Literature DB >> 28312814

Mechanical determinants of nectar-feeding energetics in butterflies: muscle mechanics, feeding geometry, and functional equivalence.

Thomas L Daniel1, Joel G Kingsolver1, Edgar Meyhöfer1.   

Abstract

We develop a mechanistic model for nectar feeding in butterflies that integrates the two basic components of the feeding process: the fluid dynamics of nectar flow through the food canal and the contractile mechanics of the muscular, cibarial pump. We use the model to predict the relation between rate of energy intake during feeding and nectar concentration. We then identify nectar concentations that maximize energy intake rates (the optimal concentrations). We illustrate the model using measurements of the food canal and cibarium of Pieris butterflies. The model predicts an overall optimal range of nectar concentration of 31-39% sucrose for butterflies, which is in agreement with previously reported laboratory values. The model also predicts an interaction among the geometries of the food canal, the cibarial cavity, and the cibarial muscles, that allows us to identify the combinations of food canal, cibarium, and muscle dimensions that yield the highest rates of energy intake. Nectar-feeding is "functionally equivalent" in butterflies and hummingbirds: two physically different feeding mechanisms can yield identical energy intake rates. This equivalence results from a mathematical and physical similarity between quasi-steady-state fluid flow in hummingbrid tongues and the force-velocity characteristics of contracting cibarial muscle in butterflies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Muscle mechanics; Nectivory; Optimal foraging; Pieris

Year:  1989        PMID: 28312814     DOI: 10.1007/BF00378241

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  10 in total

1.  Energy intake rates and nectar concentration preferences by hummingbirds.

Authors:  Staffan Tamm; Clifton Lee Gass
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN FROG PECTORAL GIRDLES: TESTING ALTERNATIVES TO A TRADITIONAL ADAPTIVE EXPLANATION.

Authors:  Sharon B Emerson
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 3.694

3.  Nectar selection by Melipona and Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) and the ecology of nectar intake by bee colonies in a tropical forest.

Authors:  David W Roubik; Stephen L Buchmann
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Mechanical determinants of nectar feeding strategy in hummingbirds: energetics, tongue morphology, and licking behavior.

Authors:  Joel G Kingsolver; Thomas L Daniel
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1983-11       Impact factor: 3.225

5.  Effects of nectar concentration on butterfly feeding: measured feeding rates for Thymelicus lineola (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) and a general feeding model for adult Lepidoptera.

Authors:  Kenneth A Pivnick; Jeremy N McNeil
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Nectar uptake rates and optimal nectar concentrations of two butterfly species.

Authors:  P G May
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  On the mechanics and energetics of nectar feeding in butterflies.

Authors:  J G Kingsolver; T L Daniel
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1979-01-21       Impact factor: 2.691

8.  On the tongue of a hummingbird: its role in the rate and energetics of feeding.

Authors:  F R Hainsworth
Journal:  Comp Biochem Physiol A Comp Physiol       Date:  1973-09-01

9.  Force development during sustained locomotion: a determinant of gait, speed and metabolic power.

Authors:  C R Taylor
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 3.312

10.  The maximum forces exerted by animals.

Authors:  R M Alexander
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 3.312

  10 in total
  7 in total

1.  The mechanics of nectar offloading in the bumblebee Bombus terrestris and implications for optimal concentrations during nectar foraging.

Authors:  Jonathan G Pattrick; Hamish A Symington; Walter Federle; Beverley J Glover
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 4.118

2.  Functional constraints on the evolution of long butterfly proboscides: lessons from Neotropical skippers (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae).

Authors:  J A S Bauder; L Morawetz; A D Warren; H W Krenn
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.411

3.  Time management and nectar flow: flower handling and suction feeding in long-proboscid flies (Nemestrinidae: Prosoeca).

Authors:  Florian Karolyi; Linde Morawetz; Jonathan F Colville; Stephan Handschuh; Brian D Metscher; Harald W Krenn
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2013-11-21

4.  Structural and physical determinants of the proboscis-sucking pump complex in the evolution of fluid-feeding insects.

Authors:  Konstantin G Kornev; Arthur A Salamatin; Peter H Adler; Charles E Beard
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Functional morphology of the feeding apparatus and evolution of proboscis length in metalmark butterflies (Lepidoptera: Riodinidae).

Authors:  Julia Anne-Sophie Bauder; Stephan Handschuh; Brian Douglas Metscher; Harald Wolfgang Krenn
Journal:  Biol J Linn Soc Lond       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 2.138

6.  Burst mode pumping: A new mechanism of drinking in mosquitoes.

Authors:  Kenji Kikuchi; Mark A Stremler; Souvick Chatterjee; Wah-Keat Lee; Osamu Mochizuki; John J Socha
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-03-20       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Inhibition of serotonergic signaling induces higher consumption of both sucrose solution and toxic baits in carpenter ants.

Authors:  Roxana Josens; Alina Giacometti; Martin Giurfa
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-28       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.