Growth curves of Araschnia levana larvae reared at 22°C in 2010. (A) Male larvae reared in early season (June). (B) Male larvae reared in late season (August). (C) Female larvae reared in early season. (D) Female larvae reared in late season. Direct development [“long day” (18L:6D) photoperiodic treatment] and diapause [“short day” (12L:12D) photoperiodic treatment] pathways were induced. Values are corrected for the effect of brood (using SAS, PROC MIXED, least square means option, Littell et al., 2006). Roman numerals stand for instars, “P” indicates pupation, and “N” marks sample sizes in the beginning of the instars and in the pupal stage. Error bars indicate standard errors; horizontal error bars stand for standard errors for the duration of the 4th and 5th instar and for the time period from molting until attaining peak body mass in respective instar.

Growth curves of Araschnia levana larvae reared at 22°C in 2010. (A) Male larvae reared in early season (June). (B) Male larvae reared in late season (August). (C) Female larvae reared in early season. (D) Female larvae reared in late season. Direct development [“long day” (18L:6D) photoperiodic treatment] and diapause [“short day” (12L:12D) photoperiodic treatment] pathways were induced. Values are corrected for the effect of brood (using SAS, PROC MIXED, least square means option, Littell et al., 2006). Roman numerals stand for instars, “P” indicates pupation, and “N” marks sample sizes in the beginning of the instars and in the pupal stage. Error bars indicate standard errors; horizontal error bars stand for standard errors for the duration of the 4th and 5th instar and for the time period from molting until attaining peak body mass in respective instar.

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
Seasonal polyphenisms are cases in which individuals representing generations occurring in different times of the year systematically differ in their morphological, physiological, and/or behavioral traits. Such differences are often assumed to constitute adaptive responses to seasonally varying environments, but the evidence for this is still scarc...

Similar publications

Article
Full-text available
Many insects possess the plastic ability to either develop directly to adulthood, or enter diapause and postpone reproduction until the next year, depending on environmental cues (primarily photoperiod) that signal the amount of time remaining until the end of the growth season. These two alternative pathways often differ in co‐adapted life‐history...
Article
Full-text available
Climate change allows species to expand polewards, but non‐changing environmental features may limit expansions. Daylength is unaffected by climate and drives life cycle timing in many animals and plants. Because daylength varies over latitudes, poleward‐expanding populations must adapt to new daylength conditions. We studied local adaptation to da...
Article
Full-text available
Phenotypic plasticity is produced and maintained by processes regulating the transcriptome. While differential gene expression is among the most important of these processes, relatively little is known about other sources of transcriptional variation. Previous work suggests that alternative splicing plays an extensive and functionally unique role i...
Article
Full-text available
In seasonal environments, organisms must synchronize their life cycles to conditions favorable for growth and reproduction. Because season length varies geographically, local adaptation should arise in traits that regulate phenological responses. Geographic photoperiodism clines are well known, but comparable studies on thermal performance are equi...

Citations

... Recently, a study by Esperk and Tammaru (2021) reported comparisons of various parameters of larval growth schedules in a 2 × 2 × 2 crossed design with photoperiod, temperature, and host plant quality as the varied factors [36]. Specifically (among other findings), they showed that levana larvae spent more time in both final and penultimate larval instars. ...
... Recently, a study by Esperk and Tammaru (2021) reported comparisons of various parameters of larval growth schedules in a 2 × 2 × 2 crossed design with photoperiod, temperature, and host plant quality as the varied factors [36]. Specifically (among other findings), they showed that levana larvae spent more time in both final and penultimate larval instars. ...
... The observed effects could also result directly from the diet quality, and this should be tested in future studies by co-varying light regimes and diets. In fact, a recent study by Esperk and Tammaru (2021) demonstrated that in terms of growth parameters, many between-generation differences have an adaptive nature and can, therefore, be considered part of the phenotypic response to seasonality. Similar study designs should be employed to scrutinize changes in body composition or life history traits reported in earlier studies. ...
Article
Full-text available
The European map butterfly Araschnia levana is a well-known example of seasonal polyphenism. Spring and summer imagoes exhibit distinct morphological phenotypes. Key environmental factors responsible for the expression of different morphs are day length and temperature. Larval exposure to light for more than 16 h per day entails direct development and results in the adult f. prorsa summer phenotype. Less than 15.5 h per day increasingly promotes diapause and the adult f. levana spring phenotype. The phenotype depends on the timing of the release of 20-hydroxyecdysone in pupae. Release within the first days after pupation potentially inhibits the default “levana-gene-expression-profile” because pre-pupae destined for diapause or subitaneous development have unique transcriptomic programs. Moreover, multiple microRNAs and their targets are differentially regulated during the larval and pupal stages, and candidates for diapause maintenance, duration, and phenotype determination have been identified. However, the complete pathway from photoreception to timekeeping and diapause or subitaneous development remains unclear. Beside the wing polyphenism, the hormonal and epigenetic modifications of the two phenotypes also include differences in biomechanical design and immunocompetence. Here, we discuss research on the physiological and molecular basis of polyphenism in A. levana, including hormonal control, epigenetic regulation, and the effect of ecological parameters on developmental fate.
Article
Full-text available
The population structure and behaviour of univoltine butterfly species have been studied intensively. However, much less is known about bivoltine species. In particular, in-depth studies of the differences in population structure, behaviour, and ecology between these two generations are largely lacking. Therefore, we here present a mark-release-recapture study of two successive generations of the fritillary butterfly Boloria selene performed in eastern Brandenburg (Germany). We revealed intersexual and intergenerational differences regarding behaviour, dispersal, population characteristics, and protandry. The observed population densities were higher in the second generation. The flight activity of females decreased in the second generation, but remained unchanged in males. This was further supported by the rate of wing decay. The first generation displayed a linear correlation between wing decay and passed time in both sexes, whereas the linear correlation was lost in second-generation females. The proportion of resting individuals in both sexes increased in the second generation, as well as the number of nectaring females. The choice of plant genera used for nectaring seems to be more specialised in the first and more opportunistic in the second generation. The average flight distances were generally higher for females than for males and overall higher in the first generation. Predictions of long-distance movements based on the inverse power function were also generally higher in females than in males but lower in the first generation. Additionally, we found protandry only in the first but not in the second generation, which might correlate with the different developmental pathways of the two generations. These remarkable differences between both generations might reflect an adaptation to the different ecological demands during the flight season and the different tasks they have, i.e. , growth in the spring season; dispersal and colonisation of new habitats during the summer season.