Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The genetic signature of ecologically different grassland Lepidopterans

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The level of genetic diversity found for species is strongly influenced by properties of the species’ ecology, abundance and behaviour (as dispersal). To address this coherence, we selected twenty-two grassland butterfly and burnet moth species, which were previously analysed by allozyme electrophoresis (using 15–25 loci per species) over a study area in western Germany with adjoining areas of Luxembourg and north-eastern France. For this study area, we calculated the species’ specific climatic niche breadths and derived various ecological parameters from literature and own field observations. The obtained parameters of genetic diversity (heterozygosity, number of alleles and percentage of polymorphic loci), genetic differentiation (D est as well as F ST and F IS values as proxis for genetic differentiation among populations and inbreeding within populations), as well as ecological and climatic niche dimensions did not show significant differences among the different Lepidoptera families; therefore taxonomic assignment apparently has a negligible influence on the genetic structure of taxa. Genetic diversity and differentiation showed a significant correlation with the ecological and climatic niche-breadth of species in many cases: generalistic species with rather unspecific ecological characteristics and climatic niche had higher genetic diversities and tend to have lower differentiation and inbreeding, whereas specialist taxa (i.e. with narrow ecological and climatic niches) have lower genetic diversities and higher differentiation and inbreeding. The results might reflect contrasting population structures of specialist species with lower abundances compared with the more common generalists. The more restricted and isolated occurrence of specialists might consequence a reduction in genetic diversity and an increase in genetic differentiation among local populations. In contrast, generalists with unspecific habitat requirements occur in higher abundances and in consequence show a more homogenous genetic structure with higher diversities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allendorf FW, Luikart G (2007) Conservation and the genetics of populations. Blackwell Publishing, Malden

    Google Scholar 

  • Augenstein B, Ulrich W, Habel JC (2012) Directional temporal shifts in community structure of butterflies and ground beetles in fragmented oligotrophic grasslands of Central Europe. Basic Appl Ecol (in press)

  • Beaumont LJ, Hughes L, Poulsen M (2005) Predicting species distributions: use of climatic parameters in BIOCLIM and its impact on predictions of species’ current and future distributions. Ecol Mod 186:250–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besold J, Huck S, Schmitt T (2008a) Allozyme polymorphisms in the Small Heath Coenonympha pamphilus: recent ecological selection or old biogeographical signal? Annales Zool Fennici 45:217–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Besold J, Schmitt T, Tammaru T, Cassel-Lundhagen A (2008b) Strong genetic impoverishment from the centre of distribution in southern Europe to peripheral Baltic and isolated Scandinavian populations of the pearly heath butterfly. J Biogeogr 35:2090–2101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bink FA (1992) Ecologische atlas van de dagvlinders van Noordwest-Europa. Schyut, Haarlem

    Google Scholar 

  • Booy G, Hendriks RJJ, Smulders MJM, Van Groenendael JM, Vosman B (2000) Genetic diversity and the survival of populations. Plant Biol 2:379–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borell YJ, Pineda H, McCarthy I, Vázquez E, Sánchez JA, Lizana GB (2004) Correlations between fitness and heterozygosity at allozyme and microsatellite loci in the Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. Heredity 92:585–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouat C, Chevallier H, Meusnier S, Noblecourt T, Rasplus J-Y (2004) Specialization and habitat: spatial and environmental effects on abundance and genetic diversity of forest generalist and specialist Carabus species. Mol Ecol 13:1815–1826

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Busby JR (1991) BIOCLIM: a bioclimatic analysis and prediction system. In: Margules CR, Austin MP (eds) Nature conservation: cost effective biological surveys and data analysis. CSIRO, Melbourne, pp 64–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford NG (2010) Smogd: software for the measurement of genetic diversity. Mol Ecol Res 3:556–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crnokrak P, Barrett SCH (2002) Purging the genetic load: a review of the experimental evidence. Evolution 56:2347–2358

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dall SRX, Cuthill IC (1997) The information costs of generalism. Oikos 80:197–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis RLH, Eales H (1997) Patch occupancy in Coenonympha tullia (Müller 1764) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae): habitat quality matters as much as patch size and isolation. J Insect Conserv 1:167–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll DA, Weir T (2005) Beetle Responses to habitat fragmentation depend on ecological traits, habitat conditions and remnant size. Conserv Biol 19:182–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert G, Rennwald E (1991) Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Württembergs. Band 1, E. Ulmer, Stuttgart, 522 pp

  • Ellegren H, Hartman G, Johansson M, Andersson L (1993) Major histocompatibility complex monomorphism and low levels of DNA fingerprinting variability in a rein-troduced and rapidly expanding population of beavers. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 90:8150–8153

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ellstrand N, Elam D (1993) Population genetic consequences of small population size: implications for plant conservation. Ann Rev Ecol Sys 24:217–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Excoffier L, Larval G, Schneider S (2005) Arlequin ver. 3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol Bioinf Online 1:47–50

  • Frankham R, Gilligan DM, Morris D, Briscoe DA (2001) Inbreeding and extinction: effects of purging. Conserv Genet 2:279–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Futuyma DJ, Moreno G (1988) The evolution of ecological specialisation. Ann Rev Ecol Sys 19:207–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Schmitt T (2009) The genetic consequences of different dispersal behaviours in two Lycaenid butterfly species. Bull Entomol Res 99:513–523

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Schmitt T (2012) The burden of genetic diversity. Biol Conserv 174:270–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Meyer M, Schmitt T (2009a) The genetic consequence of differing ecological demands of a generalist and a specialist butterfly species. Biodiv Conserv 18:1895–1908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Finger A, Meyer M, Louy D, Zachos FE, Assmann T, Schmitt T (2009b) Unprecedented long-term genetic monomorphism in an endangered relict butterfly species. Conserv Genet 10:1659–1665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Junker M, Schmitt T (2010) Low genetic differentiation and high dispersal ability in the widespread butterfly species Melanargia galathea. J Insect Conserv 14:467–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Rödder D, Schmitt T, Nève G (2011) Global warming will affect genetic diversity of Lycaena helle populations. Global Change Biol 17:194–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Engler JO, Rödder D, Schmitt T (2012a) Landscape genetics of a recent population extirpation in a burnet moth species. Conserv Genet 13:247–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habel JC, Engler JO, Rödder D, Schmitt T (2012b) Contrasting genetic and morphologic responses on recent population decline in two burnet moths (Lepidoptera, Zygaenidae). Conserv Genet 13:1293–1304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climat 25:1965–1978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann A (1994) Zygaenidae. In: Ebert G, Rennwald E (eds) Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Württembergs, vol 3. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 196–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannesen J, Veith M, Seitz A (1996) Population genetic structure of the butterfly Melitaea didyma (Nymphalidae) along a northern distribution range border. Mol Ecol 5:259–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Joron M, Brakefield PM (2003) Captivity masks inbreeding effects on male mating success in butterflies. Nature 424:191–194

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jost L (2008) G ST and its relatives do not measure differentiation. Mol Ecol 17:4015–4026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Junker M (2010) Critical examination of the Habitats Directive concept in consideration of ecology, Management Units and Evolutionarily Significant Units using the example of the butterfly species Euphydryas aurinia. PhD-thesis, Department of Biogeography, Trier University

  • Kadlec T, Vrba P, Kepka P, Schmitt T, Konvička M (2010) Tracking the decline of once-common butterfly: delayed oviposition, demography and population genetics in the Hermit, Chazara briseis. Animal Conserv 13:172–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karl I, Schmitt T, Fischer K (2009) Genetic differentiation between alpine and lowland populations of a butterfly is caused by variation at the PGI locus. Ecography 32:488–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawecki TJ (1994) Accumulation of deleterious mutations and the evolutionary cost of being a generalist. Am Nat 144:833–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leimu R, Mutikainen P, Koricheva J, Fischer M (2006) How general are positive relationships between plant population size, fitness and genetic variation? J Ecol 94:942–952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1962) Theory of fitness in a heterogeneous environment. I. The fitness set and adaptive function. Am Nat 96:361–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1968) Evolution in changing environments. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieutenant-Gosselin M, Bernatchez L (2006) Local heterozygosity-fitness correlations with global positive effects on fitness in threespine stickleback. Evolution 60:1658–1668

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Louy D, Habel JC, Schmitt T, Meyer M, Assmann T, Müller P (2007) Strongly diverging population genetic patterns of three skipper species: isolation, restricted gene flow and panmixis. Conserv Genet 8:671–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArthur RH (1972) Geographical ecology. Harper & Row, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Melbourne BA, Hastings A (2008) Extinction risk depends strongly on factors contributing to stochasticity. Nature 454:100–103

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reed DH, Frankham R (2004) Correlation between fitness and genetic diversity. Conserv Biol 17:230–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roff DA, DeRose MA (2001) The evolution of trade-offs: effects of inbreeding on fecundity relationships in the cricket Gryllus firmus. Evolution 55:111–121

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt T, Besold J (2010) Up-slope movements and large scale expansions: the taxonomy and biogeography of the Coenonympha arcania - C. darwiniana - C. gardetta butterfly species complex. Zool J Linn Soc 159:890–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt T, Seitz A (2001) Intraspecific allozymatic differentiation reveals the glacial refugia and the postglacial expansions of European Erebia medusa (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Biol J Linn Soc 74:429–458

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt T, Seitz A (2002) Influence of habitat fragmentation on the genetic structure of Polyommatus coridon (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae): implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 107:291–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt T, Seitz A (2004) Low diversity but high differentiation: the population genetics of Aglaope infausta (Zygaenidae: Lepidoptera). J Biogeogr 31:137–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt T, Gießl A, Seitz A (2003) Did Polyommatus icarus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) have distinct glacial refugia in southern Europe? Evidence from population genetics. Biol J Linn Soc 80:529–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt T, Röber S, Seitz A (2005) Is the last glaciation the only relevant event for the present genetic population structure of the Meadow Brown butterfly Maniola jurtina (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae)? Biol J Linn Soc 85:419–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulte T, Eller O, Niehuis M, Rennwald E (2007) Die Tagfalter der Pfalz. GNOR-Eigenverlag, Landau, pp 932

    Google Scholar 

  • Sol D, Timmermans S, Lefebvre L (2002) Behavioural flexibility and invasion success in birds. Anim Behav 63:495–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tripet F, Christe P, Møller AP (2002) The importance of host spatial distribution for parasite specialisation and speciation: comparative study of bird leas (Siphonapter: Ceratphyllidae). J Anim Ecol 71:735–748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Tienderen PH (1991) Evolution of generalists and specialists in spatially heterogeneous environments. Evolution 45:1317–1331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver W, Shannon CE (1949) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel M, Schmitt T, Weitzel M, Seitz A (2006) The severe decline of butterflies on western German calcareous grasslands during the last 30 years: a conservation problem. Biol Conserv 128:542–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitlock M (1993) Lack of correlation between heterozygosity and fitness in forked fungus beetles. Heredity 70:574–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

JCH was financed by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD). We are grateful for fruitful comments on this manuscript to Jan O. Engler (Bonn, Germany), Camilla Wellstein (Bayreuth, Germany) and two anonymous referees.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, Technische Universität München, Hans-Carl-von-Carlowitz-Platz 2, 85350, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany

    Jan Christian Habel

  2. Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, Adenauerallee 160, 53113, Bonn, Germany

    Dennis Rödder

  3. Terrestrial Ecology Unit, Department of Biology, Ghent University, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Luc Lens

  4. Department of Biogeography, Trier University, 54296, Trier, Germany

    Thomas Schmitt

Authors
  1. Jan Christian Habel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dennis Rödder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luc Lens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Schmitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Christian Habel.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 59 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Habel, J.C., Rödder, D., Lens, L. et al. The genetic signature of ecologically different grassland Lepidopterans. Biodivers Conserv 22, 2401–2411 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0407-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0407-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation