Heritability of Oviposition Preference and Its Relationship to Offspring Performance Within a Single Insect Population

Abstract

Within a population of the butterfly Euphydryas editha that oviposits predominantly on two host species, heritable variation in postalighting oviposition preference was found. In a separate experiment, oviposition preference of adult females was found to be correlated with offspring performance (growth). There was a significant tendency for offspring to perform better on the host species that their female parent preferred. Analysis of the data showed that no single factor, neither maternal preference nor the host species on which the offspring were raised, accounted for any significant variation in larval performance. However, the effect of the interaction between host species and maternal preference on offspring performance was highly significant. These findings imply specialization in both oviposition preference and offspring performance by individuals within a single population. With present evidence, this preference-performance correlation is likely to be genetic. However, as in previous studies, other interpretations cannot be excluded.

Reproductive decisions under threat of predation: squirrel treefrog (Hyla squirella) responses to banded sunfish (Enneacanthus obesus)

“…The entomological literature provides numerous examples of nonrandom female oviposition choice resulting in increased larval growth and survivorship (Rausher 1983;Papaj and Rausher 1987;Singer et al 1988;Craig et al 1989;Blaustein and Kotler 1993;Sherratt and Church 1994;Nylin et al 1996;Blaustein 1999), yet only a handful of studies have examined oviposition site choice in other groups of organisms (Bernardo 1996). Even fewer studies have examined oviposition responses to variation in species composition, which on a local scale may be spatially and temporally more variable than abiotic conditions.…”

Leaf choices of nest-building crab spiders (Misumena vatia)

“…This study differs from most others on parental choice of nesting substrate (e.g., Singer et al 1988) in testing predators, rather than phytophages. It is also concerned with predation pressures on the offspring, rather than the quality of food available to them.…”

“…However, recent work has revealed the frequent presence of substantial variation in presumably critical traits within populations. Little direct information exists on how selection affects such traits under natural circumstances and what factors are responsible for members of a population performing differently (Endler 1986;Singer et al 1988). In particular, there is little direct evidence that correlations between behavioral choices of animals (preference) and their resulting success (performance) even exist.…”

“…In particular, there is little direct evidence that correlations between behavioral choices of animals (preference) and their resulting success (performance) even exist. Most studies on this subject have concentrated on variation in either preference or performance, have confounded within-and among-population variation for these variables, or have confounded components of preference and performance (reviewed in Singer et al 1988 Nest site choice may be important to these spiders for at least three reasons: relative vulnerability to parasitoids, egg predators, and spiderling predators; proximity to hunting sites for the spiderlings; and microclimatic differences. I will concentrate here on factors associated with nest construction, but will also discuss spatial differences in nest predation.…”

A positive association between oviposition and fruit set: female choice or manipulation?

“…But do females choose wisely? Sometimes they do (Ahman 1985;Forsberg 1987;Singer et al 1988;Craig et al 1989;Carr et al 1998;Steinbauer et al 1998), and sometimes they do not (Chew 1977;Karban and Courtney 1987;Courtney and Kibota 1990;Larsson and Strong 1992;Burstein and Wool 1993;Larsson et al 1995). The mechanisms governing choices made by ovipositing insects are often unclear, but traits such as host chemistry, morphology and phenology may be important to female choice (reviewed by Bernays and Chapman 1994).…”