Find research datasets worth reusing

Figure 5 in Multi-scale patterns in the host specificity of plant-dwelling arthropods: the influence of host plant and temporal variation on species richness and assemblage composition of true bugs (Hemiptera)

Figure 5. Annual cyclic pattern of the proportion of the effectively specialized fauna (squares) and singleton species (circles) for the total number of hemipteran species from each sampling period.

Figure 3 in Multi-scale patterns in the host specificity of plant-dwelling arthropods: the influence of host plant and temporal variation on species richness and assemblage composition of true bugs (Hemiptera)

Figure 3. Mean number of individuals (from SIMPER analysis) of dominant hemipteran species, during each sampling period, for most plant species.

Figure 1 in Multi-scale patterns in the host specificity of plant-dwelling arthropods: the influence of host plant and temporal variation on species richness and assemblage composition of true bugs (Hemiptera)

Figure 1. Interactions between plant species sampled and sampling period for (A) abundance (number of individuals) per plant and (B) species richness per plant (standard error bars are shown).

Figure 6 in Multi-scale patterns in the host specificity of plant-dwelling arthropods: the influence of host plant and temporal variation on species richness and assemblage composition of true bugs (Hemiptera)

Figure 6. Relationship between the effectively specialized fauna (squares) and singleton species (circles) for the number of hemipteran species from each sampling period and for the entire collection. An exponential decay equation is fitted for effectively specialized fauna, y = 2.973∗ exp (−0.00575∗ x) + (−1.478), R2 = 0.7598, and for singleton species, y = 22.53∗exp (−0.08466∗x) + 0.2614, R2 = 0.9873.

Alpha-diversity, Beta-diversity and host-specificity of wood-boring longhorn beetle (Cerambycidea) in Asian tropical and subtropical forests

A long-debated question in ecology is whether the hyper-diversity of tropical plant-feeding insects is a direct consequence of high tropical plant diversity and/or should be attributed to increases in host plant specialization. To address this debate, we used the longhorn beetle as a study system because their larval stages feed on the xylems of trees and lianas. We hypothesized that longhorn beetles show higher host-specificity in tropical forests than in other forests; alternatively, the high longhorn beetle diversity in the tropics may simply be owing to more diverse host plants. We therefore designed an investigation in tropical and subtropical forests to test these hypotheses. We adapted several analyses (i.e., non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis, alpha-diversity, beta-dissimilarity indices comparisons, and variation partitioning based on redundancy analysis) to compare the species diversity of plants and longhorn beetles in different forests. Our results show that both the plant and beetle species in the tropical and subtropical areas were well-stratified (non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis). The beetle alpha-diversity in the tropical forests was significantly higher than that in the subtropical forests, but the plant alpha-diversity in the two types of forests were not significantly different. The beta-dissimilarity comparison showed that the plant species exerted a significant influence on beetle compositional assemblage in the tropical forests, but not in the subtropical forests. Finally, the variation partitioning results showed that both plant species and plant phylogenetic beta-diversity possessed significant explanatory power for beetle assemblage composition in the tropical forests, but not in the subtropical forests. We conclude that wood-boring longhorn beetles show higher host-specificity in tropical forests than in subtropical forests, and the high diversity of wood-boring longhorn beetles in tropical forests might be explained to a large extent by their more finely partitioned diet-breadth.

Figure 11 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 11. Relationships between length of egg string and number of eggs per string (A) and between numbers of eggs per right and left egg strings (B) in females of Pseudocaligus fugu obtained at a culture area off Kosasa Town, Sasebo City on 29 May 2008.

Figure 9 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 9. Pseudocaligus fugu, young adult female. (A) Habitus, dorsal view; (B) frontal filament; (C) genital compound somite, ventral view, note sinuate lateral margins of somite and attachment of paired spermatophores; (D) spermatophore; (E) right leg 4. Scales in mm.

Figure 8 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 8. Pseudocaligus fugu, fourth chalimus stage. Female (A–N), male (O–R). (A, O) Habitus, dorsal view; (B) frontal filament; (C) left caudal ramus, ventral view; (D) antennule, antenna and postantennary process in situ; (E) distal segment of antennule; (F) maxillule; (G) maxilla; (H) maxilliped; (I) right leg 1, anterior surface; (J) endopod of right leg 1, anterior surface; (K) leg 2, anterior surface; (L) leg 3, anterior surface; (M, Q) left leg 4; (N, R) leg 5; (P) antenna and postantennary process. Scales in mm.

Figure 7 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 7. Pseudocaligus fugu, third chalimus stage. Male (A–P), female (Q–S). (A, Q) Habitus, dorsal view; (B) frontal filament; (C) right caudal ramus, ventral view; (D) antennule; (E) antenna; (F) postantennary process; (G) mandible; (H) maxillule; (I) maxilla; (J) maxilliped; (K) leg 1, anterior surface; (L) endopod of right leg 1, anterior surface; (M) leg 2, anterior surface; (N) leg 3, anterior surface; (O) leg 4; (P, S) leg 5; (R) antenna and postantennary process. Scales in mm.

Figure 6 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 6. Pseudocaligus fugu, second chalimus stage. (A) Habitus, dorsal view; (B) frontal filament; (C) left caudal ramus, dorsal surface; (D) antennule, antenna and postantennary process in situ; (E) mandible; (F) maxillule; (G) maxilla; (H) maxilliped; (I) leg 1, anterior surface; (J) leg 2, anterior surface; (K).leg 3, anterior surface; (L) leg 4. Scales in mm.

Figure 5 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 5. Pseudocaligus fugu, first chalimus stage. (A) Habitus, dorsal view; (B) right caudal ramus, dorsal surface; (C) antennule; (D) antenna; (E) mandible; (F) maxillule; (G) maxilla; (H) maxilliped; (I) leg 1, anterior surface; (J) endopod of right leg 1, anterior surface; (K) leg 2, anterior surface; (L) endopod of right leg 2, anterior surface; (M) leg 3, anterior surface. Scales in mm.

Figure 4 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 4. Pseudocaligus fugu, copepodid stage. (A) Habitus, dorsal view; (B) rostrum; (C) left caudal ramus, dorsal surface; (D) antennule; (E) antenna; (F) mandible; (G) maxillule; (H) maxilla; (I) maxilliped; (J) postoral process; (K) leg 1, anterior surface; (L) leg 2, anterior surface; (M) leg 3, dorsal view. Scales in mm.

Figure 3 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 3. Pseudocaligus fugu, naupliar stages. First (A–D) and second (E–G) stages. (A, E) Habitus, ventral view; (B, F) antennule; (C, G) antenna; (D) mandible. Scales in mm.

Figure 2 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 2. Body lengths of developmental stages of Pseudocaligus fugu collected from Nagasaki Prefecture.

Figure 1 in Developmental stages and growth of Pseudocaligus fugu Yamaguti, 1936 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Caligidae) host-specific to Puffer

Figure 1. Zero-year cultured tiger puffer Takifugu rubripes infected by Pseudocaligus fugu (indicated by small arrows). Scale = 50 mm.

Transcriptomics Reveal Specific Molecular Mechanisms Underlying Transgenerational Immunity in Manduca sexta

The traditional view of innate immunity in insects is that every exposure to a pathogen triggers an identical and appropriate immune response, and that prior exposures to pathogens do not confer any protective (i.e. adaptive) effect against subsequent exposure to the same pathogen. This view has been challenged by experiments demonstrating that encounters with sub-lethal doses of a pathogen can prime the insect's immune system and thus, have protective effects against future lethal doses. Immune priming has been reported across several insect species, including the red flour beetle, the honeycomb moth, the bumblebee, and the European honeybee, among others. Immune priming can also be trans-generational where the parent's pathogenic history influences the immune response of its offspring. Phenotypic evidence of transgenerational immune priming (TGIP) exists in the tobacco moth Manduca sexta where first instar progeny of mothers injected with the bacterium Serratia marcescens exhibited a significant increase of in-vivo bacterial clearance. To identify the gene expression changes underlying TGIP in Manduca sexta, we performed transcriptome-wide, trans-generational differential gene expression analysis on mothers and their offspring after mothers were exposed to S. marcescens. We are the first to perform transcriptome-wide analysis of the gene expression changes associated with TGIP in this ecologically relevant model organism. We show that maternal exposure to both heat-killed and live S. marcescens has strong and significant trans-generational impacts on gene expression patterns in their offspring, including up-regulation of peptidoglycan recognition protein, toll-like receptor 9, and the antimicrobial peptide cecropin.

Evolution and plasticity of morph-specific integration in the bull-headed dung beetle Onthophagus taurus

Developmental and evolutionary processes underlying phenotypic variation frequently target several traits simultaneously, thereby causing covariation, or integration, among phenotypes. While phenotypic integration can be neutral, correlational selection can drive adaptive covariation. Especially the evolution and development of exaggerated secondary sexual traits may require the adjustment of other traits that support, compensate for, or otherwise function in a concerted manner. Although phenotypic integration is ubiquitous, the interplay between genetic, developmental, and ecological conditions in shaping integration and its evolution remains poorly understood. Here, we study the evolution and plasticity of trait integration in the bull-headed dung beetle Onthophagus taurus which is characterized by the polyphenic expression of horned ('major') and hornless ('minor') male morphs. By comparing populations subject to divergent intensities of mate competition we tested whether mating system shifts affect integration of traits predicted to function in a morph-specific manner. We focussed on fore and hind tibia morphology as these appendages are used to stabilize major males during fights, and on wings, as they are thought to contribute to morph-based differences in dispersal behaviour. We found phenotypic integration between fore and hind tibia length and horn length that was stronger in major males, suggesting phenotypic plasticity in integration and potentially secondary sexual trait compensation. Similarly, we observed that fore tibia shape was also integrated with relative horn length. However, although we found population differentiation in wing and tibia shape and allometry, populations did not differ in integration. Lastly, we detected little evidence for morph differences in integration in either tibia or wing shape, although wing allometries differed between morphs. This contrasts with previous studies documenting intraspecific differentiation in morphology, behaviour and allometry as a response to varying levels of mate competition across O. taurus populations. We discuss how sexual selection may shape morph-specific integration, compensation and allometry across populations.

Sister-Species Diverge in Modality-Specific Courtship Signal Form and Function

Understanding the relative importance of different sources of selection (e.g. the environment, social/sexual selection) on the divergence or convergence of reproductive communication can shed light on the origin, maintenance, or even disappearance of species boundaries. Using a multi-step approach, we tested the hypothesis that two presumed sister-species of wolf spider with overlapping ranges and microhabitat use, yet differing degrees of sexual dimorphism, have diverged in their reliance on modality-specific courtship signaling. We predicted that male Schizocosa crassipalpata (no ornamentation) rely predominantly on diet-dependent vibratory signaling for mating success. In contrast, we predicted that male S. bilineata (black foreleg brushes) rely on diet-dependent visual signaling. We first tested and corroborated the sister-species relationship between S. crassipalpata and S. bilineata using phylogenomic scale data. Next, we tested for species-specific, diet-dependent vibratory and visual signaling by manipulating subadult diet and subsequently quantifying adult morphology and mature male courtship signals. As predicted, vibratory signal form was diet-dependent in S. crassipalpata while visual ornamentation (brush area) was diet-dependent in S. bilineata. We then compared the species-specific reliance on vibratory and visual signaling by recording mating across artificially manipulated signaling environments (presence/absence of each modality in a 2 x 2 full factorial design). In accordance with our diet dependence results for S. crassipalpata, the presence of vibratory signaling was important for mating success. In contrast, the light and vibratory environment interacted to influence mating success in S. bilineata, with vibratory signaling being important only in the absence of light. We found no differences in overall activity patterns. Given that these species overlap in much of their range and microhabitat use, we suggest that competition for signaling space may have led to the divergence and differential use of sensory modalities between these sister-species.

opencc-by-2.0Aug 2021View details →

Transcriptional analysis of peripheral memory T cells reveals Parkinson's disease-specific gene signatures--Gene Validation FCS

FCS files corresponding to the gene validation experiment described in "Transcriptional analysis of peripheral memory T cells reveals Parkinson’s disease-specific gene signatures" Funding provided in part by the Aligning Science Across Parkinson’s ASAP-000375