1977
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2311.1977.tb00896.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sinking speeds of falling and flying Aphis fabae Scopoli

Abstract: Abstract. 1. The terminal velocities of freshly anaesthetized and weighed, virginoparous alatae were measured by dropping them into updrafts of known speed. For an average specimen weighing about 0.49 mg the terminal velocity was 1.78 ms‐1 with wings closed and 0.82 ms‐1 with wings fully extended horizontally.2. Extrapolating from the known terminal velocities of falling spheres of appropriate density, it is concluded that for inertly falling insects of constant shape the terminal velocity will be substantial… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
15
0

Year Published

1984
1984
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The relative speed of free fall versus active ßight depends on insect size (the Reynolds number). Thomas et al (1977) studied the fall behavior of aphids, whose average mass is Ϸ0.5 mg. They showed that aphids can ßy downward at speeds of Ϸ0.7 m/s.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The relative speed of free fall versus active ßight depends on insect size (the Reynolds number). Thomas et al (1977) studied the fall behavior of aphids, whose average mass is Ϸ0.5 mg. They showed that aphids can ßy downward at speeds of Ϸ0.7 m/s.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Þrst two scenarios assume that insects do not adjust their ßight behavior to changing environmental conditions, whereas the last two assume that the insects respond to the cooler air as they are lofted in updrafts and to the updraft speed itself, respectively. The scenarios are (1) random microinsect motion only, where w i ϭ 0 and K ϭ 10 m 2 /s; (2) the dead particle scenario, where at all grid points w i ϭ 0.45 m/s (this is the average rate of insect subsidence revealed by a comparison of radar velocities with vertical air motion measured nearby; Geerts and Miao 2005); (3) Because the fall speed and ßight speed of microinsects is limited to 1Ð2 m/s (e.g., Wellington 1945, Johnson 1969, Thomas et al 1977, Pedgley 1980), we impose a ceiling to this ability to oppose an updraft. That is, ͉W i, max ͉ ϭ 1.5 m/s, as proposed by Geerts and Miao (2005).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The migrating insects in the study by Irwin and Thresh (1988), referred to earlier, were aphids. According to Thomas et al (1977), the terminal fall speed of typical aphids, with a mass of about 0.5 mg, is in the range 0.8-1.8 m s −1 , depending on whether they are gliding with their wings outstretched or falling with their wings closed. In the next section we show that the terminal fall speed of our insects was larger than this, between 1.3 and 2.5 m s −1 .…”
Section: The Source and Nature Of The Insect Targetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most downward atmospheric motions in the CBL are slower than updraughts. However, even small insects such as aphids are able to reach high fall-speeds (up to 1.8 m s −1 ) by folding their wings (Thomas et al, 1977). Fast downward insect speeds may hence be attributed to a combination of the two effects.…”
Section: Insect and Aerosol Heightmentioning
confidence: 99%