Advertisement

Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 315–332 | Cite as

Distinguishing between anticipatory and responsive plasticity in a seasonally polyphenic butterfly

  • Toomas Esperk
  • Constanti Stefanescu
  • Tiit Teder
  • Christer Wiklund
  • Ants Kaasik
  • Toomas Tammaru
Original Paper

Abstract

Seasonal generations of short-lived organisms often differ in their morphological, behavioural and life history traits, including body size. These differences may be either due to immediate effects of seasonally variable environment on organisms (responsive plasticity) or rely on presumably adaptive responses of organisms to cues signalizing forthcoming seasonal changes (anticipatory plasticity). When directly developing individuals of insects are larger than their overwintering conspecifics, the between-generation differences are typically ascribed to responsive plasticity in larval growth. We tested this hypothesis using the papilionid butterly Iphiclides podalirius as a model species. In laboratory experiments, we demonstrated that seasonal differences in food quality could not explain the observed size difference. Similarly, the size differences are not likely to be explained by the immediate effects of ambient temperature and photoperiod on larval growth. The qualitative pattern of natural size differences between the directly developing and diapausing butterflies could be reproduced in the laboratory as a response to photoperiod, indicating anticipatory character of the response. Directly developing and diapausing individuals followed an identical growth trajectory until the end of the last larval instar, with size differences appearing just a few days before pupation. Taken together, various lines of evidence suggest that between-generation size differences in I. podalirius are not caused by immediate effects of environmental factors on larval growth. Instead, these differences rather represent anticipatory plasticity and are thus likely to have an adaptive explanation. It remains currently unclear, whether the seasonal differences in adult size per se are adaptive, or if they constitute co-product of processes related to the diapause. Our study shows that it may be feasible to distinguish between different types of plasticity on the basis of empirical data even if fitness cannot be directly measured, and contributes to the emerging view about the predominantly adaptive nature of seasonal polyphenisms in insects.

Keywords

Seasonal polyphenism Size dimorphism Voltinism Phenology Lepidoptera 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Anu Tiitsaar, Freerk Molleman, Robert B. Davis, Juhan Javoiš and three anonymous referees for constructive comments on the manuscript. Kristiina Ehapalu, Jordi Jubany, Taavet Kukk, Aigi Margus, Kristin Markov, Marta Miralles, and Martin Sauk provided technical help. The municipal council of Sant Celoni provided all facilities to carry out the food quality experiment. The study was supported by the Estonian Science Foundation grants 7406, 8413 and 9294, the targeted financing project SF0180122s08, and by the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (Center of Excellence FIBIR).

References

  1. AEMET (Agencia Estatal de Meteorología) (2011a) Valores climatológicos extremos. Barcelona/aeropuerto, 1971–2000. http://www.aemet.es/es/serviciosclimaticos/datosclimatologicos/efemerides_extremos?w=0&k=cat&l=0076&datos=det
  2. AEMET (Agencia Estatal de Meteorología) (2011b) Valores climatológicos normales. Barcelona/aeropuerto, 1971–2000. http://www.aemet.es/es/serviciosclimaticos/datosclimatologicos/valoresclimatologicos?l=0076&k=cat
  3. Angilletta MJ, Dunham AE (2003) The temperature-size rule in ectotherms: simple evolutionary explanations may not be general. Am Nat 162:332–342PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arendt JD (2011) Size-fecundity relationships, growth trajectories, and the temperature-size rule for ectotherms. Evolution 65:43–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atkinson D (1994) Temperature and organism size: a biological law for ectotherms? Adv Ecol Res 25:1–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blanckenhorn WU (2009) Causes and consequences of phenotypic plasticity in body size: the case of the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria (Diptera: Scathophagidae). In: Whitman DW, Ananthakrishnan TN (eds) Phenotypic plasticity in insects. Mechanisms and consequences. Science Publishers, Einfield, pp 369–422Google Scholar
  7. Blau WS (1981) Life history variation in the black swallowtail butterfly. Oecologia 48:116–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MHH, White JS (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24:127–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Borges I, Soares AO, Magro A, Hemptinne JL (2011) Prey availability in time and space is a driving force in life history evolution of predatory insects. Evol Ecol 25:1307–1319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brakefield PM (1996) Seasonal polyphenism in butterflies and natural selection. Trends Ecol Evol 11:275–277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brakefield PM, Frankino WA (2009) Polyphenisms in Lepidoptera: multidisciplinary approaches to studies of evolution and development. In: Whitman DW, Ananthakrishnan TN (eds) Phenotypic plasticity in insects. Mechanisms and consequences. Science Publishers, Einfield, pp 337–368Google Scholar
  12. Brakefield PM, Larsen TB (1984) The evolutionary significance of dry and wet season forms in some tropical butterflies. Biol J Linn Soc 22:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Canfield M, Greene E (2009) Phenotypic plasticity and the semantics of polyphenism: a historical review and current perspectives. In: Whitman DW, Ananthakrishnan TN (eds) Phenotypic plasticity in insects. Mechanisms and consequences. Science Publishers, Einfield, pp 65–80Google Scholar
  14. Dominick OS, Truman JW (1984) The physiology of wandering behaviour in Manduca sexta. I. Temporal organization and the influence of the internal and external environments. J Exp Biol 110:35–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Esperk T, Tammaru T (2004) Does the ‘investment principle’ model explain moulting strategies in lepidopteran larvae? Physiol Entomol 29:56–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Esperk T, Tammaru T (2010) Size compensation in moth larvae: attention to larval instars. Physiol Entomol 35:222–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fischer K, Fiedler K (2001) Sexual differences in life-history traits in the butterfly Lycaena tityrus: a comparison between direct and diapause development. Entomol Exp Appl 100:325–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Friberg M, Karlsson B (2010) Life-history polyphenism in the Map butterfly (Araschnia levana): developmental constraints versus season-specific adaptations. Evol Ecol Res 12:603–615Google Scholar
  19. Friberg M, Aalberg Haugen IM, Dahlerus J, Gotthard K, Wiklund C (2011) Asymmetric life-history decision-making in butterfly larvae. Oecologia 165:301–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fric Z, Konvička M (2002) Generations of the polyphenic butterfly Araschnia levana differ in body design. Evol Ecol Res 4:1017–1032Google Scholar
  21. Gebhardt MD, Stearns SD (1988) Reaction norms for development time and weight at eclosion in Drosophila mercatorum. J Evol Biol 1:335–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gebhardt MD, Stearns SD (1993) Phenotypic plasticity for life history traits in Drosophila melanogaster. I. Effect on phenotypic and environmental correlations. J Evol Biol 6:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gotthard K, Berger D (2010) The diapause decision as a cascade switch for adaptive developmental plasticity in body mass in a butterfly. J Evol Biol 23:1129–1137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gotthard K, Nylin S (1995) Adaptive plasticity and plasticity as an adaptation: a selective review of plasticity in animal morphology and life history. Oikos 74:3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Greene E (1989) A diet-induced developmental polymorphism in a caterpillar. Science 243:643–646PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hadfield JD (2010) MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R package. J Stat Softw 33:1–22Google Scholar
  27. Hahn DA, Denlinger DL (2007) Meeting the energetic demands of insect diapause: nutrient storage and utilization. J Insect Physiol 53:760–773PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hahn DA, Denlinger DL (2011) Energetics of insect diapause. Annu Rev Entomol 56:103–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hazel WN (2002) The environmental and genetic control of seasonal polyphenism in larval color and its adaptive significance in a swallowtail butterfly. Evolution 56:342–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Hazel WN, Ante S, Stringfellow B (1998) The evolution of environmentally-cued pupal colour in swallowtail butterflies: natural selection for pupation site and pupal colour. Ecol Entomol 23:41–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jones RE (1992) Phenotypic variation in Australian Eurema species. Aust J Zool 40:371–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Karlsson B, Johansson A (2008) Seasonal polyphenism and developmental trade-offs between flight ability and egg laying in a pierid butterfly. Proc R Soc B 275:2131–2136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Karlsson B, Wickman PO (1989) The cost of prolonged life: an experiment on a nymphalid butterfly. Funct Ecol 3:399–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kimura T, Masaki S (1977) Brachypterism and seasonal adaptation in Orgyia thyellina Butler (Lepidotera, Lymantriidae). Kontyû 45:97–106Google Scholar
  35. Kingsolver JG, Huey RB (1998) Evolutionary analyses of morphological and physiological plasticity in thermally variable environments. Am Zool 38:545–560Google Scholar
  36. Kingsolver JG, Huey RB (2008) Size, temperature, and fitness: three rules. Evol Ecol Res 10:251–268Google Scholar
  37. Koštál V (2006) Eco-physiological phases of insect diapause. J Insect Physiol 52:113–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Larsdotter Mellström H, Friberg M, Borg-Karlson A-K, Murtazina R, Palm M, Wiklund C (2010) Seasonal polyphenism in life history traits: time costs of direct development in a butterfly. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:1377–1383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Leather SR, Walters KFA, Bale JS (1993) The ecology of insect overwintering. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD, Schabenberger O (2006) SAS for mixed models, 2nd edn. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  41. Liu ZD, Gong PY, Wu KJ, Wei W, Sun JH, Li DM (2007) Effects of larval host plants on over-wintering preparedness and survival of the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Insect Physiol 53:1016–1026PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nealis VG (2012). The phenological window for western spruce budworm: seasonal decline in resource quality. Agric Forest Entomol (in press)Google Scholar
  43. Nelson RJ, Denlinger DL, Somers DE (eds) (2010) Photoperiodism: the biological calendar. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Nijhout HF (1999) Control mechanisms of polyphenic development in insects—in polyphenic development, environmental factors alter some aspects of development in an orderly and predictable way. Bioscience 49:181–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nijhout HF (2003) Development and evolution of adaptive polyphenisms. Evol Dev 5:9–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ohgushi T (1996) Consequences of adult size for survival and reproductive performance in a herbivorous ladybird beetle. Ecol Entomol 21:47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pigliucci M (2001) Phenotypic plasticity: beyond nature and nurture. John Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  48. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Development Core Team (2012) nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3.1-103. http://www.R-project.org
  49. Rehan SM, Schwarz MP, Richards MH (2011) Fitness consequences of ecological constraints and implications for the evolution of sociality in an incipiently social bee. Biol J Linn Soc 103:57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Remmel T, Tammaru T, Mägi M (2009) Seasonal mortality trends in tree-feeding insects: a field experiment. Ecol Entomol 34:98–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rodrigues D, Moreira GRP (2004) Seasonal variation in larval host plants and consequences for Heliconius erato (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) adult body size. Aust Ecol 29:437–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schroeder LA (1986) Changes in tree leaf quality and growth-performance of lepidopteran larvae. Ecology 67:1628–1636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Scriber JM (1994) Climatic legacies and sex chromosomes: latitudinal patterns of voltinism, diapause, body size, and host-plant selection on two species of swallowtail butterflies at their hybrid zone. In: Danks HV (ed) Insect life-cycle polymorphism: theory, evolution and ecological consequences for seasonality and diapause control. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 133–171Google Scholar
  54. Scriber JM, Slansky F Jr (1981) The nutritional ecology of immature insects. Annu Rev Entomol 26:183–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shapiro AM (1976) Seasonal polyphenism. Evol Biol 9:259–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stefanescu C (2004) Seasonal change in pupation behaviour and pupal mortality in a swallowtail butterfly. Anim Biodiv Cons 27:25–36Google Scholar
  57. Stefanescu C, Pintureau B, Tschorsnig HP, Pujade-Villar J (2003) The parasitoid complex of the butterfly Iphiclides podalirius feisthamelii (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in North-East Spain. J Nat Hist 37:379–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stefanescu C, Jubany J, Dantart J (2006) Egg-laying by the butterfly Iphiclides podalirius (Lepidoptera, Papilionidae) on alien plants: a broadening of host range or oviposition mistakes? Anim Biodiv Cons 29:83–90Google Scholar
  59. Tammaru T (1998) Determination of adult size in a folivorous moth: constraints at instar level? Ecol Entomol 23:80–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tammaru T, Esperk T (2007) Growth allometry of immature insects: larvae do not grow exponentially. Funct Ecol 21:1099–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tammaru T, Ruohomäki K, Saloniemi I (1999) Within-season variability of pupal period in the autumnal moth: a bet-hedging strategy? Ecology 80:1666–1677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tanaka K, Tsubaki Y (1984) Seasonal dimorphism, growth and food consumption in the swallowtail butterfly Papilio xuthus. Kontyû 52:390–398Google Scholar
  63. Tauber MJ, Tauber CA, Masaki S (1986) Seasonal adaptations of insects. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  64. Teder T, Tammaru T (2005) Sexual size dimorphism within species increases with body size in insects. Oikos 108:321–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Teder T, Esperk T, Remmel T, Sang A, Tammaru T (2010) Counterintuitive size patterns in bivoltine moths: late-season larvae grow larger despite lower food quality. Oecologia 162:117–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tolman T, Lewington R (2008) Collins butterfly guide. The most complete guide to the butterflies of Britain and Europe. HarperCollins, LondonGoogle Scholar
  67. Van Asch M, Visser ME (2007) Phenology of forest caterpillars and their host trees: the importance of synchrony. Annu Rev Entomol 52:37–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Van Dyck H, Wiklund C (2002) Seasonal butterfly design: morphological plasticity among three developmental pathways relative to sex, flight and thermoregulation. J Evol Biol 15:216–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wang X, Yang Q, Zhou X, Zhao F, Lei C (2007) Effect of photoperiod associated with diapause induction on the accumulation of metabolites in Sericinus montelus (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Appl Entomol Zool 42:419–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. West-Eberhard MJ (2003) Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  71. Whitman DW, Agrawal AA (2009) What is phenotypic plasticity and why is it important? In: Whitman DW, Ananthakrishnan TN (eds) Phenotypic plasticity in insects. Mechanisms and consequences. Science Publishers, Einfield, pp 1–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wiklund C (1971) Inonhusodling av makaonfjärilen. Zool Revy 33:35–42Google Scholar
  73. Wiklund C, Nylin S, Forsberg J (1991) Sex-related variation in growth-rate as a result of selection for large size and protandry in a bivoltine butterfly, Pieris napi. Oikos 60:241–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Windig JJ, Brakefield PM, Reitsma N, Wilson JGM (1994) Seasonal polyphenism in the wild: survey of wing patterns in five species of Bicyclus butterflies in Malawi. Ecol Entomol 19:285–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Toomas Esperk
    • 1
    • 2
  • Constanti Stefanescu
    • 3
    • 4
  • Tiit Teder
    • 1
  • Christer Wiklund
    • 5
  • Ants Kaasik
    • 1
  • Toomas Tammaru
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Ecology and Earth SciencesTartu UniversityTartuEstonia
  2. 2.Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental StudiesUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  3. 3.Museu Granollers Ciències NaturalsGranollersSpain
  4. 4.Global Ecology UnitCREAF-CEAB-CSICBellaterraSpain
  5. 5.Department of ZoologyStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations