| Literature DB >> 23467336 |
Camille Turlure1, Viktoriia Radchuk, Michel Baguette, Mark Meijrink, Arnold den Burg, Michiel Wallis Vries, Gert-Jan Duinen.
Abstract
The butterfly Boloria aquilonaris is a specialist of oligotrophic ecosystems. Population viability analysis predicted the species to be stable in Belgium and to collapse in the Netherlands with reduced host plant quality expected to drive species decline in the latter. We tested this hypothesis by rearing B. aquilonaris caterpillars from Belgian and Dutch sites on host plants (the cranberry, Vaccinium oxycoccos). Dutch plant quality was lower than Belgian one conferring lower caterpillar growth rate and survival. Reintroduction and/or supplementation may be necessary to ensure the viability of the species in the Netherlands, but some traits may have been selected solely in Dutch caterpillars to cope with gradual changes in host plant quality. To test this hypothesis, the performance of Belgian and Dutch caterpillars fed with plants from both countries were compared. Dutch caterpillars performed well on both plant qualities, whereas Belgian caterpillars could not switch to lower quality plants. This can be considered as an environmentally induced plastic response of caterpillars and/or a local adaptation to plant quality, which precludes the use of Belgian individuals as a unique solution for strengthening Dutch populations. More generally, these results stress that the relevance of local adaptation in selecting source populations for relocation may be as important as restoring habitat quality.Entities:
Keywords: Applied ecology; conservation; evolutionary ecology; insect-plant interactions; local adaptation; relocation
Year: 2012 PMID: 23467336 PMCID: PMC3586634 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.427
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Picture of Boloria aquilonaris caterpillar in its habitat (by Gilles San Martin).
Factors affecting caterpillar growth rate (estimated using best model from Appendix 1a)
| Parameter | Level | Estimate | Std |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 0.8059 | 0.0791 | |
| Time | 0.0782 | 0.0094 | |
| Caterpillar origin | Belgium | 0.1103 | 0.0696 |
| Food origin | Belgium | 0.3713 | 0.0728 |
| Caterpillar origin*Food origin | Belgium*Belgium | −0.2605 | 0.0979 |
For categorical variables, the estimate expresses the difference of the presented level with the reference level (fixed to zero). Caterpillar growth rate (1) increased with time, (2) was on average higher for Belgian caterpillars, (3) was on average higher for caterpillars fed with Belgian plants, and (4) was increasing more slowly for caterpillars of both countries fed with Dutch plants.
Figure 2Changes in caterpillar mean growth rate in time according to (a) the food origin (Black symbols: Belgian food; White symbols: Dutch food) and caterpillar origin (circles: Belgian caterpillars; squares: Dutch caterpillars) and (b) caterpillar instar at the beginning of breeding (Small symbols: penultimate instar; Large symbols: last instar) and food treatment (Black circles: Belgian food; White circles: Dutch food).
Figure 3Estimated survival rate (±95% confidence interval) of caterpillars under the different rearing conditions: (a) according to origin (circles: Belgian caterpillars; squares: Dutch caterpillars) and food treatment (Black symbols: Belgian food; White symbols: Dutch food; Experiment I), (b) for Belgian caterpillars only according to food treatment (Black symbols: Belgian food; White symbols: Dutch food) and initial instar (Small symbols: penultimate instar; Large symbols: last instar; Experiment II).
Factors affecting caterpillar growth rate (estimated using best model from Appendix 1b)
| Parameter | Level | Estimate | Std |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 0.6057 | 0.1086 | |
| Time | 0.0971 | 0.012 | |
| Initial instar | Penultimate instar | 0.321 | 0.0943 |
| Food origin | Belgium | 0.5135 | 0.1114 |
| Initial instar*Food origin | Penultimate instar*Belgium | −0.4046 | 0.1337 |
For categorical variables, the estimate expresses the difference of the presented with the reference level (fixed to zero). Caterpillar growth rate (1) increased with time, (2) was on average lower for last instar caterpillars, (3) was on average lower for caterpillars fed Dutch plants, (4) stabilized for penultimate instar caterpillars fed Dutch plants, and (5) decreased for last instar caterpillars fed Dutch plants.
| Experience | Model | Number of parameters | AICc | ΔAICc | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | I | Time + Food origin + Caterpillar origin + Interaction *** | 5 | 77.67 | 0 |
| Time + Food origin | 3 | 80.46 | 2.79 | ||
| Time + Food origin + Caterpillar origin | 4 | 82.42 | 4.75 | ||
| Time | 1 | 98.07 | 20.4 | ||
| Time + Caterpillar origin | 3 | 99.79 | 22.12 | ||
| Food origin + Caterpillar origin + Interaction | 4 | 132.48 | 54.81 | ||
| Food origin | 2 | 133.15 | 55.48 | ||
| Food origin + Caterpillar origin | 3 | 135.13 | 57.46 | ||
| Intercept only | 1 | 145.08 | 67.41 | ||
| Caterpillar origin | 2 | 146.88 | 69.21 | ||
| (b) | II | Time + Food origin + Initial instar + Interaction *** | 5 | 267.62 | 0 |
| Time + Food origin + Initial instar | 4 | 274.45 | 6.83 | ||
| Time + Food origin | 3 | 275.42 | 7.8 | ||
| Time + Initial instar | 3 | 285.59 | 17.97 | ||
| Time | 1 | 286.27 | 18.65 | ||
| Food origin + Initial instar + Interaction | 4 | 322.76 | 55.14 | ||
| Food origin + Initial instar | 3 | 327.48 | 59.86 | ||
| Food origin | 2 | 327.55 | 59.93 | ||
| Intercept only | 1 | 335.59 | 67.97 | ||
| Initial instar | 2 | 335.69 | 68.07 |