5 research outputs found
Thermoregulatory ability and mechanism do not differ consistently between neotropical and temperate butterflies
Climate change is a major threat to species worldwide, yet it remains uncertain whether tropical or temperate species are more vulnerable to changing temperatures. To further our understanding of this, we used a standardised field protocol to (1) study the buffering ability (ability to regulate body temperature relative to surrounding air temperature) of neotropical (Panama) and temperate (the United Kingdom, Czech Republic and Austria) butterflies at the assemblage and family level, (2) determine if any differences in buffering ability were driven by morphological characteristics and (3) used ecologically relevant temperature measurements to investigate how butterflies use microclimates and behaviour to thermoregulate. We hypothesised that temperate butterflies would be better at buffering than neotropical butterflies as temperate species naturally experience a wider range of temperatures than their tropical counterparts. Contrary to our hypothesis, at the assemblage level, neotropical species (especially Nymphalidae) were better at buffering than temperate species, driven primarily by neotropical individuals cooling themselves more at higher air temperatures. Morphology was the main driver of differences in buffering ability between neotropical and temperate species as opposed to the thermal environment butterflies experienced. Temperate butterflies used postural thermoregulation to raise their body temperature more than neotropical butterflies, probably as an adaptation to temperate climates, but the selection of microclimates did not differ between regions. Our findings demonstrate that butterfly species have unique thermoregulatory strategies driven by behaviour and morphology, and that neotropical species are not likely to be more inherently vulnerable to warming than temperate species
Recommended from our members
Heatwave predicts a shady future for insects: impacts of an extreme weather event on a chalk grassland in Bedfordshire, UK
Climate change is set to become one of the leading causes of biodiversity loss worldwide, with extreme weather events projected to increase in frequency. Ectothermic animals such as insects are at particular risk, especially when they are isolated and unable to move through the landscape to track suitable climate. To protect such taxa, it is important to understand how they are impacted by extreme weather events and whether management could provide effective microclimate refuges. However, potential management interventions remain untested for many species. Here, we show that the extreme high temperatures experienced in the UK on 19th July 2022 resulted in a community of butterflies becoming inactive, but that shaded areas, including artificial slopes created as part of conservation management for climate change, provided a refuge during this period. Our results indicate that future high temperatures could force butterflies to shelter in the shade, potentially being unable to fly, feed or mate during these periods, with possible long-term impacts, particularly if multiple consecutive high temperature days are experienced.
Implications for Insect Conservation
Producing artificial slopes and integrating patches of scrub within grassland could create an array of microclimates that allow butterflies and other invertebrates to thermoregulate, providing a refuge during extreme weather events. Our findings highlight the dramatic effect of extreme temperatures on insect communities, as well as simple management solutions that could be implemented widely and relatively easily by conservation managers, to counter some of the negative impacts of rising temperatures and extreme weather events.We thank the People’s Postcode Lottery Nature-based Solutions Fund for supporting the "Banking on Butterflies" Project associated with this work. MPH was funded by the David and Claudia Harding Foundation through a Harding Distinguished Postgraduate Scholarship. EAJ and her collaboration with the Wildlife Trust was supported by an Evolution Education Trust Knowledge-Exchange Studentship grant, administered by the Cambridge Conservation Initiative. The Isaac Newton Trust/Wellcome Trust ISSF/University of Cambridge Joint Research Grants Scheme grant (RG89529) supported the work of AJB and ECT in establishing this project. AJB was funded by the NERC Highlight topic GLiTRS project NE/V007173/1
Recommended from our members
Thermoregulatory ability and mechanism do not differ consistently between neotropical and temperate butterflies.
Climate change is a major threat to species worldwide, yet it remains uncertain whether tropical or temperate species are more vulnerable to changing temperatures. To further our understanding of this, we used a standardised field protocol to (1) study the buffering ability (ability to regulate body temperature relative to surrounding air temperature) of neotropical (Panama) and temperate (the United Kingdom, Czech Republic and Austria) butterflies at the assemblage and family level, (2) determine if any differences in buffering ability were driven by morphological characteristics and (3) used ecologically relevant temperature measurements to investigate how butterflies use microclimates and behaviour to thermoregulate. We hypothesised that temperate butterflies would be better at buffering than neotropical butterflies as temperate species naturally experience a wider range of temperatures than their tropical counterparts. Contrary to our hypothesis, at the assemblage level, neotropical species (especially Nymphalidae) were better at buffering than temperate species, driven primarily by neotropical individuals cooling themselves more at higher air temperatures. Morphology was the main driver of differences in buffering ability between neotropical and temperate species as opposed to the thermal environment butterflies experienced. Temperate butterflies used postural thermoregulation to raise their body temperature more than neotropical butterflies, probably as an adaptation to temperate climates, but the selection of microclimates did not differ between regions. Our findings demonstrate that butterfly species have unique thermoregulatory strategies driven by behaviour and morphology, and that neotropical species are not likely to be more inherently vulnerable to warming than temperate species.The research was supported by an ERC Starting Grant BABE 805189 (BLH, IF, IK and KS), Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute short-term fellowship (BLH), the Czech Science Foundation (GAČR 19-15645Y GPAL and 20-31295S YB), a Cambridge Conservation Initiative/Evolution Education Trust (CCI/EET) studentship (EAJ), the NERC Highlight topic GLiTRS project NE/V007173/1 (AJB), a Isaac Newton Trust/Wellcome Trust ISSF/University of Cambridge Joint Research Grants Scheme grant (RG89529) (AJB and ECT) and the Sistema Nacional de Investigación, SENACYT Panama (YB and GPAL)
Recommended from our members
Research data supporting "Thermoregulatory ability and mechanism does not differ consistently between neotropical and temperate butterflies".
A dataset of tropical and temperate butterflies.
Methods of data collection:
Neotropical data were collected in Panama from February to June 2020 and from October 2021 to March 2022 during both wet (May to December) and dry (January to April) seasons (Supplementary Fig. 1, Supplementary Table 1) (Leigh, 1999). Temperate data were collected in the Czech Republic and Austria between April and August 2021 and in the UK between April and September 2009 and May and September 2018 (Supplementary Fig. 1, Supplementary Table 1) (Bladon et al., 2020). Data collection took place between 7:30 and 17:30. Neotropical field sites included lowland scrub and managed urban green spaces, secondary semi-deciduous lowland tropical forest, mountain rainforest and management agroforestry (Supplementary Table 1). Temperate field sites included calcareous meadows, grassland meadows, alpine/montane grassland, encroaching scrub, secondary forest, and exposed ground (Supplementary Table 1).
Butterfly body temperature and morphological measurements
Butterflies were captured with butterfly nets when encountered (without chasing) and data were collected following the protocol used by Bladon et al. (2020), as follows. Once in the net, and within 10 seconds, a temperature reading of the butterfly’s thorax (body temperature, Tb) was taken using a thermocouple (0.5 mm diameter) and handheld indicator (Tecpel Thermometer 305B, TC Direct, Uxbridge, UK). Air temperature (Ta) was taken at waist height where the butterfly was caught, with the thermocouple shaded from the sun. If the butterfly was resting on a substrate before capture, the temperature of the air 1 cm above where it was sat was recorded with the thermocouple (microclimate temperature, Tm). The butterfly was identified to species or subspecies. In the case of butterflies from the tropical Calephelis genus it was not possible to identify individuals to species, so data from these butterflies were aggregated to genus level. Forewing length (in mm) from the tip of the wing to the point where it meets the thorax was measured using callipers (at the Panama and UK sites only).
Description of each column:
Species: species name
Site: location of capture of the butterfly
Date: date of capture of the butterfly
Family: family the butterfly belongs to
Activity: what the butterfly was doing when it was first encountered (nectaring, flying, resting, basking, interacting with other/same species).
Tair.perch: if the butterfly was first encountered while on a perch, this is the temperature 1cm above the perch. All temperatures are in Celcius.
Tbody: temperature of the thorax of the butterfly within 10 seconds of capture
Tair: air temperature recorded at waist height in shade in the location the butterfly was first encountered
Tperch: if the butterfly was first encountered while on a perch, this is the temperature of the surface of the perch
Region: tropical (from Panama) or temperate (from Europe)
Mean.winglength.mm: mean wing length of the species (one value per species) in mm
Colour: the dominant wing colour of the butterfly
Colour.value: the wing colour converted to a scale from 1 (white) to 6 (black)
Sexual.dimorphism.in.colour: A Y (yes) or N (no) for whether that species has males and females having different dominant wing colours (so that their colour would be different between sexes)
Migratory: A Y (yes) or N (no) for whether in the area of capture that butterfly species is known to be migratory
Average.forewing.aspect.ratio: the average aspect ratio for the forewing of the butterfly (wing length divided by wing width)
Subfamily: the subfamily the species belongs to
Tribe: the tribe the species belongs toThe research was supported by an ERC Starting Grant BABE 805189 (BLH, IF, IK and KS), Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute short-term fellowship (BLH), the Czech Science Foundation (GAČR 19-15645Y GPAL and 20-31295S YB), a Cambridge Conservation Initiative/Evolution Education Trust (CCI/EET) studentship (EAJ), the NERC Highlight topic GLiTRS project NE/V007173/1 (AJB), a Isaac Newton Trust/Wellcome Trust ISSF/University of Cambridge Joint Research Grants Scheme grant (RG89529) (AJB and ECT) and the Sistema Nacional de Investigación, SENACYT Panama (YB and GPAL)
Recommended from our members
Thermoregulatory ability and mechanism do not differ consistently between neotropical and temperate butterflies
Funder: Cambridge Conservation Initiative; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100014746Funder: Wellcome Trust; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269Climate change is a major threat to species worldwide, yet it remains uncertain whether tropical or temperate species are more vulnerable to changing temperatures. To further our understanding of this, we used a standardised field protocol to (1) study the buffering ability (ability to regulate body temperature relative to surrounding air temperature) of neotropical (Panama) and temperate (the United Kingdom, Czech Republic and Austria) butterflies at the assemblage and family level, (2) determine if any differences in buffering ability were driven by morphological characteristics and (3) used ecologically relevant temperature measurements to investigate how butterflies use microclimates and behaviour to thermoregulate. We hypothesised that temperate butterflies would be better at buffering than neotropical butterflies as temperate species naturally experience a wider range of temperatures than their tropical counterparts. Contrary to our hypothesis, at the assemblage level, neotropical species (especially Nymphalidae) were better at buffering than temperate species, driven primarily by neotropical individuals cooling themselves more at higher air temperatures. Morphology was the main driver of differences in buffering ability between neotropical and temperate species as opposed to the thermal environment butterflies experienced. Temperate butterflies used postural thermoregulation to raise their body temperature more than neotropical butterflies, probably as an adaptation to temperate climates, but the selection of microclimates did not differ between regions. Our findings demonstrate that butterfly species have unique thermoregulatory strategies driven by behaviour and morphology, and that neotropical species are not likely to be more inherently vulnerable to warming than temperate species