Oecologia

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 373–388

Alcohol tolerance: An ecological parameter in the relative success of Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans

  • J. A. McKenzie
  • P. A. Parsons
Article

Summary

Laboratory experiments have shown D. melanogaster adults to be more tolerant to alcohol in the environment than D. simulans, with the females being more tolerant than the males of their species. Larval development on alcohol supplemented media also demonstrated an increased tolerance by D. melanogaster although the effect was not as clear cut as for the adult survival. Oviposition choice experiments demonstrated a marked rejection of alcohol impregnated laying sites by D. simulans when compared to standard medium sites. D. melanogaster showed a slight preference for alcohol supplemented sites.

Collections in the maturation cellar of a vineyard produced, with the exception of a single D. simulans fly, entirely D. melanogaster adults while larvae and pupae from the cellar were also all D. melanogaster. Away from the alcohol resource, outside the cellar, both species were collected with D. simulans being the more common. However, the outside distribution of the two species was affected by alcohol fumes during vintage, as was the distribution of the sexes of D. melanogaster, with the more tolerant species or sex being closer to the source. The field results were thus in agreement with the laboratory predictions that D. melanogaster is better able to utilize an alcohol resource than D. simulans.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrewartha, H. G., Birch, L. C.: The distribution and abundance of animals. Chicago: Chicago University Press 1954.Google Scholar
  2. Barker, J. S. F.: Ecological differences and competitive interaction between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans in small laboratory populations. Oecologia (Berl.) 8, 139–156 (1971).Google Scholar
  3. Brown, W. L., Jr., Wilson, E. O.: Character displacement. Syst. Zool. 5, 49–64 (1956).Google Scholar
  4. del Solar, E., Palomino, H.: Choice of oviposition in Drosophila melanogaster. Amer. Naturalist 100, 127–134 (1966).Google Scholar
  5. Gibson, J. B., Miklovich, R.: Modes of variation in alcohol dehydrogenase in Drosophila melanogaster. Experientia (Basel) 27, 99–100 (1971).Google Scholar
  6. Hosgood, S. M. W., Parsons, P. A.: Differences between D. simulans and D. melanogaster in tolerances to laboratory temperatures. Drosophila Inf. Serv. 41, 176 (1966).Google Scholar
  7. Hutchinson, G. E.: Concluding remarks. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 22, 415–427 (1957).Google Scholar
  8. Jacobson, K. B., Murphy, J. B., Knopp, J. A., Oritz, J. R.: Multiple forms of Drosophila alcohol dehydrogenase. III. Conversion of one form to another by nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide or acetone. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 149, 22–35 (1972).Google Scholar
  9. Levins, R.: Evolution in changing environments. Some theoretical explorations. Princeton: Princeton University Press 1968.Google Scholar
  10. Mainardi, M.: Oviposition preferences in Drosophila melanogaster and in Drosophila simulans. Boll. Zool. 36, 101–103 (1969).Google Scholar
  11. Miller, R. S.: Pattern and process in competition. Adv. Ecological Res. 4, 1–74 (1967).Google Scholar
  12. Moore, J. A.: Competition between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans. I. Population cage experiments. Evolution 6, 407–420 (1952a).Google Scholar
  13. Moore, J. A.: Competition between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans. II. The improvement of competitive ability through selection. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. (Wash.) 38, 813–817 (1952b).Google Scholar
  14. Parsons, P. A.: Behavioural and ecological genetics: A study in Drosophila. Oxford: Clarendon Press 1972 (in press).Google Scholar
  15. Parsons, P. A., McKenzie, J. A.: The ecological genetics of Drosophila. Evolutionary Biology 5, 87–132 (1972).Google Scholar
  16. Soliman, M. H.: Selection of site of oviposition by Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. Amer. Mid. Nat. 86, 487–493 (1971).Google Scholar
  17. Sturtevant, A. H.: A new species closely resembling Drosophila melanogaster. Psyche (Stuttg.) 26, 153–155 (1919).Google Scholar
  18. Tantawy, A. O., Mallah, G. S.: Studies on natural populations of Drosophila. I. Heat resistance and geographical variation in Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. Evolution 15, 1–14 (1961).Google Scholar
  19. Tantawy, A. O., Soliman, M. H.: Studies on natural populations of Drosophila. VI. Competition between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans. Evolution 21, 34–40 (1967).Google Scholar
  20. Turesson, G.: The plant species in relation to habitat and climate. Hereditas (Lund) 6, 147–236 (1925).Google Scholar
  21. Wallace, B.: Topics in population genetics. New York: W. W. Norton and Company 1968.Google Scholar
  22. Ward, R. D., Hebert, P. D. N.: Variability of alcohol dehydrogenase activity in a natural population of Drosophila melanogaster. Nature (Lond.) New Biol. 236, 243–244 (1972).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1972

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. A. McKenzie
    • 1
  • P. A. Parsons
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Genetics and Human VariationLa Trobe UniversityBundooraAustralia

Personalised recommendations