ecology of phasmids - KLUEDO - Universität Kaiserslautern
ecology of phasmids - KLUEDO - Universität Kaiserslautern
ecology of phasmids - KLUEDO - Universität Kaiserslautern
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Adult female feeding preference & nymph performance 56<br />
Table 4-1: Physical leaf traits <strong>of</strong> 15 M. diocles host plant species. Measurements for water content and specific<br />
leaf weight were taken in dual-choice feeding trials with female adults, accordingly the number <strong>of</strong> leaves per<br />
species (N) equals the number <strong>of</strong> preference tests.<br />
Plant species (short name)<br />
Relative toughness* Water content* SLW*<br />
N [%] [mg*cm -2 ] N*<br />
Piper marginatum (Pmarg) 36 102.40 ± 14.83 77.98 ± 4.94 2.86 ± 0.80 422<br />
Piper aequale (Paequ) 36 234.61 ± 33.26 78.13 ± 3.23 3.74 ± 0.77 31<br />
Piper arboreum (Parbo) 20 105.92 ± 8.30 72.45 ± 2.44 5.73 ± 0.82 20<br />
Piper cordulatum (Pcord) 36 323.36 ± 31.38 83.83 ± 1.92 5.49 ± 0.68 31<br />
Piper culebranum (Pcule) 36 175.53 ± 18.82 75.20 ± 6.86 4.31 ± 1.17 32<br />
Piper dariense (Pdari) 30 171.19 ±25.55 76.90 ± 2.13 3.77 ± 0.38 30<br />
Piper dilatatum (Pdila) 36 121.42 ± 24.56 76.20 ± 3.44 4.04 ± 1.07 32<br />
Piper grande (Pgran) 24 296.38 ± 29.98 78.49 ± 3.05 4.19 ± 0.66 30<br />
Philodendron ineaquilaterum<br />
(Philinae)<br />
36 471.72 ± 18.87 77.68 ± 1.52 3.55 ± 0.27 30<br />
Philodendron sp. (Philsp) 36 505.47 ± 41.68 85.77 ± 1.52 4.69 ± 0.49 31<br />
Piper peltatum (Ppelt) 36 108.36 ± 18.68 76.90 ± 3.86 3.60 ± 0.90 31<br />
Piper perlascense (Pperl) 30 148.22 ± 21.70 72.00 ± 5.41 3.97 ± 0.77 30<br />
Piper reticulatum (Preti) 36 163.17 ± 19.79 80.68 ± 3.83 2.76 ± 0.77 31<br />
Piper hispidum (Phisp) 30 134.61 ± 14.19 70.23 ± 6.03 3.82 ± 0.61 30<br />
Piper imperiale (Pimpe) 36 279.08 ± 31.28 64.65 ± 5.94 6.02 ± 1.30 32<br />
* Mean ± StDev<br />
** the same as number <strong>of</strong> dual-choice feeding trials<br />
Leaf toughness was thought to be the primary defensive structural leaf trait. Consequently, I used<br />
Piper marginatum (with lowest leaf toughness) as reference plant species in dual-choice feeding trials.<br />
In the following figures P. marginatum is shown as the first species opposed to test plant species in<br />
alphabetical order.<br />
Leaf water content was not as heterogeneous among species as leaf toughness (Figure 4-3). The leaves<br />
<strong>of</strong> eight species shared similar water contents between 72 % (mean wc <strong>of</strong> P. imperiale) and 78 % (mean<br />
wc <strong>of</strong> P. marginatum). And average leaf water contents <strong>of</strong> 12 M. diocles host plant species ranged from<br />
approximately 70 to 80 %. However, P. cordulatum and Philodendron sp. had significantly higher water<br />
contents (83.83 ± 1.91 % and 85.77 ± 1.51 % respectively) and differed from the 13 other species.<br />
Notably Philodendron sp. also differed from all species in toughness and P. cordulatum had tougher