Programmed Scale Detachment in the Wing of the Pellucid Hawk Moth, : Novel Scale Morphology, Scale Detachment Mechanism, and Wing Transparency.

Advanced Search

Akihiro Yoshida, Yoshiomi Kato, Hironobu Takahashi, Ryuji Kodama

Author Information

Akihiro Yoshida: Laboratory of Morphodiversity, National Institute for Basic Biology, National Institutes of Natural Sciences, Okazaki, Aichi 444-8787, Japan, yoshida.akihiro09@gmail.com.
Yoshiomi Kato: International Christian University, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-8585, Japan.
Hironobu Takahashi: 3-4-16 Naka-meguro, Meguro, Tokyo 153-0061, Japan.
Ryuji Kodama: Laboratory of Morphodiversity, National Institute for Basic Biology, National Institutes of Natural Sciences, Okazaki, Aichi 444-8787, Japan.

PMID: 34664917 DOI: 10.2108/zs210031

No scales of most lepidopterans (butterflies and moths) detach from the wings through fluttering. However, in the pellucid hawk moth, , numerous scales detach from a large region of the wing at initial take-off after eclosion; consequently, a large transparent region without scales appears in the wing. Even after this programmed detachment of scales (d-scales), small regions along the wing margin and vein still have scales attached (a-scales). To investigate the scale detachment mechanism, we analyzed the scale detachment process using video photography and examined the morphology of both d- and a-scales using optical and scanning electron microscopy. This study showed that d-scale detachment only occurs through fluttering and that d-scales are obviously morphologically different from a-scales. Although a-scales are morphologically common lepidopteran scales, d-scales have four distinctive features. First, d-scales are much larger than a-scales. Second, the d-scale pedicel, which is the slender base of the scale, is tapered; that of the a-scale is columnar. Third, the socket on the wing surface into which the pedicel is inserted is much smaller for d-scales than a-scales. Fourth, the d-scale socket density is much lower than the a-scale socket density. This novel scale morphology likely helps to facilitate scale detachment through fluttering and, furthermore, increases wing transparency.

conserved program fluttering pedicel scale development socket transparent moth wing

Ando N (2018) Diversity of flight control strategies in insects: Lessons from hawkmoths. Comp Physiol Biochem 35: 108–118 (in Japanese)

AritaY, Inomata T, Ikeda M (1994) Sesiidae of Japan. Yadoriga 159: 2–29 (in Japanese)

Binetti VR, Schiffman JD, Leaffer OD, Spanier JE, Schauer CL (2009) The natural transparency and piezoelectric response of the butterfly wing. Integr Biol 1: 324–329

Dinwiddie A, Ryan N, Maria P, Lisa C, Alexis LK, Hwei ET, et al. (2014) Dynamics of F-actin prefigure the structure of butterfly wing scales. Dev Biol 392: 404–418

Dorsett DA (1962) Preparation for flight by hawk-moths. J Exp Biol 39: 79–88

Downey JC, Allyn AC (1975) Wing scale morphology and nomenclature. Bull Allyn Mus 31: 1–32

Eisner T, Alsop R, Ettershank G (1964) Adhesiveness of spider silk. Science 146: 1058–1061

Ghiradella H (1998) Hairs, bristles, and scales. In“ Microscopic Anatomy of Invertebrates” Ed by FW Harrison, M Locke, John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, pp 257–287

Goodwyn PP, Maezono Y, Hosoda N, Fujisaki K (2009) Waterproof and translucent wings at the same time: problems and solutions in butterflies. Naturwissenschaften 96: 781–787

Heinrich B, Bartholomew GA (1971) An analysis of pre-flight warmup in the sphinx moth, . J Exp Biol 55: 223–239

Hennig S (1992) Getting to know moths: Hawk moths, sphinx moths. Metamorphosis 3: 32–34

Inoue H, Okano M, Shirozu T, Sugi S, Yamamoto H (1959) Insect Full-color Encyclopedia 1 (Lepidoptera). Hokuryukan, Tokyo, pp 183–184 (in Japanese)

Lockshin RA, Zakeri Z (2001) Programmed cell death and apoptosis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2: 545–550

Schindelin J, Arganda-Carreras I, Frise E, Kaynig V, Longair M, Pietzsch T, et al. (2012) Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat Methods 9: 676–682

Siddique RH, Gomard G, Hölscher H (2015) The role of random nanostructures for the omnidirectional anti-reflection properties of the glasswing butterfly. Nat Commun 6: 6909

Simonsen TJ, Kristensen NP (2003) Scale length/wing length correlation in Lepidoptera (Insecta). J Nat Hist 37: 673–679

Stavenga DG, Matsushita A, Arikawa K, Leertouwer HL, Wilts BD (2012) Glass scales on the wing of the swordtail butterfly Graphium sarpedon act as thin film polarizing reflectors. J Exp Biol 215: 657–662

Stossberg M (1937) Über die Entwicklung der Schmetterlingsschuppen. Biol Zbl 57: 393–402

Süffert F (1937) Die Geschichte der Bildungszellen im Puppenflügelepithel bei einem Tagschmetterling. Biol Zbl 57: 615–628

Truman JW, Endo PT (1974) Physiology of insect ecdysis: neural and hormonal factors involved in wing-spreading behavior of moths. J Exp Biol 61: 47–55

Wanasekara ND, Chalivendra VB (2011) Role of surface roughness on wettability and coefficient of restitution in butterfly wings. Soft Matter 7: 373–379

Warrick DR, Toblaske BW, Powers DR (2005) Aerodynamics of the hovering hummingbird. Nature 435: 1094–1097

Yoshida A (2002) Antireflection of the butterfly and moth wings through microstructure. Forma 17: 75–89

Yoshida A, Motoyama M, Kosaku A, Miyamoto K (1996) Nanoprotuberance array in the transparent wing of a hawkmoth, . Zool Sci 13: 525–526

Yoshida A, Motoyama M, Kosaku A, Miyamoto K (1997) Antireflective nanoprotuberance array in the transparent wing of a hawkmoth, . Zool Sci 14: 737–741

Yoshida A, Tejima S, Sakuma M, Sakamaki Y, Kodama R (2017) Coherent array of branched filamentary scales along the wing margin of a small moth. Sci Nat 104: 27

Animals

Flight, Animal

Metamorphosis, Biological

Moths

Wings, Animal

Journal Article

OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience