Host specificity among Maculinea butterflies in Myrmica ant nests

Abstract

Ecological studies have been made of all 5 European species of Maculinea. These confirm that M. nausithous and M. rebeli live underground in Myrmica ant nests for 10 months of the year, as has long been known for the other 3 species. The main discovery was that each Maculinea species depends on a single, and different, host species of Myrmica. This specificity contradicts previous papers and scientific reviews of the relationship between Maculinea and ants. Therefore, early records are re-examined and 3 reasons are given to explain why most are misleading when applied to wild populations. Dependence on a single, rather than any, species of Myrmica explains why Maculinea populations exist in only a small minority of biotopes where their foodplants and Myrmica ants abound. It also explains the puzzling disappearance of Maculinea populations from apparently suitable sites. The discovery that M. alcon and M. rebeli depend on separate species of Myrmica that are not even closely related strengthens the argument that these butterflies are good species.

Development of parasitic Maculinea teleius (Lepidoptera, Lycaenidae) larvae in laboratory nests of four Myrmica ant host species

“…It was shown that M. scabrinodis was the most abundant Myrmica species in the metapopulation system in the Kraków region but the percentage of infested nests was similar or even lower than those of nests of M. rubra or M. ruginodis. Moreover, a decrease of infested nests of M. scabrinodis has been observed during the last 20 years (Thomas et al, 1989;Witek et al, 2010). This trend could be the consequence of the arms-race between the parasite and its host, which was also observed in other interactions between social parasites and their hosts (Lorenzi and Filippone, 2000;Foitzik et al, 2003;.…”

“…Some Myrmica hosts, such as M. rugulosa, adopt larvae very quickly and readily but then the survival of the butterfly larvae is relatively low, whereas colonies of M. ruginodis had lower rates of adoption of M. teleius larvae, but later survival and increase in body mass for larvae was high. Additionally, it was not possible to show that M. scabrinodis, which was considered as the main host of M. teleius (Thomas et al, 1989), provided the best conditions for adoption and development of M. teleius larvae. Therefore, we have to conclude that some Myrmica species are better hosts during adoption and initial integration phases while others provide better conditions for the later development of M. teleius larvae.…”

“…The final step termed 'full integration' determines survival and development of Maculinea larvae, including overwintering, inside host colonies Schönrogge et al, 2004). Both 'initial' and 'full' integration are much more successful in colonies of the main host although sometime colonies of other Myrmica species can rear a small fraction of a butterfly population (Thomas et al, 1989).…”

“…A more mechanistic understanding of host specificity in Maculinea-Myrmica association has been achieved by studying chemical and acoustic mimicry Barbero et al, 2009) and through the investigation of ant adoption and rearing behaviour (Als et al, 2001;Elmes et al, 2004;Stankiewicz, 2007, Nash et al, 2011). The latter studies were restricted to the cuckoo feeding M. 'rebeli' and M. alcon and they showed that caterpillars were more readily adopted by the main host species and that after adoption they achieved a high social rank within the ant society, while with other Myrmica species they appeared to survive only because they were merely tolerated (Thomas et al, 1989;Als et al, 2001;Elmes et al, 2004;Schönrogge et al, 2004;Sielezniew and Stankiewicz, 2007).…”

“…The first detailed studies on the host specificity of M. teleius showed that M. scabrinodis (Nylander, 1864) was its main host species (Thomas et al, 1989) while recent studies that recorded the frequency distribution of M. teleius pupae across the host ant species have shown that its larvae can successfully develop and survive inside nests of other Myrmica species from the same site (Stankiewicz and Sielezniew, 2002;Tartally and Varga, 2008;Witek et al, 2008).…”