4.4 Article

An evolutionarily stable strategy model for the evolution of dimorphic development in the butterfly Maculinea rebeli, a social parasite of Myrmica ant colonies

期刊

AMERICAN NATURALIST
卷 169, 期 4, 页码 466-480

出版社

UNIV CHICAGO PRESS
DOI: 10.1086/512134

关键词

delayed development; growth dimorphism; evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS); ant-butterfly interaction; social parasitism

资金

  1. Natural Environment Research Council [CEH010021] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Caterpillars of the butterfly Maculinea rebeli develop as parasites inside ant colonies. In intensively studied French populations, about 25% of caterpillars mature within 1 year (fast-developing larvae [FDL]) and the others after 2 years (slow-developing larvae [SDL]); all available evidence indicates that this ratio is under the control of egg-laying females. We present an analytical model to predict the evolutionarily stable fraction of FDL (P-ess). The model accounts for added winter mortality of SDL, general and kin competition among caterpillars, a competitive advantage of SDL over newly entering FDL (priority effect), and the avoidance of renewed infection of ant nests by butterflies in the coming season (segregation). We come to the following conclusions: (1) all factors listed above can promote the evolution of delayed development; (2) kin competition and segregation stabilize P-ess near 0.5; and (3) a priority effect is the only mechanism potentially selecting for P-ess < 0.5. However, given the empirical data, p ESS is predicted to fall closer to 0.5 than to the 0.25 that has been observed. In this particular system, bet hedging cannot explain why more than 50% of larvae postpone growth. Presumably, other fitness benefits for SDL, for example, higher fertility or longevity, also contribute to the evolution of delayed development. The model presented here may be of general applicability for systems where maturing individuals compete in small subgroups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据