Geometric morphometric analysis of the effect of temperature on wing size and shape in Aedes albopictus

Abstract

Wing geometry helps to identify mosquito species, even cryptic ones. On the other hand, temperature has a well‐known effect on insect metric properties. Can such effects blur the taxonomic signal embedded in the wing? Two strains of Aedes albopictus (laboratory and field strain) were examined under three different rearing temperatures (26, 30 and 33 °C) using landmark‐ and outline‐based morphometric approaches. The wings of each experimental line were compared with Aedes aegypti. Both approaches indicated similar associations between wing size and temperature. For the laboratory strain, the wing size significantly decreased as the temperature increased. For the field strain, the largest wings were observed at the intermediate temperature. The two morphometric approaches describing shape showed different sensibilities to temperature. For both strains and sexes, the landmark‐based approach disclosed significant wing shape changes with temperature changes. The outline‐based approach showed lesser effects, detecting significant changes only in laboratory females and in field males. Despite the size and shape changes induced by temperature, the two strains of Ae. albopictus were always distinguished from Ae. aegypti. The present study confirms the lability of size. However, it also suggests that, despite environmentally‐induced variation, the architecture of the wing still provides a strong taxonomic signal.

Altitudinal variations in wing morphology of Aedes albopictus (Diptera, Culicidae) in Albania, the region where it was first recorded in Europe

“…Mosquito size can be directly influenced by environmental conditions undergone during larval development [3]. Individuals reared at higher temperatures are expected to have smaller wings [28, 30]. A previous study carried out in the same area already showed that altitude can be a proxy for temperature, which may impact the oviposition activity of Ae.…”

“…For males and females, the size and shape analysis indicated significant differences among altitudinal populations. This result is most probably associated with biological [18] and/or environmental factors such as different blood sources (different host populations available between stations), ecological factors like different microhabitats [27], ecosystem vegetation [13], and/or climatic effects such as temperature differences between altitudes groups [11,26,28].…”

WingBank: A Wing Image Database of Mosquitoes

“…In recent publications referring to biological databases, Dujardin et al (2010); Garros and Dujardin (2013) report on the importance of creating DBs related to the use of the mosquito wing geometric morphometry (WGM) technique. In addition, Lorenz et al (2017); Jaramillo Wilke et al (2016), among other several authors (Calle et al, 2002;Jirakanjanakit and Dujardin, 2005;Dujardin, 2008;Jirakanjanakit et al, 2008;Henry et al, 2010;Vidal et al, 2011;Motoki et al, 2012;Vidal and Suesdek, 2012;Yeap et al, 2013;Börstler et al, 2014;Laurito et al, 2015;Phanitchat et al, 2019;Chaiphongpachara and Laojun, 2020;Sauer et al, 2020;Carvajal et al, 2021) who have already used to solve biological problems in Culicidae, directly and indirectly, reinforce the importance of gathering morphological, ecological and space-time data related to mosquitoes in a DB. The WingBank can enable studies of reanalysis and meta-analysis, micro and macroevolutionary and that can also contribute to integrative taxonomy, a multidisciplinary approach defended by several authors as the best approach for the diagnosis of species (Schlick-Steiner et al, 2010;Garros and Dujardin, 2013).…”

Geometric morphometric wing analysis represents a robust tool to identify female mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in Germany

“…Geographically separated populations of the same species can have significant intraspecific variation in their wing morphology 22 , 56 , 57 . Furthermore, abiotic and biotic conditions of breeding habitats can influence the wing geometry through carry-over effects from the immature to the adult stage 58 – 61 . Those factors have to be kept in mind when choosing mosquito specimens for the analyses of species-specific wing patterns.…”