跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.211.117.197) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/05/23 10:49
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:王淳信
研究生(外文):Chun-Shin Wang
論文名稱:三種鳳蝶在兩種人工種植馬兜鈴食草植物之產卵選擇
論文名稱(外文):Oviposition selection of three Papilionidae butterflies on cultivated foodplants of two Aristolochia spp.
指導教授:彭仁君彭仁君引用關係
指導教授(外文):J. J. Perng
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺東大學
系所名稱:生命科學系碩士班
學門:生命科學學門
學類:生物學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2009
畢業學年度:97
語文別:中文
論文頁數:47
中文關鍵詞:黃裳鳳蝶紅紋鳳蝶大紅紋鳳蝶港口馬兜鈴臺灣馬兜鈴產卵選
外文關鍵詞:Troides aeacus formosanusPachliopta aristolochiae interpositaByasa polyeuctes termessusAristolochia zolligerianaA .heterophyllaOviposition selection
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:94
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究在台東縣卑南鄉與鹿野鄉之人工圍籬栽種馬兜鈴植物上,探討三種鳳蝶在此食草上產卵部位與微棲地之異同,以瞭解它們對共同食草資源利用之共存競爭表現。在卑南鄉與龍田鄉人工栽種港口馬兜鈴(Aristolochia zolligeriana Miq.)上,紅紋鳳蝶(Pachliopta aristolochiae interposita Fruhstorfer)全年皆可產卵,黃裳鳳蝶(Troides aeacus formosanus Rothschild)與大紅紋鳳蝶(Byasa polyeuctes termessus Fruhstorfer)產卵發生期相似,都只在冬春兩季至初夏之間;但是,在龍田鄉台灣馬兜鈴(A. heterophylla Hemsl)上,紅紋鳳蝶僅在7-9月才有明顯產卵,黃裳鳳蝶產卵發生期與在港口馬兜鈴相同,但大紅紋鳳蝶產卵發生期會提早在秋季發生,且明顯偏好產卵在台灣馬兜鈴上。
三種鳳蝶在兩種馬兜鈴食草植物上之產卵部位頻度分布,大多不具樣區間之差異,已有各自的固定產卵資源分配型式。紅紋鳳蝶與大紅紋鳳蝶皆高度集中在葉片部位產卵;黃裳鳳蝶則較分散的產卵在各種部位上,甚至有相當之比例產卵在非寄主植物上。在兩種馬兜鈴上,三種鳳蝶產卵都在葉片部位比例較高,紅紋鳳蝶與大紅紋鳳蝶都集中產卵在嫩葉部位,高達90%以上,相對的,黃裳鳳蝶產卵在熟葉與枯葉佔較高,各佔約有21~57%左右。
在食草之各微棲地內,食草葉片生長期與數量有相當之差異,在兩種馬兜鈴上,三種鳳蝶雌蝶對微棲地內的食草品質、數量具有較高的產卵選擇需求,都產卵在嫩葉與熟葉數量最多的位置。而在港口馬兜鈴上,紅紋鳳蝶甚至還會選擇老葉與枯葉數量較少的位置,在台灣馬兜鈴上,大紅紋鳳蝶也有類似選擇趨向。
雖然三種鳳蝶利用共同食草資源,但是,它們在兩種食草在時間上與空間上產卵席位有特定相同與相異處,其中,黃裳鳳蝶利用產卵之部位和葉片生長期與另兩種鳳蝶具有相當程度之差異,此將有助其幼蟲食物資源競爭之降低,而可提高其共存;相對的,紅紋鳳蝶與大紅紋鳳蝶之產卵生態棲位高度重疊,這兩蝶種間易增加種間競爭。對產卵在葉片部位比例都較多的三種鳳蝶,食草因人工栽植讓其生長高度限制在小範圍中,將易造成三種鳳蝶幼蟲之取食競爭比在森林中更加提高。
To investigate the performances of coexistence and competition on the same foodplant resource by three butterflies, this study compared their oviposition positions and microhabitats on two cultivated pipevine foodplants of Aristolochia spp. in Bei-nan and Lu-ye, Taitung, Eastern Taiwan.
On the cultivated foodplants of Aristolochia zolligeriana Miq. in Bei-nan and Lu-ye, Pachliopta aristolochiae interposita Fruhstorfer oviposited all year round, but Troides aeacus formosanus Rothschild and Byasa polyeuctes termessus Fruhstorfer only oviposited in winter, spring and early summer. Nevertheless, P. aristolochiae interposita oviposited distinctly from July to September on A. heterophylla Hemsl in Lu-ye. The oviposition period of T. aeacus formosanus was similar to that on A. zolligeriana. On A. heterophylla, the oviposition period of B. polyeuctes termessus began from autumn, and the females prefered to oviposite on it.
P. aristolochiae interposita and B. polyeuctes termessus laid most
of their eggs specifically on the leave parts, but T. aeacus formosanus laid their eggs widely on various plant parts, especially a quite high proportion of eggs on non-host plant. The three papilionidae butterflies laid the highest proportions of eggs on the leaves of Aristolochia spp.. P. aristolochiae interposita and B. polyeuctes termessus laid up to 90 % of their eggs on the tender leaves. In contrast, T. aeacus formosanus laid more eggs on mature and old leaves, approximately to 21-57 %.
There were certain variations of leaf frequencies distributions in the various leaf stages among micro-sites of the foodplants. On the two pipevine foodplants, the three butterflies selected the sites with higher tender and mature leaves for oviposition. P. aristolochiae interposita even also needed a site with less old leaves than that within the random sampling sites.
Although the three Papilionidae butterflies utilized same food resource, their oviposition niches on the two cultivated food plant have similarity and dis-similarity at time and space scales. The oviposition positions and leaf stages of T. aeacus formosanus were different from that of the other two butterflies. This oviposition segregation will reduce their larval competition, and enhances their coexistence. In contrast, P. aristolochiae interposita and B. polyeuctes termessus have similar ecological niche for oviposition, this will increases the inter-specific competition between the two butterflies. Because the cultivation limited the foodplant height in a smaller range than that in forests, the three papilionidae butterflies had high feeding competition in their larval community on the artificially cultivated foodplants.
中文摘要……………………………………………..………………...…i
英文摘要……………………………………………………………...…iii
目錄……………………………………………………………………...vi
附表目錄…………………………………………………………….…viii
附圖目錄…………………………………………………………….…..x
附照目錄………………………………………………...........………....xi
壹、前言………………………………………………………………….1
貳、研究動機與目的……………………………………..….…….…….3
參、材料及方法……………………………….…………….……...……4
肆、資料分析………………………………………………….….………8
伍、結果……………………………………………………….…….……9
一、各樣區間三種鳳蝶之產卵量消長……………….….….………9
二、各樣區間三種鳳蝶不同部位產卵百分比分布………..…...…11
三、在兩種馬兜鈴上三種鳳蝶間之不同產卵部位頻度比較…….12
四、三種鳳蝶在各樣區間之不同生長期葉片產卵頻度分布比較.13
五、在兩種馬兜鈴上三種鳳蝶間之不同生長期葉片產卵頻度分布比較……………………………………………………………….….…14
六、三種鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數量比較……………………………………….……………………………….15
七、各樣區三種鳳蝶產卵位置高度之比較……..…………….….17
陸、討論…………………………………………………………..…..…18
一、各樣區間三種鳳蝶之產卵量消長……………….….….……..18
二、三種鳳蝶之產卵部位選擇比較………………………...…….19
三、在兩種馬兜鈴三種鳳蝶之產卵選擇比較……………..……...21
四、各樣區三種鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間不同生長期葉片數量比較……………………………………….……………………………….22
五、三種鳳蝶在產卵位置高度之比較……..………………….….23
柒、結論……………………..…………………………..……………....24
捌、引用文獻……………………………………………………..…….25








附表目錄

表1. 黃裳鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較…….….………………………………………………………………30
表2. 紅紋鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…31
表3. 黃裳鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…32
表4. 紅紋鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…33
表5. 大紅紋鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…34
表6. 黃裳鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…35
表7. 紅紋鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…36
表8. 大紅紋鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…37
表9. 黃裳鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…38
表10. 紅紋鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…39
表11. 大紅紋鳳蝶產卵點與逢機點間之馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片數比
較……………………..……………………………………………....…40














附圖目錄

圖1. 卑南鄉港口馬兜鈴(D樣區)95.11.19~97.9.12期間,三種鳳蝶之
產卵量消長…………………..……………...…………………….……41
圖2. 三種鳳蝶在各樣區之產卵量長.....................................……...…42
圖3. 三種鳳蝶在各樣區之產卵部位百分比分布(96.7.1~97.9.12)….43
圖4. 在(A)台灣馬兜鈴樣區與(B)港口馬兜鈴樣區上,三種鳳蝶產卵
部位百分比分布比較(96.7.1~97.9.12)……..………………………….44
圖5. 各樣區間(A)黃裳鳳蝶、(B)紅紋鳳蝶、(C)大紅紋蝶在不同生
期葉片產卵百分比分布(96.7.1~97.9.12)……………………….…......45
圖6. 三種鳳蝶產卵位置高度在各樣區間之比較(96.7.1~97.9.12)….46








附照目錄

照1. 四個樣區:(A)鹿野鄉港口馬兜鈴(A樣區)、(B)鹿野鄉台灣馬兜鈴(B樣區) 、(C)鹿野鄉港口馬兜鈴(C樣區)、 (D)卑南鄉港口馬兜鈴
(D樣區)…………………………………………………………………47
山中正夫。1971。台灣產蝶類的分布(1)。日本鱗翅學會特別報告 5:115-193。
行政院農業委會,1998。臺灣稀有及瀕危植物之分級(II)。
何健鎔、張連浩。1997。台灣產金鳳蝶族蝶類的生態與保育。自然保育季刊 19: 34。
吳尚澄。2007。紅紋鳳蝶取食港口馬兜鈴不同生長期葉片之生活史特性比較。國
立台東大學生命科學研究所碩士論文。43頁。
吳怡欣、楊平世。2005。黃裳鳳蝶遺傳多樣性及保育生物學研究。行政院農委會
台灣野生物遺傳多樣性與保育遺傳研究研討會。
吳怡欣、楊平世。1995。大紅紋鳳蝶與紅紋鳳蝶之生物學研究。動物園學報 7: 13-24。
陳建志。1990。蝶館老大-紅紋鳳蝶。動物園雜誌 10(3): 38-41。
郭雅晴。1989。大紅紋鳳蝶之生物學研究。國立台灣大學植物病蟲害研究所碩士
論文。75頁。
趙仁方、方懷聖。2002。台東縣蝴蝶。台東縣政府、行政院農業委員會特有生物
研究保育中心。
蕭惠文。2005。台灣玉帶鳳蝶及其寄主植物之研究。國立嘉義大學森林暨自然資
源研究所碩士論文。100頁。
濱野榮次。1987。台灣蝶類生態大圖鑑。牛頓出版社。台北。474頁。
Beccaloni, G.W. 1997. Vertical stratification of the ithomiine butterfly (Nymphalidae:
Ithomiinae) mimicry complexes: the relationship between adult flight height and larval host plant height. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 62(3): 313-341.
Bergman, K.O. 2000. Oviposition, host plant choice and survival of a grass feeding
butterfly, the Woodland Brown (Lopinga achine) (Nymph alidae: Satyrinae). Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 35: 9-21.
Bergstrom, A., Janz, N. and Nylin, S. 2006. Putting more eggs in the best basket: clutch-size regulation in the comma butterfly. Ecological Entomology 31: 255-260.
Chew, F.S. 1981. Coexistence and local extinction in two Pierid butterflies. American Naturalist 118: 655–672.
Doak, P., Kareiva, P. and Kingsolver, J. 2006. Fitness consequences of choosy oviposition for a time-limited butterfly Ecology 87(2): 395-408.
Estrada, C., and Jiggins, C. 2002. Patterns of pollen feeding and habitat preference among Heliconius species. Ecological Entomology 27: 448-456.
Elias, M., Gompert, Z., Jiggins, C., and Willmott., K. 2008. Mutualistic interactions
drive ecological niche convergence in a diverse butterfly community. Public Library of Science Biology 6(12): 300-308.
Fordyce, J. A. and Nice, C. C. 2003. Variation in butterfly egg adhesion: adaptation to local host plant senesence characteristics? Ecology Letters 6: 23-27.
Gause, G. F. 1934. The Struggle for Existence. Williams and Williams, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Chapter V.
Gibbs, M., Lace, L.A., Jones, M.J., Moore, A.J. 2004. Intraspecific competition in the speckled wood butterfly Pararge aegeria: effect of rearing density and gender on larval life history. Journal of Insect Science 4: 16-21.
Haribal, M., and Renwick, J.A.A. 2004. Differential postalightment oviposition behavior of monarch butterflies on Asclepias species. Journal of Insect Behavior 11: 507-538.
Hsieh, K.J., Kuo,Y.L., Perng. J.J., Lai, P.Y. and T.C. Lee, 2008. Population distribution
of Aristolochia zollingeriana,an endangered vine exploited by three papilionid
butterflies in Kenting national park, Taiwan. Taiwan Journal For Sci 23(3): 243-254.
Joron, M., Wynne, I.R., Lamas G. and Mallet,J. 1999. Variable selection and the
coexistence of multiple mimetic forms of the butterfly Heliconius numata.
Evolutionary Ecology 13: 721-754.
Janz, N. 2005. The relationship between habitat selection and preference for
adult and larval food resources in the polyphagous butterfly Vanessa cardui (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Journal of Insect Behavior 18(6): 767-780.
Janz, N., Nylin, S. and Wedell, N. 1994. Host plant utilization in the comma
butterfly: sources of variation and evolutionary implications. Oecologia 99: 132-140.
Liu, W., Wang, Y., X. R. 2006. Egg cluster pattern of two coexisting melitaeine
butterfly species and oviposition site selection of their adult females. Chinese Academy of Forestry 17(7): 1254-1258.
Ohsaki, N. 1980. Comparative population studies of three Pieris butterflies, P. rapae, P.
melete and P. napi, living in the same area. II. Utilization of patchy habitats by adults through migratory and non-migratory movements. Researches on Population Ecology 22: 163–183.
Ohsaki, N. 1982. Comparative population studies of three Pieris butterflies, P. rapae, P.
melete, and P. napi, living in the same area. III. Difference in the annual generation numbers in the relation to habitat selection by adult. Researches on Population Ecology 42: 193–210.
Papaj, D. R, and Rausher, M. D. 1986. Genetic differences and phenotypic plasticity as
causes of variation in oviposition preference in Battus philenor. Oecologia 74: 24–30.
Papaj, D. R, and Rausher, M. D. 1987. Components of conspecific host discrimination behavior in the butterfly Batttus Philenor. Ecology Society of America 68(2): 245–253.
Rausher, M. D. 1979. Larval habitat suitability and oviposition preference in three elated butterflies. Ecology 60(3): 503–511.
Rausher, M. D. 1980. Host abundance, juvenile survival, and oviposition preference in Battus philenor. Evolution 34(2): 342-355.
Rausher, M. D. and P. Feeny .1980. Herbivory, plant density, and plant reproductive success: the effect of Battus philenor on Aristolochia reticulata. Ecology 61(4): 905-917.
Rausher, M. D.1981. Host plant selection Battus Philenor butterflies: the roles of predation nutrition, and plant chemistry. Ecologyical Monographs PP. 1–20.
Ree, R.H. 1997. Pollen flow, fecundity, and the adaptive significance of heterostyly in Palicourea padifolia (Rubiaceae). Biotropica 29: 298–308.
Reitz, S.R. and Trumble, J.T. 2002. Competative displacement among insects and arachnids. Annual Review of Entomology 47: 435-465.
Stanton, M.L. 1982. Searching in a patchy environment: food-plant selection by Colias
p. eriphyle butterflies. Ecology 63: 839–853.
Thompson, J.N., 1991. Evolution of oviposition behavior and host preference in Lepidoptera. Annual Reviews Entomol 36: 65–89.
Thompson, J.N., 1999. What we know and do not know about coevolution: insect
herbivores and plants in a test case. In Herbivores: Between Plants and Predators
(H. Olff, V. Brown and R. Drent, eds.), pp. 7–30.
Tschenn, J.,Losey, J. E., Jesse, L. H., Obrycki, J. J., and Hufbauer, R. 2001. Effects
of corn plants and corn pollen on monarch butterfly (Lepidoptera: Danaidae)
oviposition behavior. Environmental Entomology 30: 495–500.
William, J. and Resetarits, JR. 1996. Oviposition site choice and life history evolution. American Zoologist 36(2): 205-215.
Willmott, K.R. and Mallet, J. 2004. Correlations between adult mimicry and larval hostplants in ithomiine butterflies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B (Suppl.) 271: S266–S269.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top