spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Knüttel, H.
Right arrow Articles by Fiedler, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Knüttel, H.
Right arrow Articles by Fiedler, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Host-plant-derived variation in ultraviolet wing patterns influences mate selection by male butterflies

Helge Knüttel* and Konrad Fiedler

Lehrstuhl Tierökologie I, Universität Bayreuth, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany



View larger version (37K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. The upper sides of imagos of Polyommatus icarus. (A) Males exhibit an iridescent bright blue to violet coloration due to structural elaboration of wing scales. (B) Females have dark brown uppersides with a row of more or less pronounced submarginal orange spots. Females may have an additional iridescent blue coloration, as in males, ‘dusted’ over a smaller or larger part of the wings. Scale bars, 5mm.

 


View larger version (97K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. Undersides of female imagos of Polyommatus icarus. (A,B) Colour photographs, (C,D) ultraviolet photographs. (A) Individual reared on an artificial diet from which no flavonoids were sequestered. (B) Individual reared on the same artificial diet as in A, but with the flavonoid quercetin (2.5% dry mass) added. Only minor differences in wing coloration in the visible range are found between the diets. (C) Same individual as in A. The orange and black spots are highly ultraviolet-absorbing, the background is intermediate in ultraviolet reflectance and the white spots reflect most of the ultraviolet light. (D) Same individual as in B. The wing undersides absorb ultraviolet light effectively, with the white spots being almost indistinguishable from the background coloration. A gradient towards higher ultraviolet reflectance is visible from anterior to posterior in the forewings. A grey scale of known reflectance was included in every photograph (Mean spectral reflectance in blocks from 300nm (dark) to 400nm (light): 0.1%, 9%, 18%, 32%, 62%, 78%). Scale bars, 10mm.

 


View larger version (30K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Hindwing spectral reflectance of female Polyommatus icarus. Unweighted means and 95% confidence limits of the means of individual butterflies. Solid lines, flavonoid-rich animals (F+); dashed lines, flavonoid-free animals (F-). (A)White (F+, N=27; F-, N=30). (B)Background coloration (F+, N=26; F-, N=29). (C)Black (F+, N=26; F-, N=29). (D)Orange, underside (F+, N=26; F-, N=29). (E)Orange, upperside (F+, N=22; F-, N=22). (F)Brown (F+, N=23; F-, N=22). For every individual butterfly, 10 measurements were usually taken for white and background coloration and five each for the other colours. Measurements were taken relative to a Spectralon 99 reflectance standard. N is the number of individuals.

 


View larger version (40K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. First three principal component (PC) coefficients from analyses of the shape of reflectance spectra (see Fig.3) of the hindwings of female Polyommatus icarus. Solid lines, PC1; dashed lines, PC2; dotted lines, PC3. (A) White, underside. (B) Background coloration, underside. (C) Black, underside. (D) Orange, underside. (E) Orange, upperside. (F) Brown, upperside. For further details see Fig.3.

 


View larger version (31K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. Calculated relative quantum catch with 95% confidence intervals for hypothetical lycaenid photoreceptors based on the averaged reflectance spectra of wing colours and their 95% confidence intervals. (A) Flavonoid-free females. (B) Flavonoid-rich females. Data for both categories can be compared directly because they were normalised to their common maximum. The ordinate is the quantum catch (arbitrary units). The abscissa shows wing colours. P360–P568, rhodopsin nomograms with maximum sensitivity at 360nm (ultraviolet), 437nm (blue), 500nm (green) and 568nm (red), based on data from Lycaena (Bernard and Remington, 1991). An asterisk indicates non-overlapping confidence intervals and, therefore, statistically significant differences in quantum catch between food treatments.

 


View larger version (14K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 6. Reactions of wild free-flying male Polyommatus icarus to dummies made from flavonoid-rich (open columns) and flavonoid-free (filled columns) females. The proportion of males passing by did not differ between flavonoid-rich and flavonoid-free males ({chi}21=0.09, P=0.76). The flavonoid-rich dummies elicited the more intense fluttering behaviour in more males (65.3%) than did the flavonoid-free dummies (41.6%) ({chi}21=10.58, P<0.001).

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2001