽  
pp. 226-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasuka Toda ◽  
Meng-Ching Ko ◽  
Qiaoyi Liang ◽  
Eliot T. Miller ◽  
Alejandro Rico-Guevara ◽  
...  

Early events in the evolutionary history of a clade can shape the sensory systems of descendant lineages. Although the avian ancestor may not have had a sweet receptor, the widespread incidence of nectar-feeding birds suggests multiple acquisitions of sugar detection. In this study, we identify a single early sensory shift of the umami receptor (the T1R1-T1R3 heterodimer) that conferred sweet-sensing abilities in songbirds, a large evolutionary radiation containing nearly half of all living birds. We demonstrate sugar responses across species with diverse diets, uncover critical sites underlying carbohydrate detection, and identify the molecular basis of sensory convergence between songbirds and nectar-specialist hummingbirds. This early shift shaped the sensory biology of an entire radiation, emphasizing the role of contingency and providing an example of the genetic basis of convergence in avian evolution.


2018 ◽  
Vol 93 ◽  
pp. 118-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge Ayala-Berdon ◽  
Cesar García Corona ◽  
Margarita Martínez-Gómez

1981 ◽  
Vol 117 (5) ◽  
pp. 798-803 ◽  
Author(s):  
David F. Rhoades ◽  
Jas C. Bergdahl

Author(s):  
H.F. Abou-Shaara

Beekeepers usually supply their colonies with alternatives to nectar (i.e. sugar feeding) during dearth periods of the year, especially cold times of winter. The objective of the study was to determine the best substances to feed bees to enhance the tolerance and survival of honey bees (<em>Apis</em> <em>mellifera</em> L.) to low temperatures. Seven feeding choices were compared under laboratory conditions. These feeding choices were: sugar syrup, liquid honey, creamed honey, honey candy, sugar candy, honey jelly, and honey/sugarcane juice jelly. The results showed that the number of bees attracted to each feeding choice was influenced significantly by feeding type. Worker bees were attracted to all feeding choices and showed a high preference to creamed honey, honey jelly or honey/juice jelly. The tolerance of honey bees to low temperature was enhanced when bees were fed on creamed honey, sugar syrup or honey candy. The mean time at which 50% of bees were able to survive ranged from 3 days (unfed bees) to 15.8 days (honey candy group). The survival rate of worker bees was highest when they fed on honey candy, creamed honey or sugar candy. In light of this study, creamed honey or honey candy can be considered the best feeding choices for bee colonies during winter to enhance their survival and tolerance to low temperatures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document