2016
DOI: 10.1111/jeb.12966
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparative perspective on longevity: the effect of body size dominates over ecology in moths

Abstract: Both physiologically and ecologically based explanations have been proposed to account for among-species differences in lifespan, but they remain poorly tested. Phylogenetically explicit comparative analyses are still scarce and those that exist are biased towards homoeothermic vertebrates. Insect studies can significantly contribute as lifespan can feasibly be measured in a high number of species, and the selective forces that have shaped it may differ largely between species and from those acting on larger a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
40
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 98 publications
1
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Unfortunately, the DNA sequences available are not sufficient to generate a well‐resolved phylogeny for the numerous species used in this study. Even the most up‐to‐date phylogeny presented by Holm et al () covers only 50% of the genera of this study. We therefore chose to repeat the analysis described above for the two largest monophyletic subfamilies (Larentiinae and Sterrhinae, making up 63% and 31% of the complete data set, respectively), to evaluate whether the results are consistent within these subfamilies (see Supporting Information Appendix S6).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…Unfortunately, the DNA sequences available are not sufficient to generate a well‐resolved phylogeny for the numerous species used in this study. Even the most up‐to‐date phylogeny presented by Holm et al () covers only 50% of the genera of this study. We therefore chose to repeat the analysis described above for the two largest monophyletic subfamilies (Larentiinae and Sterrhinae, making up 63% and 31% of the complete data set, respectively), to evaluate whether the results are consistent within these subfamilies (see Supporting Information Appendix S6).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…Carryover effects, defined as consequences of larval hostplant quality on reproductive output of adult females, are more important in capital breeders, which rely exclusively on larval accumulated resources, than in income breeders, which feed as adults or receive male nutrients while in copula (Jervis et al, 2005). In capital breeders, carryover effects of plant quality translate into large size of females at pupation/adult emergence, which correlate positively with fitness components, including fecundity (Rhainds, 2015;Davis et al, 2016), lifespan (Holm et al, 2016;Meister et al, 2018), mating contest outcomes (Bath et al, 2015;Joel et al, 2017), and mating success (Rhainds, 2010;Gwynne & Lorch, 2013;de Cock et al, 2014).…”
Section: Carryover Host-plant Effects On Fmfmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It appears likely that the cost of being large in dayflying geometrid moths is primarily related to positively size-dependent predation risk. We have reasons to expect that insectivorous birds, the main day-active predators of flying insects in the temperate zone, attack larger geometrids more frequently than smaller ones (Holm et al, 2016). This is because larger insects are both more easily detectable (M€ and et al, 2007) and are more rewarding food items for the predators.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%