Mosaic pattern of genital divergence in three populations of Schistocerca lineata Scudder, 1899 (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Cyrtacanthacridinae)

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 94, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 289-301

  Song, Hojun ^a   Wenzel, John W ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Geometric morphometric analysis; Intraspecific genital variation

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIVERGENCE; EVOLUTION; GRASSHOPPER; INTRASPECIFIC VARIATION; MORPHOMETRY; REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ACRIDIDAE; CYRTACANTHACRIDINAE; ORTHOPTERA; SCHISTOCERCA LINEATA;

EID: 44649189699     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: 10958312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.00983.x     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Adams DC, Rohlf FJ, Slice DE. 2004. Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the 'Revolution'. Italian Journal of Zoology 71 : 5 16.
2. Amédégnato C. 1976. Structure et évolution des genitalia chez les Acrididae et familles apparentées. Acrida 5 : 1 15.
3. Andrade CAC, Hatadani LM, Klaczko LB. 2005. Phenotypic plasticity of the aedeagus of Drosophila mediopunctata: effect of the temperature. Journal of Thermal Biology 30 : 518 523.
4. Arnqvist G. 1998. Comparative evidence for the evolution of genitalia by sexual selection. Nature 393 : 784 786.
5. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2002. Antagonistic coevolution between the sexes in a group of insects. Nature 415 : 787 789.
6. Bernstein S, Bernstein R. 2002. Allometry of male genitalia in a species of soldier beetle: support for the one-size-fits-all hypothesis. Evolution 56 : 1707 1710.
7. Bertin A, Fairbairn DJ. 2007. The form of sexual selection on male genitalia cannot be inferred from within-population variance and allometry - A case study in Aquarius remigis. Evolution 61 : 825 837.
8. Bookstein FL. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
9. Cordero Rivera A, Andres JA, Córdoba-Aguilar A, Utzeri C. 2004. Postmating sexual selection: allopatric evolution of sperm competition mechanisms and genital morphology in calopterygid damselflies (Insecta: Odonata). Evolution 58 : 349 359.
10. Dirsh VM. 1956. The phallic complex in Acridoidea (Orthoptera) in relation to taxonomy. Transactions of the Royal Entomological Society of London 108 : 223 356.
11. Dirsh VM. 1973. Genital organs in Acridomorphoidea (Insecta) as taxonomic character. Zeitschrift für die Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung 11 : 133 154.
12. Eades DC. 2000. Evolutionary relationships of phallic structures of Acridomorpha (Orthoptera). Journal of Orthoptera Research 9 : 181 210.
13. Eberhard WG. 1985. Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard, MA : Harvard University Press.
14. Eberhard WG. 2004. Rapid divergent evolution of sexual morphology: comparative tests of antagonistic coevolution and traditional female choice. Evolution 58 : 1947 1970.
15. Eberhard WG, Huber BA, Rodriguez SRL, Briceno RD, Salas I, Rodriguez V. 1998. One size fits all? Relationships between the size and degree of variation in genitalia and other body parts in twenty species of insects and spiders. Evolution 52 : 415 431.
16. Freeman H. 1974. Computer processing of line drawing images. Computer Survey 6 : 57 97.
17. Garnier S, Magniez-Jannin F, Rasplus J-Y, Alibert P. 2005. When morphometry meets genetics: inferring the phylogeography of Carabus solieri using Fourier analyses of pronotum and male genitalia. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18 : 269 280.
18. Green AJ. 1999. Allometry of genitalia in insects and spiders: one size does not fit all. Evolution 53 : 1621 1624.
19. Hosken DJ, Stockley P. 2004. Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19 : 87 93.
20. Hribar LJ. 1994. Geographic variation of male genitalia of Anopheles nuneztovari (Diptera: Culicidae). Mosquito Systematics 26 : 132 144.
21. Hubbell TH. 1932. A revision of the Puer group of the North American genus Melanoplus, with remarks on the taxonomic value of the concealed male genitalia in the Cyrtacanthacridinae (Orthoptera, Acrididae). Miscellaneous Publications Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 23 : 1 64.
22. Hubbell TH. 1960. The sibling species of the Alutacea group of the bird-locust genus Schistocerca (Orthoptera, Acrididae, Cyrtacanthacridinae). Miscellaneous Publications Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 116 : 1 91.
23. Huber BA. 1996. Genitalia, fluctuating asymmetry, and patterns of sexual selection in Physocyclus globosus (Araneae: Pholcidae). Revue Suisse de Zoologie, Supplement 1996 : 289 294.
24. Huber BA. 2004. Evidence for functional segregation in the directionally asymmetric male genitalia of the spider Metagonia mariguitarensis (González-Sponga) (Pholcidae: Araneae). Journal of Zoology 262 : 317 326.
25. Huber BA, Pérez González A. 2001. Female genital dimorphism in a spider (Araneae: Pholcidae). Journal of Zoology 255 : 301 304.
26. Iwata H, Ukai Y. 2002. SHAPE: a computer program package of quantitative evaluation of biological shapes based on elliptic fourier descriptors. Journal of Heredity 93 : 384 385.
27. Johnson NF. 1995. Variation in male genitalia of Merope tuber Newman (Mecoptera: Meropeidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 68 : 224 233.
28. Kawano K. 2004. Developmental stability and adaptive variability of male genitalia in sexually dimorphic beetles. American Naturalist 163 : 1 15.
29. Kevan DKM, Lee SK. 1974. Changes in the phallic complex of adult Atractomorpha sinensis sinensis (Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae). Canadian Entomologist 106 : 645 650.
30. Kuhl FP, Giardina CR. 1982. Elliptic Fourier features of a closed contour. Computer Graphics and Image Processing 18 : 236 258.
31. Liu J, Mercer JM, Stam LF, Gibson GC, Zeng Z, Laurie CC. 1996. Genetic analysis of a morphological shape difference in the male genitalia of Drosophila simulans and D. mauritiana. Genetics 142 : 1129 1145.
32. McLellan T, Endler JA. 1998. The relative success of some methods for measuring and describing the shape of complex objects. Systematic Biology 47 : 264 281.
33. Monti L, Baylac M, Lalanne-Cassou B. 2001. Elliptic fourier analysis of the form of genitalia in two Spodoptera species and their hybrids (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 72 : 391 400.
34. Mutanen M, Kaitala A. 2006. Genital variation in a dimorphic moth Selenia tetralunaria (Lepidoptera, Geometridae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 87 : 297 307.
35. Mutanen M, Kaitala A, Mönkkönen M. 2006. Genital variation within and between three closely related Euxoa moth species: testing the lock-and-key hypothesis. Journal of Zoology 268 : 109 119.
36. Ohno S, Hoshizaki S, Ishikawa Y, Tatsuki S, Akimoto S. 2003. Allometry of male genitalia in a lepidopteran species, Ostrinia latipennis (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Applied Entomology and Zoology 38 : 313 319.
37. Otte D. 1970. A comparative study of communicative behavior in grasshoppers. Miscellaneous Publications Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 141 : 1 168.
38. Palestrini C, Rolando A, Laiolo P. 2000. Allometric relationships and character evolution in Onthopahus taurus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology 78 : 1199 1206.
39. Pires HHR, Barbosa SE, Margonari C, Jurberg J, Diotaiuti L. 1998. Variations of the external male genitalia in three populations of Triatoma infestans Klug, 1834. Memoires of the Institute Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro 93 : 479 483.
40. Polihronakis M. 2006. Morphometric analysis of intraspecific shape variation in male and female genitalia of Phyllophaga hirticula (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 99 : 144 150.
41. Randell RL. 1963. On the presence of concealed genitalic structures in female caelifera (Insecta; Orthoptera). Transactions of the American Entomological Society 88 : 247 260.
42. Rohlf FJ. 2005. Tpsregr, Version 1.31. Stony Brook : Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Available at http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/
43. Rohlf FJ. 2006a. Tpsutil, Version 1.38. Stony Brook : Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Available at http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/
44. Rohlf FJ. 2006b. Tpsdig2, Version 2.10. Stony Brook : Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Available at http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/
45. Rohlf FJ. 2006c. Tpsrelw, Version 1.44. Stony Brook : Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Available at http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/
46. Rohlf FJ, Marcus LF. 1993. A revolution in morphometrics. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8 : 129 132.
47. Schmitz G, Reinhold K, Wagner P. 2000. Allometric relationship between genitalic size and body size in two species of mordellid beetles (Coleoptera: Mordellidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 93 : 637 639.
48. Shapiro AM. 1978. The assumption of adaptivity in genital morphology. Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 17 : 68 72.
49. Song H. 2004a. Post-adult emergence development of genitalic structures in Schistocerca Stål and Locusta L. (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 106 : 181 191.
50. Song H. 2004b. Revision of the Alutacea Group of genus Schistocerca (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Cyrtacanthacridinae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 97 : 420 436.
51. Vitalievna NM. 1995. Seasonal variation in the male genitalia of Plagodis dolabraria (Linnaeus, 1758) (Lepidoptera, Geometridae). Atalanta 26 : 311 313.
52. Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheets HD, Fink WL. 2004. Geometric morphometrics for biologists: a primer. San Diego : Elsevier Academic Press.