Heart Poisons in the Monarch Butterfly

Reichstein, T.; Euw, J. v.; Parsons, J. A.; Rothschild, Miriam

doi:10.1126/science.161.3844.861

Cited by 219 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One possibility is that the pupae are not as distasteful as the other two stages. However, monarch pupae have been shown to contain the same glycosides in the same quantity as the larvae and adults (Reichstein et al, 1968;Malcolm and Rothschild, 1983) rendering this explanation rather unconvincing, i.e., given that cardiac glycosides alone render monarchs unpalatable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Distasteful Butterflies Have Aposematic Larvae and Adults, but Cryptic Pupae: Evidence From Predation Experiments on the Monarch and the European Swallowtail

Wiklund

Sillén-Tullberg

1985

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Distasteful Butterflies Have Aposematic Larvae and Adults, but Cryptic Pupae: Evidence From Predation Experiments on the Monarch and the European Swallowtail

Wiklund

Sillén-Tullberg

1985

Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Most groups of animals include at least one example of aposematic lineage. Some examples of the most studied are Heliconius (Jiggins & McMillan, 1997) and Monarch butterflies (Reichstein, von Euw, Parsons, & Rothschild, 1968), nudibranch marine gastropods (e.g., Polycera Tullrot & Sundberg, 1991), Plethodon salamanders (Hensel & Brodie, 1976) and dendrobatid poison frogs (Myers & Daly, 1983; Santos, Coloma, & Cannatella, 2003; Saporito, Zuercher, Roberts, Gerow, & Donnelly, 2007), Micrurus coral snakes (Brodie, 1993), and Pitohui (Dumbacher, Beehler, Spande, Garraffo, & Daly, 1992) and Ifrita birds (Dumbacher, Spande, & Daly, 2000). The aposematism strategy is dependent on the predictability of the warning signal for effective recognition as well as learning and avoidance by predators (Benson, 1971; Chouteau, Arias, & Joron, 2016; Kapan, 2001; Ruxton, Sherratt, & Speed, 2004), with the expectation that common forms (i.e., similar looking) have a frequency‐dependent advantage on rarer forms in aposematic prey (Endler & Greenwood, 1988; Greenwood, Cotton, & Wilson, 1989).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation of the polymorphic Little Devil poison frog (Oophaga sylvatica) in Ecuador

Roland

Santos

Carriker³

et al. 2017

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some South American poison frogs (Dendrobatidae) are chemically defended and use bright aposematic colors to warn potential predators of their unpalatability. Aposematic signals are often frequency‐dependent where individuals deviating from a local model are at a higher risk of predation. However, extreme diversity in the aposematic signal has been documented in poison frogs, especially in Oophaga. Here, we explore the phylogeographic pattern among color‐divergent populations of the Little Devil poison frog Oophaga sylvatica by analyzing population structure and genetic differentiation to evaluate which processes could account for color diversity within and among populations. With a combination of PCR amplicons (three mitochondrial and three nuclear markers) and genome‐wide markers from a double‐digested RAD (ddRAD) approach, we characterized the phylogenetic and genetic structure of 199 individuals from 13 populations (12 monomorphic and 1 polymorphic) across the O. sylvatica distribution. Individuals segregated into two main lineages by their northern or southern latitudinal distribution. A high level of genetic and phenotypic polymorphism within the northern lineage suggests ongoing gene flow. In contrast, low levels of genetic differentiation were detected among the southern lineage populations and support recent range expansions from populations in the northern lineage. We propose that a combination of climatic gradients and structured landscapes might be promoting gene flow and phylogenetic diversification. Alternatively, we cannot rule out that the observed phenotypic and genomic variations are the result of genetic drift on near or neutral alleles in a small number of genes.

show abstract

“…The best-known example concerns the Monarch butterfly, Danaus plexiphus L., and a grasshopper, Poekilocerus bufonius Klug, which feed on Aristolochia species, plants well-known for the presence of cardiac glucosides. It was shown in a series of investigations (v. Euw et al, 1967;Reichstein, 1967;Reichstein et al, 1968) that these substances are taken into the insect body with the food, accumulated in glands and used in protective secretions against, for instance, birds (Brower et aI., 1968). A similar relation has now been established between Senecio alkaloids and the Cinnebar moth, Callimorpha ]acobaea (Aplin et aI., 1968).…”

Section: The Role Of the Secondary Substances As Attractantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Our Thoughts on Secondary Plant Substances

Fraenkel

1969

Entomologia Exp Applicata

203

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents and evaluates modern concepts about the role of the secondary plant substances in the host selection of phytophagous insects. It deals with the following main topics: A. The role of nutrients in host selection. B. The concept of utilization in this context. C. The role of the secondary substances as attractants. D. The role of the secondary substances as repellents. The conclusion is reached that host selection is principally guided by the presence and/or absence of secondary substances, and that qualitatively and quantitatively nutrients can play only a very minor part, if one at all, in this context. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG BEWERTUNG UNSERER VORSTELLUNGEN ÜBER SEKUNDÄRE PFLANZENSTOFFE Die Arbeit bringt und beurteilt moderne Auffassungen über die Rolle der sekundären Pflanzeninhaltsstoffe bei der Wirtswahl phytophager Insekten. Sie enthält die folgenden Hauptabschnitte: A. Die Rolle der Nährstoffe bei der Wirtswahl. B. Die Auffassung der Ausnutzung in diesem Zusammenhang. C. Die Rolle der sekundären Pflanzenstoffe als Attraktants. D. Die Rolle der sekundären Pflanzenstoffe als Repellents. Es wird die Schlußfolgerung gezogen, daß die Wirtspflanzenwahl grundsätzlich von der Gegenwart und/oder dem Fehlen sekundärer Pflanzenstoffe bestimmt wird, und Nährstoffe, wenn überhaupt, in diesem Zusammenhang, quantitativ und qualitativ nur eine sehr untergeordnete Rolle spielen können.

show abstract

Heart Poisons in the Monarch Butterfly

Cited by 219 publications

References 30 publications

Why Distasteful Butterflies Have Aposematic Larvae and Adults, but Cryptic Pupae: Evidence From Predation Experiments on the Monarch and the European Swallowtail

Why Distasteful Butterflies Have Aposematic Larvae and Adults, but Cryptic Pupae: Evidence From Predation Experiments on the Monarch and the European Swallowtail

Radiation of the polymorphic Little Devil poison frog (Oophaga sylvatica) in Ecuador

Evaluation of Our Thoughts on Secondary Plant Substances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About