|

Art Evans, Leland Goertz, Bethany Leach,
Martin Phillips, Justin Sanderson, Stephanie Spurgat
Texas Military Institute, San
Antonio, TX
Abstract
| Introduction | Methods
| Results | Discussion
| Acknowledgements | Literature
Cited | Research Projects
Abstract
The purpose of our experiment was to examine how a
caterpillar (4th or 5th instar) finds milkweed
in a field with other plants and scents. We tested monarch larval
use of visual, chemical, or both stimuli to find milkweed. We built
a Terrarri-quad to provide four options for the larvae's sensory
perception: (1) scent only, (2) visual only, (3) both scent and
visual, or (4) neither visual nor scent. Each caterpillar was individually
placed facing a pre-determined direction in the middle of the Terrarri-quad.
Seventy-nine larvae were tested with 30 not going to any specific
quadrant, 29 to the chemical stimulus only, 5 to visual only, 14
to the quadrant with both stimuli, and 1 to the quadrant with the
control plant, Salvia. Our data suggest that monarch larvae
primarily use chemical stimuli to find milkweed plants.
Introduction
At our school, milkweed plants are sparsely distributed,
with only about 0.008 plants per square meter. Monarch larvae have
small eyes that are very similar to a single adult ommatidium and
that allow the larvae to see ultraviolet light and colors (Scott
1986). These eyes may help larvae find their hostplants, but olfactory
strucutures may also be important in locating milkweed by allowing
larvae to detect chemicals emitted from plants (Scott 1986). If
this is so, which cues do they use more? We were wondering how the
larvae get from their host plant to another milkweed plant. We produced
four hypotheses.
Hypotheses
Hal : Monarch caterpillars use visual stimuli
to find milkweed.
Ha2 : Monarch caterpillars use chemical
stimuli to find milkweed.
H01 : Monarch caterpillars use both chemical
and visual stimuli to find milkweed.
H02 : Monarch caterpillars use neither
chemical nor visual stimuli to find milkweed.
Methods
We built an open cage called a Terrarri-quad, and
we kept it open so that the larvae could have a more realistic environment.
In their real environment, milkweed plants emit chemicals into the
air. If we had enclosed our cage, the scents from the plant would
have been stronger than normal. We built this cage out of Plexiglas.
The Terrarri-quad had four quadrants and was in the shape of a cross
(Figure 1). All quadrants were one foot in length, height, and width.
The first quadrant was separated from the rest of
the Terrarri-quad by a brown wall to prevent the larvae from seeing
the milkweed plant. The wall had small holes in it to allow the
plant chemicals to pass through, and a long short opening at the
bottom to allow the larvae to crawl underneath the wall into the
quadrant (Figure 2). To prevent larvae from seeing the plant through
the bottom opening, we built up a mound of dirt that stretched from
one side of the quadrant to the other. This quadrant presented larvae
with chemical stimuli only.
(a)
(b) 
Figure 1. The Terrari-quad (a: photo, b: diagram), our experimental
cage,
contained four quadrants from which the larvae could choose.

Figure 2. An opaque wall with small holes separated
quadrant 1 (chemical only) from the rest of the Terrari-quad.
In quadrant two, which contained the salvia, we had
no wall; we left it open. The salvia was our control plant. We had
a control plant because fields have more kinds of plants that just
milkweed. It is possible that larvae use neither visual nor chemical
cues to find milkweed plants. They might move from plant to plant
and need to actually make contact with a plant to determine whether
its milkweed. If monarch larvae use neither visual nor chemical
cues, they should go to a non-milkweed plant as often as to a milkweed
plant. Quadrant 2 presented larvae with a plant that gave neither
visual nor chemical cues associated with milkweed.
In quadrant three, we had a clear wall and ceiling
separating milkweed from the rest of the Terrarri-quad. The clear
wall allowed larvae to see, but not smell, the milkweed. This way,
the larvae could use their visual stimuli only to find the milkweed.
In quadrant four, we had no wall separating a milkweed
plant from the rest of the Terrari-quad. We left it open so that
the larvae could use both their visual and chemical stimuli to find
the milkweed stalk.
We furnished the Terrarri-quad with a layer of potting
soil, and we put fresh milkweed for each day of trials in quadrants
one, three, and four. We put salvia, our control plant, in quadrant
two. The plants were collected from our school's butterfly garden.
When bringing the salvia and milkweed stalks into our lab, we made
sure they did not touch; otherwise, the scents of the plants would
rub onto each other and confuse the results. One caterpillar was
tested per trial. For each trial, a caterpillar was placed in the
middle of the Terrarri-quad. A trial lasted ten minutes. We monitored
the larva's every move. We kept the time going even if the larvae
went into several different quadrans during one 10-minute period.
At the end of each trial, we recorded which quadrant the caterpillar
was in. If it had crawled up the walls of either quadrant one or
quadrant three, we counted it as being in that specific quadrant.
If the larva did not go to any specific quadrant, it was counted
as "no choice." We tested 79 larvae total. We recorded
what we observed on our pre-determined data sheet (Figure 3).
We received three mated female adult monarchs from
the University of Minnesota and collected about 100 eggs from them.
We fed the hatched larvae Asclepias currasavica, and
used the same kind of milkweed in our experiment. We proceeded
to raise the larvae that we had. When the larvae reached the 4th
or 5th instar stage, we tested them using the methods
described above. With each trial we placed the monarch caterpillar
in a pre-determined direction in the middle of the Terrarri-quad.
We determined the direction by placing the larvae toward a different
quadrant for each trial. After testing the larvae, we dove into
statistical testing. We used the Chi-square test to analyze our
data.
| Date |
Observer |
Instar |
Time |
Pointed Toward |
Results |
Observations |
| 9/20/00 |
JS,
MP, SS |
4th |
9:50
10:00 |
Q1 |
Q4 |
Toward
Q1, then into Q4 |
| 10/02/00 |
BL,
SS, MP |
5th |
3:55
4:05 |
Q3 |
Q1 |
Turned
around and went into Q1 |
Figure 3: Sample data collected
using predetermined data sheets
Results
Of the 79 complete observations, 30 of the larvae
did not make a choice because they remained or ended up in the middle.
Of those that made a choice, 29 went to quadrant one, 1 went to
quadrant two, 5 went to quadrant three, and 14 went to quadrant
four (Figure 4). There was a significant difference between the
quadrants in the number of larvae that chose each one (c
2 = 37.77, 3 d.f., p < 0.005). More larvae
than expected went to Quadrant 1 (chemical only) while fewer than
expected went to Quadrants 2 (neither cue) and 3 (visual only).
These data suggest that monarch larvae primarily use chemical stimuli
to find milkweed. We observed that an overwhelming amount of larvae
(around 59%) went to the chemical stimuli quadrant. Very few went
to the control quadrant, which held the control plant salvia. About
10% went to the visual quadrant, and 29% went to the quadrant with
both visual and chemical stimuli.

Figure 4: Summary of larval destinations. The numbers shown
correlate with the quadrants depicted in Figure 1.
Quadrant 1, chemical; Quadrant 2, control; Quadrant 3, visual; Quadrant
4; visual and chemical.
Besides this information, we had additional
questions. One of those questions is "Is there a correlation
between when the larvae were fed and if they made a choice?"
We fed larvae twice each day, in the morning and early afternoon.
Although we did not plan to feed larvae at different intervals before
testing them, our schedules were such that about half of the larvae
were tested in the morning and half in the afternoon. We did not
feed larvae immediately before testing them, so those tested in
the morning had been fed the afternoon before (about 16 hours prior)
and those tested in the afternoon had been fed in the morning of
the same day (about 8 hours prior). We thought that the larvae fed
16 hours earlier may be hungrier than the larvae fed 8 hours earlier
and therefore more likely to reach a quadrant faster. However, we
found no correlation between when they were fed and whether they
made a choice (c 2 = 1.91,
1 d.f., p > 0.1) (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Observed number of larvae entering various quadrants
after 8 or 16 hours of feeding.
The last question we tested was "Is
there a correlation between the way the caterpillars faced and the
way they went?" We found that there was no correlation between
the way the caterpillars faced and the way they went (c
2 = 7.64, 9 d.f., p >0.1) (Table 1). This means
that the larvae actually chose which direction they went, and we
did not determine it by facing them in a particular direction at
the start of each trial.
| |
|
Direction
of Travel |
| |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
| Direction
Larva Faced Initially |
Q1 |
7 |
2 |
0 |
5 |
| Q2 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
| Q3 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
| Q4 |
9 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
Table 1: Summary of number of
larvae found in various quadrants and the direction they faced.
Discussion
Many of the larvae we tested remained in the middle
portion of the Terrarri-quad during the ten- minute period. We were
not sure why the larvae did not make a choice. It may have been
because they were not very hungry, or maybe they were ready
to molt at the time of the experiment. The larvae could have possibly
been a little "stunned" by the new environment. Also,
we do not know why most of the larvae that made a choice went to
the 1st quadrant, which was the chemical only quadrant.
It may have been because they were attracted to the opaque wall
of the 1st quadrant. It could have been because chemical
cues are the most important, but that leaves the question of why
more larvae went to the quadrant with only chemical cues than the
quadrant with both chemical and visual cues. Although fewer larvae
went to quadrant 4 (both visual and chemical cues) than to the chemical
cue only quadrant, more chose the quadrant with both cues than the
quadrants with either visual only or neither cue. These data suggest
that while larvae might have been attracted to the opaque wall of
the chemical only quadrant, there were important differences between
the quadrants with and without chemical cues. This supports the
hypothesis that monarch larvae use mainly chemical stimuli to find
milkweed.
In conclusion, we have learned that monarch larvae
probably use chemical stimuli as their main method of finding milkweed
plants. We think they use chemical stimuli because the larvaes
eyes are not developmentally advanced enough to create a complete
image; therefore, they must rely on chemical cues.
Acknowledgments
The Texas Military Institute MS Monarch
Team would like to thank:
- The National Science Foundation for providin a
grant that allowed us to study Danaus plexippus
- Michelle Solensky for helping us with our statistical
analysis and other experimental difficulties
- Karen Oberhauser for running the Monarch Workshops
- Bill Calvert for co-running the Monarch Workshops
- Leland Goertz and Art Evans for being our sponsors
and building the Terrari-quad
- Mary Kennedy for helping us raise the larvae and
providing the opportunity for us to learn science
- Allison Mifflin, Adrianne Borrego, Kathryn Willingham,
Sarah Vellom, and Jennifer Bowes for helping us raise the larvae
- Sandy Rodie for creating a garden with milkweed
in it
- Texas Military Institute for allowing us to study
monarch butterflies
Literature Cited
Scott, James A. 1986. The Butterflies of North
America. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 38-41.
Back
to top | Interactions with Milkweed
| Student/Teacher Research
| Research Topics
| Site Overview
|