Literature DB >> 11296858

Food-plant niche selection rather than the presence of ant nests explains oviposition patterns in the myrmecophilous butterfly genus Maculinea.

J A Thomas1, G W Elmes.   

Abstract

It has been suggested that the socially parasitic butterfly Maculinea alcon detects ant odours before ovipositing on initial larval food plants near colonies of its obligate ant host Myrmica ruginodis. It has also been suggested that overcrowding on food plants near M. ruginodis is avoided by an ability to detect high egg loads, resulting in a switch to selecting plants near less suitable ant species. If confirmed, this hypothesis (H1) would have serious implications for the application of current population models aimed at the conservation of endangered Maculinea species, which are based on the null hypothesis (H0) that females randomly select food plants whose flower buds are at a precise phenological stage, making oviposition independent of ants. If H1 were wrong, practical management based upon its assumptions could lead to the extinction of protected populations. We present data for the five European species of Maculinea which show that (i) each oviposits on a phenologically restricted flower-bud stage, which accounts for the apparent host-ant-mediated niche separation in sympatric populations of Maculinea nausithous and Maculinea teleius, (ii) there is no temporal shift in oviposition by Maculinea arion in relation to host ant distribution or egg density, and (iii) oviposition patterns in 13 populations of M. alcon's closest relative, Macaulinea rebeli, conform to H0 not H1 predictions. It is concluded that conservation measures should continue to be based on H0.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11296858      PMCID: PMC1088629          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1398

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  2 in total

1.  Does the presence of ant nests matter for oviposition to a specialized myrmecophilous Maculinea butterfly?

Authors:  H van Dyck; J G Oostermeijer; W Talloen; V Feenstra; A van der Hidde; I Wynhoff
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-05-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Polymorphic growth rates in myrmecophilous insects.

Authors:  K Schönrogge; J C Wardlaw; J A Thomas; G W Elmes
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-04-22       Impact factor: 5.349

  2 in total
  9 in total

1.  Ant association facilitates the evolution of diet breadth in a lycaenid butterfly.

Authors:  Matthew L Forister; Zachariah Gompert; Chris C Nice; Glen W Forister; James A Fordyce
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Patterns of host use by brood parasitic Maculinea butterflies across Europe.

Authors:  András Tartally; Jeremy A Thomas; Christian Anton; Emilio Balletto; Francesca Barbero; Simona Bonelli; Markus Bräu; Luca Pietro Casacci; Sándor Csősz; Zsolt Czekes; Matthias Dolek; Izabela Dziekańska; Graham Elmes; Matthias A Fürst; Uta Glinka; Michael E Hochberg; Helmut Höttinger; Vladimir Hula; Dirk Maes; Miguel L Munguira; Martin Musche; Per Stadel Nielsen; Piotr Nowicki; Paula S Oliveira; László Peregovits; Sylvia Ritter; Birgit C Schlick-Steiner; Josef Settele; Marcin Sielezniew; David J Simcox; Anna M Stankiewicz; Florian M Steiner; Giedrius Švitra; Line V Ugelvig; Hans Van Dyck; Zoltán Varga; Magdalena Witek; Michal Woyciechowski; Irma Wynhoff; David R Nash
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Evidence for positive density-dependent emigration in butterfly metapopulations.

Authors:  Piotr Nowicki; Vladimir Vrabec
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Host range evolution is not driven by the optimization of larval performance: the case of Lycaeides melissa (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) and the colonization of alfalfa.

Authors:  Matthew L Forister; Chris C Nice; James A Fordyce; Zachariah Gompert
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2009-03-07       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Host ant independent oviposition in the parasitic butterfly Maculinea alcon.

Authors:  Matthias A Fürst; David R Nash
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 3.703

6.  Restricted within-habitat movement and time-constrained egg laying of female Maculinea rebeli butterflies.

Authors:  Adám Korösi; Noémi Orvössy; Péter Batáry; Szilvia Kövér; László Peregovits
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Host recognition by the specialist hoverfly Microdon mutabilis, a social parasite of the ant Formica lemani.

Authors:  Karsten Schönrogge; Emma K V Napper; Michael A Birkett; Christine M Woodcock; John A Pickett; Lester J Wadhams; Jeremy A Thomas
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 2.626

8.  Mimetic host shifts in an endangered social parasite of ants.

Authors:  Jeremy A Thomas; Graham W Elmes; Marcin Sielezniew; Anna Stankiewicz-Fiedurek; David J Simcox; Josef Settele; Karsten Schönrogge
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-01-22       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Plant defences against ants provide a pathway to social parasitism in butterflies.

Authors:  Dario Patricelli; Francesca Barbero; Andrea Occhipinti; Cinzia M Bertea; Simona Bonelli; Luca P Casacci; Simon A Zebelo; Christoph Crocoll; Jonathan Gershenzon; Massimo E Maffei; Jeremy A Thomas; Emilio Balletto
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 5.349

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.