Comparison of Static and Dynamic Assays When Quantifying Thermal Plasticity of Drosophilids
1
Section of Biology and Environmental Science, Department of Chemistry and Bioscience, Aalborg University, Fredrik Bajers Vej 7H, DK 9220 Aalborg, Denmark
2
Zoophysiology, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, C.F. Møllers Alle Building 1131, DK 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2020, 11(8), 537; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080537
Received: 12 July 2020
/
Revised: 13 August 2020
/
Accepted: 14 August 2020
/
Published: 15 August 2020
Simple Summary
Temperature directly affects many biological processes, from enzymatic reactions to population growth, and thermal stress tolerance is central to our understanding of the global distribution and abundance of species and populations. Given the importance of thermal stress tolerance in ecophysiology and evolutionary biology it is important to be able to measure thermal stress resistance accurately and in ecologically relevant ways. Several methods for such quantification exist in the arthropod literature and the comparability of different methods is currently being debated. Here we reconcile the two most commonly used thermal assays (dynamic ramping and static knockdown assays) for quantifying insect heat tolerance limits and plastic responses using a newly suggested modeling technique. We find that results obtained on the basis of the two assays are highly correlated and that data from one assay can therefore reasonably well predict estimates from the other. These data are of general relevance to the study of thermal biology of ectotherms.
Numerous assays are used to quantify thermal tolerance of arthropods including dynamic ramping and static knockdown assays. The dynamic assay measures a critical temperature while the animal is gradually heated, whereas the static assay measures the time to knockdown at a constant temperature. Previous studies indicate that heat tolerance measured by both assays can be reconciled using the time × temperature interaction from “thermal tolerance landscapes” (TTLs) in unhardened animals. To investigate if this relationship remains true within hardened animals, we use a static assay to assess the effect of heat hardening treatments on heat tolerance in 10 Drosophila species. Using this TTL approach and data from the static heat knockdown experiments, we model the expected change in dynamic heat knockdown temperature (CTmax: temperature at which flies enter coma) and compare these predictions to empirical measurements of CTmax. We find that heat tolerance and hardening capacity are highly species specific and that the two assays report similar and consistent responses to heat hardening. Tested assays are therefore likely to measure the same underlying physiological trait and provide directly comparable estimates of heat tolerance. Regardless of this compliance, we discuss why and when static or dynamic assays may be more appropriate to investigate ectotherm heat tolerance.
View Full-Text
Keywords:
dynamic and static thermal assays; thermal tolerance landscapes; heat tolerance; hardening; CTmax
▼
Show Figures
Figure 1
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
- Supplementary File 1:
ZIP-Document (ZIP, 42 KiB)
MDPI and ACS Style
Winther Bak, C.; Bahrndorff, S.; Krog Noer, N.; Bjerregaard Jørgensen, L.; Overgaard, J.; Nygaard Kristensen, T. Comparison of Static and Dynamic Assays When Quantifying Thermal Plasticity of Drosophilids. Insects 2020, 11, 537. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080537
AMA Style
Winther Bak C, Bahrndorff S, Krog Noer N, Bjerregaard Jørgensen L, Overgaard J, Nygaard Kristensen T. Comparison of Static and Dynamic Assays When Quantifying Thermal Plasticity of Drosophilids. Insects. 2020; 11(8):537. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080537
Chicago/Turabian StyleWinther Bak, Christian, Simon Bahrndorff, Natasja Krog Noer, Lisa Bjerregaard Jørgensen, Johannes Overgaard, and Torsten Nygaard Kristensen. 2020. "Comparison of Static and Dynamic Assays When Quantifying Thermal Plasticity of Drosophilids" Insects 11, no. 8: 537. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080537
Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
