|
Mary Beth Carpenter, Autumn White,
Gary Smith, Anna Carpenter
Heart of the Earth Center
for American Indian Education
Minneapolis, MN
Abstract
| Introduction |
Methods | Results
| Discussion | Acknowledgements
| Research Projects
Abstract
We tested whether Danaus plexippus larvae
and pupae matured faster on Asclepias syriaca milkweed with
herbivory or without herbivory. We found no difference in either
the rate of development, adult mass or wing length between those
raised on herbivorized and those raised on non-herbivorized milkweed.
However, results may be inconclusive because of high loss of larvae
from one treatment.
Introduction
In our experiment we wanted to determine whether the
maturation rate of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) varied
depending on whether the larvae ate common milkweed (Asclepias
syriaca) with herbivory or not. We suspected that ovipositing
females might choose one plant over another based on the degree
of herbivory of the plants. We knew that latex flows differently
in herbivorized milkweed. We suspected that perhaps larvae raised
on herbivorized milkweed might mature more quickly, giving them
an advantage in survival, since larvae are so vulnerable during
this stage of their life cycle.
We were also curious about the size of monarch adults
raised on herbivorized versus non-herbivorized common milkweed.
The wing length and weight of the adults is a measure of fitness
and we thought a bigger butterfly might be a better butterfly, with
a greater chance of withstanding a flight to Mexico or of successfully
mating and laying eggs.
Questions
- Is there a difference in the development rate of
monarch (Danaus plexippus) larvae raised on common milkweed
plants (Asclepias syriaca) with herbivory or without herbivory?
- Is there a difference in the mass and wing size
between adult monarchs raised on common milkweed with herbivory
and those raised on common milkweed without herbivory?
Hypotheses
Question 1:
H0=There is no difference in the maturation
rate of larvae (Danaus plexippus) raised on common milkweed
(Asclepias syriaca) with herbivory versus those raised on
common milkweed without herbivory.
HA1=Larvae raised on common milkweed with
herbivory will mature faster than those raised on common milkweed
without herbivory.
HA2=Larvae raised on common milkweed without
herbivory will mature faster than those raised on common milkweed
with herbivory.
Question 2:
H0=There is no difference in the mass and
wing size between adult monarchs raised on common milkweed with
or without herbivory.
HA1=Adult monarchs raised on common milkweed
with herbivory will have greater mass and greater wing size than
those raised on common milkweed without herbivory.
HA2=Adult monarchs raised on common milkweed
without herbivory will have greater mass and greater wing size than
those raised on common milkweed with herbivory.
Methods
Materials
- 2 small cages (2x2) to hold 4 potted
common milkweed plants for each treatment
- 1 large walk-in cage to hold 60 potted milkweed
plants
- 30 monarch (Danaus plexippus) mature eggs
- 8 third and fourth instars of Danaus plexippus
- 60 common milkweed plants (Asclepias syriaca)
- Small paint brush from childs watercolor
set to transfer larvae
Procedure
To test for the effect of herbivory on monarch development,
we set up our experiment with two treatments: larvae reared on plants
with recent herbivory and larvae reared on plants with no herbivory
(see Picture 1). In each treatment, a 0.75 x 0.75 x 0.75 meter cage
was set up to house 3 potted plants and 15 monarchs, starting as
eggs. Since not all eggs hatched on the same day, we placed the
first 15 instars in the treatment without herbivory and the remaining
15 instars in the cage with herbivory. Cages were placed outdoors
in an area shaded between 11:00 am and 2:00 pm. Larvae were fed
fresh milkweed daily and kept in these cages until adult emergence.
 |
 |
| Picture 1. Small cages,
one containing plants with herbivory and one containing
plants without herbivory. |
Picture 2.
Large walk-in cage for all milkweed plants. |
Since the effect of herbivory on a plant may vary
depending on the age and size of the herbivore, we needed to establish
a method for generating a consistant amount of damage to our plants.
To generate a relatively consistent degree of herbivory, we allowed
separate third and fourth instar larvae (not used in either treatment)
to feed on potted milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) plants for
one day and then used these plants in the herbivory treatment. We
kept other potted milkweed plants, intended for the non-herbivory
treatment, in a large screened tent to eliminate unintended herbivory
(see Picture 2).
Once larvae in each treatment were of sufficient size
to cause noticeable herbivory, we used these larvae as our "herbivores,"
reusing the potted plants from the non-herbivory treatment a second
day in the herbivory treatment. The larvae were removed from the
potted plants in the non-herbivory treatment and the plants were
transferred to the herbivory treatment. This was done to reduce
the total number of plants used in this experiment. In all cases,
plants placed in the herbivory treatment were subjected to only
one day of herbivory prior to placement in the treatment.
To minimize an effects of handling, we transferred
larvae from old plants to new plants using a small paintbrush, attempting
to place the larvae in about the same place on the new plant as
it was on the old. We transferred larvae inside each cage since
larvae often roll off the plants when disturbed and are easily lost.
We recorded obvious changes in larval development; however, we did
not measure instar length as this often decreases after each molt.
To determine the effect of herbivory on adult fitness,
we measured adult mass, right and left forewing length, and presence
of disease. We took 1 day old adults to the University of Minnesota
monarch lab to weigh, measure and spore-check (checking for the
presence of disease) and then release them.
Results
We lost a significant number of larvae in our experiment
due to extreme weather, parasitism and escape. Because of the high
loss of larvae in the cage without herbivory, it was very difficult
to draw authentic conclusions from our data. Out of 15 larvae in
the treatment without herbivory, only three survived to become adults
(see Table 1), primarily due to escape through small holes in the
cage netting. We lost some of our larvae to extreme weather conditions
on June 22, from both cages, although we attempted to remedy this
situation by placing plywood over the cages for protection. We also
lost two larvae to parasites that must have come in with the milkweed.
Although our preference was to conduct this experiment under semi-natural
conditions, we would recommend, whenever possible, conducting experiments
of this nature in the lab where conditions can be more easily controlled.
Table 1: Mortality among larvae
and adult monarchs.
*Because the milkweed was kept in a large walk-in cage that was
not completely enclosed, parasites and predators to the larvae were
able to get on the milkweed, which was taken directly from the large
tent and placed in the small cage.
|
|
Reasons
for Mortality |
| Larvae
raised on plants
|
With Herbivory |
2
died making their chrysalis 1 died after
emerging when it fell |
| Without
Herbivory |
1
died as a first instar in the milkweed sap 1
lost in grass during transfer to knew plant
1 parasitized as fifth instar in the J position*
1 parasitized in chrysalis*
8 escaped through holes in the net of the cage |
Table 2 lists the number of days to emergence for
larvae in each treatment. In the treatment with herbivory, the average
number of days to emerge was 27.3 days. The average number of days
to emerge in the treatment without herbivory was 27.7 days. Table
3 lists the adult fitness data in chronological order. For a comparison
of fitness data, see Table 4. On average, the mass of adults reared
on plants with herbivory was 0.537 grams while the mass of adults
reared on plants without herbivory was 0.562 grams. Average left
forewing lengths were 51.6 mm and 52.4 mm in treatments with herbivory
and without herbivory respectively.
Table 2: Days it took larvae from hatching to
emerging. Note that individuals were not followed, but were grouped
together in the cages.
| Days
from hatching to emerging |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
| Number
of larvae raised on plants
|
With
Herbivory |
1 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
| Without
Herbivory |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 3: Measurement data on adult Monarchs (Danaus
plexippus).
*Measured on the second day after it emerged.
| date emerged |
treatment |
spores |
Sex |
mass
(grams) |
left
forewing
(mm) |
Right
forewing
(mm) |
| 7/14/99 |
With herb. |
no |
F |
.485 |
51.61 |
51.87 |
| 7/15/99 |
With herb. |
no |
M |
.434 |
49.81 |
50.30 |
| 7/15/99 |
With herb. |
no |
F |
.399 |
47.78 |
47.60 |
| 7/15/99 |
With herb. |
no |
F |
.480 |
51.84 |
51.28 |
| 7/15/99 |
With herb. |
no |
M |
.578 |
53.14 |
52.46 |
| 7/15/99 |
Without herb. |
no |
M |
.549 |
50.38 |
50.48 |
| 7/16/99 |
With herb. |
no |
M |
.471 |
51.07 |
50.63 |
| 7/16/99 |
Without herb. |
no |
M |
.626 |
54.87 |
54.58 |
| 7/16/99 |
Without herb. |
no |
F |
.510 |
52.09 |
51.77 |
| 7/16/99 |
With herb. |
no |
F |
.452 |
48.64 |
49.04 |
| 7/17/99 |
With herb. |
no |
F |
.544 |
51.28 |
51.30 |
| 7/17/99 |
With herb. |
no |
M |
.685 |
53.92 |
53.62 |
| 7/17/99 |
With herb. |
no |
F |
.553 |
50.38 |
50.97 |
| 7/18/99 |
With herb. |
no |
M |
.718 |
55.52 |
55.90 |
| 7/18/99* |
With herb. |
no |
M |
.645 |
53.79 |
54.51 |
| 7/20/99 |
With herb. |
Died after
emerging when it fell to the floor of the cage and was caught
between the netting and the frame. |
Table 4: Days to maturation, mass and left forewing
length for larvae raised on plants with and without herbivory.
| Averages |
Days from hatching to
emerging |
Adult mass (grams) |
Left forewing length
(mm) |
| With herbivory |
27.3 days |
.537 grams |
51.6 mm |
| Without herbivory |
27.7 days |
.562 grams |
52.4 mm |
Data Table 5: T-test results indicate we cannot
reject our null hypotheses.
| |
tcalculated |
tcritical at the
95% confidence level |
| Days from hatching to
emerging |
2.65 |
2.92 |
| Mass |
0.529 |
2.92 |
| Left forewing length |
0.598 |
2.92 |
Discussion
Table 5 shows the results of our statistical analysis.
In all measures, there was not a significant difference between
treatments. We therefore cannot reject either of our null hypotheses.
First, there is no difference in the maturation rate of larvae raised
on milkweed with herbivory versus those raised on milkweed without
herbivory.
Secondly, there is no difference in the mass and wing
size between adult monarchs raised on common milkweed with or without
herbivory. However, because of the high loss of larvae from the
cage with no herbivory and the low sample size of adults from this
cage, these results are inconclusive.
Further investigation needs to be done. If we were
to do this again, we would conduct the experiment inside to reduce
weather effects. We would also track individual larvae, in separate
cages, to determine individual development rates. This would eliminate
the problem of not having thirty eggs hatch on the same day. Lastly,
we would also like to include artificially created herbivory to
insure uniformity in the herbivory.
Further questions
- Are bigger butterflies more successful at mating?
- Do bigger butterflies stand a greater chance of
reaching Mexico?
- How far do larvae travel to find milkweed?
- Are males generally bigger than females?
- Are there sex differences of adults raised on milkweed
with herbivory or without?
Acknowledgments
The Heart of the Earth team would like to gratefully
acknowledge the dedication and cooperation of Liz Goehring. She
was unwavering in her support of our effort, and demonstrated a
great deal of patience. Our utmost thanks go to Dr. Karen Oberhauser,
whose vision, dedication and energy have made this program possible.
It was of tremendous benefit to all members of our team.
Back
to top | Interactions with Milkweed
| Student/Teacher Research
| Research Topics
| Site Overview
|