Recognition of nonself is necessary to activate Drosophila's immune response against an insect parasite.

BACKGROUND: Innate immune responses can be activated by pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), danger signals released by damaged tissues, or the absence of self-molecules that inhibit immunity. As PAMPs are typically conserved across broad groups of pathogens but absent from the host, it is unclear whether they allow hosts to recognize parasites that are phylogenetically similar to themselves, such as parasitoid wasps infecting insects. RESULTS: Parasitoids must penetrate the cuticle of Drosophila larvae to inject their eggs. In line with previous results, we found that the danger signal of wounding triggers the differentiation of specialized immune cells called lamellocytes. However, using oil droplets to mimic infection by a parasitoid wasp egg, we found that this does not activate the melanization response. This aspect of the immune response also requires exposure to parasite molecules. The unidentified factor enhances the transcriptional response in hemocytes and induces a specific response in the fat body. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that a combination of danger signals and the recognition of nonself molecules is required to activate Drosophila's immune response against parasitic insects.

Day-flying lepidoptera larvae have a poorer ability to thermoregulate than adults.

Changes to ambient temperatures under climate change may detrimentally impact small ectotherms that rely on their environment for thermoregulation; however, there is currently a limited understanding of insect larval thermoregulation. As holometabolous insects, Lepidoptera differ in morphology, ecology and behaviour across the life cycle, and so it is likely that adults and larvae differ in their capacity to thermoregulate. In this study, we investigated the thermoregulatory capacity (buffering ability) of 14 species of day-flying Lepidoptera, whether this is influenced by body length or gregariousness, and whether it differs between adult and larval life stages. We also investigated what thermoregulation mechanisms are used: microclimate selection (choosing locations with a particular temperature) or behavioural thermoregulation (controlling temperature through other means, such as basking). We found that Lepidoptera larvae differ in their buffering ability between species and body lengths, but gregariousness did not influence buffering ability. Larvae are worse at buffering themselves against changes in air temperature than adults. Therefore Lepidoptera may be more vulnerable to adverse temperature conditions during their larval life stage. Adults and larvae rely on different thermoregulatory mechanisms; adults primarily use behavioural thermoregulation, whereas larvae use microclimate selection. This implies that larvae are highly dependent on the area around their foodplant for effective thermoregulation. These findings have implications for the management of land and species, for example, highlighting the importance of creating and preserving microclimates and vegetation complexity surrounding Lepidoptera foodplants for larval thermoregulation under future climate change.

How butterflies keep their cool: Physical and ecological traits influence thermoregulatory ability and population trends.

Understanding which factors influence the ability of individuals to respond to changing temperatures is fundamental to species conservation under climate change. We investigated how a community of butterflies responded to fine-scale changes in air temperature, and whether species-specific responses were predicted by ecological or morphological traits. Using data collected across a UK reserve network, we investigated the ability of 29 butterfly species to buffer thoracic temperature against changes in air temperature. First, we tested whether differences were attributable to taxonomic family, morphology or habitat association. We then investigated the relative importance of two buffering mechanisms: behavioural thermoregulation versus fine-scale microclimate selection. Finally, we tested whether species' responses to changing temperatures predicted their population trends from a UK-wide dataset. We found significant interspecific variation in buffering ability, which varied between families and increased with wing length. We also found interspecific differences in the relative importance of the two buffering mechanisms, with species relying on microclimate selection suffering larger population declines over the last 40 years than those that could alter their temperature behaviourally. Our results highlight the importance of understanding how different species respond to fine-scale temperature variation, and the value of taking microclimate into account in conservation management to ensure favourable conditions are maintained for temperature-sensitive species.