Variable male investment in devices impeding female remating in the Clouded Apollo butterfly (Parnassius mnemosyne (LINNAEUS, 1758))

  • Ádám Gór Doctoral School of Veterinary Science, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest
  • Adrien Fónagy Department of Zoology, Plant Protection Institute, Centre for Agricultural Research, ELKH
  • Kata Pásztor Doctoral School of Biological Sciences, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences
  • Viktor Szigeti Lendület Ecosystem Services Research Group, Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, ELKH
  • Zsolt Lang Department of Biostatistics, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest
  • János Kis Department of Zoology, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest
Keywords: Copulatory opening APpendix, Ditrysia, mark-release-recapture, mating behaviour, Papilionidae, reproductive system

Abstract

Sexual conflict over mating may induce prolonged male mate-guarding in time in the absence of males to prevent female remating via devices such as mating plugs, widespread in insects. In most Lepidoptera, internal plugs are common, while in two butterfly families large external devices, called sphragides, evolved independently. The lack of, or incomplete sphragides in a few individuals were reported in sphragis-bearing species. Previous studies focused on typifying species-specific devices in many species based on a few specimens. In contrast, we investigated alternative mate-guarding devices in detail of a sphragis-bearing butterfly and aimed to introduce their Hungarian terminology. We conducted a six-year observational field study in a Clouded Apollo Parnassius mnemosyne population. Inspecting 492 females, we identified three different devices, filament, stopple and shield (a part of the sphragis), increasing in size and structure complexity, implying differential male investment and effectiveness in securing paternity. Shield dimensions, colour and all devices’ shapes varied considerably. Shields were far more frequent than other devices. Some devices were lost, and a few were video-recorded when removed by males, showing some roles of different parts of the male external genitalia. We discuss potential causes of device variation and the role of removal attempts, and assess potential costs and benefits for both sexes.

References

ALBERTS S.C., ALTMANN J. & WILSON M.L. (1996): Mate guarding constrains foraging activity of male baboons. Animal Behaviour, 51: 1269–1277. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0131

ALCOCK J. (1994): Postinsemination associations between males and females in insects: The mate-guarding hypothesis. Annual Review of Entomology, 39: 1–21.

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.39.1.1

ARNQVIST G. & ROWE L. (2002): Antagonistic coevolution between the sexes in a group of insects. Na-ture, 415: 787–789. https://doi.org/10.1038/415787a

AUCKLAND J.N., DEBINSKI D.M. & CLARK W.R. (2004): Survival, movement, and resource use of the butterfly Parnassius clodius. Ecological Entomology, 29: 139–149.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0307-6946.2004.00581.x

BOGGS C.L. & WATT W.B. (1981): Population structure of pierid butterflies IV. Genetic and physiologi-cal investment in offspring by male Colias. Oecologia, 50: 320–324. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00344970

CALABRESE J.M., RIES L., MATTER S.F., DEBINSKI D.M., AUCKLAND J.N., ROLAND J. & FAGAN W.F. (2008): Reproductive asynchrony in natural butterfly populations and its consequences for female matelessness. Journal of Animal Ecology, 77: 746–756.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01385.x

CANALES-LAZCANO J., CONTRERAS-GARDUÑO J. & CORDERO C. (2019): Strategic adjustment of copu-latory plug size in a nematode. Current Zoology, 65: 571–577. https://doi.org/10.1093/cz/zoy067

CARVALHO A.P.S., MOTA L.L. & KAWAHARA A.Y. (2019): Intersexual ‘Arms Race’ and the evolution of the sphragis in Pteronymia butterflies. Insect Systematics and Diversity, 3: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/isd/ixy021

CARVALHO A.P.S., ORR A.G. & KAWAHARA A.Y. (2017): A review of the occurrence and diversity of the sphragis in butterflies (Lepidoptera, Papilionoidea). ZooKeys, 694: 41–70. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.694.13097

CHAPMAN T., BANGHAM J., VINTI G., SEIFRIED B., LUNG O., WOLFNER M.F., SMITH H.K. & PARTRIDGE L. (2003): The sex peptide of Drosophila melanogaster: Female post-mating responses analyzed by using RNA interference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100: 9923–9928. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1631635100

CONDAMINE F.L., ROLLAND J., HÖHNA S., SPERLING F.A.H. & SANMARTÍN I. (2018): Testing the role of the Red Queen and Court Jester as drivers of the macroevolution of Apollo butterflies. Systema-tic Biology, 67: 940–964. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syy009

DANCHIN E.G.J., GIRALDEAU L.-A. & CÉZILLY F. (2008, eds.): Behavioural ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 874 pp. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00361253

DANZY J., GUTIERREZ V., PAMPUSH J. & CAMPBELL B. (2009): Factors affecting the distribution of copulatory plugs in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) on Cayo Santiago. Folia Primatologica, 80: 264–274. https://doi.org/10.1159/000252585

DICKINSON J.L. & RUTOWSKI R.L. (1989): The function of the mating plug in the chalcedon checkerspot butterfly. Animal Behaviour, 38: 154–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(89)80074-0

DIXSON A.F. & ANDERSON M.J. (2002): Sexual selection, seminal coagulation and copulatory plug formation in primates. Folia Primatologica, 73: 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1159/000064784

DOUGHERTY L.R. & SIMMONS L.W. (2017): X-ray micro-CT scanning reveals temporal separation of male harm and female kicking during traumatic mating in seed beetles. Proceedings of the Royal So-ciety B: Biological Sciences, 284: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.0550

DUNHAM A.E. & RUDOLF V.H.W. (2009): Evolution of sexual size monomorphism: The influence of passive mate guarding. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 22: 1376–1386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01768.x

EDWARD D.A. (2015): The description of mate choice. Behavioral Ecology, 26: 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/aru142

EENS M. & PINXTEN R. (1995): Inter-sexual conflicts over copulations in the European starling: Eviden-ce for the female mate-guarding hypothesis. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 36: 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00170711

FRIC Z., KLIMOVA M. & KONVIČKA M. (2006): Mechanical design indicates differences in mobility among butterfly generations. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 8: 1511–1522.

GERGELY P., GÓR Á., HUDÁK T., ILONCZAI Z. & SZOMBATHELYI E. (2018): Nappali lepkéink – Határo-zó terepre és természetfotókhoz (Második, javított kiadás). Kitaibel Kiadó, Biatorbágy, 264 pp.

GÓR Á., FÓNAGY A., PÁSZTOR K., SZIGETI V., LANG Z. & KIS J. (2023): Facultative male investment in prolonged mate-guarding in a butterfly. Behaviour, 160: 515–557. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568539X-bja10219

HONĚK A. (1993): Intraspecific variation in body size and fecundity in insects: A general relationship. Oikos, 66: 483–492. https://doi.org/10.2307/3544943

JENNIONS M.D. & PETRIE M. (2000): Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biological Reviews, 75: 21–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.1999.tb00040.x

JORMALAINEN V. (1998): Precopulatory mate guarding in crustaceans: Male competitive strategy and intersexual conflict. Quarterly Review of Biology, 73: 275–304. https://doi.org/10.1086/420306

KAWAGOE T., SUZUKI N. & MATSUMOTO K. (2001): Multiple mating reduces longevity of females of the windmill butterfly Atrophaneura alcinous. Ecological Entomology, 26: 258–262. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2311.2001.00326.x

KING B.H. & FISCHER C.R. (2005): Males mate guard in absentia through extended effects of postcopu-latory courtship in the parasitoid wasp Spalangia endius (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae). Journal of Insect Physiology, 51: 1340–1345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2005.08.004

KONVIČKA M., DUCHOSLAV M., HARAŠTOVÁ M., BENEŠ J., FOLDYNOVÁ S., JIRKŮ M. & KURAS T. (2001): Habitat utilization and behaviour of adult Parnassius mnemosyne (Lepidoptera: Papilioni-dae) in the Litovelské Pomoraví, Czech Republic. Nota Lepidopterologica, 24: 39–51.

KONVIČKA M. & KURAS T. (1999): Population structure, behaviour and selection of oviposition sites of an endangered butterfly, Parnassius mnemosyne, in Litovelské Pomoraví, Czech Republic. Journal of Insect Conservation, 3: 211–223. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009641618795

LEHTONEN T.K., SVENSSON P.A. & WONG B.B.M. (2016): The influence of recent social experience and physical environment on courtship and male aggression evolutionary ecology and behaviour. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 16: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-016-0584-5

MARSHALL G.A.K. (1901): On the female pouch in Acraea. The Entomologist, 34: 73–75.

MATSUMOTO K. (1987): Mating patterns of a sphragis-bearing butterfly, Luehdorfia japonica LEECH (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae), with descriptions of mating behavior. Researches on Population Eco-logy, 29: 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02515428

MATSUMOTO K., ORR A.G. & YAGO M. (2018): The occurrence and function of the sphragis in the Zerynthiine genera Zerynthia, Allancastria and Bhutanitis (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea: Papilioni-dae). Journal of Natural History, 52: 1351–1376. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222933.2018.1464228

MATSUMOTO K. & SUZUKI N. (1992): Effectiveness of the mating plug in Atrophaneura alcinous (Lepi-doptera: Papilionidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 30: 157–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166698

MATSUMOTO K. & SUZUKI N. (1995): The nature of mating plugs and the probability of reinsemination in Japanese Papilionidae. In: SCHRIBER J. M., TSUBAKI Y. & LEDERHOUS R. C. (eds.): Swallowtail Butterflies: Their Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Scientific Publishers, Gainesville, pp. 145–154.

MATTER S.F., REED B., ILLERBRUN K., DOYLE A., MCPIKE S. & ROLAND J. (2012): Young love? Mating of Parnassius smintheus Doubleday (Papilionidae). Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society, 66: 111–113. https://doi.org/10.18473/lepi.v66i2.a4

MCCORKLE D.V. & HAMMOND P.C. (1985): Observations on the biology of Parnassius clodius (Pap-ilionidae) in the Pacific Northwest. Journal of the Lepidopterists Society, 39: 156–162.

MEGLÉCZ E., NÈVE G., PECSENYE K. & VARGA Z. (1999): Genetic variations in space and time in Par-nassius mnemosyne (L.) (Lepidoptera) populations in north-east Hungary: Implications for conser-vation. Biological Conservation, 89: 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00006-3

OKADA K., KATSUKI M., SHARMA M.D., KIYOSE K., SEKO T., OKADA Y., WILSON A.J. & HOSKEN D.J. (2021): Natural selection increases female fitness by reversing the exaggeration of a male sexually selected trait. Nature Communications, 12: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23804-7

ORR A.G. (1988): Mate conflict and the evolution of the sphragis in butterflies. Doktori disszertáció. School of Australian Environmental Studies, Griffith University, 348 pp.

ORR A.G. (1995): The evolution of the sphragis in the Papilionidae and other butterflies. In: SCHRIBER J.M., TSUBAKI Y. & LEDERHOUS R.C. (eds.): Swallowtail Butterflies: Their Ecology and Evolutio-nary Biology. Scientific Publishers, Gainesville, pp. 155–164.

ORR A.G. (2002): The sphragis of Heteronympha penelope WATERHOUSE (Lepidoptera: Satyridae): Its structure, formation and role in sperm guarding. Journal of Natural History, 36: 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930010022926

ORR A.G. & RUTOWSKI R.L. (1991): The function of the sphragis in Cressida cressida (FAB.) (Lepi-doptera, Papilionidae): A visual deterrent to copulation attempts. Journal of Natural History, 25: 703–710. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222939100770461

PARKER G.A. (1974): Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. Journal of Theore-tical Biology, 47: 223–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(74)90111-8

PARKER G.A. (2006): Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: An overview. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 361: 235–259. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1785

PARTRIDGE L. & HURST L.D. (1998): Sex and conflict. Science, 281: 2003–2008. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5385.2003

PETERSEN W. (1929): Über die sphragis und das spermatophragma der tagfaltergattung Parnassius (Lep.). Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift, 5: 407–413.

https://doi.org/10.1002/MMND.192919280506

PIERRE J. (1985): Le sphragis chez les Acraeinae (Lepidoptera Nymphalidae) [The sphragis in the Acra-einae (Lepidoptera Nymphalidae)]. Annales de La Société Entomologique de France, 21: 393–398.

R CORE TEAM. (2022): R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Sta-tistical Computing.

REINHARDT K., NAYLOR R. & SIVA-JOTHY M.T. (2003): Reducing a cost of traumatic insemination: Female bedbugs evolve a unique organ. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 270: 2371–2375. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2003.2515

RÖNN J., KATVALA M. & ARNQVIST G. (2007): Coevolution between harmful male genitalia and female resistance in seed beetles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104: 10921–10925. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701170104

SAKALUK S.K. (1991): Post-copulatory mate guarding in decorated crickets. Animal Behaviour, 41: 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80472-5

SCHRÖDER T. (2003): Precopulatory mate guarding and mating behaviour in the rotifer Epiphanes senta (Monogononta: Rotifera). Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 270: 1965–1970. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2003.2466

SCOBLE M.J. (1992): The Lepidoptera. Form, function and diversity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 404 pp.

SETTELE J., KUDRNA O., HARPKE A., KÜHN I., VAN SWAAY C., VEROVNIK R., WARREN M., WIEMERS M., HANSPACH J., HICKLER T., KÜHN E., VAN HALDER I., VELING K., VLIEGENTHART A., WYNHOFF I. & SCHWEIGER O. (2008): Climatic risk atlas of European butterflies (Vol. 1). Pensoft. http://biorisk.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=1821

SIMMONS L.W. (2001): The evolution of polyandry: An examination of the genetic incompatibility and good-sperm hypotheses. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 14: 585–594. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1420-9101.2001.00309.x

STOCKLEY P., FRANCO C., CLAYDON A.J., DAVIDSON A., HAMMOND D.E., BROWNRIDGE P.J., HURST J.L. & BEYNON R.J. (2020): Revealing mechanisms of mating plug function under sexual selection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117: 27465–27473. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920526117

STUTT A.D. & SIVA-JOTHY M.T. (2001): Traumatic insemination and sexual conflict in the bed bug Ci-mex lectularius. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98: 5683–5687. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.101440698

VAN SWAAY C., CUTTELOD A., COLLINS S., MAES D., LÓPEZ MUNGUIRA M., ŠAŠIC M., SETTELE J., VEROVNIK R., VERSTRAEL T., WARREN M., WIEMERS M. & WYNHOFF I. (2010): European Red List of butterflies..Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 47 pp.

SZIGETI V., KŐRÖSI Á., HARNOS A. & KIS J. (2019): Lifelong foraging and individual specialisation are influenced by temporal changes of resource availability. Oikos 128: 649–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/OIK.05400

SZIGETI V., KŐRÖSI Á., HARNOS A. & KIS J. (2018): Temporal changes in floral resource availability and flower visitation in a butterfly. Arthropod-Plant Interactions, 12: 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11829-017-9585-6

SZIGETI V., KŐRÖSI Á., HARNOS A., NAGY J. & KIS J. (2016): Comparing two methods for estimating floral resource availability for insect pollinators in semi-natural habitats. Annales de La Société En-tomologique de France, 52: 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00379271.2016.1261003

TIMMERMEYER N., GERLACH T., GUEMPEL C., KNOCHE J., PFANN J.F., SCHLIESSMANN D. & MICHIELS N.K. (2010): The function of copulatory plugs in Caenorhabditis remanei: Hints for female bene-fits. Frontiers in Zoology, 7: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-7-28

TREGENZA T. & WEDELL N. (2002): Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature, 415: 71–73. https://doi.org/10.1038/415071a

TREGENZA T., WEDELL N. & CHAPMAN T. (2006.): Introduction. Sexual conflict: A new paradigm? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 361: 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1796

VLAŠÁNEK P. & KONVIČKA M. (2009): Sphragis in Parnassius mnemosyne (Lepidoptera: Papilioni-dae): Male-derived insemination plugs loose efficiency with progress of female flight. Biologia, 64: 1206–1211. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-009-0207-3

ZHENG B., WANG Y., XIA C., HUANG D., CAO Y., HAO J. & ZHU C. (2018): The complete mitochondrial genome of Parnassius actius (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae: Parnassinae) with the related phylogenetic analysis. Zoological Systematics, 43: 1–17. https://doi.org/10.11865/ZS.201801

Published
2023-12-10
Section
eredeti közlemények