[NatureNS] Another parasitic wasp- Pelecinid

Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:55:24 -0300
From: "Stephen R. Shaw" <srshaw@DAL.CA>
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca
References: <20130829151207.13936jqthtq7kd4w@wm1.dal.ca>
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
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects

&gt; row. This was a light sandy-loam (as I learned much later) but 
Probably few care, but in the previous long post on this there's a  
silly arithmetical mistake:
> 'So if you had a huge wasp SGO with 630 cells, the S/N improvement   
> would be twice that of a roach with only ~25 cells [sqrt(630) = 25]'.

No - it wouldn't be twice that, it would be five times that.

The '630 cells' is in the correct direction but is way overblown to  
make the case.  To double the Signal-to-Noise ratio for the known 25  
cells of the roach SGO where the signals converge in the CNS, you need  
to multiply by (2 squared = 4), to produce 100 cells. The square root  
of 100 is 10, the sqrt of 25 is 5, so the S/N improvement then would  
be ideally 10/5, a factor of 2, or 100% over the original, as the  
wording intended.

Making 630 cells converge ideally would give you a 25/5 improvement  
over the roach, or a 5-fold increase in S/N, 500%, unnecessarily large  
for the argument being made.
As indicated previously, it is not known how many sense cells are  
present in the pelecinid's SGO in its huge hind tibia -- so far no-one  
has looked.
Steve



next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects