Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ph5wq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T15:11:24.930Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Feeding performance of the larval stag beetle Aegus chelifer (Coleoptera: Lucanidae) explains adult body size variation and sexual dimorphism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2021

Nut Songvorawit*
Affiliation:
Behavioural Ecology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok10330, Thailand Intergrative Ecology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok10330, Thailand
Buntika Areekul Butcher
Affiliation:
Intergrative Ecology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok10330, Thailand Centre of Excellence in Entomology: Bee Biology, Biodiversity of Insects and Mites, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok10330, Thailand
Chatchawan Chaisuekul
Affiliation:
Intergrative Ecology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok10330, Thailand Centre of Excellence in Entomology: Bee Biology, Biodiversity of Insects and Mites, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok10330, Thailand
*
*Corresponding author. Email: nut.so@chula.ac.th

Abstract

In stag beetle larvae, food availability is considered a major cause of body size variation in adults, but this has not been explicitly tested. To evaluate wood use and the effects of food quantity on growth and adult body size, the feeding performance of the tropical stag beetle Aegus chelifer MacLeay (Coleoptera: Lucanidae), which is widely distributed in Southeast Asia, was investigated by rearing larvae with different food quantities. Apparent digestibility was approximately 9%, and the efficiency of conversion of ingested food ranged from 0.7% to 1.7%. Feeding period, total food consumption, and adult body size significantly increased alongside food quantity. Males had higher consumption rates than females did at the same larval weight due to shorter food retention time. Males showed greater variation in feeding, growth performance, and adult body size than females. Differences in feeding performance that depend on food availability may enhance their fitness and may further result in sexual differences and adult body size variation.

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Entomological Society of Canada

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Leah Flaherty

References

Alford, R.A. and Harris, R.N. 1988. Effects of larval growth history on anuran metamorphosis. American Naturalist, 131: 91106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banno, H. 1984. The effect of various plants on the growth and food utilization of the larvae of Neptis sappho intermedia WB Pryer (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Japanese Journal of Ecology, 34: 914.Google Scholar
Banno, H. and Yamagami, A. 1989. Food consumption and conversion efficiency of the larvae of Eupromus ruber (Dalman) (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Applied Entomology and Zoology, 24: 174179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanco, C.A., Perera, O., Ray, J.D., Taliercio, E., and Williams, L., III. 2006. Incorporation of rhodamine B into male tobacco budworm moths, Heliothis virescens, to use as a marker for mating studies. Journal of Insect Science, 6: 110.Google ScholarPubMed
Cook, J.M. and Bean, D. 2006. Cryptic male dimorphism and fighting in a fig wasp. Animal Behaviour, 71: 10951101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damgaard, C. and Weiner, J. 2000. Describing inequality in plant size or fecundity. Ecology, 81: 11391142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillon, R.J. and Dillon, V.M. 2004. The gut bacteria of insects: nonpathogenic interactions. Annual Reviews in Entomology, 49: 7192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doležal, P., Habuštová, O., and Sehnal, F. 2007. Effects of photoperiod and temperature on the rate of larval development, food conversion efficiency, and imaginal diapause in Leptinotarsa decemlineata . Journal of Insect Physiology, 53: 849857.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ek-Amnuay, P. 2008. Beetles of Thailand. Amarin Printing and Publishing Public, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
Ek-Amnuay, P. 2009. Breeding and rearing beetles. Amarin Printing and Publishing Public, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
Emlen, D.J. 1997. Diet alters male horn allometry in the beetle Onthophagus acuminatus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 264: 567574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emlen, D.J. 2000. Integrating development with evolution: a case study with beetle horns – results from studies of the mechanisms of horn development shed new light on our understanding of beetle horn evolution. Bioscience, 50: 403418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emlen, D.J. and Allen, C.E. 2003. Genotype to phenotype: physiological control of trait size and scaling in insects. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 43: 617634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emlen, D.J., Lavine, L.C., and Ewen-Campen, B. 2007. On the origin and evolutionary diversification of beetle horns. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104: 86618668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engel, P. and Moran, N.A. 2013. The gut microbiota of insects: diversity in structure and function. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 37: 699735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fremlin, M. and Hendriks, P. 2014. Number of instars of Lucanus cervus (Coleoptera: Lucanidae) larvae. Entomologische Berichten, 74: 115120.Google Scholar
Gayahan, G.G. and Tschinkel, W.R. 2008. Fire ants, Solenopsis invicta, dry and store insect pieces for later use. Journal of Insect Science, 8: 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotoh, H., Cornette, R., Koshikawa, S., Okada, Y., Lavine, L.C., Emlen, D.J., and Miura, T. 2011. Juvenile hormone regulates extreme mandible growth in male stag beetles. PLOS One, 6: e21139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gotoh, H., Fukaya, K., and Miura, T. 2012. Heritability of male mandible length in the stag beetle Cyclommatus metallifer . Entomological Science, 15: 430433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, D.J. and Gange, A.C. 2006. Size variation and mating success in the stag beetle, Lucanus cervus . Physiological Entomology, 31: 218226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, D.J., Gange, A.C., Hawes, C.J., Rink, M., Abdehalden, M., Fulaij, N.A., et al. 2011. Bionomics and distribution of the stag beetle, Lucanus cervus (L.), across Europe. Insect Conservation and Diversity, 4: 2338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriksen, N.B. 1991. Gut load and food-retention time in the earthworms Lumbricus festivus and L. castaneus: a field study. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 11: 170173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holter, P. 1973. A chromic oxide method for measuring consumption in dung-eating Aphodius larvae. Oikos, 24: 117122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hosking, G.P. and Hutcheson, J.A. 1979. Nutritional basis for feeding zone preference of Arhopalus ferus (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science, 9: 185192.Google Scholar
Iguchi, Y. 1998. Horn dimorphism of Allomyrina dichotoma septentrionalis (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) affected by larval nutrition. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 91: 845847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karino, K., Seki, N., and Chiba, M. 2004. Larval nutritional environment determines adult size in Japanese horned beetles, Allomyrina dichotoma . Ecological Research, 19: 663668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kawano, K. 2002. Character displacement in giant rhinoceros beetles. The American Naturalist, 159: 255271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kawano, K. 2003. Character displacement in stag beetles (Coleoptera: Lucanidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 96: 503511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kawano, K. 2006. Sexual dimorphism and the making of oversized male characters in beetles (Coleoptera). Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 99: 327341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kienzle, E., Schrag, I., Butterwick, R., and Opitz, B. 2001. Calculation of gross energy in pet foods: new data on heat combustion and fibre analysis in a selection of foods for dogs and cats. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 85: 148157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimura, F.T. and Miller, V.L. 1957. Chromic oxide measurement, improved determination of chromic oxide in cow feed and feces. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 5: 216216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köprücü, K. and Özdemir, Y. 2005. Apparent digestibility of selected feed ingredients for Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Aquaculture, 250: 308316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotiaho, J.S. and Tomkins, J.L. 2001. The discrimination of alternative male morphologies. Behavioral Ecology, 12: 553557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, S., Tigreros, N., Fedina, T., and Ming, Q. 2012. Genetic and nutritional effects on male traits and reproductive performance in Tribolium flour beetles. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 25: 438451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Magura, T., Tóthmérész, B., and Lövei, G.L. 2006. Body size inequality of carabids along an urbanisation gradient. Basic and Applied Ecology, 7: 472482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, M.M., Jones, C., and Bernays, E. 1991. The evolution of cellulose digestion in insects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 333: 281288.Google Scholar
Mascari, T.M. and Foil, L.D. 2009. Evaluation of rhodamine B as an orally delivered biomarker for rodents and a feed-through transtadial biomarker for phlebotomine sand flies (Diptera: Psychodidae). Journal of Medical Entomology, 46: 11311137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGinnis, A. and Kasting, R. 1964. Digestion in insects, colorimetric analysis of chromic oxide used to study food utilization by phytophagous insects. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 12: 259262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizunuma, T. and Nagai, S. 1994. Sekai no kuwagatamushi daizukan: the lucanid beetles of the world. Mushisha, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Moczek, A.P. 1998. Horn polyphenism in the beetle Onthophagus taurus: larval diet quality and plasticity in parental investment determine adult body size and male horn morphology. Behavioral Ecology, 9: 636641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moczek, A.P. 2002. Allometric plasticity in a polyphenic beetle. Ecological Entomology, 27: 5867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nijhout, H.F. 1975. A threshold size for metamorphosis in the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta (L.). The Biological Bulletin, 149: 214225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinratana, A. and Maes, J.M. 2003. Lucanidae of Thailand. Sunprinting, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2020. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from https://www.R-project.org/ [accessed 1 May 2021].Google Scholar
Rohlf, F.J. 2013. tpsDIG. Version 2.17. Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York, United States of America.Google Scholar
Seaman, J.W. Jr, Walls, S.C., Wise, S.E., and Jaeger, R.G. 1994. Caveat emptor: rank transform methods and interaction. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 9: 261263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shafiei, M., Moczek, A.P., and Nijhout, H.F. 2001. Food availability controls the onset of metamorphosis in the dung beetle, Onthophagus taurus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Physiological Entomology, 26: 173180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Songvorawit, N., Butcher, B.A., and Chaisuekul, C. 2017a. Decaying wood preference of stag beetles (Coleoptera: Lucanidae) in a tropical dry–evergreen forest. Environmental Entomology, 46: 13221328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Songvorawit, N., Butcher, B.A., and Chaisuekul, C. 2017b. Different allometric intercepts in major Aegus chelifer chelifer stag beetle males from urban and forest habitats. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology, 20: 835839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Songvorawit, N., Butcher, B.A., and Chaisuekul, C. 2018. Captive breeding reveals larval performance and adult body size differences between two geographical populations of the stag beetle Aegus chelifer chelifer (Coleoptera: Lucanidae). Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology, 21: 708715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stillwell, R.C., Blanckenhorn, W.U., Teder, T., Davidowitz, G., and Fox, C.W. 2010. Sex differences in phenotypic plasticity affect variation in sexual size dimorphism in insects: from physiology to evolution. Annual review of Entomology, 55: 227245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, E. and Early, R. 1991. Analysis of chromic oxide in small samples of feeds and feces using chlorine bleach. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 71: 931934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tatsuta, H., Mizota, K., and Akimoto, S.I. 2004. Relationship between size and shape in the sexually dimorphic beetle, Prosopocoilus inclinatus (Coleoptera: Lucanidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 81: 219233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsuchiya, Y., Takami, Y., Okuzaki, Y., and Sota, T. 2012. Genetic differences and phenotypic plasticity in body size between high- and low-altitude populations of the ground beetle Carabus tosanus . Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 25: 18351842.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B., and Lewis, B.A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74: 35833597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walczynska, A. 2007. Energy budget of wood-feeding larvae of Corymbia rubra (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). European Journal of Entomology, 104: 181186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yasuda, H. and Dixon, A.F.G. 2002. Sexual size dimorphism in the two-spot ladybird beetle Adalia bipunctata: developmental mechanism and its consequences for mating. Ecological Entomology, 27: 493498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinna, R., Gotoh, H., Brent, C.S., Dolezal, A., Kraus, A., Niimi, T., et al. 2016. Endocrine control of exaggerated trait growth in rhinoceros beetles. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 56: 247259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed