| Literature DB >> 27555876 |
Marc-Oliver Adams1, Carlo Lutz Seifert2, Lisamarie Lehner1, Christine Truxa1, Wolfgang Wanek3, Konrad Fiedler1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information on larval diet of many holometabolous insects remains incomplete. Carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) stable isotope analysis in adult wing tissue can provide an efficient tool to infer such trophic relationships. The present study examines whether moth feeding guild affiliations taken from literature are reflected in isotopic signatures.Entities:
Keywords: Larval diet; Trophic position; δ13C; δ15N
Year: 2016 PMID: 27555876 PMCID: PMC4994389 DOI: 10.1186/s12983-016-0170-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Zool ISSN: 1742-9994 Impact factor: 3.172
Fig. 1Non-metric multi-dimensional scaling plot (NMDS) of Euclidean distances between moth feeding guilds based on δ15N and δ13C values. Symbols represent individual samples of the respective moth guild
PERMANOVA post hoc pair-wise comparisons of dietary guilds based on 10,000 permutations
| Aquatic | Grass | Herb | Lichen |
| Litter | Moss | Reed | Root | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grass | 5.76 *** | ||||||||
| Herb | 5.02 *** | 1.80 * | |||||||
| Lichen | 6.94 *** | 3.99 *** | 5.30 *** | ||||||
|
| 7.97 *** | 7.59 *** | 6.90 *** | 6.36 *** | |||||
| Litter | 5.20 *** | 3.97 *** | 5.91 *** | 2.77 *** | 6.67 *** | ||||
| Moss | 7.36 *** | 4.37 *** | 4.53 *** | 3.64 *** | 5.45 *** | 4.71 *** | |||
| Reed | 2.23 ** | 4.02 *** | 4.02 *** | 4.29 *** | 6.78 *** | 2.16 * | 5.68 *** | ||
| Root | 3.51 ** | 6.25 *** | 6.25 *** | 4.79 *** | 5.97 ** | 3.83 *** | 6.35 *** | 2.48 ** | |
| Tree | 8.14 *** | 2.91 ** | 5.79 *** | 1.89 * | 6.82 *** | 4.40 *** | 3.37 *** | 4.98 *** | 6.64 *** |
Values represent t-scores,* symbols the respective significance level of the comparison
Significance codes: p ≤ 0.001 ‘***’; p ≤ 0.01 ‘**’; p ≤ 0.05 ‘*’
Fig. 2Metric multi-dimensional scaling plot (MMDS) of bootstrap averages (50 repetitions). Individual repetitions are based on random draw and replacement of samples from the original dataset. Colour symbols represent the group centroids of respective dietary guilds for each repetition; black symbols the overall centroids across all repetitions. Boundary lines approximate 95 % confidence regions
Fig. 3The plots depict mean a δ15N and b δ13C values across moth feeding guilds. Whiskers represent the respective standard deviation. For illustrative purposes, guilds are arranged from lowest to highest mean and the order therefore differs between graphs. The compact letter display is based on pair-wise post hoc comparison with Tukey’s HSD correction. Different letters indicate a significant difference between the respective feeding guilds
Fig. 4Biplot of δ13C and δ15N values for moth dietary guilds (black symbols) and the corresponding food substrates (red symbols). Symbols depict the mean of across all members of the respective guild, whiskers represent the standard deviation
Mean δ13C and δ15N values for each moth dietary guild and the corresponding substrate group
| δ 15N | δ 13C | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moth | Substrate | Δ | Moth | Substrate | Δ | |
| Aquatic | 12.9 (±2.6) | 6.7 (± 2.6) | 6.3 | −28.7 (± 2.8) | −18.4 (± 2.4) | −10.3 |
| Herb | 4.5 (± 1.3) | −0.2 (-n.a -) | 4.7 | −29.2 (± 1.8) | −28.4 (-n.a.-) | −0.8 |
| Grass | 5.7 (± 2.5) | −0.8 (± 1.9) | 6.4 | −30.1 (± 2.0) | −34.3 (± 1.8) | 4.2 |
| Lichen | 2.8 (± 2.4) | −10.8 (± 2.2) | 13.6 | −26.8 (± 1.2) | −23.9 (± 1.3) | −2.9 |
|
| −7.0 (± 1.8) | −10.8 (± 2.2) | 3.8 | −28.2 (± 1.5) | −23.8 (± 1.3) | −4.3 |
| Litter | 5.7 (± 2.6) | 1.0 (± 3.0) | 4.7 | −26.7 (± 2.1) | −30.7 (± 1.2) | 4.0 |
| Moss | −0.2 (± 1.6) | −3.1 (± 3.4) | 2.9 | −28.7 (± 0.4) | −30.3 (± 1.1) | 1.7 |
| Reed | 8.9 (± 4.4) | 2.7 (± 1.3) | 6.2 | −26.9 (± 1.2) | −24.9 (± 0.4) | −2.0 |
| Root | 9.5 (± 2.0) | 1.9 (± 4.1) | 7.6 | −22.2 (± 3.9) | −29.8 (± 3.1) | 7.6 |
| Tree | 3.3 (± 1.5) | −1.5 (± 1.8) | 4.8 | −27.9 (± 1.9) | −30.7 (± 1.4) | 2.8 |
Values correspond to the biplot in Fig. 2. Values in parentheses provide the standard deviations (SD). In the case of grasses, only one substrate sample was analyzed and SD could therefore not be calculated. For both isotopes, the discrepancy between moth means and substrate means across samples is included (Δ values, equivalent to the trophic level enrichment, TLE)