See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/274017898

Describing Variability in Wing Shapes among Three Populations of Plesispa

reichei Using Landmark-Based Geometric Morphometric Analysis

Article  in  International Journal of Bioscience Biochemistry and Bioinformatics · January 2014

DOI: 10.7763/IJBBB.2014.V4.377

CITATION READS

1 243

6 authors, including:

Mark Ronald Manseguiao Sharon Rose Tabugo

Davao del Norte State College Mindanao State University - Iligan Institute of Technology
9 PUBLICATIONS   9 CITATIONS    33 PUBLICATIONS   147 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Muhmin Michael Manting Mark Anthony Jariol Torres

Mindanao State University - Iligan Institute of Technology Mindanao State University - Iligan Institute of Technology
37 PUBLICATIONS   108 CITATIONS    138 PUBLICATIONS   731 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

ecology View project

Reseach Panel Member View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mark Ronald Manseguiao on 25 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, Vol. 4, No. 5, September 2014

Describing Variability in Wing Shapes among Three

Populations of Plesispareichei Using Landmark-Based
Geometric Morphometric Analysis
Mark Ronald S. Manseguiao, Jessie G. Gorospe, Sharon Rose M. Tabugo, Muhmin Michael E. Manting,
Mark Anthony J. Torres, and Cesar G. Demayo

 used to measure variation of a species across a geographic

Abstract—This study was conducted to describe variability in landscape [8]. We apply landmark-based geometric
3 populations of a coconut pest, Plesispareichei landmark-based morphometric methodsto measure the phenotypic variation in
geometric morphometric analysis of inner wing shapes. A total the wingsRohlf [9]. Shape or reference points are reduced to a
of 21 landmarks were used to represent dimensions in the left
and right wings. Analysis of Variance, coordinate mapping,
set of coordinates where statistical analyses are employed to
relative warp, Euclidean Distance Matrix and Cluster Analyses permit comparison of shape similarities [10]. Changes in the
were used to analyze these landmarks. Results showed that shape and size of a structure in an organism may offer a better
significant variations were observed among populations. understanding to its development and evolution thus it is a
Variation in the left wing is mainly seen along the proximal useful tool to measure the phenotypic changes by which an
landmark pointsbut is variable in the right wing which may be organism adapts to a new environment [11]. Thus,
an indication of asymmetry.Cluster analysis showed wing shape
variationsbetween populations indicating population
understanding shape variations in the wings will allow a
differentiation in the pest. Distance was not a factor which may better understanding of diversity in pest populations which
indicate differences in genetic structure between populations. may contribute to the development of abetter management of
this pest.
Index Terms—Asymmetry, coconut beetle, landmarks, warp.

II. MATERIAL AND METHODS

I. INTRODUCTION
A. Collection and Identification
An emerging pest in Malaysia, Plesispareichei (Chapui) is
Adult coconut leaf beetles, P. reichei, were randomly
considered a potential pest of the coconut tree in the
collected from coconuts from three different locations in
Philippines [1]. The species is morphologically similar to
Mindanao Island, Philippines (Fig. 1). Pure ethyl alcohol was
Brontispalongissima (Gestro) [1], [2]. Outbreaks of B.
used as a preservative during transport. Identification of
longissima have been prevalent in the Philippines since it was
specimens was done according to Staines [12]. Individuals
detected in 2005 however due to similarity in appearance,
were then labeled by location and stored individually in
outbreaks of P. reichei might have been misreported.
Eppendorf tubes with 3-5 drops of pure ethyl alcohol.
Continuous high warmtropical weather and low natural
enemy populations may have contributed as factors for B. Imaging and Landmarking of Specimens
outbreaks in many geographical areas where coconuts are
planted in abundance [3]. The success of this winged insect to
infest on coconuts leading to outbreaks can be attributed to
the pest ability to transfer from plant to plant and from one
area to another. It was therefore the objective of this study to
describe population diversity by looking into variations in
wing shapes which are known to be affected by
environmental factors thereby affecting its feeding
distribution by increasing reproductive success in an area [4].
Insect wings evolve rapidly and its development is thought
to be controlled by one or a set of genes [5]-[7] and can be

Fig. 1. Map of sampling sites in Mindanao Island, Philippines.

Manuscript received March 4, 2014; revised May 10, 2014. This work
was supported by the Philippine Department of Science and Technology
Images of the wings of the specimens was done using a
under the Accelerated Science and Technology Human Resource
Development Program. digital camera enhanced through a stereomicroscope. A total
M. R. S. Manseguiao, S. R. M. Tabugo, M. M. E. Manting, M. A. J. of 21 landmarkpoints were chosen (Fig. 2, Table I). These
Torres, and C. G. Demayo are with the Department of Biological Sciences in landmark points were chosen to represent major dimensions
Mindanao State University – Iligan Institute Technology, Iligan, Philippines
(e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]; of the wings. These landmark points were established on the
muhminmichael, [email protected] and torres, [email protected], digitized images using tpsDig software v2.12 [13]. The
[email protected]). landmark points are superimposed onto the image that
J. M. Gorospe is with the School of Graduate Studies at the Naawan
campus of the Mindanao State University system, Philippines. generates two-dimensional coordinates. General Least

DOI: 10.7763/IJBBB.2014.V4.377 397

 International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, Vol. 4, No. 5, September 2014

Squares (GLS) Procrustes superimposition method was done Cluster Analysis was used to compare similarities among
to standardize the coordinates and to remove variation due to populations based on centroid size.
differences in translation, orientation and size [14], [15].

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

ANOVA results showed significant differences across the
three populations of in the right wing P. reichei (Table
II-Table III). Significant differences were also found in the
left wing except between BAL and WAO populations (Table
IV-Table V).
TABLE II: RESULTS OF ANOVA TEST FOR SIGNIFICANT VARIATION IN THE
CENTROID SIZES OF THE RIGHT WING OF P. REICHEI
Sum of Mean
Df F P(same)
Fig. 2. P. reichei (Chapui) wing showing veins used as indicators of the squares Squares
landmark points. Legend: C = Costa, Sc = Subcosta, R= Radius, M = Media, Between
1.18 × 1006 2 589425 14.99 1.36 x 10-06
A = Anal. groups
Within groups 5.19 × 1006 132 39324.4
TABLE I: DESCRIPTIONS OF ANATOMICAL LANDMARK POINTS ON THE Total 6.37× 1006 134
WING OF PLESISPA REICHEI (CHAPUI)
Landmark Description Landmark Description TABLE III: TUKEY'S PAIRWISE COMPARISONS OF THE RIGHT WING
no. (LM) no. (LM) BETWEEN THREE POPULATIONS OF P. REICHEI
1 Proximal end of 12 Distal end of proximal BAL WAL WAO
C+Sc lateral margin BAL 2.18 × 10-05 0.01
2 Distal end of C+Sc 13 Midpoint of proximal WAL 7.73 0.04
lateral margin WAO 4.29 3.44
3 Midpoint of LM 2 14 Proximal end of A1
and4 TABLE IV: RESULTS OF ANOVA TEST FOR SIGNIFICANT VARIATION IN THE
4 Distal end of R 15 Distal end of A1 CENTROID SIZES OF THE LEFT WING BETWEEN THREE POPULATIONS OF P.
5 Midpoint of LM4 and 16 Midpoint of LM10 REICHEI
6 and 15
6 Distal point of wing 17 Midpoint of LM 9 and Sum of Mean
Df F P(same)
20 squares Squares
Between 06
7 Midpoint of LM 6 18 Curve of M 1.02 × 10 2 509379 16.36 4.51x10-07
and 8 groups
8 Distal end M 19 Midpoint of LM 18 Within groups 4.11 × 1006 132 31141.7
and 20 on M Total 5.13 × 1006 134
9 Distal end of wing 20 Proximal end of wing
fold fold
TABLE V: TUKEY'S PAIRWISE COMPARISONS OF THE LEFT WING BETWEEN
10 Distal end of Cu 21 Proximal end of M
THREE POPULATIONS OF P. REICHEI
11 Midpoint of 10 and
12 BAL WAL WAO
BAL 0 0.07
WAL 4.94 2.18 × 10-05
C. Image Analysis WAO 3.08 8.02
Relative warp analysis using tpsRelW [16], following the
Relative warp analysis which compares wing morphology
algorithms developed by Bookstein [14] were used to
across the three populations showthree relative warps that
describe variationsin the wings within the populations based
were significant in both the left and right wings (Table VI and
from a consensus or mean shape. Thin plate splines were then
Table VII, Fig. 3 and Fig. 4).Variation between populations
used to visualize the transformation of the wing using the
are also graphically shown in the inset boxplots.
same software. Box plots were also generated to show the
distribution of the populations away from the mean TABLE VI: VARIATION IN THE RIGHT WING BETWEEN THREE POPULATIONS
shapeusing PAST software 1.91 [17]. OF P. REICHEI EXPLAINED BY THE SIGNIFICANT RELATIVE WARPS AND THE
CORRESPONDING PERCENTAGE VARIANCE
Euclidean Distance Matrix Analysis (EDMA) was done
Relative %
using PAST software 1.91 [17]. EDMA is a coordinate free Variance Description
Warp
approach in determining the correspondence between
landmark points to further evaluate the changes between Variation along the lower and proximal margins
1 53.06
of the wing
landmark points [18]. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) Variation along the distal margins of the wing
2 18.43
inherent in the EDMA method reduces data to determine
3 11.38 Variation along the upper margins of the wing
which components retain the highest degree of the variation
in the point to point analysis [19]. TABLE VII: VARIATION IN THE LEFT WING BETWEEN THREE POPULATIONS
OF P. REICHEI EXPLAINED BY THE SIGNIFICANT RELATIVE WARPS AND THE
D. Statistical Analysis CORRESPONDING PERCENTAGE VARIANCE
The mean differences in wing centroid size among Relative %
Variance Description
populations were determined and subjected to Analysis of Warp
Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s test to show significant 1 57.49 Variation along the lower margins of the wing
interactions between the populations using PaST software 2 17.22 Variation along the distal margins of the wing
1.91 [17]. A heatmap was also generated using the same 3 6.88 Variation along the upper margins of the wing
program to illustrate points of contraction and expansion.

398
 International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, Vol. 4, No. 5, September 2014

Fig. 3. Summary of the geometric morphometric relative warp analysis of the Fig. 4. Summary of the geometric morphometric relative warp analysis of the
left wing showing the consensus morphology (uppermost panel) and the right wing showing the consensus morphology (uppermost panel) and the
variation in the shapes of the pronotum among the three populations of P. variation in the shapes of the pronotum among the three populations of P.
reichei. reichei.

The first relative warp of the left wing (RW1=57.49) show

variation along the lower and distal margin of the wing with a
bimodal distribution by which a portion of all three
populations contributes to a positively oriented lesser peak.
The same is observed in the second relative warp
(RW2=17.22). The last significant warp (RW3=6.88) show
also bimodal distribution but the lesser peak is negatively
oriented.
The right wing relative warp analysis show that most of the
population (RW1=53.06) is explained by a variation along
the lower margin of the wing with a bimodal distribution with
the lesser peak negatively oriented contributed mainly by
WAO. The second relative warp (RW=18.43) has a trimodal
distribution with the two lesser peaks oriented positively. The
third significant relative warp show a bimodal distribution
with the lesser peak oriented negatively.
Coordinate maps of the landmark points in the insect
wings were generated to visualize the coordinates across the
populations to compare points of variation in the
landmarkswith a corresponding heatmap of expansion and
contraction landmark points (Fig. 4 and 5). Contraction and
expansion points in the right wing are seen on the proximal
and distal ends of the wings whereas the left wing has a
relatively neutral margin with the exception of contraction
points in the distal ends.Euclidean Distance Matrix Analysis
(EDMA) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) further
evaluates the distances between two landmark points to
determine the landmark points that contribute to the changes Fig. 5. Plot of landmark points of the right wing of P. reichei across
populations (A) and (B) points of expansion (blue) and contraction (red) in
in wing morphology. the wing across three populations.

399
 International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, Vol. 4, No. 5, September 2014

LM12-LM21 having the highest expansion, indicating an

increase in the lower margins of the wing. The bottom 10% of
contraction inter-landmark points was observed to be
between upper margins landmarks and between the proximal
and distal points in the wings (Table X), with LM1-LM21
waving the most contraction. These observations indicate
that the wing become shorter from proximal to distal point
but longer in the upper margin to the lower margin.
TABLE IX: INTERLANDMARK (INTER-LM) DISTANCES WITH THE TOP 10%
PCA SCORES FOR THE SIGNIFICANT COMPONENTS OF THE PROCRUSTES
TRANSFORMED LANDMARK COORDINATES OF THE RIGHT WING OF
P. REICHEI FROM THREE LOCATIONS IN MINDANAO
PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4 PC5
%var=24.22% %var=15.75% %var=12.33 %var=6.39 %var=5.25
LM value LM value LM value LM value LM value
6-11 0.1975 3-20 0.2061 3-4 0.1912 1-11 0.2309 1-16 0.1574
7-11 0.1869 3-13 0.1845 2-4 0.1821 11-12 0.194 7-19 0.1502
5-11 0.1736 3-21 0.1804 7-10 0.1332 11-13 0.1844 7-17 0.1448
3-11 0.1322 3-15 0.1738 7-17 0.1293 11-21 0.164 1-20 0.142
4-7 0.1201 3-12 0.1669 4-10 0.1289 11-15 0.154 1-10 0.1417
6-10 0.1196 3-14 0.164 8-17 0.1182 11-14 0.1407 1-7 0.141
4-6 0.1194 1-3 0.1455 8-10 0.1176 2-11 0.1334 1-15 0.1361
5-9 0.1112 2-13 0.1376 4-16 0.1152 1-10 0.1312 13-16 0.1105
5-10 0.1096 2-21 0.1361 4-17 0.1127 1-12 0.1284 9-17 0.1098
6-17 0.1083 3-16 0.1305 10-19 0.1089 12-17 0.1154 1-11 0.1061
6-9 0.1081 2-14 0.1206 7-9 0.1087 1-17 0.1119 1-2 0.1025
7-10 0.1037 4-20 0.1156 2-7 0.1081 2-12 0.1074 14-16 0.1015
11-18 0.1025 2-12 0.115 6-10 0.1059 10-15 0.1063 12-16 0.1014
6-16 0.1023 4-19 0.1132 10-18 0.1037 15-17 0.1055 6-19 0.101
4-11 0.0997 11-13 0.1035 2-8 0.09844 6-18 0.1054 10-13 0.09436
5-18 0.09928 4-17 0.102 3-5 0.09765 5-18 0.1049 7-14 0.09183
Fig. 6. Plot of landmark points of the left wing of P. reichei across 6-18 0.09823 1-2 0.09781 8-9 0.09633 11-20 0.1033 14-20 0.09132
populations (A) and (B) points of expansion (blue) and contraction (red) in 9-11 0.09699 11-12 0.09292 5-10 0.09575 2-10 0.1012 13-15 0.08559
the wing across three populations. 8-11 0.09648 11-21 0.09282 6-17 0.09188 10-12 0.1001 12-20 0.08396
7-17 0.09464 4-15 0.0866 2-5 0.09128 12-19 0.0989 1-21 0.08387
TABLE VIII: INTER-LANDMARK (LM) DISTANCES WITH THE TOP 10% PCA 5-17 0.09375 3-11 0.08533 7-19 0.09094 16-17 0.09195 10-14 0.08362
SCORES FOR THE SIGNIFICANT COMPONENTS OF THE PROCRUSTES
TRANSFORMED LANDMARK COORDINATES OF THE LEFT WING OF PLESISPA TABLE X: INTERLANDMARK (INTER-LM) DISTANCES WITH THE BOTTOM
REICHEI (CHAPUI) FROM THREE LOCATIONS IN MINDANAO 10% PCA SCORES FOR THE SIGNIFICANT COMPONENTS OF THE PROCRUSTES
PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4 TRANSFORMED LANDMARK COORDINATES OF THE LEFT WING OF P. REICHEI
%var=37.39% %var=20.26% %var=10.50 %var=5.42 FROM THREE LOCATIONS IN MINDANAO
PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4
LM Value LM Value LM value LM value %var=37.39% %var=20.26% %var=10.50 %var=5.42
12-21 0.3105 2-21 0.1849 13-21 0.1823 3-20 0.2291 LM value LM value LM value LM value
11-21 0.2634 1-2 0.1762 11-19 0.1657 3-21 0.1884 3-5 -0.0436 7-19 -0.0803 9-20 -0.09452 2-5 -0.08838
10-21 0.2205 1-21 0.1667 12-20 0.1628 2-21 0.182 6-12 -0.04885 6-20 -0.08442 3-20 -0.09572 14-20 -0.08918
11-20 0.2196 2-14 0.1473 5-11 0.1579 3-12 0.1485 4-6 -0.05065 10-11 -0.08649 10-20 -0.09655 1-18 -0.09027
10-20 0.2018 1-3 0.1461 12-21 0.1547 5-20 0.1436 7-12 -0.05072 5-18 -0.08685 4-21 -0.09743 14-17 -0.09039
16-21 0.1995 1-20 0.1398 11-18 0.1469 3-15 0.1397 2-21 -0.05222 6-18 -0.08819 2-7 -0.09952 1-20 -0.0919
16-20 0.1882 2-20 0.1308 8-11 0.1459 2-12 0.134 6-19 -0.05267 5-19 -0.09237 7-21 -0.1028 3-8 -0.09504
9-21 0.1847 3-21 0.1284 6-11 0.1451 6-20 0.1326 3-7 -0.05606 5-17 -0.09479 6-21 -0.108 12-20 -0.09931
9-20 0.1735 1-11 0.1189 4-11 0.143 3-11 0.1264 5-19 -0.05697 6-17 -0.1007 5-20 -0.1113 1-8 -0.1014
15-21 0.158 11-14 0.1188 2-13 0.1364 3-16 0.1216 3-6 -0.06029 6-19 -0.1031 19-21 -0.1127 2-7 -0.1023
17-21 0.1434 3-14 0.1173 13-20 0.1352 5-19 0.119 2-5 -0.06294 4-5 -0.1031 8-20 -0.1133 2-9 -0.1023
8-21 0.1296 2-13 0.1172 7-11 0.1351 3-13 0.1183 2-19 -0.06519 7-11 -0.1147 11-14 -0.1137 13-20 -0.1038
17-20 0.1292 1-19 0.1168 9-11 0.1341 2-20 0.1163 3-19 -0.06538 4-7 -0.1215 18-20 -0.1191 2-17 -0.1058
8-20 0.1288 14-20 0.1165 3-11 0.1289 2-13 0.1159 15-20 -0.06762 3-7 -0.1234 4-20 -0.1202 1-19 -0.1073
13-21 0.1225 1-17 0.1103 17-19 0.1148 4-20 0.1094 2-7 -0.07251 4-6 -0.125 1-21 -0.1227 2-19 -0.111
19-21 0.1104 1-4 0.1095 2-12 0.1145 6-19 0.1084 2-6 -0.07721 3-5 -0.135 11-12 -0.1238 1-17 -0.1121
18-20 0.1049 1-9 0.1044 10-19 0.1131 5-17 0.1041 13-20 -0.124 5-11 -0.1407 2-19 -0.1269 15-20 -0.1142
18-21 0.1034 3-20 0.1038 1-2 0.1041 3-19 0.1036 14-20 -0.1576 2-7 -0.1455 17-20 -0.133 3-4 -0.1294
19-20 0.1031 14-21 0.1028 11-17 0.1014 2-14 0.1031 2-20 -0.176 3-6 -0.1461 11-13 -0.1334 2-4 -0.132
2-14 0.0711 2-12 0.1018 3-13 0.0958 3-14 0.1011 1-20 -0.1862 6-11 -0.1466 6-20 -0.1369 2-18 -0.1368
7-20 0.0666 1-8 0.099 2-14 0.0952 6-17 0.1008 14-21 -0.1945 2-5 -0.1663 7-20 -0.1417 2-8 -0.1418
1-21 -0.305 2-6 -0.1746 19-20 -0.1508 13-21 -0.1496
EDMA and PCA assessed the 210 possible inter-landmark
measurement combinations from the 21 landmarks in the A similar effect is also seen in the right wing.Expansion is
wings. Four component axes were found to be significant in seen between distances in the distal landmark points of the
explaining the variation in the left wing. The top 10% of wing to the lower margin points (Table IX), with LM6-LM11
expanding inter-landmark points were found to be between having the most distance. Contraction is observed in the
landmark points in the lower part of the wings (Table VIII) landmark points in the right wing between points in the lower
and the proximal point of the median vein (LM21) or the margins of the wing to the proximal landmark points (Table
proximal landmark of the wing fold (LM20),with XI), with LM11-LM14 having the least distance.

400
 International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, Vol. 4, No. 5, September 2014

Overall, the contraction and expansion of the landmark Cluster analysis of the centroid sizes of the wing
points suggest that the overall shape of the wings become morphology showed that the left and right wings were
shorter from proximal to distal landmark points and broader grouped according to geographic location. Each location is
between points in the upper margins to the lower margins. seen to be significantly different from each other (p<0.5; Fig.
Also, the proximal points become closer together suggesting 7). Left and right wings were also significantly different
a slender wing. except for BAL indicating functional asymmetry arises in the
According to Chapman [20], narrower and petiolate bases wings. Functional asymmetry is deviations in the bilateral
are characteristics of slow-flying insects while those with symmetry of an organism believed to be induced by stresses
broader bases are faster. Based on the data, the wings of in the environment. Furthermore, it shows that these
P.reicheifrom the three populations are observed to be more environmental factors might be similar in BAL and WAO
narrow proximally, shorter in length and broader between the despite a large geographic distance between the two
leading edge to the trailing edge of the wing. This suggests locations.
that wing shape contribute to a slower flight but more The variations observed in P.reichei may be attributed to
powerful since more force is produced to lift the body up. the effects of latitude and altitude as has been observed in
Drosophila melanogaster [21], [22]. Moreover these wing
TABLE XI: INTERLANDMARK (INTER-LM) DISTANCES WITH THE BOTTOM morphology changes including wing asymmetry may also be
10% PCA SCORES FOR THE SIGNIFICANT COMPONENTS OF THE PROCRUSTES attributed to the diet during development [23], relative
TRANSFORMED LANDMARK COORDINATES OF THE RIGHT WING OF P.
REICHEI FROM THREE LOCATIONS IN MINDANAO humidity and rainfall [24], [25].
PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4 PC5
%var=24.22% %var=15.75% %var=12.33 %var=6.39 %var=5.25
LM value LM value LM value LM value LM value IV. CONCLUSION
14-19 -0.0949 3-18 -0.0955 4-5 -0.0987 4-21 -0.0737 5-16 -0.0874
1-10 -0.0950 1-19 -0.0960 3-12 -0.1001 2-3 -0.0746 5-20 -0.0895 This study has clearly described the variations in the wings
9-21 -0.0957 2-18 -0.0960 17-21 -0.1005 8-19 -0.0841 10-18 -0.0903 of three geographically distant populations of P. reichei using
18-21 -0.0967 8-11 -0.101 3-20 -0.1019 3-21 -0.0845 3-20 -0.0936
19-21 -0.0971 2-8 -0.102 2-13 -0.1047 11-16 -0.0861 8-10 -0.0948 landmark-based geometric morphometric analysis. While
16-21 -0.0975 3-4 -0.1026 4-7 -0.108 4-14 -0.0900 16-18 -0.1005 differences were observed between geographical locations,
14-16 -0.0997 3-8 -0.1077 14-17 -0.109 8-14 -0.0911 3-17 -0.1006 distance was not a factor for the differences which may
10-21 -0.1006 2-5 -0.1083 11-17 -0.1116 2-18 -0.0934 4-10 -0.1007
11-13 -0.1006 7-11 -0.1084 15-17 -0.113 10-11 -0.0949 8-16/ -0.1048
indicate differences in the genetic structure of the populations.
10-14 -0.1023 9-11 -0.1137 1-19 -0.1161 7-11 -0.0996 17-21 -0.1085 Environmental differences may also have triggeredwing
14-17 -0.1025 6-11 -0.1142 2-21 -0.1181 9-17 -0.1006 17-19 -0.1089 development. Similar environmental cues may produce
1-4 -0.1026 2-17 -0.1181 12-17 -0.1247 3-14 -0.1011 4-15 -0.1121
17-21 -0.103 10-11 -0.1195 1-17 -0.1252 18-21 -0.1091 4-20 -0.1161
similarity in wing landmarksbut distinct geographically.
8-14 -0.1065 2-7 -0.125 3-21 -0.1262 18-20 -0.1099 4-16 -0.1219
8-21 -0.1092 11-19 -0.1318 13-17 -0.1273 8-17 -0.1102 2-17 -0.1375 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
4-14 -0.1199 2-6 -0.141 2-14 -0.1282 18-19 -0.1214 19-20 -0.1545
4-21 -0.1263 2-19 -0.1429 3-13 -0.1287 17-18 -0.1263 16-17 -0.1577 Thanks are owed to Philippine Department of Science and
11-21 -0.1278 3-5 -0.1494 3-14 -0.1368 14-18 -0.1318 15-19 -0.1588 Technology under the Accelerated Science and Technology
1-11 -0.1323 3-7 -0.1507 4-6 -0.1379 9-11 -0.163 16-19 -0.1603 Human Resource Development Program for their prompt
2-4 -0.1361 11-17 -0.1558 1-2 -0.156 8-11 -0.1636 15-17 -0.1699
11-14 -0.1416 3-6 -0.1779 1-3 -0.166 11-18 -0.1752 17-20 -0.1753 responses to queries regarding the study.

REFERENCES
WAO RW

WAO LW
WAL RW

A. Sivapragasam and W. H. Loke, “Plesispareichei: a pest of

WAL LW

BAL RW

[1]
BAL LW

increasing importance in Malaysia,” in Developing an Asia-Pacific

strategy for forest invasive species: the coconut beetle
problem-bridging agriculture and forestry. Asia-Pacific Forest
Invasive Species Network workshop, ed., S. Appanah, H. C. Sim, and K.
V. Sankaran, pp. 55-62, no. 2, Vietnam: FAO Regional Office for Asia
400 and the Pacific, 2007.
[2] R. J. Lever, Pests of the coconut palm, no. 18, Food & Agriculture Org.,
1969, pp. 112-113
800
[3] G. T. Choo-Toh, “An outbreak of Plesispareichei(Chapui) on palms in
Singapore,” in Proc. the 5th international conference on plant
1200
53 protection in the tropics, ed., A. Sivapragasam and Malaysian Plant
91
38 Protection Society, Malaysia: Malaysian Plant Protection Society, pp.
64-69, 1999.
Distance

1600 [4] B. Cui and G. Liu, “Research significant of wing and vein among
Insecta,” International Journal of Biology, vol. 3, pp. 80-183, 2011.
[5] M. A. Sturtevant and E. Bier, “Analysis of the genetic hierarchy
2000 guiding wing vein development in Drosophila,” Development 121, no.
3, pp. 785-801, 1995.
64
[6] S. F. Gilbert, J. M. Opitz, and R. A. Raff, “Resynthesizing evolutionary
2400 and developmental biology,” Dev. Biol., vol. 173, pp 357–372, 1996.
[7] M. A. J. Torres, L. A. Adamat, M. M. E. Manting, S. R. M. Tabugo, R.
C. Joshi, L. Sebastian, A. T. Barrion, and C. G. Demayo,
2800 “Developmental modules defining the shapeof the forewing of
Scotinopharacoarctata,” Egypt. Acad. J. biolog. Sci., vol. 3, no. 1, pp.
105-112, 2010.
3200
100 [8] T. M. Francoy, R. A. O. Silva, P. Nunes-Silva, C. Menezes, and V. L.
Imperatriz-Fonseca, “Gender identification of five genera of stingless
Fig. 7. Dendrogram of centroid size comparison using ward’s method from bees (Apidae, Meliponini) based on wing morphology,” Genetics and
three populations of P. reichei. molecular research, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 207-214, 2009.

401
 International Journal of Bioscience, Biochemistry and Bioinformatics, Vol. 4, No. 5, September 2014

[9] F. J. Rohlf, Geometric morphometrics and phylogeny, Stony Brook, Jessie G. Gorospe is a faculty and the dean of the
NY: State University of New York, pp. 175-193, 2002. School of Graduate Studies at the Naawan Campus of
[10] P. Mitteroecker and P. Gunz, “Advances in geometric morphometrics,” the Mindanao State University system.
Evolutionary Biology, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 235-247, 2009.
[11] R. Laffont, C. Firmat, P. Alibert, B. David, S. Montuire, and, T.
Saucède, “Biodiversity and evolution in the light of morphometrics:
From patterns to processes,” ComptesRendusPalevol, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.
133-142, 2011.
[12] C. L. Staines. (2012). Hispines of the World. USDA/APHIS/PPQ.
Center for Plant Health Science and Technology and National Natural
History Museum. [Online]. Available:
http://idtools.org/id/beetles/hispines
[13] F. J. Rohlf, TPSDig version 2.12, Stony Brook, NY: State University of
New York, 2008. Sharon Rose M. Tabugo is an associate professor in
[14] F. L. Bookstein, Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and the Department of Biological Sciences in Mindanao
biology, London, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1991. State University – Iligan Institute Technology.
[15] I. L. Dryden and K. V. Mardia, Statistical analysis of shape, Chichester,
U.K: Wiley, 1998.
[16] F. J. Rohlf, TPSRelw version 1.46, Stony Brook, NY: State University
of New York, 2008.
[17] Ø. Hammer, D. A. T. Harper, and P. D. Ryan. (2001). Past:
Paleontological Statistics Software Package for education and data
analysis. Paleontologí aElectrónica. [Online] 4. pp. 1-9. Available:
http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.html
[18] S. Lele and J. T. Richtsmeier, “Euclidean distance matrix analysis:
confidence intervals for form and growth differences,” American
Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 98, no. 1, pp. 73-86, 1995. MuhminMichael E. Manting is an instructor in the
[19] I. T. Jolliffe, “Principal component analysis,” Springer series in Department of Biological Sciences in Mindanao State
statistics, vol. 29, 2002. University – Iligan Institute Technology.
[20] R. F. Chapman, The insects: structure and function, Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 193-225, 1998.
[21] W. Pitchers, J. E. Pool, and I. Dworkin, “Altitudinal clinal variation in
wing size and shape in African Drosophila melanogaster: one cline or
many?” Evolution, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 438-452, 2013.
[22] H. Johnson, M. J. Solensky, D. A. Satterfield, and A. K. Davis, “Does
Skipping a Meal Matter to a Butterfly's Appearance? Effects of Larval
Food Stress on Wing Morphology and Color in Monarch Butterflies,”
PloS one, vol. 9, no. 4, p. e93492, 2014.
[23] E. J. Márquez and C. I. Saldamando-Benjumea, “Rhodniusprolixus and
Rhodniusrobustus–like (Hemiptera, Reduviidae) wing asymmetry
under controlled conditions of population density and feeding Mark Anthony J. Torres is an associate professor in
frequency,” Journal of biosciences, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 549-560, 2013. the Department of Biological Sciences in Mindanao
[24] G. F. Gómez, E. J. Márquez, L. A. Gutiérrez, J. E. Conn, and M. M. State University – Iligan Institute Technology. He is
Correa, “Geometric morphometric analysis of Colombian Anopheles also a director at the Institute for Peace and
albimanus (Diptera: Culicidae) reveals significant effect of Development in Mindanao of the University.
environmental factors on wing traits and presence of a metapopulation,”
Actatropica, vol. 135, pp. 75–85, 2014.
[25] M. J. D. Juri, J. Liria, J. C. Navarro, R. Rodriguez, and G. N. Fritz,
“Morphometric Variability of Anopheles pseudopunctipennis (Diptera:
Culicidae) from Different Ecoregions of Argentina and Bolivia,”
Florida Entomologist, vol. 94, no. 3, pp. 428-438, 2011.

Mark Ronald S. Manseguiao is a graduate student

taking up master’s in science in biology at the
Mindanao State University of Science and Technology Cesar G. Demayo is the graduate adviser of the lead
– Iligan Institute of Technology, Iligan City, author and department chairman of the Department of
Philippines under a scholarship grant with the Biological Sciences in Mindanao State University –
Philippine Department of Science and Technology – Iligan Institute Technology, Iligan, Philippines 9200.
Accelerated Science and technology Human Resource
Development Program. He took up his baccalaureate
degree in Biology at the University of the Philippines
Mindanao, Davao City, Philippines.

402

View publication stats