Short Communication
Print
Short Communication
An attempt of interspecies mating between Phengaris nausithous and P. teleius (Lepidoptera, Lycaenidae)
expand article infoAnna Pilařová, Stanislava Zachardová, Zdeněk Faltýnek Fric§, Vladimír Vrabec
‡ Czech University of Life Sciences, Praha, Czech Republic
§ Biology Centre CAS, České Budějovice, Czech Republic
Open Access

Abstract

Interspecies mating is rarely observed even in the wild. Such a case in Lycaenidae is reported and photographically documented for the species pairing Phengaris teleius (Bergsträsser, 1779) and P. nausithous (Bergsträsser, 1779), which was observed on 19 July 2016 in northern Bohemia near the village of Hynčice, Czech Republic. Possible causes of this phenomenon are discussed.

Introduction

From time to time, a mating between different species of butterflies is observed. The observation of such behaviour or the occurrence of hybrids in the wild is more common in some groups of butterflies than in others. More such information from the wild is available for Papilionidae (genera Ornithoptera Boisduval, 1832, Papilio Linnaeus, 1758, Troides Hübner, 1819) (Sands and Sawyer 1977, Sperling 2011 etc.), Pieridae (genus Colias Fabricius, 1807) (for instance Hovanitz 1949; Taylor 1972), Nymphalidae (genera Danaus Kluk, 1802, Erebia Dalman, 1816, Heliconius Kluk, 1780, Limenitis Fabricius, 1807) (Platt et al. 1978; Baidya et al. 2018 etc.), etc. However, relatively few observations are available for the family Lycaenidae (for instance Downey 1962; Smetacek and Bhakare 2010). The genus Phengaris Doherty, 1891 belonging to this family is the subject of very intensive research due to its complex ecological relationship with ants, yet we are not aware of any similar behaviour being recorded in closely related species of this genus. In the following text, we provide first information and photographic documentation about the interspecific copulation of the sympatric species Phengaris teleius (Bergsträsser, 1799) and P. nausithous (Bergsträsser, 1799), which has been observed in the wild.

Material and methods

Survey of species of the genus Phengaris is mandatory for the conservation of these butterflies protected by the EU Habitat Directive. Our survey of Large Blues of the genus Phengaris took place in the area of the Protected Landscape Area Broumovsko (Northern Bohemia, Czech Republic) in 13 habitat patches in the vicinity of the villages of Hynčice, Ruprechtice and Vižňov which contained the flowering food plant Sanguisorba officinalis L. from 4 July to 5 August, 2016. The location of the patches is shown in Fig. 1. We monitored the species in this northwestern part of Czech Republic to estimate their density using the Mark-Release-Recapture method, calculated by program MARK 8.1 (White and Burnham 1999) with modifications according to Nowicki et al. (2005). Colonies of Phengaris butterflies here form a single metapopulation structure with dispersal occurring between patches. The total number of individuals of Phengaris teleius for this metapopulation was estimated by the Cormack-Jolly-Seber method (see Schwarz and Arnason 1996; Schwarz and Seber 1999) to be 802 individuals while 1487 individuals were estimated for P. nausithous.

Figure 1. 

Distribution of patches where the species Phengaris teleius and P. nausithous were marked in Broumovsko in northern Bohemia of the Czech Republic in 2016. The place of observation is patch H2. Drawn in publicly available document from www.mapy.cz.

We randomly took photographs of individuals throughout the survey, and the sequence of images from the interspecific mating of the aforementioned taxa was revealed later after a thorough review of the photos taken at site Hynčice 2 near the river Stěnava (GPS coordinates roughly in the middle of the territory: 50°36'58"N, 16°18'35"E, elevation about 400 m). The date of the pictures is July 19, 2016, time 13:25 CEST, by one of us (VV).

Results

After the survey in Broumovsko had finished, we encountered an unusual attempt at interspecific mating of a female P. nausithous and male P. teleius during analyses of photo-documentation (Figs 2, 3). At first, we thought it was an interesting photo of both species on a single inflorescence of a food plant, but on closer inspection, we found that the butterflies were attempting to copulate with a visible connection of their abdomens. We thus do not know the exact period of time that they remained in copula.

Figure 2. 

Individuals of Phengaris teleius and P. nausithous on a flower of either’s food plant, Sanguisorba officinalis, while attempting to mate with each other.

Figure 3. 

The mutual connection of individuals of different species in this poorer quality image is evident.

Discussion

Despite these two species being closely related (see Fric et al. 2007) and that they utilise the same host plant (in Europe exclusively Sanguisorba officinalis), we are not aware of any other similar records of these species mating.

The vast majority of interspecific copulation cases happen within one genus. For instance, in American Limenitis archippus (Cramer, 1776) and related species (see Platt et al. 1978 but also Porter 1989), in the genus Colias (Hovanitz 1949; Taylor 1972), in Danaus (Baidya et al. 2018), in Heliconius (Mallet et al. 2007), while the best known butterfly examples are in the genus Papilio (Sperling 2011). Rarer are cases of mating between different genera in Lepidoptera (examples: Clarke et al. 1996; Sands and Sawyer 1977; Spitzer et al. 2010) or even between two families as in Novotný et al. (2009) between Zygaena filipendulae (Linnaeus, 1758) (Zygaenidae) and Amata phegea (Linnaeus, 1758) (Erebidae, Arctiinae) or between a butterfly (Melitaea athalia (Rottemburg, 1775), Nymphalidae) and a moth (Amata phegea) (Wiemers 1987, who also reviews some other examples).

Such intraspecific mating is a prerequisite for hybridization (Descimon and Mallet 2009); however, natural hybridization in Lepidoptera is rare. A famous example is “Erebia serotina Descimon & de Lesse, 1953”, which is a natural hybrid of males of E. pronoe (Esper ,1780) and females of E. epiphron (Knoch, 1783) (Michel et al. 2013). The majority of known hybrids are not natural as they are produced in captivity (Wang and Dong 2001), especially between various species of the genus Papilio (for instance Clarke and Sheppard 1955), where even after several generations the hybrids are still fertile (Blanchard and Descimon 1988). Using molecular methods, it has been repeatedly shown that the reproductive barriers in Lepidoptera usually work well (Porter 1989; Elzinga et al. 2014). When natural interspecific mating does occur, it has been found that the willingness is strongly asymmetric between species. For instance, Deering and Scriber (2002) observed high preferences of males of Papilio canadensis (Rothschild & Jordan, 1906) for females of Papilio glaucus Linnaeus, 1758.

Observations of interspecific mating between different members of the family Lycaenidae are reported by Downey (1962) between two species of Callophrys Billberg, 1820 and between two species of Lycaena Fabricius, 1807. Further lycaenid examples are from Smetacek and Bhakare (2010), who reported mating between Castalius rosimon (Fabricius, 1775) and Talicada nyseus (Guerin, 1843) and between Chilades parrhasius (Fabricius 1793) and Zizina otis (Fabricius, 1787). For the genus Phengaris Doherty, 1891, however, we have not found any record of such an observation or information about the presence of hybrids anywhere, and therefore, due to the very frequent sympatry and syntopy of both species, we consider this very interesting.

What are the reasons for inter-specific mating, or even hybridisation? In general, it results from an imperfect reproduction barrier. Such barriers in Lepidoptera usually consist of several levels, many species combining olfactory recognition (Li et al. 2017) with specific behaviour and pheromones, and other signals (Phelan and Baker 1990). However, mating pheromones have frequently similar composition (Ganyard and Brady 1971, 1972) and their content vary not only between species but also within (De Pasqual et al. 2021). Also, the lock-and-key mechanism in lepidopteran genitalia does not always work (see Mikkola 1992, 2008).

Hybridization can have negative impacts when some species newly colonise or are introduced into a landscape with closely related species (Cianchi et al. 2003), but there are cases where it may trigger new speciation (Mavarez et al. 2006; Capblancq et al. 2015). In the case of our observation, a union of butterflies was identified in the photographs, but it is far from certain whether the copulation was successful and whether additional isolation mechanisms prevented the possibility of hybrid offspring.

We cannot be sure why the observed attempted pairing of Phengaris butterflies occurred. As the species in Phengaris vary in number of androconia (see for instance Sibatani et al. 1994), a possible explanation is the confusion of individuals by mixing the pheromones of both species when there is a particularly high density of individuals at the observation point. Alternatively, a suitable conspecific partner might be harder to find if a pheromone is similar. However, neither reason appears particularly likely given that the population density of either species at the observation site was not higher than average, but neither was it at the limit of observability.

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the Czech Ministry of Interior project VK01010103 (B.C.B.). Experiments and observations comply with the current laws of the Czech Republic where they were performed. The authors would like to thank the company HBH Projekt spol. s r. o. for financial support of field research. They also thank the administration of the Broumovsko Protected Landscape Area for the granted exemption from the protection conditions of the species of the genera Phengaris and Formica, no. 01275/BR/16. Special thanks to students of the Czech University of Life Sciences Kateřina Hejretová, Anežka Štěpánková, and Šárka Valachová for their help in the field. David Lees helped improve the English.

References

  • Baidya S, Basu DN, Roy S, Basu Roy A (2018) Occurrence of interspecific mating between two species of Danaus Kluk, 1780 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in Nature. Psyche: A Journal of Entomology 2018: e3059017. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3059017
  • Blanchard R, Descimon H (1988) Hybridization between two species of Swallowtails: meiosis mechanism, and the genesis of gynandromorphs. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 42: 94–102.
  • Capblancq T, Després L, Rioux D, Mavárez J (2015) Hybridization promotes speciation in Coenonympha butterflies. Molecular Ecology 24(24): 6209–6222. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13479
  • Cianchi R, Ungaro A, Marini M, Bullini L (2003) Differential patterns of hybridization and introgression between the swallowtails Papilio machaon and P. hospiton from Sardinia and Corsica islands (Lepidoptera, Papilionidae). Molecular Ecology 12(6): 1461–1471. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01813.x
  • Clarke CA, Sheppard PM (1955) The breeding in captivity of the hybrid Papilio rutulus female x Papilio glaucus male. Lepidopterists News 9: 46–48.
  • Clarke CA, Cronin A, Francke W, Philipp P, Pickett JA, Wadhams LJ, Woodcock CM (1996) Mating attempts between the Scarlet Tiger Moth, Callimorpha dominula L., and the Cinnabar Moth, Tyria jacobaeae L. (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae), involve a common sex pheromone composition. Experientia 52(6): 636–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01969746
  • De Pasqual C, Groot AT, Mappes J, Burdfield-Steel E (2021) Evolutionary importance of intraspecific variation in sex pheromones. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 36(9): 848–859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2021.05.005
  • Deering MD, Scriber MJ (2002) Field bioassays show heterospecific mating preference asymmetry between hybridizing North American Papilio butterfly species (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Journal of Ethology 20(1): 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-002-0050-2
  • Downey JC (1962) Inter-specific mating in Lycaenidae. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 16: 235–237.
  • Elzinga J, Mappes J, Kaila L (2014) Pre- and post-mating reproductive barriers drive divergence of five sympatric species of Naryciinae moths (Lepidoptera: Psychidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 112(3): 584–605. https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12281
  • Fric Z, Wahlberg N, Pech P, Zrzavy J (2007) Phylogeny and classification of the Phengaris-Maculinea clade (Lepidoptera : Lycaenidae): total evidence and phylogenetic species concepts. Systematic Entomology 32(3): 558–567. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3113.2007.00387.x
  • Ganyard Jr MC, Brady UE (1971) Inhibition of attraction and cross-attraction by interspecific sex pheromone communication in Lepidoptera. Nature 234(5329): 415–416. https://doi.org/10.1038/234415a0
  • Ganyard Jr MC, Brady UE (1972) Interspecific Attraction in Lepidoptera in the Field. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 65(6): 1279–1282. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/65.6.1279
  • Hovanitz W (1949) Interspecific matings between Colias eurytheme and Colias philodice in wild populations. Evolution 3(2): 170–173. https://doi.org/10.2307/2405551
  • Li C, Wang H, Chen X, Yao J, Shi L, Zhou C (2017) Role of visual and olfactory cues in sex recognition in butterfly Cethosia cyane cyane. Scientific Reports 7(1): 5033. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-04721-6
  • Mallet J, Beltrán M, Neukirchen W, Linares M (2007) Natural hybridization in heliconiine butterflies: the species boundary as a continuum. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2007, 7: 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-7-28
  • Mavarez J, Salazar C, Bermingham E, Salcedo C, Jiggins C, Linares M (2006) Speciation by hybridization in Heliconius butterflies. Nature 441: 868–871. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04738
  • Michel F, Meglécz E, Martin JF, Descimon H (2013) Erebia serotina Descimon & de Lesse 1953 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae), a recurrent hybrid between two distantly related species. Annales de la Société entomologique de France (N.S. ) 49: 100–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/00379271.2013.774741
  • Mikkola K (2008) The lock-and-key mechanisms of the internal genitalia of the Noctuidae (Lepidoptera): How are they selected for? European Journal of Entomology 105(1): 13–25. https://doi.org/10.14411/eje.2008.002
  • Novotný D, Beneš J, Konvička M (2009) Repeated observation of interfamilial “mating” between males of the arctiid moth Amata phegea and females of the burnet moth Zygaena filipendulae (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae and Zygaenidae). Nachrichten des Entomologischen Vereins Apollo 30: 81–82.
  • Nowicki P, Richter A, Glinka U, Holzschuh A, Toelke U, Henle K, Woyciechowski M, Settele J (2005) Less input same output: simplified approach for population size assessment in Lepidoptera. Population Ecology 47: 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-005-0223-2
  • Phelan PL, Baker TC (1990) Comparative study of courtship in twelve phycitine moths (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Journal of Insect Behavior 3(3): 303–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01052112
  • Platt AP, Rawson GW, Balogh G (1978) Inter-specific hybridization involving Limenitis archippus and its congeneric species (Nymphalidae). Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 32: 289–303.
  • Porter AH (1989) Genetic evidence for reproductive isolation between hybridizing Limenitis butterflies (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in Southwestern New Mexico. The American Midland Naturalist 122(2): 275–280. https://doi.org/10.2307/2425913
  • Sands DPA, Sawyer PF (1977) An example of natural hybridization between Troides oblongomaculatus papuensis Wallace and Ornithoptera priamus poseidon Doubleday (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Australian Journal of Entomology 16: 81–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-6055.1977.tb00066.x
  • Schwarz CJ, Arnason AN (1996) A general methodology for the analysis of capture-recapture experiments in open populations. Biometrics 52: 860–873. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533048
  • Sibatani A, Saigusa T, Hirowatari T (1994) The genus Maculinea van Eecke, 1915 (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) from the East Palaearctic Region. Tyo to Ga 44(4): 157–220.
  • Smetacek P, Bhakare S (2010) Two instances of inter-generic mating by Lycaenidae (Lepidoptera) in Maharashtra, India. Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 43: 23–25. https://doi.org/10.5962/p.266506
  • Sperling F (2011) Natural hybrids of Papilio (Insecta: Lepidoptera): poor taxonomy or interesting evolutionary problem? Canadian Journal of Zoology 68: 1790–1799. https://doi.org/10.1139/z90-260
  • Spitzer L, Beneš J, Vrba P, Zlatník M (2010) Tree observation of interspecific mating attempts by males of the Meadow Brown (Maniola jurtina (Linnaeus, 1758)) in the wild (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae: Satyrinae, Heliconiinae). Nachrichten des Entomologischen Vereins Apollo 31(3): 166–168.
  • Wang CZA, Dong J (2001) Interspecific hybridization of Helicoverpa armigera and H. assulta (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Chinese Science Bulletin 46: 489–491. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03187264
  • Wiemers M (1987) Beitrag zur artfremden Freilandpaarung. Eine Freilandkopula zwischen Mellicta (Lep.: Nymphalidae) und Amata (Lep.: Ctenuchidae) sowie eine weitere Zygaenen-Hybridkopula (Lep.: Zygaenidae). Entomologische Zeitschrift mit Insektenbörse 97(3): 27–30.
login to comment