Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 503–512 | Cite as

Leaf variegation in Caladium steudneriifolium (Araceae): a case of mimicry?

  • Ulf Soltau
  • Stefan Dötterl
  • Sigrid Liede-Schumann
Original Paper

Abstract

The leaves of Caladium steudneriifolium (Araceae) of the understorey of a submontane rainforest in the Podocarpus National Park (South East Ecuador, 1,060 m a.s.l.) are plain green or patterned with whitish variegation. Of the 3,413 individual leaves randomly chosen and examined in April 2003, two-thirds were plain green, whereas one third were variegated (i.e., whitish due to absence of chloroplasts). Leaves of both morphs are frequently attacked by mining moth caterpillars. Our BLAST analysis based on Cytochrome-c-Oxidase-subunit-1 sequences suggests that the moth is possibly a member of the Pyraloidea or another microlepidopteran group. It was observed that the variegated leaf zones strongly resemble recent damages caused by mining larvae and therefore may mimic an attack by moth larvae. Infestation was significantly 4–12 times higher for green leaves than for variegated leaves. To test the hypothesis that variegation can be interpreted as mimicry to deter ovipositing moths, we first ruled out the possibility that variegation is a function of canopy density (i.e., that the moths might be attracted or deterred by factors unrelated to the plant). Then plain green leaves were artificially variegated and the number of mining larvae counted after 3 months. The results on infestation rate (7.88% of green leaves, 1.61% of the variegated leaves, 0.41% of white manipulated leaves and 9.12% of uncoloured manipulated leaves) suggest that ovipositing moths are deterred by the miner-infestation mimicry. Thus, variegation might be beneficial for the plants despite the implicated loss of photosynthetically active surface.

Keywords

Araceae Herbivory Mimicry Mining moths Understorey Variegation 

References

  1. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol 215:403–410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Augner M, Bernays EA (1998) Plant defence and Batesian mimicry. Evol Ecol 12:667–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barret SCH (1987) Mimicry in plants. Sci Am 257:68–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benson WW, Brown KS, Gilbert LE (1975) Coevolution of plant and herbivores: passion flower butterflies. Evolution 29:659–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bogner JS, Nicolson DH (1991) A revised classification of Araceae with dichotomous keys. Willdenowia 21:35–50Google Scholar
  6. Croat T (1988) Ecology and life forms of Araceae. Aroideana 11:4–55Google Scholar
  7. Croat T (1994) Taxonomic status of neotropical Araceae. Aroideana 17:33–60Google Scholar
  8. Gilbert LE (1980) Ecological consequences of a coevolved mutualism between butterflies and plants. In: Gilbert LE, Raven PH (eds) Coevolution of animals and plants. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp 210–240Google Scholar
  9. Givnish TJ (1990) Leaf mottling: relation to growth form and leaf phenology and possible role as camouflage. Funct Ecol 4:463–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grayum MH (1990) Evolution and phylogeny of the Araceae. Ann Missouri Bot Gard 77:628–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lev-Yadun S (2003) Why do some thorny plants resemble green zebras? J Theor Biol 244:483–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lev-Yadun S, Inbar M (2002) Defensive ant, aphid and caterpillar mimicry in plants. Biol J Linn Soc 77:393–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lev-Yadun S, Dafni A, Inbar M, Izhaki I, Ne’eman G (2002) Colour patterns in vegetative parts of plants deserve more research attention. Trends Pl Sci 7:59–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lev-Yadun S, Dafni A, Flashman MA, Inbar M, Izhaki I, Katzir G, Ne’eman G (2004) Plant coloration undermines herbivorous insects camouflage. BioEssays 26:1126–1130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Madison M (1981) Notes on Caladium (Araceae) and its allies. Selbyana 5:342–377Google Scholar
  16. Maia ACD, Schlindwein C (2006) Caladium bicolor (Araceae) and Cyclocaphala celata (Coleoptera, Dynastinae): a well-established pollination system in the northern Atlantic rainforest of Pernambuco, Brazil. Pl Biol 8:529–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mayo SJ, Bogner J, Boyce PC (1997) The genera of Araceae. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, pp 67–71Google Scholar
  18. Niemelä P, Tuomi J (1987) Does the leaf morphology of some plants mimic caterpillar damage? Oikos 50:256–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prokopy RJ, Owens ED (1983) Visual detection of plants by herbivorous insects. Ann Rev Entomol 28:337–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shapiro AP (1981) Egg-mimics of Streptanthus (Cruciferae) deter oviposition by Pieris sisymbrii (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Oecologia (Berl.) 48:142–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Simon C, Frati F, Beckenbach A, Crespi B, Liu H, Flook P (1994) Evolution, weighting, and phylogenetic utility of mitochondrial gene sequences and a compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers. Ann Entomol Soc Am 87:650–701Google Scholar
  22. Smith AP (1986) Ecology of a leaf color polymorphism in a tropical forest species: habitat segregation and herbivory. Oecologia (Berl.) 69:283–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. StatSoft, Inc. (2005) STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 7.1. www.statsoft.com
  24. Wiens D (1978) Mimicry in plants. Evol Biol 11:365–403Google Scholar
  25. Williams KS, Gilbert LE (1981) Insects as selective agents on plant vegetative morphology: egg mimicry reduces egg laying by butterflies. Science 212:467–469PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulf Soltau
    • 1
  • Stefan Dötterl
    • 1
  • Sigrid Liede-Schumann
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant SystematicsUniversity of BayreuthBayreuthGermany

Personalised recommendations