Flight-reproduction trade-offs are weak in a field cage experiment across multiple Drosophila species

IF 2.2 Q1 ENTOMOLOGY
Liana I. De Araujo, Minette Karsten, John S. Terblanche
{"title":"Flight-reproduction trade-offs are weak in a field cage experiment across multiple Drosophila species","authors":"Liana I. De Araujo,&nbsp;Minette Karsten,&nbsp;John S. Terblanche","doi":"10.1016/j.cris.2023.100060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Flight-reproduction trade-offs, such that more mobile individuals sacrifice reproductive output (e.g., fecundity) or incur fitness costs, are well-studied in a handful of wing-dimorphic model systems. However, these trade-offs have not been systematically assessed across reproduction-related traits and taxa in wing monomorphic species despite having broad implications for the ecology and evolution of pterygote insect species.</p><p>Here we therefore determined the prevalence, magnitude and direction of flight-reproduction trade-offs on several fitness-related traits in a semi-field setting by comparing disperser and resident flies from repeated releases of five wild-caught, laboratory-reared <em>Drosophila</em> species, and explicitly controlling for a suite of potential confounding effects (maternal effects, recent thermal history) and potential morphological covariates (wing-loading, body mass).</p><p>We found almost no systematic differences in reproductive output (egg production), reproductive fitness (offspring survival), or longevity between flying (disperser) and resident flies in our replicated releases, even if adjusting for potential morphological variation. After correction for false discovery rates, none of the five species showed evidence of a significant fitness trade-off associated with increased flight (sustained, simulated voluntary field dispersal).</p><p>Our results therefore suggest that flight-reproduction trade-offs are not as common as might have been expected when assessed systematically across species and under the relatively standardized conditions and field setting employed here, at least not in the genus <em>Drosophila</em>. The magnitude and direction of potential dispersal- or flight-induced trade-offs, and the conditions that promote them, clearly require closer scrutiny.</p><p>We argue that flight or dispersal is either genuinely cheaper than expected, or the costs manifest differently than those assessed here. Lost opportunities (i.e., time spent on mate-finding, mating or foraging) or nutrient-poor conditions could promote fitness costs to dispersal in our study system and that could be explored in future.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34629,"journal":{"name":"Current Research in Insect Science","volume":"3 ","pages":"Article 100060"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Research in Insect Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666515823000094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENTOMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Flight-reproduction trade-offs, such that more mobile individuals sacrifice reproductive output (e.g., fecundity) or incur fitness costs, are well-studied in a handful of wing-dimorphic model systems. However, these trade-offs have not been systematically assessed across reproduction-related traits and taxa in wing monomorphic species despite having broad implications for the ecology and evolution of pterygote insect species.

Here we therefore determined the prevalence, magnitude and direction of flight-reproduction trade-offs on several fitness-related traits in a semi-field setting by comparing disperser and resident flies from repeated releases of five wild-caught, laboratory-reared Drosophila species, and explicitly controlling for a suite of potential confounding effects (maternal effects, recent thermal history) and potential morphological covariates (wing-loading, body mass).

We found almost no systematic differences in reproductive output (egg production), reproductive fitness (offspring survival), or longevity between flying (disperser) and resident flies in our replicated releases, even if adjusting for potential morphological variation. After correction for false discovery rates, none of the five species showed evidence of a significant fitness trade-off associated with increased flight (sustained, simulated voluntary field dispersal).

Our results therefore suggest that flight-reproduction trade-offs are not as common as might have been expected when assessed systematically across species and under the relatively standardized conditions and field setting employed here, at least not in the genus Drosophila. The magnitude and direction of potential dispersal- or flight-induced trade-offs, and the conditions that promote them, clearly require closer scrutiny.

We argue that flight or dispersal is either genuinely cheaper than expected, or the costs manifest differently than those assessed here. Lost opportunities (i.e., time spent on mate-finding, mating or foraging) or nutrient-poor conditions could promote fitness costs to dispersal in our study system and that could be explored in future.

在多个果蝇物种的野外笼实验中,飞行-繁殖的权衡是弱的
飞行繁殖权衡,如更多的流动个体牺牲繁殖产出(如繁殖力)或产生适应成本,在少数机翼二形态模型系统中得到了很好的研究。然而,尽管这些权衡对翼虫物种的生态学和进化有着广泛的影响,但尚未对翅膀单形态物种的繁殖相关特征和分类群进行系统评估。因此,在这里,我们通过比较五种野生捕获、实验室饲养的果蝇的多次放生中的分散蝇和常驻蝇,确定了在半田间环境中几种适应度相关性状的飞行繁殖权衡的普遍性、规模和方向,并明确控制一系列潜在的混杂效应(母体效应、近期热史)和潜在的形态协变量(翅膀负荷、体重),即使针对潜在的形态变化进行调整。在对错误发现率进行校正之后,五个物种中没有一个显示出与飞行增加(持续的、模拟的自愿野外扩散)相关的显著适应度权衡的证据。因此,我们的研究结果表明,在相对标准化的条件和野外环境下,跨物种系统地评估飞行繁殖权衡并不像预期的那样普遍,至少在果蝇属中没有。潜在的扩散或飞行引发的权衡的规模和方向,以及促进这些权衡的条件,显然需要更仔细的审查。我们认为,飞行或疏散要么确实比预期的要便宜,要么成本表现得与这里评估的不同。失去的机会(即花在寻找配偶、交配或觅食上的时间)或营养不良的条件可能会增加我们研究系统中分散的适应成本,这一点可以在未来进行探索。
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
Current Research in Insect Science
Current Research in Insect Science Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
36 days
×
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