Abstract
AbstractIntegrating aspects of larval lepidopteran behavior that enhance survival into conservation plans could increase the overall impact of the efforts. We previously recommended that where possible, maintaining 2–4 ramets of closely-spaced common milkweed would support the development of at least one monarch through pupation, based on a seemingly innate behavior in which monarch larvae (Danaus plexippus) abandon their natal milkweed ramet (Asclepiassp.). Here, we explored the impact of intraspecific competition on larval ramet abandonment behavior and fitness of monarch larvae in small artificial milkweed patches.We observed larvae reared under direct and indirect intraspecific competition, and larvae reared alone.We found no influence of intraspecific competition; however, our study provides further support that milkweed ramet abandonment is a seemingly innate behavior. This behavior occurs before all of the available leaf biomass on a ramet is consumed and prior to the pre-pupal wandering stage.Implications for insect conservation: Results from our study suggest that in the absence of predation, parasitism, and interspecific competition, and when sufficient plant biomass is present to support larval development, the presence of an intraspecific competitor does not influence larval behavior or fitness. Based on milkweed ramet abandonment behavior, we continue to suggest maintaining small patches of 2–4 milkweed ramets when possible.
Funder
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Iowa State University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Insect Science,Nature and Landscape Conservation,Animal Science and Zoology,Ecology
Reference29 articles.
1. Baker, A. M., and D. A. Potter. 2019. Configuration and Location of Small Urban Gardens Affect Colonization by Monarch Butterflies.Front. Ecol. Evol.7
2. Borkin, S. S. 1982. Notes on shifting distribution patterns and survival of immature Danaus plexippus (Lepidoptera: Danaidae) on the food plant Asclepias syriaca. The Great Lakes Entomologist. 15:9
3. Brower, L. P., O. R. Taylor, E. H. Williams, D. A. Slayback, R. R. Zubieta, and M. I. Ramírez. 2012. Decline of monarch butterflies overwintering in Mexico: is the migratory phenomenon at risk?: Decline of monarch butterflies in Mexico. Insect Conservation and Diversity. 5: 95–100
4. De Anda, A., and K. S. Oberhauser. 2015. Invertebrate natural enemies and stage-specific mortality rrates of monarch eggs and larvae, pp.60–70. In Oberhauser KS, Nail KR, Altizer S (eds) Monarchs in a Changing World. Cornell University Press, New York
5. Dethier, V. G. 1959. Food-plant distribution and density and larval dispersal as factors affecting insect populations. Canadian Entomologist. 91:581–596