4.4 Article

Patterns of pollen feeding and habitat preference among Heliconius species

Journal

ECOLOGICAL ENTOMOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 4, Pages 448-456

Publisher

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2311.2002.00434.x

Keywords

co-evolution; ecological isolation; Lepidoptera; pollen feeding; speciation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

1. The ecological circumstances that precipitate speciation remain poorly understood. Here, a community of Heliconius butterflies in lowland Panama was studied to investigate patterns of pollen use, and more specifically the ecological changes associated with the recent divergence of Heliconius melpomene (Linnaeus) and H. cydno (Doubleday). 2. Considering the seven commonest Heliconius species in the community, 32 types of pollen or spore were encountered in pollen loads but only five pollen species were common. Systematic exploitation of pollen was therefore confined to a small proportion of the flowers visited. 3. Most of the variation in pollen load composition between individuals was explained by differences in collecting locality. The exception was Psiguria, which was used in all habitats by the melpomene/hecale clade far more than by the erato/sapho clade. This may suggest an ancestral switch within Heliconius towards increased reliance on Psiguria pollen. 4. Heliconius cydno and H. melpomene differed significantly in pollen load composition for three of the five most commonly collected pollen species. This is most probably explained by differences in habitat preference; H. melpomene and its co-mimic H. erato are found in open habitat while H. cydno and its co-mimic H. sapho are found in closed-canopy forest. 5. As melpomene and cydno are known to hybridise occasionally, such differences in adult microhabitat contribute to pre-mating isolation. Habitat divergence between H. cydno and H. melpomene, which is associated with changes in mimicry, must have played a role in their recent speciation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available