in fact human scientists have been unable to recreate this feat:Scientists don't yet understand how Ampulex manages either of these feats. Part of the reason for their ignorance is the fact that scientists have much left to learn about nervous systems and metabolism. But millions of years of natural selection has allowed Ampulex to reverse engineer its host. We would do well to follow its lead, and gain the wisdom of parasites.
Seem the Ampulex makes for a better showcase of intelligent design than the Bacterial Flagella, although if ID activists are to believed, the Intelligent Designer somehow created what would later evolve into the Type III secretory system used by such pest as the bubonic plague. Talking about Divine retribution... Oh yes the original paper Gal R, Rosenberg LA, Libersat F. Parasitoid wasp uses a venom cocktail injected into the brain to manipulate the behavior and metabolism of its cockroach prey. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol. 2005 Dec;60(4):198-208. Other relevant papers can also be found at the Libersat's siteThe Israeli researchers found that they could also drop oxygen consumption in cockroaches by injecting paralyzing drugs or by removing the neurons that the wasps disable with their sting. But they can manage only a crude imitation; the manipulated cockroaches quickly dehydrated and were dead within six days. The wasp venom somehow puts the roaches into suspended animation while keeping them in good health, even as a wasp larva is devouring it from the inside
18 Comments
Sir_Toejam · 11 February 2006
I often wonder if 'ol GW hasn't been stung (a few times) by one of these wasps.
It sure seems he lets Karl Rove feed off of him like a maggot quite frequently.
Harq al-Ada · 11 February 2006
I thought the secretory system evolved INTO the flagellum, not the other way around.
PvM · 11 February 2006
PvM · 11 February 2006
Stephen Elliott · 12 February 2006
steve s · 12 February 2006
the idea of a wasp driving a cockroach home is one of those 'the universe is weirder than you Can imagine' dealies
Sir_Toejam · 12 February 2006
yee haw! sounds like the wasps are having a little rodeo.
how fast can you hogtie a cockroach?
what gets me is how much detail the researchers would have to uncover in order to get the full story here.
that was a LOT of work!
Sir_Toejam · 12 February 2006
no, wait, the wasps are "cockroach whisperers"...
Henry J · 12 February 2006
Re "The wasp takes hold of one of the roach's antennae and leads it"
Reminds me of Borg assimilating somebody... (Resistance is futile!)
Henry
PvM · 12 February 2006
So what does all this tell us of the intelligent designer beyond that he did what he did because he wanted to and that he used whatever means he needed to accomplish it?
Seems he has a strong dislike for roaches and seems to have a fondness for type III secretory systems, which are part of some of the most 'virulent' strains. Salmonella, Yersinia, chlamydiae....
Lovely
Wherever the evidence leads suddenly may not sound as compelling an argument anymore :-)
Sir_Toejam · 12 February 2006
hmm.
I don't recall anybody ever positing that the intelligent designer was benevolent, now that I think about it.
I think i know who the intelligent designer is!
could it beeeeeeeeee...
SATAN!
PvM · 12 February 2006
Interesting thought Sir, one never knows for whom one really 'works' now isn't it?
Anton Mates · 12 February 2006
It's fairly obvious that the God of the Young Earth Creationist is not particularly benevolent, so I don't think there's much difficulty in ascribing things like this to him. If he can introduce death and pain into the entire universe in retribution for a single act of disobedience, or flood the planet because most humans were misbehaving, or send people to Hell, rigging up a few nasty parasites and pathogens falls well within his observed moral spectrum.
IDers, for their part, are careful to keep their Designer sufficiently vague in capability and motivation that no observed fact can have any bearing on either.
Really, the only people I can see this troubling are liberal theists like the young Darwin, who really would like to believe in a perfectly benevolent God that makes his nature known through the goodness of the world. And I think they're mostly happy with the solution he suggested, that such unpleasantnesses as wasp parasitism are a necessary consequence of the same evolutionary process that produced everything that's cool and wonderful about life on Earth.
PvM · 12 February 2006
People, more qualified than I in theology, have pointed out their concerns with Intelligent Design. My major concerns with ID are both scientific and theological. I find ID to be scientifically vacuous and as a Christian I worry about making the Designer falsifiable. Others have argued that ID tries to take away faith, an essential part of Christian religion, and replace it with science or 'certainty'.
William E Emba · 13 February 2006
PvM · 15 February 2006
Sir_Toejam · 16 February 2006
rolex watch replicas · 10 June 2006
A fantastic site, and brilliant effort. A great piece of work.