Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Artificial Selection for Weight and its Consequences in Tenebrio molitor L.

Abstract

BEGINNING in 1946 a population of Tenebrio molitor (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) was reared continuously in standard optimal or sub-optimal conditions of food, temperature and humidity, avoiding as much as possible interferences of cannibalism and overpopulation. At the same time, artificial selection in favour of small and big pupal weights was undertaken and resulted in splitting the initial population into two strains, one labelled F (small weights), the other labelled G (big weights). The first eight years were mainly devoted to this work of selection, consisting in the removal of all F-pupæ weighing more than 160 mg, then more than 130 mg, and of all G-pupæ weighing less than 160 mg. From 1952 on, after about 12 consecutive generations of both strains, both appeared definitely homogeneous and no further selection was needed save in quite exceptional instances1. It had also become obvious that by selecting for weights one had also selected automatically in favour of shorter or longer durations of larval development. Further attempts to split the two strains in order to obtain dwarf strains failed2. Thus time had come to find out whether the two strains differed also in other respects. They do so indeed, to an extent that it is now possible to formulate a true physiological diagnosis involving quite a number of unexpected characters.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Leclercq, J., Physiol. Compar. et Oecol., 2, 161 (1950); 4, 89 (1955).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Leclercq, J., Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liège, 24, 52, 60 (1955).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Huot, L., and Leclercq, J., Arch. Intern. Physiol. Biochem., 66, 270 (1958).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Leclercq, J., Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liège, 25, 296, 317 (1956).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Huot, L., Leclercq, J., and Florkin, M., Arch. Intern. Physiol. Biochem., 67, 461 (1959).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Leclercq, J., Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liège, 25, 336 (1956).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fraenkel, G., and Leclercq, J., Arch. Intern. Physiol. Biochem., 64, 601 (1956).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Leclercq, J., Arch. Intern. Physiol. Biochem., 68, 500 (1960).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Moreau, C., and Leclercq, J., Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liège, 32, 157 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Collinet, C., Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liè, 26, 381 (1957).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

LECLERCQ, J. Artificial Selection for Weight and its Consequences in Tenebrio molitor L.. Nature 198, 106–107 (1963). https://doi.org/10.1038/198106b0

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/198106b0

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing