DOCSLIB.ORG

Spotlight Comparative Phylogenetics of Papilio

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spotlight Comparative Phylogenetics of Papilio Copyedited by: YS MANUSCRIPT CATEGORY: Systematic Biology Spotlight Syst. Biol. 69(5):813–819, 2020 © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Society of Systematic Biologists. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: [email protected] DOI:10.1093/sysbio/syaa029 Advance Access publication April 7, 2020 Comparative Phylogenetics of Papilio Butterfly Wing Shape and Size Demonstrates Independent Hindwing and Forewing Evolution , ,∗ H. L. OWENS1 2 ,D.S.LEWIS3,F.L.CONDAMINE4,A.Y.KAWAHARA2, AND R. P. GURALNICK2 1Center for Macroecology, Evolution, and Climate, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark; 2Florida Museum of 3 Natural History, University of Florida, 1659 Museum Rd, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA; Department of Biology, Burman University, 6730 University Drive, Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/69/5/813/5817324 by Royal Library Copenhagen University user on 11 September 2020 Lacombe, Alberta, Canada T4L 2E5; and 4CNRS, Institut des Sciences de l’Evolution de Montpellier, Place Eugène Bataillon, 34095 Montpellier, France ∗ Correspondence to be sent to: Center for Macroecology, Evolution, and Climate, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark; E-mail: [email protected]. Received 16 December 2019; reviews returned 27 March 2020; accepted 30 March 2020 Associate Editor: April Wright Abstract.—The complex forces that shape butterfly wings have long been a subject of experimental and comparative research. Butterflies use their wings for flight, camouflage, mate recognition, warning, and mimicry. However, general patterns and correlations among wing shape and size evolution are still poorly understood. We collected geometric morphometric measurements from over 1400 digitized museum specimens of Papilio swallowtails and combined them with phylogenetic data to test two hypotheses: 1) forewing shape and size evolve independently of hindwing shape and size and 2) wing size evolves more quickly than wing shape. We also determined the major axes of wing shape variation and discovered that most shape variability occurs in hindwing tails and adjacent areas. We conclude that forewing shape and size are functionally and biomechanically constrained, whereas hindwings are more labile, perhaps in response to disruptive selective pressure for Batesian mimicry or against predation. The development of a significant, re-usable, digitized data resource will enable further investigation on tradeoffs between flight performance and ecological selective pressures, along with the degree to which intraspecific, local-scale selection may explain macroevolutionary patterns. [Batesian mimicry; Lepidoptera; geometric morphometrics; museum specimens.] “…[O]n these expanded membranes Nature writes, as Still, experimental manipulations (e.g. Jantzen on a tablet, the story of the modifications of species, and Eisner 2008) cannot characterize processes so truly do all changes of the organization register at evolutionary time scales and across lineages. themselves thereon.”—Henry Walter Bates on butterfly Comparative analysis of data from natural history wings, 1863 collections may ameliorate this shortcoming by bridging the gap between experimental manipulation For decades, researchers have examined butterfly wing and observed macroevolutionary patterns. Strauss diversity through lenses of functional adaptation, (1990) quantified variation in wing morphology in evolutionary history, and development. For nearly all select heliconiine and ithomiine butterflies and found Lepidoptera species, wings power flight to search hindwings were much more variable than forewings, for larval host plants, nectar sources, mates, and providing a tantalizing link between functional studies new territory (Scoble 1992). The physical requirements and the impact of aerodynamic constraints on wing for powered flight are thought to exert natural shape evolution. In contrast, a recent study of Morpho selective pressure on lepidopteran wing size and shape; butterflies found a strong correlation between forewing indeed, artificial selection experiments on wing and and hindwing sizes as well as shapes (Chazot et al. body size allometries have demonstrated significant 2016). Such data sets can also be used to identify fitness advantages for wild-type males compared morphological “paths of least resistance,” axes along those selectively bred for alternative allometries which diversification happens most quickly (Schluter (Frankino et al. 2005). However, evidence suggests that 1996). Comparative studies of Myotis bat skulls forewings and hindwings unequally contribute to flight (Dzeverin 2008) and whole Pheidole ants (Pie and Tschá performance: in a study of 19 species of butterflies 2013) found size evolved more quickly than shape, but and 25 species of moths, all could fly with their size variation as an evolutionary path of least resistance hindwings removed, although at the cost of speed and remains untested in Lepidoptera. maneuverability (Jantzen and Eisner 2008). Therefore, We built on this groundwork to test two predictions forewing shape and size may result from stabilizing via examination of swallowtail butterflies in one clade of selection imposed by the biomechanical requirements of the genus Papilio (subgenera Agehana, Alexanoria, Chilasa, flight, whereas hindwing shape and size may respond Heraclides, and Pterourus, hereafter “swallowtails in the more readily to neutral or selective processes such as clade of interest”): 1) forewing shape and size evolve sexual selection (Chazot et al. 2016), and predation independently of hindwing shape and size and 2) wing pressure (Sourakov 2013, Barber et al. 2015, Willmott et al. size evolves more quickly than wing shape (Table 1). 2017, Rubin et al. 2018). Our first prediction is based on the presumption that 813 [13:01 13/8/2020 Sysbio-OP-SYSB200029.tex] Page: 813 813–819 Copyedited by: YS MANUSCRIPT CATEGORY: Systematic Biology 814 SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY VOL. 69 TABLE 1. Hypotheses examined in this study, with predictions Geometric Phylogenetic Morphometric Relationships regarding phylogenetic signal and evolutionary rate. Landmarks F1 Hypothesis Predictions F2 > Forewing shape is evolving Forewing Kmult Hindwing Kmult F3 2 2 > independently of hindwing (Forewing / Hindwing ) 1 F4 shape Forewing and hindwing r <1 PLS F5 Heraclides > F6 Forewing size is evolving Forewing Kmult Hindwing Kmult 2 2 > F7 independently of hindwing (Forewing / Hindwing ) 1 F11 size Forewing and hindwing R2 <1 F8 F9 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/69/5/813/5817324 by Royal Library Copenhagen University user on 11 September 2020 Shape is evolving more Forewing shape 2 < Forewing size 2 quickly than size Hindwing shape 2 < Hindwing size 2 F10 H1 H2 Pterourus H3 H12 H4 Agehana the forewing is functionally constrained whereas other H5 H7 Pterourus selective pressures (e.g. predation, sexual selection) H11 H9 H6 operate on hindwing shape. The second is based H8 H10 Chilasa on the presumption that overall size change is an evolutionary path of least resistance. To test these Alexanoria hypotheses, we took morphometric measurements from FIGURE 1. Geometric morphometric landmarks and phylogeny digitized museum specimens and analyzed them in used for analysis. Phylogeny shows nonmonophyly of New World a comparative phylogenetic framework with a well- swallowtails (Heraclides + Pterourus) and subgenus Pterourus. Shape sampled and resolved species-level phylogeny (Owens landmarks, indicated by dots, adapted from Lewis et al. (2015). et al. 2017). Phylogenetic relationships from Owens et al. (2017) with bars indicating currently recognized subgenera; bar colors correspond with subsequent figure plots. Images depict species corresponding to each labeled clade. MATERIALS AND METHODS Morphometrics https://pj.fieldmuseum.org/event/626b0f98-98e7-49c8 Standardized dorsal and ventral images of Papilio -903e-d67017fe2356; MGCL: https://scan-bugs.org/ butterfly specimens with scale and color bars portal/collections/list.php?taxa=Papilio&type=1&has were obtained from four natural history museums images=1&db=70;&page=1; NMNH: https://collect (Supplementary Fig. S1 available on Dryad at ions.nmnh.si.edu/search/ento/). https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.p2ngf1vmn): the Landmarks for morphometric measurement were American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), Field based on previous morphological work on Heraclides Museum (FMNH), Florida Museum of Natural History, swallowtails (Lewis et al. 2015; Fig. 1). One forewing McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity landmark (F1 in Fig. 1) was removed from final (MGCL), and the Smithsonian Institution National analysis due to particularly high rate of measurement Museum of Natural History (NMNH; Supplementary error; this was largely due to curling of the anterior Table S1 available on Dryad). Images were taken with wing margin in many specimens. To allow full view a NIKON D300S with an AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm of otherwise overlapping wing elements, we used f/2.8D lens (AMNH), Canon EOS 70D with a Canon EF 10 forewing landmarks from dorsal images and 12 50mm f/1.4 USM lens (FMNH), Canon EOS 70D with a hindwing landmarks from ventral images (Fig. 1). Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens (MGCL), or a Landmark and 1-cm scale bar coordinates were Canon EOS 6D with a Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 lens collected in ImageJ 1.49 (https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/) (NMNH) mounted on either a copy stand or tripod and using the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Karl Jordan: a Life in Systematics
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF Kristin Renee Johnson for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History of SciencePresented on July 21, 2003. Title: Karl Jordan: A Life in Systematics Abstract approved: Paul Lawrence Farber Karl Jordan (1861-1959) was an extraordinarily productive entomologist who influenced the development of systematics, entomology, and naturalists' theoretical framework as well as their practice. He has been a figure in existing accounts of the naturalist tradition between 1890 and 1940 that have defended the relative contribution of naturalists to the modem evolutionary synthesis. These accounts, while useful, have primarily examined the natural history of the period in view of how it led to developments in the 193 Os and 40s, removing pre-Synthesis naturalists like Jordan from their research programs, institutional contexts, and disciplinary homes, for the sake of synthesis narratives. This dissertation redresses this picture by examining a naturalist, who, although often cited as important in the synthesis, is more accurately viewed as a man working on the problems of an earlier period. This study examines the specific problems that concerned Jordan, as well as the dynamic institutional, international, theoretical and methodological context of entomology and natural history during his lifetime. It focuses upon how the context in which natural history has been done changed greatly during Jordan's life time, and discusses the role of these changes in both placing naturalists on the defensive among an array of new disciplines and attitudes in science, and providing them with new tools and justifications for doing natural history. One of the primary intents of this study is to demonstrate the many different motives and conditions through which naturalists came to and worked in natural history.
    [Show full text]
  • And Ford, I; Ford, '953) on the Other Hand Have Put Forward a View Intermediate Between the Extreme Ones of Darwin on the One Hand and Goldschmidt on the Other
    THE EVOLUTION OF MIMICRY IN THE BUTTERFLY PAPILIO DARDANUS C. A. CLARKE and P. M. SHEPPARD Departments of Medicine and Zoology, University of Liverpool Received23.V.59 1.INTRODUCTION WHENBatesputforward the mimicry hypothesis which bears his name, Darwin (1872), although accepting it, had some difficulty in explaining the evolution of the mimetic resemblance of several distinct species to one distasteful model by a series of small changes, a require- ment of his general theory of evolution. He said "it is necessary to suppose in some cases that ancient members belonging to several distinct groups, before they had diverged to their present extent, accidentally resembled a member of another and protected group in a sufficient degree to afford some slight protection; this having given the basis for the subsequent acquisition of the most perfect resemb- lance ". Punnett (1915) realised that the difficulty is even more acute when one is dealing with a polymorphic species whose forms mimic very distantly related models. Knowing that, in those butterflies which had been investigated genetically, the forms differed by single allelomorphs he concluded that the mimicry did not evolve gradually and did not confer any advantage or disadvantage to the individual. He argued that an allelomorph arises at a single step by mutation and that therefore the mimicry also arises by chance at a single step. Goldschmidt (x) although not denying that mimicry confers some advantage to its possessors also maintained that the resemblance arises fully perfected by a single mutation of a gene distinct from that producing the colour pattern in the model, but producing a similar effect in the mimic.
    [Show full text]
  • Mimicry - Ecology - Oxford Bibliographies 12/13/12 7:29 PM
    Mimicry - Ecology - Oxford Bibliographies 12/13/12 7:29 PM Mimicry David W. Kikuchi, David W. Pfennig Introduction Among nature’s most exquisite adaptations are examples in which natural selection has favored a species (the mimic) to resemble a second, often unrelated species (the model) because it confuses a third species (the receiver). For example, the individual members of a nontoxic species that happen to resemble a toxic species may dupe any predators by behaving as if they are also dangerous and should therefore be avoided. In this way, adaptive resemblances can evolve via natural selection. When this phenomenon—dubbed “mimicry”—was first outlined by Henry Walter Bates in the middle of the 19th century, its intuitive appeal was so great that Charles Darwin immediately seized upon it as one of the finest examples of evolution by means of natural selection. Even today, mimicry is often used as a prime example in textbooks and in the popular press as a superlative example of natural selection’s efficacy. Moreover, mimicry remains an active area of research, and studies of mimicry have helped illuminate such diverse topics as how novel, complex traits arise; how new species form; and how animals make complex decisions. General Overviews Since Henry Walter Bates first published his theories of mimicry in 1862 (see Bates 1862, cited under Historical Background), there have been periodic reviews of our knowledge in the subject area. Cott 1940 was mainly concerned with animal coloration. Subsequent reviews, such as Edmunds 1974 and Ruxton, et al. 2004, have focused on types of mimicry associated with defense from predators.
    [Show full text]
  • OBITUARIES Sir Edward Poulton, F.R.S
    No. 3870, jANUARY 1, 1944 NATURE 15 the University of Edinburgh, previously held by a tragic death, and his successor, F. Hasenohrl, was Black. To him we owe the discovery of the maximum killed in action on the Italian front in 1915. The density of water. The centenary of John Dalton falls chemists born in 1844 include Prof. J. Emerson on July 27 of this year, but any commemoration Reynolds (died 1920), who occupied for twenty-eight must inevitably be clouded over by the results of years the chair of chemistry in the University of the air raid of December 24, 1940, when the premises Dublin, and Ferdinand Hurter (died 1898), a native of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society of Schaffhausen, Switzerland, who came to England were completely destroyed. From 1817 until 1844 in 1867 and became principal chemist to the United DaJton was president of the Society, and within its Alkali Company. Among astronomers, Prof. W. R. walls he taught, lectured and experimented. The Brooks (died 1921) of the United States was famous Society had an unequalled collection of his apparatus, as a 'comet hunter'. Charles Trepied (died 1907) was but after digging among the ruins the only things for many years director of the Observatory at found were his gold watch, a spark eudiometer and Bouzariah, eleven kilometres from Algiers, while some charred remains of letters and note-books. A Annibale Ricco (died 1919), though he began life as month after Dalton passed away in Manchester, an engineer, for nineteen years directed the observa­ Francis Baily died in London, after a life devoted to tory of Catania and Etna, his special subject being astronomy and kindred subjects.
    [Show full text]
  • Examples of the Mimetic Female Fol'ms of Papilio Danlallus, Form Of
    PL.-\TE 1. Frontis]Jiecl!. A IJlaur£s lliav£us domtnicamls S' • Da1laida (Lim1las) chrysippus <5 • Amauris albimaculata S'. ? form. CC1lea. A 11ZQUr£S echeria .\lrs. P. P. \\'helpley, pnx. Andy': & Sleigh, Lid . Alljigures are about ~ of the natural size. Examples of the mimetic female fOl'ms of Papilio danlallus, subsp. cellea, bred in 1\JO(; from [L /11!POCOOI/ form of female: Dnrbltn, Natal. The female pluent an,] the Dltuaine models from the same locality are also figured. P APILO DARDANUS. THE MOST INTERESTING BUTTERFLY IN THE WORLD. by, PRoP'. E. B. POULTON~ F.B.S. r Illustrated.) Naturalists at Nairobi are fortunate in that they live in a district which is pre-eminent in the light that is thrown on the past history and origin of the varied forms of this most remarkable butterfly. The imp;ortance and interest of the Kikuyu and Nairobi examples will, however, be best understood if introduced by an account of the finished product, to which they supply essential preparatory stages. Of the three plates by which this account is illustrated (1) originally appeared in the Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (1908, pI. XXIII.) and is here reproduced by kind permission of the Council, while (II) and (III) were first published in the Proceedings of the Second Entomological Congress at Oxford in 1912.•• Trans." and " Proc." with no further addition, excep,t the year and page, refer to the publications of the Entomological Society of London. Nearly every note, or paper, quoted in the following pages can be consulted in the volumes of " Hope Reports" in the possession of the East Africa and Uganda History Society.
    [Show full text]
  • Mimicry: Ecology, Evolution, and Development
    Editorial Mimicry: Ecology, evolution, and development David PFENNIG, Guest Editor Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Coker Hall, CB#3280, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA, [email protected] 1 Introduction 1879), multiple undesirable species (e.g., toxic species) converge on the same warning signal, thereby sharing Mimicry occurs when one species (the “mimic”) the cost of educating predators about their undesirabil- evolves to resemble a second species (the “model”) be- ity. cause of the selective benefits associated with confusing Mimicry is among the most active research areas in a third species (the “receiver”). For example, natural all of evolutionary biology, in part because of the highly selection can favor phenotypic convergence between integrative nature that the study of mimicry necessarily completely unrelated species when an edible species entails. Mimicry involves asking both functional ques- receives the benefit of reduced predation by resembling tions (it involves investigating, for example, the adap- an inedible species that predators avoid. tive significance of more versus less precise resem- Research into mimicry has a rich history that traces blance between models and mimics) and mechanistic back to the beginnings of modern evolutionary biology. ones (it also involves investigating, for example, how In 1862––a scant three years after Darwin had published mimetic phenotypes are produced). Thus, mimicry re- The Origin of Species––Henry Walter Bates (1862), an search draws on diverse fields, many of which are on English explorer and naturalist, first suggested that close the cutting edge of biological research. Indeed, as Bro- resemblances between unrelated species could evolve as die and Brodie (2004, p.
    [Show full text]
  • How Discoveries in Papilio Butterflies Led to a New Species Concept 100
    Systematics and Biodiversity 1 (4): 441–452 Issued 9 June 2004 DOI: 10.1017/S1477200003001300 Printed in the United Kingdom C The Natural History Museum James Mallet* Department of Biology, Perspectives University College London, 4 Stephenson Way, Poulton, Wallace and Jordan: how London NW1 2HE, UK and discoveries in Papilio butterflies led to Department of Entomology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, a new species concept 100 years ago London SW7 5BD, UK submitted September 2003 accepted December 2003 Abstract A hundred years ago, in January 1904, E.B. Poulton gave an address en- titled ‘What is a species?’ The resulting article, published in the Proceedings of the Entomological Society of London, is perhaps the first paper ever devoted entirely to a discussion of species concepts, and the first to elaborate what became known as the ‘biological species concept’. Poulton argued that species were syngamic (i.e. formed reproductive communities), the individual members of which were united by synepi- gony (common descent). Poulton’s species concept was informed by his knowledge of polymorphic mimicry in Papilio butterflies: male and female forms were members of the same species, in spite of being quite distinct morphologically, because they belonged to syngamic communities. It is almost certainly not a coincidence that Al- fred Russel Wallace had just given Poulton a book on mimicry in December 1903. This volume contained key reprints from the 1860s including the first mimicry papers, by Henry Walter Bates, Wallace himself and Roland Trimen. All these papers deal with species concepts and speciation as well as mimicry, and the last two contain the initial discoveries about mimetic polymorphism in Papilio: strongly divergent female morphs must belong to the same species as non-mimetic males, because they can be observed in copula in nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Papilio Dardanus, Brown, and Papilio Glaucus, Linn
    THE GENETICS OF SOME MIMETIC FORMS OF PAPILIO DARDANUS, BROWN, AND PAPILIO GLAUCUS, LINN. By C. A. CLARKE AND P. M. SHEPPARD The Universit),, Liverpool. (Received, june 3, 1957) Bates (I862) put [brward the hypothesis that some anilnals obtain protection from ~heir predators by resembling or mimicking unpalatable or otherwise protected species and in consequence are mistaken for them by the predators. Mtiller (1879) suggested that even protected species would gain by resembling one another. These two hy-po- theses have been discussed and enlarged upon by many people but comparatively little work has been done either to determine the extent of the protection so afforded or to ascertain the evolutionary steps by which the mimicry has been brought about. The genetic work that has been done in this field (m.ostly with butterflies) suggests that the differences between various mimetic and non-mimetic forms of polymorphic butterflies are controlled by simple mendelian mechanisms, often a single allelomorphic difference. This has led some people, notably Punnett (I915) and more recently Goldschmidt (i945) to maintain that, because the allelomorph must have arisen at a single step by mutation, the mimetic resemblance must also have arisen fully developed from the beginning. This view leads to ~various theoretical difficulties which have been discussed by Ford (1953). Because of these, both Fisher (1930) and Ford (Carpenter and Ford 1933, Ford 1937) take the view that when a mutant pro- ducing some mimetic resemblance is established in a population the resemblance is improved by selection for a gene-complex in which the original effect of the gene is altered towards more perfect mimicry.
    [Show full text]
  • Alfred Russel Wallace and the Darwinian Species Concept
    Gayana 73(2): Suplemento, 2009 ISSN 0717-652X Alfred Russel Wallace and the Darwinian Species Concept: His Paper on the Swallowtail Butterflies (Papilionidae) of 1865 Alfred Russel Wallace y el Concepto Darwiniano de Especie: Su Trabajo de 1865 sobre Mariposas Papilio (Papilionidae) Jam ES MA LLET 1 Galton Laboratory, Department of Biology, University College London, 4 Stephenson Way, London UK, NW1 2HE E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Soon after his return from the Malay Archipelago, Alfred Russel Wallace published one of his most significant papers. The paper used butterflies of the family Papilionidae as a model system for testing evolutionary hypotheses, and included a revision of the Papilionidae of the region, as well as the description of some 20 new species. Wallace argued that the Papilionidae were the most advanced butterflies, against some of his colleagues such as Bates and Trimen who had claimed that the Nymphalidae were more advanced because of their possession of vestigial forelegs. In a very important section, Wallace laid out what is perhaps the clearest Darwinist definition of the differences between species, geographic subspecies, and local ‘varieties.’ He also discussed the relationship of these taxonomic categories to what is now termed ‘reproductive isolation.’ While accepting reproductive isolation as a cause of species, he rejected it as a definition. Instead, species were recognized as forms that overlap spatially and lack intermediates. However, this morphological distinctness argument breaks down for discrete polymorphisms, and Wallace clearly emphasised the conspecificity of non-mimetic males and female Batesian mimetic morphs in Papilio polytes, and also in P.
    [Show full text]
  • The Genetics of Papilio Dardanus, Brown. 11. Races Dardanus, Polytrophus, Meseres, and Tibullus
    THE GENETICS OF PAPILIO DARDANUS, BROWN. 11. RACES DARDANUS, POLYTROPHUS, MESERES, AND TIBULLUS C. A. CLARKE AND P. M. SHEPPARD Departments of Medicine and Zoology, University of Liuerpool, England Received September 28, 1959 N Part I (CLARKEand SHEPPARD1959) we described the genetics of P. dar- Idanus race cenea from South Africa. The present paper concerns four other races of the butterflydardanus, polytrophus, meseres and tibullus. The map (Figure I) shows the distribution of these and their geographical relationships FIGURE1.-Distribution and geographical relationship of P. dardanus races. 440 C. A. CLARKE AND P. M. SHEPPARD with P. dardanus cenea. In addition the areas inhabited by the Madagascan race meriones and the Abyssinian race antinorii are indicated, and these forms will be the subject of a separate paper (Part 111). RACE DARDANUS This has the most extensive range of any of the races of P. dardanus. It is found down the West Coast of Africa from Sierra Leone to Angola, and spreads east- wards towards Uganda and Tanganyika Territory to Lake Victoria. In these areas it merges into the transitional race meseres. In the western part of its range the female is almost invariably the mimetic form hippocoon, and this closely resembles the form hippocoonides already described under race cenea from South Africa (Part I). In race dardanus we have bred hippocoon both from the eastern and western parts of its range and have also investigated f. trophonissa, f. niobe and f. plane- moides. The mimetic form cenea has not so far appeared in our material but we have carried out a race cross using this form from South Africa (see below).
    [Show full text]
  • Remained Fairly Constant, the Present Pattern Being That of the Common Ancestor of All the Races
    SUPER-GENES AND MIMICRY C. A. CLARKE and P. M. SHEPPARD Departments of Medicine and Zoology, University of Liverpool Received23.V.59 1.INTRODUCTION IThas been shown (Clarke and Sheppard, 196oa) that only two loci control the main differences between the various mimetic and non- mimetic forms of the female of the African butterfly Papilio dardanus. As far as colour and pattern are concerned only one locus apparently is responsible, the presence or absence of "tails" on the hindwing being determined by the other. This mode of genetic determination does not necessitate that each pattern arose fully perfected as the result of a single mutation, but only that the various allelomorphs act as a "switchmechanism ",theactual patterns thus switched having evolved gradually as the result of the accumulation of modifiers (see Ford, I 953 Clarke and Sheppard, i 96ob). Moreover, as we will attempt to show in this paper, it is probable that the switch mechanism itself evolved by a series of small steps and what now appears to be a single locus is really a super-gene. 2.THE PRIMITIVE PATTERN Itis impossible to determine with certainty the primitive colour- pattern of P. dardanus (that present just before the first mimic evolved) since this is a matter of pre-history. However, it is possible to make an enlightened guess on the matter. The males of this species are every- where the same in general pattern although the details vary slightly from race to race. They all have tailed hindwings and a black and yellow pattern, the yellow pigment fluorescing under ultra-violet light.
    [Show full text]
  • MECHANISMS of ADAPTATION in CORAL SNAKE MIMICRY David
    MECHANISMS OF ADAPTATION IN CORAL SNAKE MIMICRY David William Kikuchi A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Biology. Chapel Hill 2013 Approved by: David W. Pfennig Allen H. Hurlbert Karin S. Pfennig Maria R. Servedio Kyle Summers ©2013 David William Kikuchi ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT DAVID WILLIAM KIKUCHI: MECHANISMS OF ADAPTATION IN CORAL SNAKE MIMICRY (Under the direction of David Pfennig) In Batesian mimicry, an undefended prey species (the mimic) evolves to resemble a defended one (the model) because of the selective advantage of this resemblance in deterring predation. Although Batesian mimicry is one of the oldest known examples of natural selection’s power to produce adaptation, many unanswered questions remain about its evolution, including how mimetic signals coevolve with the perceptual abilities of predators, how mimetic signals are produced, how important shared evolutionary history with a model species is for mimics, and if mimicry can evolve over rough adaptive landscapes. My thesis attempts to address these knowledge gaps by examining the venomous coral snake Micrurus fulvius and its nonvenomous mimic, the scarlet kingsnake Lampropeltis elapsoides. In addition to my empirical studies, I have produced two reviews: one is a general review of mimicry in the form of an annotated bibliography, and the other a review of the hypotheses for imperfect mimicry. In a field experiment, I asked whether or not predators were sensitive to differences between models and mimics in phenotype, that is to say, imperfect mimicry.
    [Show full text]