Repeat, repeat offenders and the "fruit fly" problem
Science Daily has done it again. In a recent news article on the genetics of sleep in fruit flies (the Science article here), they have posted a photo of a fruit fly.
Now you may say "what's wrong with that?" Well, as a dipterist, I take my fly identification very seriously. A major problem I have with the genetics community is the proliferation of the term "fruit fly" for members of the Drosophilidae - including the golden calf of genetics, Drosophila melanogaster. To a fly specialist, "fruit fly" refers to a member of the family Tephritidae, a group of very serious pests of live fruit (i.e. the stuff we want to eat). Members of the Drosophilidae, on the other hand, are usually found in rotting fruit or fungus, and, thus, we dipterists refer to them as "pomace flies" or "vinegar flies." Now, you can see how someone searching for a photo of Drosophila melanogaster, typing in "fruit fly," may be mislead to an incorrect photo, and then post it (*cough* Science Daily *cough*). To the average person this may not be important, but to the science community these differences are extreme: one type of fruit fly causes billions of dollars in economic damage worldwide, while the other fruit fly is loved by geneticists worldwide. This is why we use scientific names.
Nevertheless, the research on sleep in Drosophila is intriguing. If you would like to read a more in-depth news article, our own Elsa Youngsteadt (NCSU Entomology) recently wrote a great Science news article on sleep in genetic model organisms.
Will the real fruit fly please stand up? (Top:Drosophilidae by Richard Leung; Bottom:Tephritidae by Sean McCann)
Now you may say "what's wrong with that?" Well, as a dipterist, I take my fly identification very seriously. A major problem I have with the genetics community is the proliferation of the term "fruit fly" for members of the Drosophilidae - including the golden calf of genetics, Drosophila melanogaster. To a fly specialist, "fruit fly" refers to a member of the family Tephritidae, a group of very serious pests of live fruit (i.e. the stuff we want to eat). Members of the Drosophilidae, on the other hand, are usually found in rotting fruit or fungus, and, thus, we dipterists refer to them as "pomace flies" or "vinegar flies." Now, you can see how someone searching for a photo of Drosophila melanogaster, typing in "fruit fly," may be mislead to an incorrect photo, and then post it (*cough* Science Daily *cough*). To the average person this may not be important, but to the science community these differences are extreme: one type of fruit fly causes billions of dollars in economic damage worldwide, while the other fruit fly is loved by geneticists worldwide. This is why we use scientific names.
Nevertheless, the research on sleep in Drosophila is intriguing. If you would like to read a more in-depth news article, our own Elsa Youngsteadt (NCSU Entomology) recently wrote a great Science news article on sleep in genetic model organisms.
Will the real fruit fly please stand up? (Top:Drosophilidae by Richard Leung; Bottom:Tephritidae by Sean McCann)
Poor ScienceDaily. On some level I blame *us scientists* for being poor communicators - the geneticists allow "fruit fly" to persist, the dipterists and hymenopterists, perhaps, should reach out more to educate the public about our fascinating fruit flies, pomace flies, bumble bees, carpenter bees, and other insects and how to tell them apart, etc.
Posted by ardeans on July 31, 2008 at 10:48 AM EDT #
Well, one of my reasons for posting this was to help inform people about these differences. I in no way wanted to be inflammatory or to put down Science Daily. I just see this issue as persistent.
Posted by Matt B on July 31, 2008 at 01:47 PM EDT #
Right. Well, on one level it is sloppy journalism, and it should be called out.
Posted by ardeans on July 31, 2008 at 03:23 PM EDT #
I'll put the blame squarely on ScienceDaily. They can apparently pay journalists to write articles, but they aren't willing to pay photographers for decent images. They scrimped on the image budget and got what they paid for.
The photo credit is "istockphoto", one of those trashy low-end agencies that charges basically nothing for an image license. Users end up with images taken by photographers who don't value their own work and aren't willing to put in the time to identify their subjects correctly.
They're lucky they even got a dipteran. If you go to the istockphoto site and type in "beetle", note the prominence of cicadas and roaches.
Posted by Alex on July 31, 2008 at 04:36 PM EDT #
Yeah, I just perused iStockphoto and found this lovely Drosophila melanogaster image: http://tinyurl.com/63j3gb
Perhaps SD should have run with that?! Too bad there is so much failure on display - these are all really cool research stories that deserve accurate representation.
Posted by ardeans on July 31, 2008 at 05:27 PM EDT #
I was almost certain that tinyurl link was going to be a rickroll.
Posted by Keith Bayless on July 31, 2008 at 09:04 PM EDT #
I only use tinyURL because the comments have HTML disabled (to prevent spam), and I want to present links like this:
http://bugguide.net/images/cache/RL4ZQL5Z8L1H9HRRGH1HEHVHMH5Z7H2
ZLLWZ4LAZSL1H7H6ZKLEZ5HOFGFDHHJHUH
3HNHYH5LJHXLAZILHRGHBHLL.jpg (not real)
as this:
http://tinyurl.com/2q9j9y (real)
Posted by ardeans on July 31, 2008 at 11:27 PM EDT #