|
Dale Pulis, April Schmitz, Christine Steckling,
Holly R., Matt Kometz and Ruth Naber
Mississippi Heights
Middle School
Sauk Rapids, Minnesota
Abstract | Introduction | Methods | Results | Discussion | Acknowledgements | Literature
Cited | Research Projects
Abstract
We tested the effect of monarch
larvae (Danaus plexippus) eating their chorion after hatching.
Data were collected on growth rates (both length and mass), length
of time in instars, and survival. Two treatments consisted of larvae
which were allowed to eat their chorion completely and those that were
prevented from eating their chorion. Larvae were housed in individual
containers and fed daily with common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca).
On a daily basis measurements were recorded on length, mass, and instar
stage. The data suggest that larvae that do not eat their chorion remain
longer in the first instar than those that do. Also larvae took longer
in the 5th instar when they did eat the chorion. There was a significant
difference in monarch survival rates in the homes of different members
of our research team, but not on whether or not the larvae ate their
chorion.
Introduction
After observing
hatching monarch larvae (Danaus plexippus) eating their chorion,
our team of six designed an experiment to determine if monarch instars
that were allowed to eat the chorion would grow better than the instars
that were not allowed to eat the chorion. Although we were able to
find little research on nutritional value of chorion material in butterflies,
we did find an article on the eggshell material of Drosophila. The
article reveals that the eggshell of this insect consists of three
layers of a protein material (Pascucci et al. 1996). We think that
added nutritional value if present in the chorion, might affect larvae
growth. We also examined survival rates for those that were and were
not allowed to eat their chorion.
Hypotheses::
Ha1 Monarch larvae that eat the chorion
will be more likely to survive than those that don't.
Ha2 Monarch larvae that don't eat the chorion will be more likely
to survive than those that don't.
Ha3 Monarch larvae
that eat the chorion will grow larger than those that don't.
Ha4 Monarch larvae that don't eat the chorion will grow larger
than those that don't.
Ha5 Monarch larvae that eat the chorion will
grow faster in the early instars than those that don't.
Ha6 Monarch larvae don't eat the chorion will grow faster
in the early instars than those that don't.
Ho Not eating
the chorion will have no effect on the monarch larvae.
Methods
We reared
enough monarch eggs to supply at least 30 larvae for each member of
our six person team. While waiting for the eggs to hatch each person
labeled containers with a number, tester's initials, date of hatching,
and "C" or "NC". Each container was lined with
slightly moist paper towel and had a cover that would keep the larva
from escaping. Petri dishes were used during the first two instars.
During the experiment caterpillars in their containers were given enough Asclepias
syriaca (common milkweed) so they would always have ample food.
Each day as we worked with the caterpillars their containers were cleaned
and they were fed.
To begin the experiment we observed
our eggs and, as the caterpillars emerged, we carefully removed half
of the newly hatched
instars before they had a chance to turn around and eat the chorion.
We rejected larvae that we either did not observe emerging from the
egg or see finish eating the chorion to avoid non-random assignment
of larvae to treatments. We tried to get fifteen instars and we placed
them in the "NC" containers. We recorded on our data
sheets the label of the containers (in this case "NC" for
no chorion) and the date and time that they hatched.
We also collected approximately fifteen
more instars per person. These instars had finished eating the chorion.
They were
given the label "C" and the same information was recorded
for them.
We started recording data on the second day. Through
the entire experiment we recorded daily length measurements for each
larva as well as its instar stage. We also recorded extra notes of
interest. When each larva reached the third instar we also recorded
mass measurements which were taken with an electronic balance which
measured to the nearest hundredth of a gram. We continued to monitor
and record data until the larvae pupated. When larvae reached the fourth
instar, they were transferred to clear plastic cups with covers for
larvae to pupate on .
Results
Mass Measurements
Mass measurements were taken daily
beginning with the first day of the 3rd instar. Our electronic balances
were not able
to get readings on younger instars. Analysis was done using the mass
on the final day of the 3rd and 4th instars and the third day of the
5th instar. We did not wish to disturb the larvae for measurements
as they neared the pupation stage. See the graph in figure 1 to examine
results. A t-test was run on this data. Average masses for both treatments
in the 3rd instar were 0.07 grams resulting in a t-value of 0. In the
4th instar, the average was 0.27 grams for chorion eaters and 0.31
grams for non-chorion eaters resulting in a t-value of 1.00. The 5th
instars showed an average mass at the end of the third day of 1.19
grams for the chorion eaters and 1.24 grams for the non-chorion eaters
resulting in a t-value of 1.04. With a critical t-value of 1.671 and
values of p>0.100 for all comparisons, no significant difference
was found in relation to mass for chorion versus non-chorion eaters.

Figure 1. This graph shows the average mass increase for
3rd to 5th instars of chorion eaters and non-chorion eaters.
Length
Measurements
Length measurements were taken daily
beginning with the second day. Analysis was done using the length
measurements on the
final day of each of the 1st through 4th instars and the third day
of the 5th instar. See the graph in figure 2 to compare the results.
The length at the end of the 1st instar averaged 4.72 mm for chorion
eaters versus 4.76 mm for non-chorion eaters. The resulting t-value
was 0.4106. Averages for the 2nd instar were 8.2 mm for chorion eaters
and 8.2 mm for non-chorion eaters resulting in a t-value of 0.17733.
The average length of the 3rd instars was 13.8 mm for chorion eaters
and 13.8 mm for non-chorion eaters. The resulting t-value was 0.087.
Averages for the 4th instar were 24.0 mm for chorion eaters and 24.3
mm for non-chorion eaters with a t-value of 0.49. After the third day
of the 5th instar, average length for chorion eaters was 41.4 mm and
for non-chorion eaters was 40.0 mm. This generated a t- value of 1.565.
With a critical value of 1.671 and p>0.100 for all comparisons,
we found no significant difference in length for chorion versus non-chorion
eaters.

Figure 2. This graph gives the comparison in average length
of larvae from the day after hatching to the 3rd day of the 5th instar.
Time Spent
in Instars (see graph in figure 3)
Each day the instar was recorded
and averages were later calculated to determine the average time spent
in each instar. Sample sizes ranged from 74 to 88 larvae for various
test groups. T-tests were run on the data for each instar. The 1st
instar had averages of 2.46 days for chorion eaters and 2.89 days for
non-chorion eaters resulting in a t-value of 2.3 with 0.010<p<0.025.
We can be about 98% confident that there is a significant difference
in the amount of time spent in the 1st instar. We found that the non-chorion
eaters spent about a half day more in the first instar. We can thus
reject our null hypothesis that there is no difference in development
time between the two treatments.
In the 2nd instar the average time
spent was 2.22 days for chorion eaters and 2.24 days for non-chorion
eaters with a t-value
of 0.11. Averages for the 3rd instar were 2.17 days for chorion eaters
and 2.19 days for non-chorion eaters resulting in a t-value of 0.087.
The average time spent in the 4th instar was 2.58 days for chorion
eaters and 2.69 days for non-chorion eaters resulting in a t-value
of 0.49. Since the critical value of t would be 1.671, p>0.100 ,
no significant difference was found for the time spent in the 2nd to
4th instars between chorion and non-chorion eaters.
In the 5th instar, averages were 4.93
days for chorion eaters and 4.64 days for non-chorion eaters. The
t-value was 1.81 with
0.025<p<0.05. We can be 95% confident that there is a significant
difference in the amount of time spent in the 5th instar. The chorion
eaters spent a bit longer in the 5th instar also but the difference
was not quite as great as in the 1st instar.

Figure 3. This graph depicts the average number of days our
larvae spent in each instar. In compares chorion eaters to non-chorion
eaters.
Survival
Rates
We collected data on survival rates
in two areas and ran two Chi-square tests. For survival rates by
individual testers,
a Chi-square value of 21.01 with five degrees of freedom, this was
highly significant with a p-value < 0.001. We are 99.9% confident
that some testers kept their larvae alive better than others (see graph
in figure 4).

Figure 4. This graph shows the result of comparing survival
rates of larvae among individual testers.
(a)
| Tester |
Lived |
Died |
Total |
| 1 |
29 |
1 |
30 |
| 2 |
25 |
5 |
30 |
| 3 |
33 |
0 |
33 |
| 4 |
28 |
2 |
30 |
| 5 |
26 |
4 |
30 |
| 6 |
20 |
10 |
30 |
| Total |
161 |
22 |
183 |
(b)
| Tester |
Lived |
Died |
Total |
| 1 |
29 |
3.6 |
30 |
| 2 |
25 |
3.6 |
30 |
| 3 |
33 |
4.0 |
33 |
| 4 |
28 |
4.0 |
30 |
| 5 |
26 |
4.0 |
30 |
| 6 |
20 |
4.0 |
30 |
| Total |
161 |
22 |
183 |
Table 1. Chi-square tables for
(a) observed and (b) expected survival of larvae among individual
testers.
For survival rates for chorion
versus non-chorion eaters, the Chi-square value was 0.0902 with one
degree of freedom (see table 1). Since the p-value for this is greater
than 0.100, we cannot reject the null hypothesis that there is no significant
difference in survival for chorion versus non-chorion eaters. (see
graphs in figure 6 and 7)

Figure 5. Percent survival
of chorion eaters and non-chorion eaters.
(a)
| |
Lived |
Died |
Total |
| Chorion eaters |
75 |
11 |
86 |
| Non-chorion eaters |
86 |
11 |
97 |
| Total |
161 |
22 |
183 |
(b)
| |
Lived |
Died |
Total |
| Chorion eaters |
75.66 |
10.34 |
86 |
| Non-chorion eaters |
85.34 |
11.66 |
97 |
| Total |
161 |
22 |
183 |
Table 2. Chi-square tables for
(a) observed and (b) expected survival of chorion eaters versus non-chorion
eaters.
Discussion
After evaluating our data on chorion
eaters versus non-chorion eaters, we found significant differences
in the amount of time spent in 1st and 5th instars between chorion
eaters and non-chorion eaters. Differences also existed in terms of
survival rates by individual testers but not between our two experimental
treatments.
In both length and mass we found no significant difference
between chorion eaters and non-chorion eaters. We cannot reject our
null hypotheses of no difference in relation to length and mass. During
our daily recordings, we found accurate length measurements were difficult
to obtain since larvae were very active. Length varied within a few
seconds by five or more millimeters in the later instars. In addition,
the larvae when nearing molting seemed to contract and decrease in
length.
In our experiment we found the most
significant differences existed in relation to the length of time
larvae spent in the 1st and
5th instars. We are 98% confident of the significant difference in
the 1st instar. Chorion eaters spent about a half day less in the 1st
instar. This would give the 1st instar larvae that ate its chorion
a survival advantage over those that didnt. Organisms that develop
or grow more slowly could suffer more predation.
Our statistical results on the 5th instar larvae indicate
that we can be 95% confident that there is a significant difference
in time spent as a 5th instar. This difference is not what we might
expect; chorion eaters spent more time in the 5th instar. However,
we are not sure of the mechanism that could cause this difference,
and would like to see further studies on the time spent in each instar
in the future.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank those members of our families
who were patient and supportive and helped us in many ways to complete
this research project. A special thanks goes to Jane Pulis and Steve
Naber for their assistance in building larvae and adult cages so that
we could rear adults to lay enough eggs for our research. Thank you
also to friends who helped monitor and care for the larvae at times,
and our colleagues who helped provide us with supplies. Our gratitude
goes to Karen Oberhauser and her daughter, Leah. They spent many hours
helping us crunch numbers and analyze other data. Karen was our source
of encouragement and inspiration when things got tougher. We are very
appreciative of the support given us by our school district and especially
our building principal at Mississippi Heights Middle School, Bonnie
Strobbe.
We are grateful that the Monarchs in the Classroom program
at the University of Minnesota, the Science Museum of Minnesota, and
the National Science Foundation combined their efforts to provide this
wonderful program for teachers and students. In addition to their financial
support, the staff that they provided were truly dedicated individuals.
Literature
Cited
Pascucci,
T., J. Perrino, A. P. Mahowald and G. L. Waring. 1996. Eggshell
assembly in Drosophila: processing and localization of vitelline membrane
and chorion proteins. Developmental
Biology 177(2): 590-598.
|