Differential performance of contrasting defensive traits of cocoons of two moth species against bird predation

IF 0.7 4区 农林科学 Q4 ENTOMOLOGY
Mariko Furukawa, Kosuke Nakanishi, Atsushi Honma, Koh-Ichi Takakura, Kazuyo Matsuyama, Naoya Hidaka, Hiroichi Sawada, Takayoshi Nishida
{"title":"Differential performance of contrasting defensive traits of cocoons of two moth species against bird predation","authors":"Mariko Furukawa,&nbsp;Kosuke Nakanishi,&nbsp;Atsushi Honma,&nbsp;Koh-Ichi Takakura,&nbsp;Kazuyo Matsuyama,&nbsp;Naoya Hidaka,&nbsp;Hiroichi Sawada,&nbsp;Takayoshi Nishida","doi":"10.1111/ens.12482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Prey defensive traits against predators can be categorized into primary defense (avoiding detection) and secondary defense (avoiding attack after detection). There are trade-offs between these two defensive traits, which consider the cost of defense. To quantify the predation avoidance efficacy of both defensive traits against common predators, we compared bird predation pressures and the corresponding avoidance measures of cocoons of two nettle moth species, which utilize contrasting avoidance strategies: <i>Parasa lepida</i> (investing predominantly in primary defense) and <i>Monema flavescens</i> (investing predominantly in secondary defense). Field censuses revealed that bird predation was the most significant mortality factor for both species. The survival rate of cocoons was significantly higher for <i>M. flavescens</i> than for <i>P. lepida</i>, although <i>M. flavescens</i> were more conspicuous than <i>P. lepida</i>. Measurement of prepupae (cocoon content) mass, and experiments on the feeding preferences of the prepupae of both species using chicks, confirmed a similar quantity and quality of both speciesʼ prepupae as prey items. Our results were explained by the advantage of cocoon hardness outweighing the disadvantage of cocoon conspicuousness. The predation behavior of wild birds suggested that they spent considerably longer handling than searching for cocoons, which accounted for their cocoon preference for <i>P. lepida</i> over <i>M. flavescens</i> in the context of optimal foraging theory. Our results suggested that secondary defense was more effective in reducing bird predation than primary defense in limacodid cocoons.</p>","PeriodicalId":11745,"journal":{"name":"Entomological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/ens.12482","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Entomological Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ens.12482","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENTOMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Prey defensive traits against predators can be categorized into primary defense (avoiding detection) and secondary defense (avoiding attack after detection). There are trade-offs between these two defensive traits, which consider the cost of defense. To quantify the predation avoidance efficacy of both defensive traits against common predators, we compared bird predation pressures and the corresponding avoidance measures of cocoons of two nettle moth species, which utilize contrasting avoidance strategies: Parasa lepida (investing predominantly in primary defense) and Monema flavescens (investing predominantly in secondary defense). Field censuses revealed that bird predation was the most significant mortality factor for both species. The survival rate of cocoons was significantly higher for M. flavescens than for P. lepida, although M. flavescens were more conspicuous than P. lepida. Measurement of prepupae (cocoon content) mass, and experiments on the feeding preferences of the prepupae of both species using chicks, confirmed a similar quantity and quality of both speciesʼ prepupae as prey items. Our results were explained by the advantage of cocoon hardness outweighing the disadvantage of cocoon conspicuousness. The predation behavior of wild birds suggested that they spent considerably longer handling than searching for cocoons, which accounted for their cocoon preference for P. lepida over M. flavescens in the context of optimal foraging theory. Our results suggested that secondary defense was more effective in reducing bird predation than primary defense in limacodid cocoons.

两种蛾类蚕茧防御鸟类捕食的差异表现
猎物对捕食者的防御特征可以分为初级防御(避免被发现)和次级防御(在被发现后避免攻击)。这两种防御特征之间存在权衡,考虑了防御成本。为了量化这两种防御特征对常见捕食者的捕食-回避效果,我们比较了两种荨麻蛾茧的鸟类捕食压力和相应的回避措施,这两种蛾采用了对比鲜明的回避策略:Parasa lepida(主要投资于一级防御)和Monema flavescens(主要投资二级防御)。实地普查显示,鸟类捕食是这两个物种最重要的死亡因素。黄曲霉的茧存活率明显高于麻风杆菌,尽管黄曲霉比麻风杆菌更明显。对蚕茧(茧含量)质量的测量,以及使用雏鸡对两个物种蚕茧喂养偏好的实验,证实了两个物种的蚕茧作为猎物的数量和质量相似。我们的结果是用茧硬度的优势大于茧显著性的劣势来解释的。野生鸟类的捕食行为表明,它们处理茧的时间比寻找茧的时间要长得多,这解释了在最佳觅食理论的背景下,它们对鳞翅目P.lepida的茧偏好高于对黄曲霉的茧偏好。我们的研究结果表明,在鲎茧中,二级防御比一级防御更能有效减少鸟类捕食。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Entomological Science
Entomological Science 生物-昆虫学
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
30
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Entomological Science is the official English language journal of the Entomological Society of Japan. The Journal publishes original research papers and reviews from any entomological discipline or from directly allied field in ecology, behavioral biology, physiology, biochemistry, development, genetics, systematics, morphology, evolution and general entomology. Papers of applied entomology will be considered for publication if they significantly advance in the field of entomological science in the opinion of the Editors and Editorial Board.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信