Advertisement

Comparative ultrastructure of corneal surface topography in insects with aspects on phylogenesis and function

  • C. G. Bernhard
  • G. Gemne
  • J. Sällström
Article

Summary

The corneas of some nocturnal Lepidoptera carry an array of surface protuberances (nipples), about 200 mμ high, that acts as an impedance transformer equalizing by gradual transition the refractive index of air to that of the cornea. A screening of the insect class has been carried out in the present study with respect to the variation in corneal topography seen in previous obsarvations.

361 species in most insect orders were prepared for EM by thin sectioning or platinum replication. Using the amplitude of the surface protuberances as parameter, a grouping of the cornea types was made on the basis of the well-defined variation of nipple heights observed between individuals of certain species. Thus, the corneas of one extreme group were either smooth (Fig. 4A) or possessed protrusions (Fig. 4B and C) less than about 50 mμ high, arranged either irregularly or in a regular, hexagonal array (group I). At the other extreme, there was a group with “full-sized” nipples (Figs. 1 and 3) ranging in amplitude around 250 mμ (group III). An intermediate group of nipple heights (group II) comprised corneas with “low-sized” nipples (Fig. 6) between 50 and about 200 mμ high. Regularity in the arrangement of the various types of protuberances was observed both in groups I and II (compare Figs. 4C and 8). Irregularity tended to be associated with low amplitudes (e.g. Fig. 4B), being found only in group I corneas.

Full-sized nipples (group III corneas) were found only among the anagenetically highest orders, Trichoptera and Lepidoptera (Tables 3 and 4), which, however, also had corneas with low protrusions (group I) and low-sized nipples (group II). In one of the two mecopteroid orders, Diptera (Table 2), protrusions and low-sized nipples were found (the latter only in Culicomorpha). The corneas of all other orders (Table 1) had only group I corneas with one noteworthy exception, Thysanura, the most primitive order investigated. All four thysanuran species examined had corneas with low-sized nipples (Fig. 8), thus belonging to group II.

The morphological findings demonstrated in the present study can be taken to illustrate the following trends.

1.a)The higher relative number of group II and III corneas (low- and full-sized nipples) in the anagenetieally highest orders and the exclusive occurrence of group III corneas in the most advanced orders, Trichoptera and Lepidoptera, may indicate a progressive development of nipples during phylogenesis. Thus, the full-sized nipples may represent an apomorphous condition. Parallelisms — leading to the appearance of low- and full-sized nipples — may have occurred several times during insect phylogenetic development, thus possibly reflecting an evolutionary potential (with or without a selective pressure for this character).

b)Low-sized nipples were found in the most primitive insect order, Thysanura. This circumstance may point to regression from full-sized nipples that were present in an ancestor common to all insects. In such a case, the full-sized nipples in Trichoptera and Lepidoptera are to be considered plesiomorphous.

At present nothing supports conclusively a preference for one of these two alternatives.

2.Among the Lepidoptera, a greater relative number of butterflies than moths lack full-sized nipples. This may be taken to indicate a regression of nipples in the day-flying group of insects in comparison with their possible moth-like, nocturnal ancestors. That in many species there are low-sized nipples (the regression thus being incomplete) may indicate that a function of the nipples in ranges of shorter wavelengths has brought about an arrest of the regression at lower amplitudes.

Keywords

Nipple Corneal Surface Hexagonal Array Insect Order Corneal Topography 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bernhard, C. G.: Structural and functional adaptation in a visual system. Endeavour 26, 79–84 (1967).Google Scholar
  2. —, Gemne, G., Møller, A. R.: Modification of specular reflexion and light transmission by biological surface structures. Quart. Rev. Biophys. 1, 89–105 (1968).Google Scholar
  3. - - - Influence on light transmission by variations in insect corneal nipple topography. In preparation (1970).Google Scholar
  4. —, Miller, W. H.: A corneal nipple pattern in insect compound eyes. Acta physiol. scand. 56, 385–386 (1962).Google Scholar
  5. —, Møller, A. R.: Function of the corneal nipples in the compound eyes of insects. Acta physiol. scand. 58, 381–382 (1963).Google Scholar
  6. - - - The insect corneal nipple array. A biological, broad-band impedance transformer that acts as an antireflection coating. Acta physiol. scand. 63, Suppl. 243 (1965).Google Scholar
  7. Brundin, L.: Application of phylogenetic principles in systematics and evolutionary theory. In: Current problems of lower vertebrate phylogeny (IV. Nobel Symposium, Stockholm, June 1967, Ørvig, T., ed.). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell 1968.Google Scholar
  8. Gemne, G.: Ultrastructural ontogenesis of cornea and corneal nipples in the compound eye of insects. Acta physiol. scand. 66, 511–512 (1966a).Google Scholar
  9. —: Fine structure of the insect cornea and corneal nipples during ontogenesis. In: Electron microscopy 1966. Proceedings of the Sixth Internat. Congr. for Electron Microscopy, Kyoto, vol. II, pp. 511–512. Tokyo: Maruzen Co. 1966b.Google Scholar
  10. - Ontogenesis of corneal surface ultrastructure in nocturnal Lepidoptera. In preparation (1970a).Google Scholar
  11. Gemne, G.: Ultrastructure of the developing corneal surface in the honey-bee. In preparation (1970b).Google Scholar
  12. - Ultrastrueture of epicorneal topography and morphogenesis in insects, with aspects on phylogenesis and function. Thesis, in preparation (1970c).Google Scholar
  13. Grassé, P.-P.: Traité de Zoologie, Tome X, fasc. 1. Paris 1951.Google Scholar
  14. Hennig, W.: Grundzüge einer Theorie der phylogenetischen Systematik. Berlin: Deutsch. Zentralverl. 1950.Google Scholar
  15. —: Phylogenetic systematics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press 1966.Google Scholar
  16. - Kritische Bemerkung über den Bau der Flügelwurzel bei den Dipteren und die Frage nach der Monophylie der Nematocera. Stuttg. Beitr. Natk. Nr. 193 (1968).Google Scholar
  17. Locke, M.: The structure and formation of the cuticulin layer in the epicuticle of an insect, Calpodes ethlius (Lepidoptera, Hesperiidae). J. Morph. 118, 461–494 (1966).Google Scholar
  18. Mayr, E.: Animal species and evolution. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press 1963.Google Scholar
  19. Miller, W. H., Bernard, G. D., Allen, J. L.: The optics of insect compound eyes. Microcomponents with dimensions near a wavelength of light cause observable optical effects. Science 162, 760–767 (1968).Google Scholar
  20. —, Møller, A. R., Bernhard, C. G.: The corneal nipple array. In: The functional organization of the compound eye (C. G. Bernhard, ed.) pp. 21–33. London: Pergamon Press 1966.Google Scholar
  21. Perry, M. M.: Further studies on the development of the eye of Drosophila melanogaster. I. The ommatidia. J. Morph. 124, 227–248 (1968).Google Scholar
  22. Ross, H. H.: Evolution and classification of the mountain caddisflies. Urbana: University of Illinois Press 1956.Google Scholar
  23. Taylor, R. L., Richards, A. G.: Integumentary changes during moulting of arthropods with special reference to the subcuticle and ecdysial membrane. J. Morph. 116, 1–21 (1965).Google Scholar
  24. Waddington, C. H., Perry, M. M.: The ultrastructure of the developing eye of Drosophila. Proc. roy. Soc. B 153, 155–178 (1960).Google Scholar
  25. Zeuner, F. E.: Notes on the evolution of the Rhopalocera. Verh. XI. int. Kongr. Ent. Wien 1960, 1, 310–313 (1961).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1970

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. G. Bernhard
    • 1
  • G. Gemne
    • 1
  • J. Sällström
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysiologyKarolinska InstitutetStockholm

Personalised recommendations