Differences in Troglomorphism and Sexual Dimorphism in Two Sympatric Subtroglophile Crickets of Genus Troglophilus (Insecta: Orthoptera)

• Autorzy: Jugovic Jure , Šumer Nika

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.3161/15052249PJE2021.69.1.004

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

We investigated morphological variation and sexual dimorphism in two species of syntopic cave crickets (Troglophilus neglectus and T. cavicola) from Northern Balkans. T. cavicola is able to penetrate deeper in caves and stays there for longer periods than T. neglectus. Yet, it has not exhibited clearly stronger constructive (body size, elongation of appendages, increased spinulation) or reductive (eye reduction) traits than T. neglectus. Moreover, contrary to expectation, there is no clear association between more prolonged staying in a stable cave environment and overall lower morphological variability in T. cavicola. Only some of its morphological traits actually showed less while other showed more variation than in T. neglectus. While T. cavicola males are larger than females, there is no such difference in T. neglectus. This may help males of T. cavicola being more competitive towards overall larger T. neglectus. With the exception of the body size, overall sexual dimorphism was better expressed in larger T. neglectus. The morphospaces occupied by males and females overlap more strongly in T. cavicola than in T. neglectus, indicating that ecological niches of both sexes are better separated in the latter species.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

appendages; eye reduction; Balkans; morphometrics; body size; cave cricket; spinulation

PL

osprzęt; redukcja oczu; Bałkany; morfometria; rozmiar; świerszcz jaskiniowy; wirowanie

• Wydawca: Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: Vol. 69, nr 1
• Strony: 35--50
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 48 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Jugovic Jure

• Department of Biodiversity, Faculty of Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Information Technologies, University of Primorska, Glagoljaška 8, 6000 Koper, Slovenia

autor

Šumer Nika

• Department of Biodiversity, Faculty of Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Information Technologies, University of Primorska, Glagoljaška 8, 6000 Koper, Slovenia

Bibliografia

• 1. Barr T. C. 1968 – Cave ecology and the evolution of troglobites – Evol. Biol. 2: 35-102.
• 2. Blanckenhorn W. U. 2000 – The evolution of body size: what keeps organism small? – Q. Rev. Biol. 75: 385-407.
• 3. Blanckenhorn W. U. 2005 – Behavioral causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism – Ethology, 111: 977-1016.
• 4. Blanckenhorn W. U., Dixon A. F. G., Fairbairn D. J., Foellmer M. W., Gibert P., van der Linde K., Meier R., Nylin S., Pitnick S., Schoff C., Signorelli M., Teder T., Wiklund C. 2007 – Proximate causes of Rensch's rule: does sexual size dimorphism in arthropods result from sex differences in development time? – Am. Nat. 169 (2): 245-257.
• 5. Bilandžija H., Hollifield B., Steck M., Meng G., Ng M., Koch A. D., Gračan R., Etkovi H., Porter M. L., Renner K. J., Jeffery W. 2020 – Phenotypic plasticity as a mechanism of cave colonization and adaptation – eLife 9: e51830.
• 6. Culver D. C., Kane T., Fong D. 1995 – Adaptation and natural selection in caves: the evolution of Gammarus minus – Harvard University Press, 1st edition.
• 7. Culver D. C., Pipan T. 2015 – Shifting paradigms of the evolution of cave life – Acta-Carsologica, 44 (3): 415-425.
• 8. Derkarabetian S., Steinmann D. B., Hedin M. 2010 – Repeated and time-correlated morphological convergence in cave-dwelling harvestmen (Opiliones, Laniatores) from Montane Western North America – PloS One, 5: e10388.
• 9. Di Russo C., Rampini M., Cobolli M. 2014 – The cave crickets of Greece: a contribution to the study of Southern Balkan Rhaphidophoridae diversity (Orthoptera), with the description of a new species of Troglophilus Krauss, 1879 – Biodivers. J. 5 (3): 397-420.
• 10. Dormann C. F., Elith J., Bacher S., Buchmann C., Carl G., Carré G., García Marquéz J. R., Gruber B., Lafourcade B., Leitão P. J., et al. 2013 – Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance – Ecography, 36 (1): 27-46.
• 11. Fea M. P., Mark C. J., Holwell G. I. 2019 – Sexually dimorphic antennal structures of New Zealand Cave Wētā (Orthoptera: Rhaphidophoridae) – N. Z. J. Zool. 46 (2): 124-148.
• 12. Hochkirch A., Gröning J. 2008 – Sexual size dimorphism in Orthoptera (sens. str.): A review – J. Orthoptera Res. 17 (2): 189-196.
• 13. Inward D. J. G., Davies R. G., Pergande C., Denham A. J., Vogler A. P. 2011 – Local and regional ecological morphology of dung beetle assemblages across four bio-geographic regions – J. Biogeogr. 38 (9): 1668-1682.
• 14. Jost M. C., Shaw K. L. 2006 – Phylogeny of Ensifera (Hexapoda: Orthoptera) using three ribosomal loci, with implications for the evolution of acoustic communication – Mol. Phyl. Evol. 38 (2): 510-530.
• 15. Jugovic J., Prevorčnik S., Blejec A., Sket B. 2011 – Morphological differentiation in the cave shrimps Troglocaris (Crustacea: Decapoda: Atyidae) of the Dinaric karst – a consequence of geographical isolation or adaptation? – J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 49 (3): 185-195.
• 16. Jugovic J., Zupan S., Bužan E., Čelik T. 2018 – Variation in the morphology of the wings of the endangered grass-feeding butterfly Coenonympha oedippus (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in response to contrasting habitats – Eur. J. Entomol. 115: 339-353.
• 17. Jugovic J., Koprivnikar N. 2020 – Rolling in the deep: Morphological variation as an adaptation to different nesting behaviours of coprophagous Scarabaeoidea – Biologia (Bratislava): 13 pp. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-020-00627-3.
• 18. Karaman I., Hammouti N., Pavićević D., Kiefer A., Horvatović M., Seitz A. 2011 – The genus Troglophilus Krauss, 1879 (Orthoptera: Rhaphidophoridae) in the west Balkans – Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 163 (4): 1035-1063.
• 19. Karny H. H. 1937 – Orthoptera. Fam. Gryllacrididae, subfamiliae Omne. – Genera Insectorum Fascicule, 206: 1-317.
• 20. Konec M., Prevorčnik S., Sarbu S., Verovnik R., Trontelj P. 2015 – Parallels between two geographically and ecologically disparate cave invasions by the same species, Asellus aquaticus (Isopoda, Crustacea) – J. Evol. Biol. 28 (4): 864-875.
• 21. Kosswig C., Kosswig L. 1940 – Die Variabilitätbei Asellus aquaticus unterbesonderer Beruckschtigung der Variabilität in isoliertenunter- und oberirdischen Populationen – Revue de Facultie des Sciences (Istanbul), series B, 5: 1-55.
• 22. Kreysing M., Pusch R., Haverkate D., Landsberger M., Engelmann J., Ruiter J., Mora-Ferrer C., Ulbricht E., Grosche J., Franze K., et al. 2012 – Photonic crystal light collectors in fish retina improve vision in turbid water – Science, 336 (6089): 1700-1703.
• 23. Leubner F., Hörnschemeyer T., Bradler S. 2016 – The thorax of the cave cricket Troglophilus neglectus: anatomical adaptations in an ancient wingless insect lineage (Orthoptera: Rhaphidophoridae) – BMC Evol. Biol. 16 (39): 1-19.
• 24. Lipovšek S., Novak T., Janžekovič F., Pabst M. A. 2011 – Role of the fat body in the cave crickets Troglophilus cavicola and Troglophilus neglectus (Rhaphidophoridae, Saltatoria) during overwintering – Arthropod Struct. Dev. 40 (1): 54-63.
• 25. Lovich J. E., Gibbons J. W. 1992 – A review of techniques for quantifying sexual size dimorphism. — Growth Dev. Aging, 56: 269-281.
• 26. Mammola S., Isaia M. 2018. – Day–night and seasonal variations of a subterranean invertebrate community in the twilight zone – Subterr. Biol. 27: 31-51. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.27.28909.
• 27. Mammola S., Amorim I. R., Bichuette M. E., Borges P. A. V., Cheeptham N., Cooper S. J. B., Culver D. C., Deharveng L., Eme D., Ferreira R. L., et al. 2020a – Fundamental research questions in subterranean biology – Biol. Rev. 95 (6): 1-18.
• 28. Mammola S., Arnedo M. A., Fišer C., Cardoso P., Dejanaz A. J., Isaia, M. 2020b – Environmental filtering and convergent evolution determine the ecological specialization of subterranean spiders – Funct. Ecol. 34 (5): 1064-1077.
• 29. Muršič Z. 2016 – Evolution of response to light in cave populations of the freshwater isopod (Asellus aquaticus) – Master thesis, University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical faculty, Ljubljana (in Slovene).
• 30. Novak T., Kuštor V. 1983 – On Troglophilus neglectus (Rhapidophoridae, Saltatoria) from north Slovenia (YU) – Mém. Biospéol. 10: 127-137.
• 31. Pehani Š., Virant-Doberlet M., Jeram S. 1997 – The life cycle of the cave cricket Troglophilusneglectus Krauss with a note on T. cavicola Kollar (Orthoptera: Rhaphidophoridae) – Entomol. 116 (3): 224-238.
• 32. Pipan, T., Culver, D. C. 2017 – The unity and diversity of the subterranean realm with respect to invertebrate body size – J. Caves Karst Stud. 79: 1-9.
• 33. Poulson T. L. 1963 – Cave adaptation in amblyopsid fishes – Am. Midl. Nat. 70: 257-290.
• 34. Prevorčnik S., Blejec A., Sket B. 2004 – Racial differentiation in Asellus aquaticus (L.) (Crustacea: Isopoda: Asellidae) – Arch. Hydrobiol. 160 (2): 193-214.
• 35. Pricop E., Negrea B. M. 2009 – On the adaptations to cave life of some different animal groups (first note) – ELBA Bioflux, 1 (2): 41-47.
• 36. Protas, M., Jeffery W. R. 2012 – Evolution and development in cave animals: from fish to crustaceans – Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Dev. Biol. 1 (6): 823-845.
• 37. Rentz D. C. F., Su Y. N. 2003 – Orthoptera (Grasshoppers, Locusts, Katydids, Crickets) (In: Encyclopedia of Insects, Eds: V. H. Resh, R. T. Carde) – Academic Press, California, pp. 831.
• 38. Rentz D. C. F., Ingrisch S. 2009 – Orthoptera (Grasshoppers, Locusts, Katydids, Crickets) (In: Encyclopedia of Insects, Eds: V. H. Resh, R. T. Carde) – Academic Press, California, pp. 738.
• 39. Romero A. 2009 – Cave biology. Life in darkness – Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, U.K.
• 40. Rowe L. 1994 – The costs of mating and mate choice in water striders – Anim. Behav. 48 (5): 1049-1056.
• 41. Shine R. 1989 – Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimorphism: A review of the evidence – Q. Rev. Biol. 64 (4): 419-461.
• 42. Schmitz L., Motani R. 2010 – Morphological differences between the eyeballs of nocturnal and diurnal amniotes revisited from optical perspectives of visual environments – Vision Res. 50 (10): 936-946.
• 43. Schneider C. A., Rasband W. S., Eliceiri K. W. 2012 – “NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis” – Nat. methods, 9 (7): 671-675.
• 44. Sket B. 2008 – Can we agree on an ecological classification on subterranean animals? – J. Nat. Hist. 42 (21-22): 1549-1563.
• 45. Teder T., Tammaru T. 2005 – Sexual size dimorphism within species increases with body size in insects – Oikos, 108 (2): 321-334.
• 46. Trontelj P., Blejec A., Fišer C. 2012 – Ecomorphological convergence of cave communities – Evolution, 66 (12): 3852-3865.
• 47. Wilkens H. 1986 – The tempo of regressive evolution: studies of the eye reduction in stygobiont fishes and decapod crustaceans of the Gulf Coast and west Atlantic region – Stygologia, 2: 130-143.
• 48. Verovnik R., Sket B., Trontelj P. 2004 – Phylogeography of subterranean and surface populations of water lice Asellus aquaticus (Crustacea: Isopoda) – Mol. Ecol. 13 (6): 1519-1532.