Advertisement

Journal of Comparative Physiology A

, Volume 205, Issue 2, pp 211–221 | Cite as

Eye and wing structure closely reflects the visual ecology of dung beetles

  • Claudia ToccoEmail author
  • Marie Dacke
  • Marcus Byrne
Original Paper

Abstract

An important resource partitioning strategy allowing dung beetles to coexist in the same habitat, while utilising the same food, is species’ separation of activity times. After establishing the diel activity period of three closely related, co-occurring dung beetles, we examined their eye and wing morphology. Absolute and relative eye size, and facet size were greater in the nocturnal Escarabaeus satyrus, followed by the crepuscular Scarabaeus zambesianus and then the diurnal Kheper lamarcki. The diurnal K. lamarcki had the highest wing aspect ratio (long, narrow wings), followed by the crepuscular S. zambesianus and the nocturnal E. satyrus (short, broad wings), suggesting that dim-light active species fly slower than diurnal species. In addition, the two species active in dim light had a lower wing loading than the diurnal species, indicating the need for greater manoeuvrability in the dark. Analyses of wing shape revealed that the diurnal K. lamarcki wing had a proportionally larger jugal and anal region than both dim light species. Our results show that different species of dung beetles have a combination of optical and morphological wing adaptations to support their foraging activities in diverse light conditions.

Keywords

Diel activity period Eye size Aspect ratio Wing loading Scarabaeini 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Nic Venter, and Ted and Winnie Harvey for their help in the field; and the Claude Leon Foundation and the University of the Witwatersrand for funding CT. All national guidelines for care of animals were followed. No insect species in this study is CITES-listed or endangered according to regional Red Lists or Threaten or Protected Species (ToPS) legislation.

References

  1. Baird E (2005) Visual control of flight speed in honeybees. J Exp Biol 208:3895–3905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barlow HB (1956) Retinal noise and absolute threshold. J Opt Soc Am 46:634–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernon G (1981) Species abundance and diversity of the Coleoptera component of a South African cow dung community and associated insect predators. Dissertation, Bowling Green State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  4. Berwaerts K, Van Dyck H, Aerts P (2002) Does flight morphology relate to flight performance? An experimental test with the butterfly Pararge aegeria. Funct Ecol 16:484–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Betts CR, Wootton RJ (1988) Wing shape and flight behaviour in butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea and Hesperioidea): a preliminary analysis. J Exp Biol 138:271–288Google Scholar
  6. Birn-Jeffery AV, Higham TE (2016) Geckos decouple fore- and hind limb kinematics in response to changes in incline. Front Zool 13:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Byrne M, Dacke M, Nordström P, Scholtz C, Warrant E (2003) Visual cues used by ball-rolling dung beetles for orientation. J Comp Physiol A 189:411–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Caveney S, Scholtz CH, McIntyre P (1995) Patterns of daily flight activity in onitine dung beetles (Scarabaeinae: Onitini). Oecologia 103:444–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chao A, Simon-Freeman R, Grether G (2013) Patterns of niche partitioning and alternative reproductive strategies in an east African dung beetle assemblage. Insect Behav 26:525–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chown SL, Sørensen JG, Terblanche JS (2011) Water loss in insects: an environmental change perspective. J Insect Physiol 57:1070–1084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dacke M, Nordström P, Scholtz CH, Warrant E (2002) A specialized dorsal rim area for polarized light detection in the compound eye of the scarab beetle Pachysoma striatum. J Comp Physiol A 188:211–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dacke M, Nilsson D-E, Scholtz CH, Byrne M, Warrant EJ (2003a) Animal behaviour: insect orientation to polarized moonlight. Nature 424:33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dacke M, Nordström P, Scholtz CH (2003b) Twilight orientation to polarised light in the crepuscular dung beetle Scarabaeus zambesianus. J Exp Biol 206:1535–1554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dacke M, Byrne MJ, Scholtz CH, Warrant EJ (2004) Lunar orientation in a beetle. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 271:361–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dacke M, Byrne MJ, Baird E, Scholtz CH, Warrant EJ (2011) How dim is dim? Precision of the celestial compass in moonlight and sunlight. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 366:697–702CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Davis ALV (2002) Dung beetle diversity in South Africa: influential factors, conservation status, data inadequacies and survey design. Afr Entomol 10:53–65Google Scholar
  17. Davis ALV, Scholtz CH, Deschodt C (2008) Multi-scale determinants of dung beetle assemblage structure across abiotic gradients of the Kalahari-Nama Karoo ecotone, South Africa. J Biogeogr 35:1465–1480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Doube B (1991) Dung beetles of Southern Africa. In: Dung beetle ecology, 2014th edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 133–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dyhr JP, Higgins CM (2010) The spatial frequency tuning of optic-flow-dependent behaviors in the bumblebee Bombus impatiens. J Exp Biol 213:1643–1650CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. el Jundi B, Warrant EJ, Byrne MJ, Khaldy L, Baird E, Smolka J, Dacke M (2015) Neural coding underlying the cue preference for celestial orientation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112:11395–11400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ellington CP (1984) The aerodynamics of hovering insect flight. II. Morphological parameters. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 305:17–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Feer F, Pincebourde S (2005) Diel flight activity and ecological segregation within an assemblage of tropical forest dung and carrion beetles. J Trop Ecol 21:21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Forgie SA, Philips TK, Scholtz CH (2005) Evolution of the Scarabaeini (Scarabaeidae: scarabaeinae). Syst Entomol 30:60–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Foster JJ, el Jundi B, Smolka J, Khaldy L, Nilsson D-E, Byrne MJ, Dacke M (2017) Stellar performance: mechanisms underlying Milky Way orientation in dung beetles. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 372:20160079CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Frederiksen R, Warrant EJ (2008) The optical sensitivity of compound eyes: theory and experiment compared. Biol Lett 4:745–747CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Fry SN, Rohrseitz N, Straw AD, Dickinson MH (2009) Visual control of flight speed in Drosophila melanogaster. J Exp Biol 212:1120–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hanski I, Cambefort Y (1991) Dung beetle ecology. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holter P (2016) Herbivore dung as food for dung beetles: elementary coprology for entomologists: dung as food for dung beetles. Ecol Entomol 41:367–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Howland HC (1974) Optimal strategies for predator avoidance: the relative importance of speed and manoeuvrability. J Theor Biol 47:333–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Iannuzzi L, Salomão RP, Costa FC, Liberal CN (2016) Environmental patterns and daily activity of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in the Atlantic Rainforest of Brazil. Entomotropica 31:196–207Google Scholar
  31. Johansson F, Söderquist M, Bokma F (2009) Insect wing shape evolution: independent effects of migratory and mate guarding flight on dragonfly wings. Biol J Linnean Soc 97:362–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Klingenberg CP (2011) MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Mol Ecol Resour 11:353–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Linander N, Baird E, Dacke M (2017) How bumblebees use lateral and ventral optic flow cues for position control in environments of different proximity. J Comp Physiol A 203:343–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McIntyre P, Caveney S (1998) Superposition optics and the time of flight in onitine dung beetles. J Comp Physiol A 183:45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meyer-Rochow VB, Gál J (2004) Dimensional limits for arthropod eyes with superposition optics. Vis Res 44(19):2213–2223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Moran D, Softley R, Warrant EJ (2015) The energetic cost of vision and the evolution of eyeless Mexican cavefish. Sci Adv 1:e1500363CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Narendra A, Reid SF, Raderschall CA (2013) Navigational efficiency of nocturnal myrmecia ants suffers at low light levels. PLoS One 8:e58801CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Niino M, Hosaka T, Kon M, Ochi T, Yamada T, Okuda T (2014) Diel flight activity and habitat preference of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in Peninsular Malaysia. Raffles B Zool 62:795–804Google Scholar
  39. Niven JE, Anderson JC, Laughlin SB (2007) Fly photoreceptors demonstrate energy-information trade-offs in neural coding. PLoS Biol 5:e116CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Norberg UM, Rayner JMV (1987) Ecological morphology and flight in bats (Mammalia; Chiroptera): wing adaptations, flight performance, foraging strategy and echolocation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 316:335–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ospina-Garcés SM, Escobar F, Baena ML, Davis ALV, Scholtz CH (2018) Do dung beetles show interrelated evolutionary trends in wing morphology, flight biomechanics and habitat preference? Evol Ecol 32(6):663–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Otálora-Luna F, Lapointe SL, Dickens JC (2013) Olfactory cues are subordinate to visual stimuli in a Neotropical generalist weevil. PLoS One 8:e53120CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Peck SB, Forsyth A (1982) Composition, structure, and competitive behaviour in a guild of Ecuadorian rain forest dung beetles (Coleoptera; Scarabaeidae). Can J Zool 60:1624–1634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. R Core Team (2015) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 25 Mar 2017
  45. Rasband WS (2012) ImageJ: image processing and analysis in Java. ASCLGoogle Scholar
  46. Reber T, Vähäkainu A, Baird E, Weckström M, Warrant E, Dacke M (2015) Effect of light intensity on flight control and temporal properties of photoreceptors in bumblebees. J Exp Biol 218:1339–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rohlf FJ (2017a) tpsDig v2.3. http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/soft-tps.html. Accessed 21 Nov 2017
  48. Rohlf FJ (2017b) tpsSmall v1.34. http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/soft-tps.html. Accessed 21 Nov 2017
  49. Rose R, Menzel R (1981) Luminance dependence of pigment color discrimination in bees. J Comp Physiol A 141:379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shiomi K, Sato K, Handrich Y, Bost C (2016) Diel shift of king penguin swim speeds in relation to light intensity changes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 561:233–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Simmons LW, Ridsdill-Smith J (2011) Reproductive competition and its impact on the evolution and ecology of dung beetles. In: Simmons LW, Ridsdill-Smith J (eds) (2011) Ecology and evolution of dung beetles. Wiley, Oxford, pp 1–20Google Scholar
  52. Smolka J, Baird E, el Jundi B, Reber T, Byrne MJ, Dacke M (2016) Night sky orientation with diurnal and nocturnal eyes: dim-light adaptations are critical when the moon is out of sight. Animal Behav 111:127–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Spiewok S, Schmolz E (2006) Changes in temperature and light alter the flight speed of hornets (Vespa crabro L.). Physiol Biochem Zool 79:188–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Srinivasan MV, Zhang SW, Lehrer M, Collett TS (1996) Honeybee navigation en route to the goal: visual flight control and odometry. J Exp Biol 199:237–244Google Scholar
  55. Suárez-Tovar CM, Sarmiento CE (2016) Beyond the wing planform: morphological differentiation between migratory and nonmigratory dragonfly species. J Evol Biol 29:690–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tarasov S, Génier F (2015) Innovative bayesian and parsimony phylogeny of dung beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Scarabaeinae) enhanced by ontology-based partitioning of morphological characters. PLoS One 10:e0116671CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Tocco C, Quinn DE, Midgley JM, Villet MH (2017) Optimising design and effort for environmental surveys using dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Can Entomol 149:214–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tocco C, Balmer J, Villet MH (2018) Trophic preference of southern African dung beetles (Scarabaeoidea: Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae) and its influence on bioindicator surveys. Afr J Ecol 56:938–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wakeling JM (1997) Odonatan wing and body morphologies. Odonatologica 26:35–52Google Scholar
  60. Warrant EJ (1999) Seeing better at night: life style, eye design and the optimum strategy of spatial and temporal summation. Vis Res 39:1611–1630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Warrant EJ (2008) Seeing in the dark: vision and visual behaviour in nocturnal bees and wasps. J Exp Biol 211:1737–1746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Warrant E, Dacke M (2011) Vision and visual navigation in nocturnal insects. Annu Rev Entomol 56:239–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Warrant EJ, McIntyre PD (1990) Limitations to resolution in superposition eyes. J Comp Physiol A 167:785–803Google Scholar
  64. Ziani S, Gudenzi I (2012) Commenti sulla sistematica generica degli Scarabaeini del bacino del Mediterraneo con una chiave dicotomica per il loro riconoscimento (Insecta Coleoptera Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). Quad Stud Notizie Storia Nat Romagna 36:115–158Google Scholar
  65. Zídek J, Pokorný S (2011) Replacement name for a subgenus of Scarabaeus Linné, and remarks on Scarabaeus isidis (Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae: Scarabaeini). Klapalekiana 47:89–90Google Scholar
  66. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Smith GM (2007) Analysing ecological data. Springer, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Animal, Plant and Environmental SciencesUniversity of the WitwatersrandJohannesburgSouth Africa
  2. 2.Lund Vision Group, Department of BiologyLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations