Skip to main content
. 2010 Jul 6;107(29):12963–12968. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1004675107

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Female neotenics and eggs suppress the differentiation of new female neotenics. (A) Termite royals with workers and brood. Female neotenics (FN) are indicated by arrowheads. (B) Presence of current FN significantly suppressed the differentiation of new female (nympoid) reproductives from nymphs in comparison with controls (P < 0.001, Tukey's HSD). Removal of eggs did not significantly reduce the inhibitory effect (P = 0.42). (C) Presence of current functional neotenics significantly suppressed the differentiation of new female (ergatoid) reproductives from workers (P < 0.001, Tukey's HSD). Removal of eggs did not significantly reduce the inhibitory effect (P = 0.97). (D) Continuous addition of 100 eggs per day (Egg ++) suppressed the differentiation of new female neotenics from workers (P < 0.01), but 20 eggs per day (Egg +) did not have a significant effect compared with controls (P = 0.34). (E) Volatiles of current female neotenic reproductives through stainless steel mesh significantly suppressed the differentiation of new female neotenics from nymphs (P < 0.001). Values denote the mean ± SEM of five replications.