Movement Ecology (Apr 2017)

Migration distance as a selective episode for wing morphology in a migratory insect

  • D. T. Tyler Flockhart,
  • Blair Fitz-gerald,
  • Lincoln P. Brower,
  • Rachael Derbyshire,
  • Sonia Altizer,
  • Keith A. Hobson,
  • Leonard I. Wassenaar,
  • D. Ryan Norris

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40462-017-0098-9
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 5, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Selective pressures that occur during long-distance migration can influence morphological traits across a range of taxa. In flying insects, selection should favour individuals that have wing morphologies that increase energy efficiency and survival. In monarch butterflies, differences in wing morphology between migratory and resident populations suggest that migratory populations have undergone selection for larger (as measured by length and area) and more elongated (as measured by roundness and aspect ratio) forewings. However, selection on wing morphology may also occur within migratory populations, particularly if individuals or populations consistently migrate different distances. Results Using 613 monarch butterflies that were collected on the Mexican wintering grounds between 1976 – 2014, we tested whether monarch wing traits were associated with migratory distance from their natal areas in eastern North America (migration range: 774–4430 km), as inferred by stable-hydrogen (δ 2H) and -carbon (δ 13C) isotopic measurements. Monarchs that migrated farther distances to reach their overwintering sites tended to have longer and larger wings, suggesting positive selective pressure during migration on wing length and area. There was no relationship between migration distances and either roundness or aspect ratio. Conclusions Our results provide correlative evidence that the migratory period may act as a selective episode on monarch butterfly wing morphology, although selection during other portions of the annual cycle, as well as extensive mixing of individuals from various natal locations on the breeding grounds, likely counteracts directional selection of migration on morphology.

Keywords