Skip to main content
Log in

Mechanical determinants of nectar-feeding energetics in butterflies: muscle mechanics, feeding geometry, and functional equivalence

  • Original Papers
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

We develop a mechanistic model for nectar feeding in butterflies that integrates the two basic components of the feeding process: the fluid dynamics of nectar flow through the food canal and the contractile mechanics of the muscular, cibarial pump. We use the model to predict the relation between rate of energy intake during feeding and nectar concentration. We then identify nectar concentations that maximize energy intake rates (the optimal concentrations). We illustrate the model using measurements of the food canal and cibarium of Pieris butterflies. The model predicts an overall optimal range of nectar concentration of 31–39% sucrose for butterflies, which is in agreement with previously reported laboratory values. The model also predicts an interaction among the geometries of the food canal, the cibarial cavity, and the cibarial muscles, that allows us to identify the combinations of food canal, cibarium, and muscle dimensions that yield the highest rates of energy intake. Nectar-feeding is “functionally equivalent” in butterflies and hummingbirds: two physically different feeding mechanisms can yield identical energy intake rates. This equivalence results from a mathematical and physical similarity between quasi-steady-state fluid flow in hummingbrid tongues and the force-velocity characteristics of contracting cibarial muscle in butterflies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander RMcN (1985) The maximum forces exerted by animals. J Exp Biol 115:231–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker I, Baker HG (1982) Some constituents of floral nectars of Erythrina in relation to pollinators and systematics. Alertonia 4:25–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird RB, Stewart WE, Lightfoot EN (1960) Transport Phenomena. John Wiley and Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastham LES, Eassa YEE (1955) The feeding mechanism of the butterfly Pieris brassicae L. Phil Trans Roy Soc 239:1–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson SB (1984) Morphological variation in frog pectoral girdles: testing alternatives to a traditional adaptive explanation. Evolution 38:376–388

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewald PW, Williams WA (1982) Function of the bill and tongue in nectar uptake by hummingbirds. Auk 99:573–576

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung YC (1981) Biomechanics: Mechanical Properties of Living Tissues. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hainsworth FR (1973) On the tongue of a hummingbird: its role in the rate and energetics of feeding. Comp Biochem Physiol 46:65–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingsolver JG, Daniel TL (1979) On the mechanics and energetics of nectar feeding in butterflies. J Theor Biol 76:167–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingsolver JG, Daniel TL (1983) Mechanical determinants of nectar feeding strategy in hummingbirds: energetics, tongue morphology, and licking behavior. Oecologia 60:214–226

    Google Scholar 

  • May PG (1985) Nectar uptake rates and optimal nectar concentrations of two butterfly species. Oecologia 66:381–386

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahon TA (1984) Muscles, Reflexes, and Locomotion. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Pivnick KA, McNeil JN (1985) Effects of nectar concentration on butterfly feeding: measured feeding rates for Thymelicus lineola (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) and a general feeding model for adult Lepdoptera. Oecologia 66:226–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Prosser CL (1973) Comparative Animal Physiology. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyke GH, Waser NM (1981) On the production of dilute nectars by hummingbird and honeyeater flowers. Biotropica 13:260–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyke GH, Pulliam HR, Charnov EL (1977) Optimal foraging: a selective review of theory and tests. Quart Rev Biol 52:137–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Roubik DW, Buchmann SL (1984) Nectar slection by Melipona and Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) and the ecology of nectar intake by bee colonies in a tropical forest. Oecologia 61:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Snodgrass RE (1935) Principles of Insect Morphology. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamm S, Gass CL (1986) Enery intake rates and nectar concentration preferences by hummingbirds. Oecologia 70:20–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor CR (1985) Force development during sustained locomotion: a determinant of gait, speed and metabolic power. J Exp Biol 115:253–262

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Daniel, T.L., Kingsolver, J.G. & Meyhöfer, E. Mechanical determinants of nectar-feeding energetics in butterflies: muscle mechanics, feeding geometry, and functional equivalence. Oecologia 79, 66–75 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00378241

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00378241

Key words

Navigation