Deceptive signals and behaviors of a cleptoparasitic beetle show local adaptation to different host bee species

Abstract

Chemosensory signals play a key role in species recognition and mate location in both invertebrate and vertebrate species. Closely related species often produce similar but distinct signals by varying the ratios or components in pheromone blends to avoid interference in their communication channels and minimize cross-attraction among congeners. However, exploitation of reproductive signals by predators and parasites also may provide strong selective pressure on signal phenotypes. For example, bolas spiders mimic the pheromones of several moth species to attract their prey, and parasitic blister beetle larvae, known as triungulins, cooperatively produce an olfactory signal that mimics the sex pheromone of their female host bees to attract male bees, as the first step in being transported by their hosts to their nests. In both cases, there is strong selection pressure on the host to discriminate real mates from aggressive mimics and, conversely, on the predator, parasite, or parasitoid to track and locally adapt to the evolving signals of its hosts. Here we show local adaptation of a beetle, (Coleoptera: Meloidae), to the pheromone chemistry and mate location behavior of its hosts, two species of solitary bees in the genus We report that ' deceptive signal is locally host-adapted in its chemical composition and ratio of components, with host bees from each allopatric population preferring the deceptive signals of their sympatric parasite population. Furthermore, in different locales, the triungulin aggregations have adapted their perching height to the height at which local male bees typically patrol for females.

Low Host Specialization in the Cuckoo Wasp, Parnopes grandior, Weakens Chemical Mimicry but Does Not Lead to Local Adaption

“…For example, Casacci et al [28] found that parasitic caterpillars (Phengaris (=Maculinea) rebeli (Hirschke, 1904)) show local variations in host (Myrmica ants) specificity, which are consistent with CHC similarities between hosts and parasites at different sites. Local adaptations in chemical deceptive signals were also detected in the parasitic beetle Meloe franciscanus Van Dyke, 1928 attacking two allopatric populations of Habropoda solitary bees [27]. However, we did not find evidence for local adaptation in P. grandior.…”

“…Because of its low host specialization, however, P. grandior would not be able to chemically match all available hosts at a given location, given that CHC profiles tend to be species-specific in insects [7,13]. In particular, we might document local adaptation to one of the host species as shown in other insect brood parasites, including socially parasitic ants, bee-parasitic beetles and ant-parasitic Lepidoptera [27][28][29]. Alternatively, P. grandior may maintain a weak mimicry to all present hosts and/or reduce the CHC profile complexity and/or CHC amounts (insignificance strategy).…”

Ecology of the Western Queen Butterfly Danaus gilippus thersippus (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts

“…The urgency to decarbonize US power plants has increased pressure on public lands to develop ground-mounted, utility-scale solar energy in the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts (California, US). Solar energy development in these natural environments has increased the rate and magnitude of habitat alteration in aridlands, which are hotspots of biodiversity [16]. In California, D. g. thersippus and desert populations of milkweed species co-occur, including the endangered milkweed, Asclepias nyctaginifolia [17].…”

“…The urgency to decarbonize US power plants has increased pressure on public lands which support wildlife and which are adjacent to protected areas to develop ground-mounted, utility-scale solar renewable energy in the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts. This has increased the rate and magnitude of habitat alteration in these ecosystems, which are hotspots of biodiversity [16]. Aridlands are complex crosslinked networks of soil organisms, primary producers, pollinators, herbivores, predators, parasites and microbiota, with highly variable abiotic resources, including multi-year drought cycles.…”

Raven Calls Indicate Sender’s Neural State

“…With respecting the animal communication, there are three domain categories, sound, behaviour and the order [11][12][13][14]. The pronunciation process of animal depends on a series of muscles interaction, including breathing muscles, mouth muscles and throat muscles and the amplitude of vocal cord [15,16].…”