» Articles » PMID: 28747640

Structural and Physical Determinants of the Proboscis-sucking Pump Complex in the Evolution of Fluid-feeding Insects

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2017 Jul 28
PMID 28747640
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Fluid-feeding insects have evolved a unique strategy to distribute the labor between a liquid-acquisition device (proboscis) and a sucking pump. We theoretically examined physical constraints associated with coupling of the proboscis and sucking pump into a united functional organ. Classification of fluid feeders with respect to the mechanism of energy dissipation is given by using only two dimensionless parameters that depend on the length and diameter of the proboscis food canal, maximum expansion of the sucking pump chamber, and chamber size. Five species of Lepidoptera - White-headed prominent moth (Symmerista albifrons), White-dotted prominent moth (Nadata gibosa), Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus), Carolina sphinx moth (Manduca sexta), and Death's head sphinx moth (Acherontia atropos) - were used to illustrate this classification. The results provide a rationale for categorizing fluid-feeding insects into two groups, depending on whether muscular energy is spent on moving fluid through the proboscis or through the pump. These findings are relevant to understanding energetic costs of evolutionary elaboration and reduction of the mouthparts and insect diversification through development of new habits by fluid-feeding insects in general and by Lepidoptera in particular.

Citing Articles

Biomechanical drivers of the evolution of butterflies and moths with a coilable proboscis.

Palaoro A, Monaenkova D, Beard C, Adler P, Kornev K Proc Biol Sci. 2024; 291(2035):20240903.

PMID: 39591995 PMC: 11597405. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2024.0903.


Feeding rate in adult Manduca sexta is unaffected by proboscis submersion depth.

Pierce T, Hedrick T PLoS One. 2024; 19(5):e0302536.

PMID: 38809859 PMC: 11135714. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302536.


Diverse material properties and morphology of moth proboscises relates to the feeding habits of some macromoth and other lepidopteran lineages.

Bast E, Marshall N, Myers K, Marsh L, Hurtado M, Van Zandt P Interface Focus. 2024; 14(2):20230051.

PMID: 38618232 PMC: 11008959. DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2023.0051.


Wettability and morphology of proboscises interweave with hawkmoth evolutionary history.

Palaoro A, Gole A, Sun Y, Puchalski A, Beard C, Adler P J Exp Biol. 2023; 226(19).

PMID: 37724664 PMC: 10617603. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.245699.


Honey bees switch mechanisms to drink deep nectar efficiently.

Wei J, Rico-Guevara A, Nicolson S, Brau F, Damman P, Gorb S Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023; 120(30):e2305436120.

PMID: 37459520 PMC: 10372696. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2305436120.


References
1.
Mitter C, Davis D, Cummings M . Phylogeny and Evolution of Lepidoptera. Annu Rev Entomol. 2016; 62:265-283. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-ento-031616-035125. View

2.
Smedley S, Eisner T . Sodium uptake by puddling in a moth. Science. 1995; 270(5243):1816-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.270.5243.1816. View

3.
Pivnick K, McNeil J . Effects of nectar concentration on butterfly feeding: measured feeding rates for Thymelicus lineola (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) and a general feeding model for adult Lepidoptera. Oecologia. 2017; 66(2):226-237. DOI: 10.1007/BF00379859. View

4.
Tsai C, Monaenkova D, Beard C, Adler P, Kornev K . Paradox of the drinking-straw model of the butterfly proboscis. J Exp Biol. 2014; 217(Pt 12):2130-8. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.097998. View

5.
Krenn H . Feeding mechanisms of adult Lepidoptera: structure, function, and evolution of the mouthparts. Annu Rev Entomol. 2009; 55:307-27. PMC: 4040413. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-ento-112408-085338. View