Geographic variation of wing morphology in three Eurasian populations of the fruit fly, <i>Drosophila lummei</i>

Haas, Heather L.; Tolley, Krystal A.

doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.1998.tb00087.x

Cited by 37 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We found weak evidence for allometry in the wing ratio VR CU , which appeared to decrease with size, but a larger sample size is needed to decide whether or not an outlier does represent the normal range of variation. Morphometric analysis of wing venation in Drosophila lummei Hackman, 1972 did find variation in wing shape consistent with genetic differences in geographically distant populations (Haas & Tolley 1998). However, our ordination of wing dimensions failed to show any variation that was not simply due to size, and suggests that wing ratios may not be informative in the sylvestris-group.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 44%

Phenotypic and genetic variation within the Cricotopus sylvestris species-group (Diptera, Chironomidae), across a Nearctic - Palaearctic gradient

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gresens SE, Stur E, Ekrem T. 2012. Phenotypic and genetic variation within the Cricotopus sylvestris species-group (Diptera, Chironomidae), across a Nearctic -Palaearctic gradient. Fauna norvegica 31: 137-149.Intraspecific variation sometimes obscures species boundaries and makes identification of certain Chironomidae difficult. This is true for many species in the genus Cricotopus. We used DNA barcode data and multivariate statistical analyses to investigate which phenotypic characters in populations of the Cricotopus sylvestris species-group are useful for species identification. Specimens collected across a broad latitudinal range from the Southwest United States through subarctic Canada to northern Norway formed nine distinct barcode clusters. Body size of adult flies decreased by 51% from the northern to southernmost populations. Meristic characters in wings and legs were strongly related to overall body size, and related morphometric ratios were not species specific. Antennal ratio increased significantly with body size, thus limiting its value in species delimitation. Non-metric ordinations of setal and coloration pattern data were characteristic for most species in the sylvestris-group. DNA barcode data worked well in separating morphologically different populations, except for the case of C. (I.) sylvestris and C. (I.) trifasciatus, which were distinguished by ordination of color pattern, but not by barcoding data. These two species appeared closely related, and we conclude that sequence data from neutral nuclear markers will be necessary to determine if these are genetically distinct species, or whether there is merely a high level of environmental plasticity in pigmentation within this geographically widespread barcode cluster. doi: 10.5324/fn.v31i0.1417. Received: 2011-11-29. Accepted: 2012. Published on paper and online: 2012-10-17.Keywords: DNA barcoding, morphometrics, phenotypic plasticity, species delimitation, color pattern Sciences, Towson University, 8000 York, Towson, MD 21252-0001, USA 2. Museum of Natural History and Archaeology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway Corresponding author: Susan E. Gresens E-mail: sgresens@towson.edu Hirabayashi et al. 2004). Species-level identification of adult Cricotopus is difficult because high levels of intraspecific variation lead to overlap in the values of morphological traits between species. This is particularly true for many mensural data; coloration and the pattern of setae on thorax and the abdominal tergites are therefore important for identification of Cricotopus species (Hirvenoja 1973). Within a species, however, pigmentation varies seasonally and geographically (LeSage & Harrison 1980; Boesel 1983;Oliver & Dillon 1988) and can potentially obscure otherwise good differences Department of Biological INTrOduCTIONThe genus Cricotopus van der Wulp, 1874 is one of the largest in the Orthocladiinae, containing five subgenera, with species distributed across the globe (Cranston et al. 1989). Aquati...

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 44%

Phenotypic and genetic variation within the Cricotopus sylvestris species-group (Diptera, Chironomidae), across a Nearctic - Palaearctic gradient

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Shape, however, is more complex. Although many studies have documented shape change in a variety of Drosophila species (Alonso & Munoz, 1984; Cavicchi et al ., 1991; Bitner‐Mathé et al., 1995; Imasheva et al ., 1995; Bublii et al ., 1996; Pezzoli et al ., 1997; Baylac & Penin, 1998; Haas & Tolley, 1998; Huey et al . 2000), there is little evidence indicating that natural shape change is adaptive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The contrasting genetic architecture of wing size and shape in Drosophila melanogaster

Gilchrist

Partridge

2001

Heredity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surprisingly little is known about the genetic architecture of body size in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Using both generation means and triple-test-cross analyses, we investigated the genetic architecture of wing size (an indicator of body size) and wing shape in a naturally occurring body size cline. For wing size, we found signi®cant epistatic genetic variance and evidence of past directional selection for increased body size. While wing shape also exhibits signi®cant epistatic genetic variance, there was no indication of directional selection, suggesting instead a history of optimizing selection. Our results support the idea that epistatic variance may be more common in natural populations than was once suspected. Also, our results suggest substantial directional selection on wing size but not shape.Keywords: directional selection, Drosophila melanogaster, epistasis, genetic architecture, wing shape, wing size. IntroductionBody size is of central importance in evolution and ecology, and it has been study extensively in both arti®cial and natural environments. Numerous allometric relationships between life history, physiological and behavioural traits and body size have been reported across species (e.g. Schmidt-Nielsen, 1984). Various trade-os aecting body size have been identi®ed (Stearns, 1992). Although arti®cial selection experiments provide numerous insights into aspects of the evolution of body size, the generality of the ®ndings is necessarily limited. Attempts to understand the how and why of evolution must eventually involve studies of natural populations.In Drosophila, in particular, surprisingly little is known about the quantitative genetics of body size of natural populations, apart from its high heritability (Coyne & Beecham, 1987; Prout & Barker, 1989; Ruiz et al., 1991; Thomas & Barker, 1993). Our intention in this study was to answer some additional and important questions regarding the evolution of body size in Drosophila melanogaster in a natural body-size cline. First, using wing area as a measure of body size, we questioned the importance of epistasis in population divergence. The answer is relevant not only to the shifting balance theory of evolution, but also to questions regarding the evolution of mating systems and conservation genetics (see Whitlock et al., 1995; Fenster et al., 1997). Secondly, what sort of selection (either directional or optimizing) is likely to be the predominant form of natural selection acting on the trait? Body size in D. melanogaster has an intermediate optimum value, largely determined by correlations with fecundity, development time and larval survival (Ro, 1981). Thus, although appearing to be under optimizing selection, the optimizing selection on body size is only apparent (Falconer, 1989): it is not clear what type of selection acts directly on genes determining body size within the constraints imposed by correlated characters.In addition to wing area, we also analysed wing shape. Although a number of investigators have documented ...

show abstract

“…In Drosophila, wing morphology has been used extensively in taxonomic studies and has revealed marked interspecific divergence (Shorrocks, 1972), with intraspecific variation in the wing size and shape also being frequently demonstrated (Hass and Tolley, 1998;Gilchrist et al, 2000;Hoffmann and Shirriffs, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wing shape heritability and morphological divergence of the sibling species Drosophila mercatorum and Drosophila paranaensis

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fruit-flies Drosophila paranaensis and Drosophila mercatorum pararepleta are sibling species belonging to the repleta group. Females of these two species are normally considered to be morphologically indistinguishable while males only differ consistently in the morphology of their genitalia. These species are sympatric throughout a large area of their geographic distribution. In this study, we investigated the degree of morphological divergence between D. paranaensis and D. mercatorum pararepleta based on morphometric analysis of their wings. The ellipse method was used to describe the placement of the longitudinal and transversal wing veins as well as the size of the wing and the shape of its outline. The heritability under laboratory and field conditions was also estimated from the parameters generated. Multivariate analysis showed that wing morphology possessed sufficient differences to discriminate between the two species with a successful classification rate of 95-98% for females and 82-87% for males. The results of the autoclassification were confirmed by a cross-validation test for females (92-96%). Most measurements possessed significant natural heritability (a mean of 0.48 for D. mercatorum and 0.88 for D. paranaensis), indicating that the variation observed was related to differences in genes acting additively. The principal difference between the two species was in the placement of the posterior transverse wing vein. However, the pattern of morphological variation in the wings of both species was similar, possibly because of shared restrictions in wing development pathways.

show abstract

Geographic variation of wing morphology in three Eurasian populations of the fruit fly, Drosophila lummei

Cited by 37 publications

References 35 publications

Phenotypic and genetic variation within the Cricotopus sylvestris species-group (Diptera, Chironomidae), across a Nearctic - Palaearctic gradient

Phenotypic and genetic variation within the Cricotopus sylvestris species-group (Diptera, Chironomidae), across a Nearctic - Palaearctic gradient

The contrasting genetic architecture of wing size and shape in Drosophila melanogaster

Wing shape heritability and morphological divergence of the sibling species Drosophila mercatorum and Drosophila paranaensis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About