2020
DOI: 10.3897/natureconservation.38.48682
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Environmental stress in Parnassius apollo reflected through wing geometric morphometrics in a historical collection with a possible connection to habitat degradation

Abstract: Monitoring climate changes and habitat degradation in threatened species without negative impact to the populations can pose a considerable challenge. A rare chance to test the morphological response of wing shape and size to environmental factors on the mountain Apollo (Parnassius apollo) collected from 1938 to 1968 at a single location – Strečno mountain pass, N Slovakia presented itself in a historical collection. The canonical variate analysis showed a significant shift from a narrower to broader forewing,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
(60 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The intraspecific variability of wing morphology among the 100 samples (males) was analysed. All individuals were checked for measurement and digitisation errors, which were minimised (Štefánik and Fedor 2020). The results of ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in wing length and width (length: F(2, 97) = 17.38, p ˂ 0.0001, width: F(2, 97) = 34.19, p ˂ 0.0001) between all sites (length and width: Tukey's post hoc test, Kojšovská hoľa (1246 m a. s. l) vs Dobroslava (335 m a. s. l), p ˂ 0.001; Kojšovská hoľa (1246 m a. s. l) vs Zlatá Idka (660 m a. s. l) p ˂ 0.001, with the exception of Dobroslava vs Zlatá Idka, which did not show significant differences in the length or width of the forewings (p = 0.702).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The intraspecific variability of wing morphology among the 100 samples (males) was analysed. All individuals were checked for measurement and digitisation errors, which were minimised (Štefánik and Fedor 2020). The results of ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in wing length and width (length: F(2, 97) = 17.38, p ˂ 0.0001, width: F(2, 97) = 34.19, p ˂ 0.0001) between all sites (length and width: Tukey's post hoc test, Kojšovská hoľa (1246 m a. s. l) vs Dobroslava (335 m a. s. l), p ˂ 0.001; Kojšovská hoľa (1246 m a. s. l) vs Zlatá Idka (660 m a. s. l) p ˂ 0.001, with the exception of Dobroslava vs Zlatá Idka, which did not show significant differences in the length or width of the forewings (p = 0.702).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The intraspecific variability of wing morphology among the 100 samples (males) was analysed. All individuals were checked for measurement and digitisation errors, which were minimised (Štefánik and Fedor 2020). The results of ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in wing length and width (length: F(2, 97) = 17.38, p ˂ 0.0001, width: F(2, 97) = 34.19, p ˂ 0.0001) between all sites (length and width: Tukey's post hoc test, Kojšovská hoľa (1246 m a. s. l) vs Dobroslava (335 m a. s. l), p ˂ 0.001; Kojšovská hoľa (1246 m a. s. l) vs Zlatá Idka (660 m a. s. l) p ˂ 0.001, with the exception of Dobroslava vs Zlatá Idka, which did not show significant differences in the length or width of the forewings (p = 0.702).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%