4.5 Article

WING SHAPE VARIATION ASSOCIATED WITH MIMICRY IN BUTTERFLIES

期刊

EVOLUTION
卷 67, 期 8, 页码 2323-2334

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/evo.12114

关键词

Heliconius; mimicry; morphological evolution; polymorphism; wing shape

资金

  1. CNRS ATIP grant
  2. ERC Starting Grant (MimEvol)
  3. BBSRC
  4. Chaire Modelisation Mathematique et Biodiversite (Ecole Polytechnique, MNHN & Veolia Environnement)
  5. BBSRC [BB/E006191/1, BB/H014268/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/H014268/1, BB/E006191/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mimetic resemblance in unpalatable butterflies has been studied by evolutionary biologists for over a century, but has largely focused on the convergence in wing color patterns. In Heliconius numata, discrete color-pattern morphs closely resemble comimics in the distantly related genus Melinaea. We examine the possibility that the shape of the butterfly wing also shows adaptive convergence. First, simple measures of forewing dimensions were taken of individuals in a cross between H. numata morphs, and showed quantitative differences between two of the segregating morphs, f. elegans and f. silvana. Second, landmark-based geometric morphometric and elliptical Fourier outline analyses were used to more fully characterize these shape differences. Extension of these techniques to specimens from natural populations suggested that, although many of the coexisting morphs could not be discriminated by shape, the differences we identified between f. elegans and f. silvana hold in the wild. Interestingly, despite extensive overlap, the shape variation between these two morphs is paralleled in their respective Melinaea comimics. Our study therefore suggests that wing-shape variation is associated with mimetic resemblance, and raises the intriguing possibility that the supergene responsible for controlling the major switch in color pattern between morphs also contributes to wing shape differences in H. numata.

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

4.5
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