Butterflies show flower colour preferences but not constancy in foraging at four plant species
Abstract
1. The extent to which flower colour and other visual cues influence butterfly flower choice in the field is poorly understood, especially in comparison with choices by Hymenoptera. 2. Using a novel approach to studies of visitation behaviour by butterflies, flower colour of four Asteraceae species was phenotypically manipulated to decouple the influence of that trait from others (including morphology and nectar rewards) on visitation by Lycaena heteronea , Speyeria mormonia , Cercyonis oetus , and Phyciodes campestris. 3. Flower visits were recorded to experimental flower arrays in subalpine meadows to measure (i) spontaneous preference by butterflies for particular colours and other traits and (ii) flower constancy (longer than expected strings of visits made to flowers of the same species), a behaviour that can reduce interspecific gene flow in plants. 4. Over three field seasons, 3558 individual flower visits in 1386 foraging bouts were observed for free‐flying butterflies. All four butterfly species responded to the phenotypic manipulations of flower colour, although in different ways. Speyeria mormonia and L. heteronea also exhibited preferences based on other flower traits. Lycaena heteronea responded to combinations of traits such that the other traits it preferred depended upon the context of flower colour. 5. None of the butterfly species exhibited flower constancy in any of the arrays employed. 6. The observed preferences show that butterflies, like some other pollinators, are potentially capable of exerting selection on colour and other floral traits. Moreover, these flower preferences can depend on the context of other flower traits. The absence of constancy contrasts with reports of high constancy in many bees.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The few field studies that examine butterfly color preference suggest that context-dependent color preference may be common.
“The few field studies that examine butterfly color preference suggest that context‐dependent color preference may be common (Clements, 1923; Pohl, Van Wyk, & Campbell, 2011) making the case for future studies that explore color preference in natural contexts.”
From Variation in context‐dependent foraging behavior across pollinators (2017) · cites this paper as Pohl, Van Wyk, & Campbell, 2011
Cites
Reconstructing the ancestral butterfly eye: focus on the opsins
Briscoe, A. D. (2008) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.013045 · Cited by 123 · cited 3× · see citing works
“The remarkable diversity in the number, distribution and specific properties of visual pigments among butterflies (Briscoe, 2008) suggests correspondingly diverse ways of perceiving colours that could partially underlie the distinct behavioural responses observed in this study.”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Variation in context‐dependent foraging behavior across pollinators
Briggs, H. M., Graham, S., Switzer, C. M., & Hopkins, R. (2017) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1101/210377 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
“Most studies investigate pollinator visitation patterns in reference to variation in a single floral trait in a single environment, and yet there is evidence that interactions between traits and environmental context can alter pollinator preference (Hersch and Roy 2007; Raguso 2008; Pohl et al. 2011; Yoshida et al. 20…”
Background
- Authors
- POHL, N. B., VAN WYK, J., & CAMPBELL, D. R.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- ORCID
- CAMPBELL, DIANE R.
- Venue
- Ecological Entomology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-03-23
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 290-300
- ISSN
- 0307-6946 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2311
- OpenAlex
- W2044680028
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ecological Entomology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant and animal studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect-Plant Interactions and Control
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Lepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
- Keywords
- flower color preference, flower constancy, Asteraceae, pollinator foraging behavior, floral traits, interspecific gene flow
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review