New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Unraveling the Secrets of This Weird Beetle’s 48-Hour Clock

New research examines the molecular machinery behind a beetle’s strange biological cycle

Top view of beetle.

Black chafer beetle.

KKPCW (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Nearly all animals follow 24-hour activity cycles based on their genetically built-in circadian clocks. But one beetle species operates in 48-hour time chunks instead—apparently driven by a strict schedule for sex. A study in Current Biology shows that a particular gene somehow activates with a two-day pattern to contribute to this cycle.

Both male and female black chafer beetles hide underground during the day and emerge every second night to search for food and a mate. Once aboveground, the females climb plant stalks while secreting sexy-smelling pheromone trails to lead males to them.

Walter Leal, a chemical ecologist at the University of California, Davis, had long wondered whether males of this species sense the females’ pheromones on a 48-hour cycle as well. In the new study, he and his colleagues used a recently released “transcriptome”—a catalog of these insects’ RNA—to finally dig into this schedule’s genetic basis. They identified genes likely to produce odor receptors—and found that only one made a receptor fitting the female’s pheromone. Their experiments confirmed that disrupting this gene’s activity halted males’ attraction.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Next the team monitored how much of this receptor the male beetles produced over time, to determine when they’d be best at tracking the pheromone. Receptor production spiked at night every 48 hours around the time female pheromone production peaked, then hit a low the next night. “We found a 48-hour [receptor-producing] cycle, which is synchronized with the females,” Leal says. “It’s a beautiful story.” The findings show the 48-hour cycle is present in both sexes and engrained on the molecular level.

Biological rhythms typically rely on environmental cues such as day and night; there are no known 48-hour cues in nature. Future work will untangle what drives this cycle in black chafer beetles and how the genes regulate their timing. Jennifer Hurley, a biologist at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, says research is revealing how environmental signals can affect biological rhythms. With studies like this, she says, “the field is recognizing that the number of rhythms in biology is enormous.”

Andrew Chapman is a Truckee, Calif.–based freelance science writer who covers life sciences and the environment.

More by Andrew Chapman
Scientific American Magazine Vol 330 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Irregular Hours” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 330 No. 5 (), p. 12
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0524-12

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe