Intraspecific variation in wing geometry among Tabanus rubidus (Diptera: Tabanidae) populations in Thailand

Abstract

Tabanus rubidus (Wiedemann, 1821) (Diptera: Tabanidae) is a hematophagous insect of veterinary and medical importance and is the predominant Tabanus spp. in Thailand. It is a potential mechanical vector of Trypanosoma evansi, which causes surra in domestic and wild animals. Wing geometric morphometrics is widely used as morphological markers for species identification and to assess the insect population structure. Herein, we investigated the intraspecific variation in wing geometry among T. rubidus populations in Thailand using landmark-based geometric morphometric analysis. Tabanus rubidus females were collected from five populations in four geographical regions in Thailand. The left wings of 240 specimens were removed and digitized using 22 landmarks for analysis. While wing size variations were found between some populations, wing shape variations were detected in all. These intraspecific variations in T. rubidus populations indicate an adaptive response to the local environmental conditions.

Wing geometric morphometrics to distinguish and identify Haematobosca flies (Diptera: Muscidae) from Thailand

“…Hence, we do not suggest using the wing size to distinguish these flies if the sex of the flies is unknown. In fact, it has also been shown that the wing size is unsuitable for the differentiation of insect species because it is frequently influenced by environmental factors ( Jirakanjanakit et al, 2007 ; Morales Vargas et al, 2010 ; Baleba et al, 2019 ; Phanitchat et al, 2019 ; Chaiphongpachara et al, 2022b ; Chaiphongpachara et al, 2022c ).…”

“…It is a quantitative method for measuring the size and shape variation through landmark-, semilandmark-, and outline-based analyses ( Dujardin 2008 ; Dujardin et al, 2014 ; Dujardin and Dujardin, 2019 ). The GM method can be used to identify species and evaluate differences within species (intraspecific variation) and between sexes (sexual dimorphism) in several insects of medical and veterinary importance ( Ruangsittichai et al, 2011 ; Lorenz et al, 2012 ; Sontigun et al, 2017 ; De Souza et al, 2020 ; Oliveira-Christe et al, 2020 ; Simões et al, 2020 ; Changbunjong et al, 2021 ; Martinet et al, 2021 ; Chaiphongpachara et al, 2022a ; Chaiphongpachara et al 2022b ; Chaiphongpachara et al 2022c ; Laojun et al, 2023 ). The efficiency of GM for species identification has been demonstrated in stomoxyine flies ( Stomoxys spp.)…”

Wing morphology variations in Culicoides circumscriptus from France

“…To test the validity of global size for accurate species identification, we used a maximum likelihood approach based validated reclassification approach ( 59 ). The allometric effect (the effect of size on shape variation) was performed by linear regression of the first (shape derived) discriminant factor on the CS, and then estimated by the determination coefficient r 2 ( 36 ).…”

“…WGM is largely developed in several vectors families like as Culicidae [see review of Lorentz et al ( 29 )] to explore intraspecific variations among mosquito populations or to research interspecific variation, to study in sexual dimorphism, plasticity and deviation, to detection of parasites and to characterize laboratory strain. This technique was used to study the intra specific variations in Glossinidae ( 30 ), Muscidae ( 31 ), Psychodiae ( 28 , 32 , 33 ), Reduviidae ( 34 ) and Tabanidae ( 35 , 36 ) and to show inter specific variations in Muscidae ( 37 ). The landmark-based WGM analysis of Culicoides wings has proven to be a valuable tool for interspecific discrimination ( 38–42 ), C. circumscriptus intersexes specimens ( 43 ), sexual dimorphism ( 44 ) and geographic variations ( 45 ).…”

Discrimination of cryptic species: Tabanus triangulum and Tabanus occidentalis (Diptera: Tabanidae) differ in size and shape

“…The advantages of this method include: low cost, high precision ( Dujardin, 2008 ). In the past decade, the application of this technique has expanded to horse flies from various regions, highlighting differences between species that are sometimes indistinguishable by morphological characteristics and barcoding alone ( Torres & Miranda-Esquivel, 2016 ; Changbunjong et al, 2021 ; Chaiphongpachara et al, 2022 ; Mullens et al, 2022 ).…”