The diapause decision as a cascade switch for adaptive developmental plasticity in body mass in a butterfly

Gotthard, Karl; Berger, David

doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.01994.x

Cited by 43 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Apart from their striking differences in colouration, the two generations also differ in body design, wing loading, dispersal propensity and resource allocation pattern (Fric and Konvicka 2002; Friberg and Karlsson 2010). The spring and summer generations of P. napi differ in dispersal ability and fecundity (Karlsson and Johansson 2008), as well as in mating propensity and sexual maturity at eclosion (Larsdotter Mellström et al 2010), whereas the different developmental pathways of P. aegeria differ in the number of eyespots present on the dorsal side of the hind wing (Shreeve 1987), as well as in body size and fecundity (Van Dyck and Wiklund 2002; Gotthard and Berger 2010). All these adaptive or nonadaptive, season-specific traits must be developed downstream of the decision whether to enter diapause or direct development, which may further explain why there is a point of no return after which the larvae cannot switch pathways after a certain size or age.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The offspring of two spring cohorts develop directly (without diapause) into two separated summer cohorts (Van Dyck and Wiklund 2002). In central Sweden this species is an obligatory pupal diapauser (Gotthard and Berger 2010), and typically appears in a single large generation per year, but occasionally flies in a partial, small, directly developing summer generation (Eliasson et al 2005). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Asymmetric life-history decision-making in butterfly larvae

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In temperate environments, insects appearing in several generations in the growth season typically have to decide during the larval period whether to develop into adulthood, or to postpone adult emergence until next season by entering a species-specific diapause stage. This decision is typically guided by environmental cues experienced during development. An early decision makes it possible to adjust growth rate, which would allow the growing larva to respond to time stress involved in direct development, whereas a last-minute decision would instead allow the larva to use up-to-date information about which developmental pathway is the most favourable under the current circumstances. We study the timing of the larval pathway decision-making between entering pupal winter diapause and direct development in three distantly related butterflies (Pieris napi, Araschnia levana and Pararge aegeria). We pinpoint the timing of the larval diapause decision by transferring larvae from first to last instars from long daylength (inducing direct development) to short daylength conditions (inducing diapause), and vice versa. Results show that the pathway decision is typically made in the late instars in all three species, and that the ability to switch developmental pathway late in juvenile life is conditional; larvae more freely switched from diapause to direct development than in the opposite direction. We contend that this asymmetry is influenced by the additional physiological preparations needed to survive the long and cold winter period, and that the reluctance to make a late decision to enter diapause has the potential to be a general trait among temperate insects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetric life-history decision-making in butterfly larvae

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it remains to be tested whether size polyphenism may be adaptive per se (i.e. if the relationship between size and fitness differs seasonally), something which has been suggested for some other 405 butterflies Karlsson 2010, Gotthard andBerger 2010). Nevertheless, the most likely ultimate reason for the between-generation differences in larval growth trajectories of I. podalirius appears to be related to the presence or absence of the 408 overwintering stage in the future development of the insect.…”

Section: Discussion 345mentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinguishing between anticipatory and responsive plasticity in a seasonally polyphenic butterfly

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 betweengeneration 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.

show abstract

“…Individual insects that follow the two alternative pathways of direct and diapause development often display substantial phenotypic differences (Shapiro and references therein, Beldade & Brakefield ). Seasonal polyphenisms in morphology of insects with more than one generation per year are well known (Shapiro ) but until recently there have been few studies of how the expression of life‐history traits may differ among pathways (Van Dyck & Wiklund ; Musolin ; Gotthard & Berger ; Teder et al . ; Aalberg Haugen, Berger & Gotthard ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…; Aalberg Haugen, Berger & Gotthard ). It has been suggested that, depending on the degree of developmental independence among pathways, we might expect differential optimization of life‐history traits in response to the predictable difference in environment that the two classes of individuals will be subjected to (Gotthard & Berger ; Kivelä, Välimäki & Gotthard ). In fact, the developmental decision of pathway contains information about the expected future selective environment that can be used for alternative developmental regulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diapause induction and relaxed selection on alternative developmental pathways in a butterfly

Haugen

Gotthard

2014

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. Seasonal phenotypic plasticity entails differential trait expression depending on the time of season. The facultative induction of winter diapause in temperate insects is a developmental switch mechanism often leading to differential expression in life-history traits. However, when there is a latitudinal shift from a bivoltine to univoltine life cycle, selection for pathway-specific expression is disrupted, which may allow drift towards less optimal trait values within the non-selected pathway. 2. We use field-and experimental data from five Swedish populations of Pararge aegeria to investigate latitudinal variation in voltinism, local adaptation in the diapause switch and footprints of selection on pathway-specific regulation of life-history traits and sexual dimorphism in larval development. 3. Field data clearly illustrated how natural populations gradually shift from bivoltinism to univoltinism as latitude increases. This was supported experimentally as the decrease in direct development at higher latitudes was accompanied by increasing critical daylengths, suggesting local adaptation in the diapause switch. 4. The differential expression among developmental pathways in development time and growth rate was significantly less pronounced in univoltine populations. Univoltine populations showed no significant signs of protandry during larval development, suggesting that erosion of the direct development pathway under relaxed selection has led to the loss of its sex-specific modifications.

show abstract

The diapause decision as a cascade switch for adaptive developmental plasticity in body mass in a butterfly

Cited by 43 publications

References 41 publications

Asymmetric life-history decision-making in butterfly larvae

Asymmetric life-history decision-making in butterfly larvae

Distinguishing between anticipatory and responsive plasticity in a seasonally polyphenic butterfly

Diapause induction and relaxed selection on alternative developmental pathways in a butterfly

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About