@article{fdi:010007845,
  title = {{T}he effect of laboratory maintenance of {P}anstrongylus megistus on its flight activity},
  author = {{S}oares, {R}.{P}.{P}. and {D}ujardin, {J}ean-{P}ierre and {R}omanha, {A}.{J}. and {S}antoro, {M}.{M}. and {S}chofield, {C}.{J}. and {D}iotaiuti, {L}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{I}n this study we compared two lines of #{P}. megistus$ which differed only by its laboratory maintenance time. {PM}1 (more than five generations in insectarium) and {PM}2 (one or two generations under laboratory conditions). {T}he parameters studied were temperature (tp), humidity (hm), the weight/length ratios (nutritional status, w/l), isoenzyme electrophoresis at 7 locus ({ME}, {GPI}, {LDH}, {ICD} and alfa-{GPD}), as well as enzymatic activity of alfa-glycerophosphate dehydrogenase (alfa-{GPD} ac.), a crucial flight activity related enzyme. {I}nsects were processed according to {SCHOFIELD} (1980) and observed througth a period of 30 days. {T}he temperature and humidity were measured daily at the safe time, and the insects that had flighted, "good" flyers (gf), were also measured for the determination of the nutritional status. {M}uscle extraction was made for isoenzyme and alfa-{GPD} enzymatic studies. {A}t the end of this period the same number of insects that did not fly, "bad" flyers (bf), were used as control and submitted to the same analysis. {N}o isoenzyme difference was observed between gf and bf for the two populations. {M}ain external factors influencing flight activity were w/l ({PM}1 {P}=0.0027; {PM}2 {P}=0.0209) and tp ({PM}1 {P}=0.0814; {PM}2 {P}=0.0118). {H}owever, {PM}1 and {PM}2 strongly differed with respect to alfa-{GPD} activity : it was the main difference found between {PM}1-gf and {PM}1-bf ({P}=0.0001), whereas it did not present any evidence for heterogeneity in {PM}2 ({P}=0.5995). {W}e used two multivariate approaches to verify the differences between gf and bf (logistic regression and canonical variate analysis, {CVA}). {L}ogistic regression was able to separate "good" from "bad" flyers of the old established laboratory strain ({PM}1) using as the unique parameter value the alfa-{GPD} activity (87 to 93% of correct attribution), while it reached lower scores (78 to 86%) in {PM}2, needing the combination of two or more parameters excluding alfa-{GPD} activity. ({R}{\'e}sum{\'e} d'auteur)},
  keywords = {{BIOLOGIE} ; {ETHOLOGIE} ; {ELEVAGE} {DE} {LABORATOIRE} ; {TEMPERATURE} ; {HUMIDITE} {DE} {L}'{AIR} ; {ETAT} {NUTRITIONNEL} ; {ISOENZYME} ; {ENZYME}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{M}emorias do {I}nstituto {O}swaldo {C}ruz},
  volume = {91},
  numero = {no sp{\'e}cial},
  pages = {142},
  ISSN = {0074-0276},
  year = {1996},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010007845},
}