The effects of milkweed age on monarch growth and development
Elaine Dunham, Michelle Prysby, and Karen Oberhauser
University Scientist
University of Minnesota
St. Paul, MN
Abstract
Since female monarchs tend to lay their eggs on newer milkweed plants, we were interested
in studying the effects plant age had on monarch growth and development. We reared
eggs laid by five different females on milkweed plants that were classified as either
"young" or "old" based on their appearance in the field. There were no significant
differences in the mass of individuals reared in the two treatments, but monarchs
in the "old plant" treatment developed more slowly both as larvae and pupae. This
suggests that they compensated for the lower nutritional value in the older plants
by eating more.Larvae increased their mass exponentially as they progressed between
instars, and males tended to be larger than females, although this difference was
not significant. Adults were less than half the mass of larvae just before pupation.
Introduction
Our observations, and those of several citizen science volunteers (see
www.mlmp.org) suggest that female monarchs prefer to lay eggs on milkweed
plants with new growth.Since new growth in many plants, including milkweed, tends
to be higher in nitrogen (Mattson 1980, Slansky 1993, Lavoie 2002a, MonarchLab 2002),
we hypothesized that this preference may result in faster-growing or larger offspring.
We tested this hypothesis by rearing larvae on wild-collected plants that appeared
to be old and young, and measuring their mass throughout their development.
Methods
We collected five to 12 eggs each from five different field-captured females, and
divided the eggs from each female into two groups that would receive either young-
or old-looking plants as they developed. We started a total of 21 larvae on young
plants and 23 on old plants. All eggs were laid on the same day.
We kept larvae in individual containers throughout their development, and gave them
fresh leaves daily.We picked wild-growing milkweed plants (Asclepias syriaca)
daily, and classified them as old or young based on their appearance; young plants
had no damage from herbivores, tended to be smaller, and looked fresher than old
plants.We recorded the time from egg-laying to both pupation and adult emergence
for each butterfly, and weighed larvae daily after the end of the first instar.
First instar larvae were too small to weigh accurately. We obtained a final larval
mass before each larva had attached its rear pair of prolegs to the rearing container,
and weighed each adult approximately 24 hours after emergence.Monarchs were kept
in an air-conditioned lab (range from 21 - 25 °C) and exposed to natural daylight
from a west-facing window during their development.
We used t-tests to compare masses and development times of individuals in the two
treatments, separating the sexes for the analyses of mass.
Results
Table 1 summarizes adult masses for individuals in the two plant treatments. Even
though the difference in male and female mass was not significant at the 0.05 level
of confidence (Table 1), we analyzed males and females separately when comparing
the effect of plant treatment in order to minimize within-treatment variation.There
were no significant differences between individuals reared on the two plant types.
Table 1. Analysis of adult mass
|
|
Plant treatment |
Mass (±s.e.) |
p |
|
Males |
Combined |
584.6 ± 13.7 |
0.11 |
|
Females |
Combined |
560.2 ± 13.9 |
|
Males |
Old Plants |
579.1 ± 25.4 |
0.78 |
|
Young Plants |
588.6 ± 15.9 |
|
Females |
Old Plants |
565.8 ± 20.7 |
0.71 |
|
Young Plants |
554.6 ± 19.5 |
Table 2. Analysis of development time
|
|
Days to Pupation (±s.e.) |
p |
Days in pupa (±s.e.) |
p |
|
Old Plants |
19.2 ± 0.2 |
0.005 |
11.7 ± 0.1 |
< 0.001 |
|
Young Plants |
18.3 ± 0.2 |
10.8 ± 0.2 |
|
Males |
18.7 ± 0.2 |
0.85 |
11.3 ± 0.2 |
0.72 |
|
Females |
18.8 ± 0.3 |
11.4 ± 0.2 |
Since males and females did not differ in development time (Table 2), we combined
the sexes to compare development time (from egg to pupation and from pupation to
adult emergence) for individuals reared on the two plant types. Individuals reared
on old plants took longer to develop; this difference was significant during both
the larva stage and the pupa stage.
Figure 1 shows the average masses of individuals of each sex on their first measurement
in each instar, the final larval mass and adult mass 24 hours after emergence. Growth
throughout the larval stage was exponential; larvae increased their mass by approximately
4.3 to 5.3 times during each instar (table 3).The rate of growth did not vary among
stages (ANOVA F = 2.35, p = 0.07), although they tended to grow at slower rates
later in development.While differences between the sexes were only significant in
the second instar stage (see table 3), males were larger than females throughout
their development.

Figure 1. Monarch mass. Larval masses are shown for the first day in each instar,
with the exception of the last mass, which was recorded on the day before the larva
hung in the pre-pupal "J" stage. Adult masses were recorded 24 hours after emergence.
Means of 19 males and 20 females are shown.
Table 3. Male and female larval masses (measured on the first day of each instar
stage, except where noted)
|
Larval stadium |
Mean mass increase from last stage (±s.e.) |
Male mass (±s.e.) |
Female mass (±s.e.) |
p |
|
2 |
|
4.6 ± 0.3 |
3.8 ± 0.2
|
0.02 |
|
3 |
5.25 ± 0.38 |
22.6 ± 2.7 |
18.6 ± 1.2 |
0.10 |
|
4 |
5.19 ± 0.31 |
98.1 ± 7.7 |
93.5 ± 7.2 |
0.33
|
|
5 |
4.34 ± 0.25 |
384.0 ± 27.6 |
370.3 ± 18.0 |
0.34 |
|
Last measurement |
4.60 ±0.17 |
1663.4 ± 33.9 |
1558.1 ± 37.8 |
0.07 |
Discussion
Leaves from older plants tend to be lower in nitrogen (Mattson 1980, Slansky 1993,
Lavoie 2002a, MonarchLab 2002).We hypothesized that larvae fed older milkweed plants
would become smaller adults, since nitrogen is a limiting resource for most insects
(McNeil and Southwood 1978, Mattson 1980, White 1993).However, this did not happen;
there were no significant differences between individuals reared on different plant
types.While monarchs that ate plants that appeared to be older do not suffer reduced
mass, they did take longer to develop. This suggests that they may compensate for
lower quality food by eating more, and thus requiring longer to develop. Lavoie
(2002) found that this was the case when larvae were fed plants that received varying
amounts of nitrogen fertilizer.
Male monarchs tend to be larger than females (Oberhauser and Frey 1999, MonarchLab
2002).While there was a trend toward this difference in our study, this difference
was not significant at the 0.05 level of confidence.However, our sample size was
small, and the large natural variation of size may mean that we could not detect
this effect.Interestingly, the mean mass of male larvae was greater than the mean
mass of female larvae during each stage. Since males did not take longer to develop
than females, it appears that they may be more efficient at converting food nutrients
to growth, or may be able to consume more in a given amount of time.
Note: For a detailed study of growth of larvae fed plants that vary in nutritional
quality, see (insert the two studies by Beth here).
References
Lavoie, B. 2002. The Effects of Varying Nitrogen Supply on Common Milkweed (Asclepias
syriaca) Leaf Nitrogen Content and Condition and on Monarch (Danaus plexippus)
Consumption Rates and Performance. Master's thesis. University of Minnesota.
Mattson, W. J., Jr.1980. Herbivory in relation to plant nitrogen content. Annual
Review of Ecology and Systematics, 11:119-161.
McNeil, S., and Southwood, T. R. E. 1978. The role of nitrogen in the development
of insect/plant relationships. Pages 77-98 in J. B. Harborne, editor. Biochemical
aspects of plant and animal coevolution. Academic, London, UK.
MonarchLab. 2002. Sample Monarch Vital Statistics. http://www.monarchlab.umn.edu/research/VS/sample.html
Scriber, J. M. 1984. Host-plant suitability. Pages 159-202 in W. J. Bell
and R. T. Carde, editors.Chemical ecology of insects. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts,
USA.
Slansky, F., Jr., and Scriber, J. M. 1985.Food consumption and utilization.Pages
87-163 in G. A. Kerkut and L. I. Gilbert, editors. Comprehensive insect physiology,
biochemistry, and pharmacology, Vol. 4. Pergamon, Oxford, UK.
White, T. C. R. 1993.The inadequate environment: Nitrogen and the abundance of animals.
Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA. http://www.monarchlab.umn.edu/research/VS/sample.html
Back to top | Interactions with Milkweed
| Student/Teacher Research
| Research Topics