Journal of Comparative Physiology B

, Volume 177, Issue 8, pp 849–855

Separate effects of macronutrient concentration and balance on plastic gut responses in locusts

Original Paper


It is well established that animal guts are phenotypically plastic, adjusting inter-alia to diet quality. However, the relative contributions due to the two principal dimensions of diet “quality”—nutrient concentration and nutrient balance—remain to be teased apart. We report an experiment using synthetic foods in which the balance and overall concentration (in relation to indigestible cellulose) of protein and digestible carbohydrate were varied orthogonally, and the effects on the dry mass of locust guts measured. There were three principal results: (1) larger guts were associated with dilute compared with concentrated diets, suggesting a compensatory response to ameliorate the impact of reduced diet quality; (2) there was, by contrast, an anti-compensatory response to nutrient imbalance, where larger guts were associated with surplus protein intake; (3) the experimental group given the food that contained low protein and low cellulose, the composition that predicted the smallest guts, showed a bimodal response in which half of the insects had guts that were larger than expected for their cellulose intake, suggesting that they were able to respond to a protein-related cue in the absence of significant dietary fibre. We discuss these results in relation to regulatory theory.


Nutrient balance Dietary fibre Gut plasticity Phenotypic plasticity 


  1. Battley PF, Piersma T (2005) Adaptive interplay between feeding ecology and features of the digestive tract in birds. In: Starck JM, Wang T (eds) Physiological and ecological adaptations to feeding in vertebrates. Science Publishers, Enfield, pp 201–227Google Scholar
  2. Bines JE, Taylor RG, Justice F, Paris MCJ, Sourial M, Nagy E, Emselle S, Catto-Smith AG, Fuller PJ (2002) Influence of diet complexity on intestinal adaptation following massive small bowel resection in a preclinical model. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 17:1170–1179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boersma M, Elser JJ (2006) Too much of a good thing: on stoichiometrically balanced diets and maximal growth. Ecology 87:1325–1330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bolnick DI, Svanback R, Fordyce JA, Yang LH, Davis JM, Hulsey CD, Forister ML (2003) The ecology of individuals: incidence and implications of individual specialization. Am Nat 161:1–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buddington RK (1987) Does the natural diet influence the intestines ability to regulate glucose-absorption?. J Comp Physiol [B] 157:677–688Google Scholar
  6. Chapman RF (1988) Variations in the size of the midgut caeca during the fifth instar of the grasshopper, Schistocerca americana (Drury). J Insect Physiol 34:329–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Conover WJ, Iman RL (1982) Analysis of covariance using the rank transformation. Biometrics 38:715–724PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dadd RH (1961) The nutritional requirements of locusts IV. Requirements for vitamins of the b-complex. J Insect Physiol 6:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Delorme CB, Wojcik J, Gordon C (1981) Method of addition of cellulose to experimental diets and its effect on rat growth and protein-utilization. J Nutr 111:1522–1527PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Diamond JM, Hammond K (1992) The matches, achieved by natural selection, between biological capacities and their natural loads. Experientia 48:551–557PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dow JAT (1986) Insect midgut function. Adv Insect Physiol 19:187–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elsenhans B, Caspary WF (2000) Food viscosity as determinant for adaptive growth responses in rat intestine: long-term feeding of different hydroxyethyl celluloses. Br J Nutr 84:39–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Karasov WH, Diamond JM (1983) Adaptive regulation of sugar and amino-acid-transport by vertebrate intestine. Am J Physiol 245:G443–G462PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Karasov WH, Solberg DH, Diamond JM (1987) Dependence of intestinal amino acid uptake on dietary protein or amino acid levels. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 252:G614–G625Google Scholar
  15. Lee K-P, Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ (2004) The effects of nutritional imbalance on compensatory feeding for cellulose-mediated dietary dilution in a generalist caterpillar. Physiol Entomol 29:108–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Piersma T, Drent J (2003) Phenotypic flexibility and the evolution of organismal design. Trends Ecol Evol 18:228–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Piersma T, Lindstrom A (1997) Rapid reversible changes in organ size as a component of adaptive behaviour. Trends Ecol Evol 12:134–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ (1997) Integrative models of nutrient balancing: application to insects and vertebrates. Nutr Res Rev 10:151–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ (1998) Nutrient transfer functions: the site of integration between feeding behaviour and nutritional physiology. Chemoecology 8:61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ (2003) Nutrient balancing in grasshoppers: Behavioural and physiological correlates of dietary breadth. J Exp Biol 206:1669–1681PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Raubenheimer D, Lee K-P, Simpson SJ (2005) Does Bertrand’s rule apply to macronutrients? Proc Biol Sci 272:2429–2434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Seaman JW, Walls SC, Wise SE, Jaeger RG (1994) Caveat emptor: rank transform methods and interaction. Trends Ecol Evol 9:261–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Secor SM, Whang EE, Lane JS, Ashley SW, Diamond J (2000) Luminal and systemic signals trigger intestinal adaptation in the juvenile python. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 279:G1177–G1187PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Secor SM, Lane JS, Whang EE, Ashley SW, Diamond J (2002) Luminal nutrient signals for intestinal adaptation in pythons. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 283:G1298–G1309PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Sibly RM (1981) Strategies of digestion and defecation, chap 5. In: Townsend CR, Calow P (eds) Physiological ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 109–139Google Scholar
  26. Simpson SJ, Abisgold JD (1985) Compensation by locusts for changes in dietary nutrients: behavioural mechanisms. Physiol Entomol 10:443–452Google Scholar
  27. Simpson SJ, Raubenheimer D (1993) The central role of the haemolymph in the regulation of nutrient intake in insects. Physiol Entomol 18:395–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Simpson SJ, Sibly RM, Lee KP, Behmer ST, Raubenheimer D (2004) Optimal foraging when regulating intake of multiple nutrients. Anim Behav 68:1299–1311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Spector MH, Levine GM, Deren JJ (1977) Direct and indirect effects of dextrose and amino-acids on gut mass. Gastroenterology 72:706–710PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Starck JM (1999) Structural flexibility of the gastro-intestinal tract of vertebrates—implications for evolutionary morphology. Zool Anz 238:87–101Google Scholar
  31. Starck JM (2005) Structural flexibility of the digestive system of tetrapods—patterns and processes at the cellular and tissue level. In: Starck JM, Wang T (eds) Physiological and ecological adaptations to feeding in vertebrates. Science Publishers, Enfield, pp 175–200Google Scholar
  32. Yang Y, Joern A (1994) Gut size changes in relation to variable food quality and body size in grasshoppers. Funct Ecol 8:36–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zanotto FP, Simpson SJ, Raubenheimer D (1993) The regulation of growth by locusts through post-ingestive compensation for variation in the levels of dietary protein and carbohydrate. Physiol Entomol 18:425–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Liggins Institute and School of Biological SciencesUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of ZoologyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  3. 3.Department of Public Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations