Skull morphology of two cryptic bat species: Pipistrellus pipistrellus and P. pygmaeus - a 3D geometric morphometrics approach with landmark reconstruction

• Autorzy: Sztencel-Jablonka A. , Jones G. , Bogdanowicz W.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Differences in skull morphology between two cryptic species of bat, Pipistrellus pipistrellus (n = 14) and P. pygmaeus (n = 15), originating from Great Britain, were investigated. Four different data sets were analysed: (1) 23 landmarks and (2) 26 landmarks on the dorsal and ventral sides of the cranium, respectively, (3) 49 landmarks on the upper jaw, and (4) 34 landmarks on the labial side of the mandible. For almost all data sets, when compared within sex groups, P. pipistrellus were significantly larger than P. pygmaeus; the biggest difference being observed in the mandible size. Interspecific differences in shape, analysed by Principal Component Analysis and Discriminant Function Analysis (DFA) of the Procrustes superimposed landmarks, were also mostly visible in the mandible, and were related to dietary differences between the species. For example, the longer and more upright canines of P. pipistrellus allow them to pierce harder prey, the bigger molars ease its processing, and the shortened body of the mandible and the more developed coronoid process presumably generate a stronger bite. The shape and size of the mandible proved to be a good characteristic for distinguishing both cryptic taxa. A procedure for estimating missing landmarks for 3D geometric morphometric purposes was created. Our procedure of finding the missing landmarks had no effect on the within-group loss of variation. DFA of data sets with reconstructed versus orginal (but reduced) landmarks yielded similar results (three versus two misclassified specimens in leave-one-out cross-validation).

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Chiropterologica
• Rocznik: 2009
• Tom: 11
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.113-126,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Sztencel-Jablonka A.

• Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wilcza 64, 00-679 Warsaw, Poland

autor

Jones G.

• School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Wodland Road, Bristol, BS8 IUG, Grat Britain

autor

Bogdanowicz W.

• Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wilcza 64, 00-679 Warsaw, Poland

Bibliografia

• Adams, D. C., F. J. Rohlf, and D. E. Slice. 2004. Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the ‘revolution’. Italian Journal of Zoology, 71: 5-16.
• Ahlén, I. 1981. Identification of Scandinavian bats by their sounds. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Rapport, 6: 1-56.
• Barlow, K. E. 1997. The diets of two phonic types of the bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus in Britain. Journal of Zoology (London), 243: 597-609.
• Barlow, K. E., and G. Jones. 1997. Differences in song-flight calls and social calls between two phonic types of the vespertilionid bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus. Journal of Zoology (London), 241: 315-324.
• Barlow, K. E., and G. Jones. 1999. Roosts, echolocation calls and wing morphology of two phonic types of the Pipistrellus pipistrellus. Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde, 64: 257-268.
• Barlow, K. E., G. Jones, and E. M. Barratt. 1997. Can skull morphology be used to predict ecological relationships between bat species? A test using two cryptic species of pipistrelle. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 264B: 1695-1700.
• Barratt, E. M., R. Deaville, T. M. Burland, M. W. Bruford, G. Jones, P. A. Racey, and R. K. Wayne. 1997. DNA answers the call of pipistrelle bat species. Nature, 97: 138-139.
• Bartonička, T., Z. Řehák, and J. Gaisler. 2007. Can pipistrelles, Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Schreber, 1774) and Pipistrellus pygmaeus (Leach, 1825), foraging in a group, change parameters of their signals? Journal of Zoology (London), 272: 194-201.
• Bogdanowicz, W. 1992. Sexual dimorphism in size of the skull in European Myotis daubentoni (Mammalia: Chiroptera). Pp. 17-25, in Prague studies in mammalogy (I. Horáček and V. Vohralík, eds.). Charles University Press, Praha, xxi + 246 pp.
• Bogdanowicz, W., M. B. Fenton, and K. Daleszczyk. 1999. The relationships between echolocation calls, morphology and diet in insectivorous bats. Journal of Zoology (London), 247: 381-393.
• Bogdanowicz, W., J. Juste, R. D. Owen, and A. K. Sztencel. 2005. Geometric morphometries and cladistics: testing evolutionary relationships in mega- and microbats. Acta Chiropterologica, 7: 39-49.
• Bornholdt, R., L. R. Oliveira, and M. E. Fabian. 2008. Size and shape variability in the skull of Myotis nigricans (Schinz, 1821) (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) from two geographic areas in Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, 68: 623-631.
• Bryja, J., P. Kaňuch, A. Fornůsková, T. Bartonička, and Z. Řehák. 2009. Low population genetic structuring of two cryptic bat species suggests their migratory behaviour in continental Europe. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 96: 103-114.
• Burnett, C. D. 1983. Geographic and secondary sexual variation in the morphology of Eptesicus fuscus. Annals of Carnegie Museum, 52: 139-162.
• Campbell, N. A., and D. J. Kitchener. 1980. Morphological divergence in the genus Eptesicus (Microchiroptera: Vespertilionidae) in Western Australia: a multivariate approach. Australian Journal of Zoology, 28: 457-474.
• Cardini, A., and S. Elton. 2007. Sample size and sampling error in geometric morphometric studies of size and shape. Zoomorphology, 126: 121-134.
• Clifton, K. B., and P. J. Motta. 1998. Feeding morphology, diet, and ecomorphological relationships among five Caribbean labrids (Teleostei, Labridae). Copeia, 4: 953-966.
• Davidson-Watts, I., and G. Jones. 2006. Differences in foraging behaviour between Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Schreber, 1774) and Pipistrellus pygmaeus (Leach, 1825). Journal of Zoology (London), 268: 55-62.
• De Gueldre, G., and F. De Vree. 1984. Movements of the mandibles and tongue during mastication and swallowing in Pteropus giganteus (Megachiroptera). A cineradiographical study. Journal of Morphology, 179: 95-114.
• De Gueldre, G., and F. De Vree. 1988. Quantitative electromyography of the masticatory muscles of Pteropus giganteus (Megachiroptera). Journal of Morphology, 196: 73-106.
• De Gueldre, G., and F. De Vree. 1990. Biomechanics of the masticatory apparatus of Pteropus giganteus (Megachiroptera). Journal of Zoology (London), 220: 311-332.
• Dumont, E. R. 2004. Patterns of diversity in cranial shape among plant-visiting bats. Acta Chiropterologica, 6: 59-74.
• Emerson, S. B., and L. Radinsky. 1980. Functional analysis of sabertooth cranial morphology. Paleobiology, 6: 295-312.
• Evin, A., M. Baylac, M. Ruedi, M. Mucedda, and J. M. Pons. 2008. Taxonomy, skull diversity and evolution in a species complex of Myotis (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae): a geometric morphometric appraisal. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 95: 529-538.
• Fenton, M. B. 1988. Head size and the foraging behaviour of animal-eating bats. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 67: 2029-2035.
• Fenton, M. B., and W. Bogdanowicz. 2002. Relationships between external morphology and foraging behaviour: bats in the genus Myotis. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 80: 1004-1013.
• Findley, J. S., and G. L. Traut. 1970. Geographic variation in Pipistrellus hesperus. Journal of Mammalogy, 51: 741-765.
• Findley, J. S., and D. E. Wilson. 1982. Ecological significance of chiropteran morphology. Pp. 243-260, in Ecology of bats (T. H. Kunz, ed.). Plenum Press, New York, 425 pp.
• Freeman, P. W. 1979. Specialized insectivory: beetle-eating and moth-eating molossid bats. Journal of Mammalogy, 60: 467-479.
• Freeman, P. W. 1981a. A multivariate study of the family Molossidae (Mammalia, Chiroptera): morphology, ecology, evolution. Fieldiana: Zoology (N.S.), 7: 1-173.
• Freeman, P. W. 1981b. Correspondence of food habits and morphology in insectivorous bats. Journal of Mammalogy, 62: 166-173.
• Freeman, P. W. 1984. Functional cranial analysis of large animalivorous bats (Microchiroptera). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 21: 387-408.
• Freeman, P. W. 1988. Frugivorous and animalivorous bats (Microchiroptera): dental and cranial adaptations. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 33: 249-272.
• Freeman, P. W. 1992. Canine teeth of bats (Microchiroptera): size, shape, and role in crack propagation. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 45: 97-115.
• Freeman, P. W. 1995. Nectarivorous feeding mechanisms in bats. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 56:439-463.
• Freeman, P. W. 2000. Macroevolution in Microchiroptera: recoupling morphology and ecology with phylogeny. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2: 317-335.
• Freeman, P. W., and W. N. Weins. 1997. Puncturing ability of bat canine teeth: the tip. Pp. 225-232, in Life among the muses: papers in honor of James S. Findley (T. L. Yates, W. L. Gannon, and D. E. Wilson, eds.). Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, 302 pp.
• Fujita, M. 1984. Geographic variation and sexual dimorphism in Myotis lucifugus: do bigger babies make bigger mothers? Bat Research News, 25: 41.
• Gannon, W. L., and G. R. Racz. 2006. Character displacement and ecomorphological analysis of two long-eared Myotis (M. auriculus and M. evotis). Journal of Mammalogy, 87: 171-179.
• Goldman, L. J., and O. W. Henson, Jr. 1977. Prey recognition and selection by the constant-frequency bat, Pteronotus p. parnellii. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2: 411-419.
• Häussler, U., A. Nagel, M. Braun, and A. Arnold. 2000. External characters discriminating sibling species of European pipistrelles, Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Schreber, 1774) and P. pygmaeus (Leach, 1825). Myotis, 37: 27-40.
• ICZN. 2003. Opinion 2028 (Case 3073). Vespertillio pipistrellus Schreber, 1774 and V. pygmaeus Leach, 1825 (currently Pipistrellus pipistrellus and P pygmaeus; Mammalia, Chiroptera): neotypes designated. The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 60: 85-87.
• Iliopoulou-Georgudaki, J. G. 1984. Intraspecific and intrapopulation morphologic variation in the sharp-eared bat, Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857) (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae), from Greece. Bonner zoologische Beiträge, 15: 15-24.
• Jacobs, D. S. 1996. Morphological divergence in an insular bat, Lasiurus cinereus semotus. Functional Ecology, 10: 622-630.
• Jones, G., and E. M. Barratt. 1999. Vespertilio pipistrellus Schreber, 1774 and V. pygmaeus Leach, 1825 (currently Pipistrellus pipistrellus and P. pygmaeus; Mammalia, Chiroptera): proposed designation of neotypes. The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 56: 182-186.
• Jones, G., and S. M. van Parijs. 1993. Bimodal echolocation in pipistrelle bats: are cryptic species present? Proceedings of the Royal Society, London, 251B: 119-125.
• Kallen, F. C., and C. Gans. 1972. Mastication in the little brown bat, Myotis lucifugus. Journal of Morphology, 136: 385-420.
• Klingenberg, C. P. 2008. MorphoJ. Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, UK. http://www.flywings.org.uk/ MorphoJ_page.htm
• Marcus, L. F., M. Corti, A. Loy, G. J. P. Naylor, and D. E. Slice. 1996. Advances in morphometrics. Plenum Press, New York, 620 pp.
• Mayer, F., and O. von Helversen. 2001. Sympatric distribution of cryptic bat species across Europe. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 74: 365-374.
• Myers, P. 1978. Sexual dimorphism in size of vespertilionid bats. American Naturalist, 112: 701-711.
• Neuweiler, G. 2000. The biology of bats. Oxford University Press, New York, 320 pp.
• Nicholls, B., and P. A. Racey. 2006. Habitat selection as a mechanism of resource partitioning in two cryptic bat species Pipistrellus pipistrellus and Pipistrellus pygmaeus. Ecography, 29: 697-708.
• Nogueira, M. R., L. R. Monteiro, A. L. Peracchi, and A. F. B. de Araújo. 2005. Ecomorphological analysis of the masticatory apparatus in the seed-eating bats, genus Chiroderma (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae). Journal of Zoology (London), 266: 355-364.
• O’ Higgins, P. 2000. The study of morphological variation in the hominid fossil record: biology, landmarks and geometry. Journal of Anatomy, 197: 103-120.
• O’Higgins, P., and N. Jones. 2006. Tools for statistical shape analysis. Hull York Medical School, Hull, http://hyms.fme. googlepages.com/resources.
• Papadatou, E., R. K. Butlin, and J. D. Altringham. 2008. Identification of bat species in Greece from their echolocation calls. Acta Chiropterologica, 10: 127-143.
• Park, K. J., J. D. Altringham, and G. Jones. 1996. Assortative roosting in the two phonic types of Pipistrellus pipistrellus during the mating season. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 263B: 1495-1499.
• Perez-Barberia, F. J., and I. J. Gordon. 1999. The functional relationship between feeding type and jaw and cranial morphology in ungulates. Oecologia, 118: 157-165.
• Racey, P. A., E. M. Barratt, T. M. Burland, R. Deaville, D. Gotelli, G. Jones, and S. B. Piertney. 2007. Microsatellite DNA polymorphism confirms reproductive isolation and reveals differences in population genetic structure of cryptic pipistrelle bat species. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 90: 539-550.
• Ralls, K. 1976. Mammals in which females are larger than males. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 51: 245-276.
• Rohlf, F. J. 2000. NTSYS-pc numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, version 2.11T. Exeter Software, Setauket.
• StatSoft, Inc. 2005. STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 7.1. www.statsoft.com.
• Stebbings, R. E. 1973. Size clines in the bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus related to climatic factors. Periodicum Biologorum, 75: 189-194.
• Storz, J. F., J. Balasingh, H. R. Bhat, P. N. Thiruchenthil, D. P. Swami Doss, A. A. Prakash, and T. H. Kunz. 2001. Clinal variation in body size and sexual dimorphism in an Indian fruit bat, Cynopterus sphinx (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 72: 17-31.
• Swartz, S. M., P. W. Freeman, and E. F. Stockwell. 2003. Ecomorphology of bats: comparative and experimental approaches relating structural design toecology. Pp. 257-300, in Bat ecology (T. H. Kunz and M. B. Fenton, eds.). The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 779 pp.
• Swiderski, D. L., M. Zelditch, and W. L. Fink. 2000. Phylogenetic analysis of skull shape evolution in marmotine squirrels using landmarks and thin-splines. Hystrix (N.S.), 11: 49-75.
• Tschapka, M., E. B. Sperr, L. A. Caballero-Martínez, and R. A. Medellín. 2008. Diet and cranial morphology of Musonycteris harrisoni, a highly specialized nectar-feeding bat in western Mexico. Journal of Mammalogy, 89: 924-932.
• Turnbull, W. D. 1970. Mammalian masticatory apparatus. Fieldiana: Geology, 18: 149-356.
• Van Cakenberghe, V., A. Herrel, and L. F. Aguirre. 2002 Evolutionary relationships between cranial shape and diet in bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera). Pp. 205-236, in Topics in functional and ecological vertebrate morphology (P. Aerts, A. Herrel, K. D’Aout, and R. Van Damme, eds.). Shaker, Maastricht, 372 pp.
• Vaughan, N., G. Jones, and S. Harris. 1997. Habitat use by bats (Chiroptera) assessed by means of a broad-brand acoustic method. Journal of Applied Ecology, 34: 716-730.
• Weid, R., and O. von Helversen. 1987. Ortungsrufe europäischer Fledermäuse beim Jagdflug im Freiland. Myotis, 25: 5-27.
• Williams, D. F., and J. S. Findley. 1979. Sexual size dimorphism in vespertilionid bats. The American Midland Naturalist, 102: 113-126.
• Zelditch, M. L., D. L. Swiderski, H. D. Sheets, and W. L. Fink. 2004. Geometric morphometrics for biologists: a primer. Elsevier, New York, 443 pp.
• Zingg, P. 1990. Akustische Artidentifikation von Fledermäusen (Mammalia: Chiroptera) in der Schweiz. Revue Suisse de Zoologie, 97: 263-294.