Study

Adaptations to captivity in the butterfly Pieris brassicae (L.) and the implications for ex situ conservation

  • Published source details Lewis O.T. & Thomas C.D. (2001) Adaptations to captivity in the butterfly Pieris brassicae (L.) and the implications for ex situ conservation. Journal of Insect Conservation, 5, 55-63.

Summary

Breeding butterflies in captivity for conservation carries a risk that captive butterflies will develop traits not well suited to their natural environment, such as larger bodies and shorter wings. This study compared traits of large whites Pieris brassicae bred in captivity with those of a recently wild-caught population, at the University of Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.

Eggs were collected from two sources – a ‘captive’ group, bred in captivity for more than 25 years (100-150 generations) at Horticulture Research International, Warwickshire, UK, and a ‘wild’ group collected from the field at Bridgend, Glamorgan, South Wales. The captive group originated from butterflies caught in southern England.

Butterflies were reared from these eggs in groups, fed on fresh cabbage leaves.

The following measurements were taken: egg-laying by 15 mated females from each group confined with males in flight cages for 16 days; number of mature eggs and mass of ovaries in unmated females after one, two, four and six days; total adult body mass, mass of thorax, wing area and aspect ratio (wingspan2/wing area) in freshly emerged males and females (the number of individuals measured for size is not specified).

Captive females laid more eggs than wild females. They laid on 11 of the 16 days, up to 90 eggs per female on average, compared to less than 10 eggs/female on only three of the 16 days, for wild butterflies.

There was no difference between captive and wild groups in the number of mature eggs produced by unmated females (66 captive, 44 wild females measured). Captive females had heavier ovaries (average 7.9 mg) than wild-caught females (average 5.8 mg) two days after emergence (15 captive, 11 wild females measured), but not after four or six days (23 and 17 females measured).
 
Captive butterflies were heavier than wild butterflies (average mass around 1.9 g, compared to 1.8-1.85 g for wild butterflies). There was no difference in thorax mass.
 
Captive females had smaller wings and both sexes had broader, shorter wings (lower aspect ratio) than wild butterflies (wing area was not compared for males).
 
The authors recommend keeping butterflies in relatively large enclosures similar to wild environments for captive breeding, to reduce these changes.
 
 
Note: If using or referring to this published study, please read and quote the original paper, the abstract of which can be viewed at: http://www.springerlink.com/content/h36m326545300x28/
 

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust