size considerations: was Re: [NatureNS] Wasp question (long)

Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 13:38:31 -0300
From: Steve Shaw <srshaw@DAL.CA>
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
References: <B189E9D2F3254EDDA89A6CC05D855E61@andyebc3345d2b>
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.3.4)
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

Index of Subjects
Hi Dave, Paul & others,
The many complicated formulations of how diffusion occurs are modelled  
mainly on the formally similar process of heat conduction along rods  
and through slabs etc, where industrial application needs have led to  
more widespread analysis (eg. classic book by Carslaw & Jaeger).  The  
rate of supply will indeed vary according to whether the oxygen is  
removed instantaneously at the far end, or allowed to build up, in the  
long term though not initially.  In terms of the evolutionary pressure  
to branch further, I don't think this argument is valid. The reason is  
that the rate of movement of diffusant along a channel or tube in the  
direction of its length is independent of the width of the channel  
until you get down to molecular dimensions (wall effects).  If you  
imagine that all the branched-off channels have the same diameter as  
the original one, that would be similar to instantaneously widening  
the pathway (increases cross-sectional area), which would have a  
serious effect (the first part of the pathway would be limiting).   
However, this is not how tracheae branch and sub-branch again, but  
rather like the branches of a tree, with the deeper branches getting  
finer and finer until they enter the muscles; I'm not sure if the  
actual aggregate cross-section remains exactly constant, but it  
probably approaches that.  Most of the tracheal system has hydrophobic  
walls which is partly why they don't fill with water when an insect is  
immersed, but the tips of the final branches, tracheoles, are  
hydrophylic and contain fluid where gas exchange occurs.  When the  
muscles are active, I think it was Wigglesworth who showed that this  
fluid withdraws deeper into the muscle so the interface moves closer  
to site of oxygen demand.

I cut a few corners in the earlier e-mail: some insects in some parts  
of their bodies actively pump the tracheal system locally by  
contracting nearby muscles, so this presumably aids movement of gases  
along, beyond the constraints of simple diffusion.  The most obvious  
example though adapted for a different use would be that of the  
Madagascar hissing cockroach, which when alarmed expels air rapidly  
from the enlarged tracheae connected to one pair of spiracles.  And in  
addition to the series of segmental hearts, blood is also circulated  
up long appendages like the antennae by little pumping stations  
('accessory hearts') at their bases.

I assumed that the old story about sauropods in swamps was still  
correct, but Paul sets this on its head.  I agree that the likely  
reason why the large carboniferous dragonflies could function is that  
their bodies while very long were not all that wide, from memory of a  
diorama somewhere illustrating this. The tracheae basically run across  
the body segments from the sides, but in addition there are  
longitudinal tubes that connect up the tracheae between segments in  
most insects as well.
Interesting, in light of the earlier recommendation of Vincent  
Dethier's beautifully written books (the comment on flight in  
particular though I'd forgotten that he treated that), it has emerged  
more recently that small insects don't fly by the same mechanism as  
larger birds.  From Michael Dickinson's work, air viscosity is really  
important at small size, and small insects generate lift quite  
differently by having air vortices roll off the wings.  This raises  
the interesting question of whether those large ancient dragonflies  
would have used more conventional lift mechanisms as they were as  
large or larger than many modern birds.  I haven't followed this  
recently but assume that people will now be looking at hummingbirds.

Dave, there's a lot of info about heart rate in different insect  
species (tables in a book by J. C. Jones for instance), and I guess  
that circulation rate goes up as size does, but am not sure if this is  
well documented without further digging.  You may know already that  
fancy insect flight muscle doesn't work well when cold, which is  
another likely reason for sunning, to increase its temperature.  It is  
known that this happens during warm-up when some moths vibrate their  
wings for several minutes -- the temperature in flight muscle goes up  
by several degrees, allowing them finally to take off.
Steve, Halifax



Quoting David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com>:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Shaw" <srshaw@DAL.CA>
> To: <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 1:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Wasp question (long)
>
>
>> Hi Paul, Derek, Andy, Dave and all,
>   So if you
>> double the width of the insect, you double the length of the tube
>> pathway (*2), but the rate of movement of the gases O2 and CO2 will
>> drop to one quarter of what it had been before, at the tissue end
>> (1/(2 squared) = 1/4).  This is believed to be one of the main factors
>> that limits the ultimate size of insects, such that at large size they
>> simply cannot supply O2 to the tissues fast enough by passive
>> diffusion.  The most energetically expensive tissue known is insect
>> flight muscle, to give an idea of why this might be important.
>
> Hi Steve & All,                Oct 7, 2010
>    It is correct that if delivery of a gas by diffusion to the end  
> of a tube (of uniform diameter) is J then delivery to the end of  
> same diameter tube will be J/4, if tube length is doubled.
>
>    And-- the above applies (I think) whether removal of gas from the  
> sink end of the tube is at a very rapid rate relative to the rate of  
> diffusion or at a slow rate; if removal is rapid then the  
> concentration gradient will be steep and if slow then shallow.
>
>    But if this dimensional effect were relevant, why over all these  
> years, would not evolutionary pressures have developed sufficient  
> branching in larger insects to compensate for this effect ?
>
>    Unless I have missed something, the answer is quite simple. Most  
> insects have evolved with flight somewhere in the background and if  
> you are going to fly then small is beautiful. For example, fairly  
> large Mayflies can almost float in thermals generated by a canoe or  
> wharf at calm twilight. And smaller insects can ride the tiny  
> thermals generated by shrubs or other localized heat sources.
>
>    Also, unless transfer of O2 from the trachea to tissue fluids,  
> followed by flow away from the trachea, is very efficient, and it is  
> difficult to see how it could be*, then the really steep  
> concentration gradient would be at the gas/liquid interface.
>
> *Based on O2 solubility in water at 20oC; 20% O2 in air would be in  
> equilibrium with about 0.6% O2 by volume in water.
>
>    Insects, especially rapid flie