Temporal model of fluid-feeding mechanisms in a long proboscid orchid bee compared to the short proboscid honey bee
Journal of Theoretical Biology, ISSN: 0022-5193, Vol: 484, Page: 110017
2020
- 7Citations
- 31Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes7
- CrossRef6
- Captures31
- Readers31
- 31
Review Description
Bees (Apidae) are flower-visiting insects that possess highly efficient mouthparts for the ingestion of nectar and other sucrose fluids. Their mouthparts are composed of mandibles and a tube-like proboscis. The proboscis forms a food canal, which encompasses a protrusible and hairy tongue to load and imbibe nectar, representing a fluid-feeding technique with a low Reynolds number. The western honey bee, Apis mellifera ligustica, can rhythmically erect the tongue microtrichia to regulate the glossal shape, achieving a tradeoff between nectar intake rate and viscous drag. Neotropical orchid bees ( Euglossa imperialis ) possess a proboscis longer than the body and combines this lapping-sucking mode of fluid-feeding with suction feeding. This additional technique of nectar uptake may have different biophysics. In order to reveal the effect of special structures of mouthparts in terms of feeding efficiency, we build a temporal model for orchid bees considering fluid transport in multi-states including active suction, tongue protraction and viscous dipping. Our model indicates that the dipping technique employed by honey bees can contribute to more than seven times the volumetric and energetic intake rate at a certain nectar concentration compared with the combined mode used by orchid bees. The high capability of the honey bee's proboscis to ingest nectar may inspire micropumps for transporting viscous liquid with higher efficiency.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002251931930387X; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.110017; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85072542466&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31542476; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S002251931930387X; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.110017
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know