A poor substitute for the real thing: captive-reared monarch butterflies are weaker, paler and have less elongated wings than wild migrants.

For many animals and insects that are experiencing dramatic population declines, the only recourse for conservationists is captive rearing. To ensure success, reared individuals should be biologically indistinct from those in the wild. We tested if this is true with monarch butterflies, Danaus plexippus, which are increasingly being reared for release by citizens and commercial breeders. Since late-summer monarchs should be as migration capable as possible for surviving the arduous long-distance migration, we evaluated four migration-relevant traits across two groups of captive-reared monarchs (n = 41 and 42) and one group of wild-caught migrants (n = 41). Monarchs (descendants of wild individuals) were reared from eggs to adulthood either in a warm indoor room next to a window, or in an incubator that mimicked late-summer conditions. Using an apparatus consisting of a perch mounted to an electronic force gauge, we assessed 'grip strength' of all groups, then used image analysis to measure forewing size, pigmentation and elongation. In three of the four traits, reared monarchs underperformed compared to wild ones, even those reared under conditions that should have produced migration-ready individuals. The average strength of reared monarchs combined was 56% less than the wild group, even when accounting for size. Their orange wing colour was paler (an indicator of poor condition and flight ability) and their forewings were less elongated (elongation is associated with migration propensity) than wild monarchs. The reason(s) behind these effects is unknown but could stem from the frequent disturbance and/or handling of reared monarchs, or the fact that rearing removes the element of natural selection from all stages. Regardless, these results explain prior tagging studies that showed reared monarchs have lower migratory success compared to wild.