Abstract

Abstract Juvenile growth trajectories evolve via the interplay of selective pressures on age and size at maturity, and developmental constraints. In insects, the moulting cycle is a major constraint on larval growth trajectories. Surface area to volume ratio of a larva decreases during growth, so renewal of certain surfaces by moulting is likely needed for the maintenance of physiological efficiency. A null hypothesis of isometry, implied by Dyar's Rule, would mean that the relative measures of growth remain constant across moults and instars. We studied ontogenetic changes and allometry in instar‐specific characteristics of larval growth in 30 lepidopteran species in a phylogenetic comparative framework. Relative instar‐specific mass increments (RMI) typically, but not invariably, decreased across instars. Ontogenetic change in RMIs varied among families with little within‐family variation. End‐of‐instar growth deceleration (GD) became stronger with increasing body size across instars. Across‐instar change in GD was conserved across taxa. Ontogenetic allometry was generally non‐isometric in both RMI and GD. Results indicate that detailed studies on multiple species are needed for generalizations concerning growth trajectory evolution. Developmental and physiological mechanisms affecting growth trajectory evolution show different degrees of evolutionary conservatism, which must be incorporated into models of age and size at maturation.

Highlights

  • Understanding developmental and physiological mechanisms that generate evolutionary constraints is vital in evolutionary biology (Davidowitz, Roff, & Nijhout, 2016; Nijhout, Roff, & Davidowitz, 2010; Roff, 2002; Stearns, 1992; see Gould & Lewontin, 1979, and contributions in Flatt & Heyland, 2011)

  • We focused on relative instar-specific mass increments (RMI) and end-of-instar growth deceleration (GD)

  • We focused on relative instar-specific mass increments (RMIs) and end-of-instar growth deceleration (GD), both of which typically changed across instars independently of thermal regime

Read more

Summary

| INTRODUCTION

Understanding developmental and physiological mechanisms that generate evolutionary constraints is vital in evolutionary biology (Davidowitz, Roff, & Nijhout, 2016; Nijhout, Roff, & Davidowitz, 2010; Roff, 2002; Stearns, 1992; see Gould & Lewontin, 1979, and contributions in Flatt & Heyland, 2011). Developmental and physiological mechanisms associated with the moulting process have, the potential to act as important constraints on insect life-history evolution (Davidowitz et al, 2016; Nijhout et al, 2006, 2010; Tammaru, 1998; Tammaru et al, 2010, 2015). The extent to which the area of a surface becomes limiting depends on the absolute size of the larva (cf Kühsel, Brückner, Schmelzle, Heethoff, & Blüthgen, 2017) As these patterns are based on fundamental physical principles, we would expect a high degree of similarity in these relationships across species and instars. We discuss the data in the light of different hypotheses proposed to explain the ultimate causes and proximate triggers of the moulting process

| MATERIALS AND METHODS
Findings
| DISCUSSION
| CONCLUSIONS
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call