The polyphagous great eggfly Hypolimnas bolina Linneaus (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) with the reported larval hosts in the plant families Acanthaceae, Amaranthaceae, Aroidea, Asteraceae, Convolvulaceae, Malvaceae, Portulacaceae, Tiliaceae, and Urticaceae, exhibited host plant preference in the biotope of the Andhra University at Visakhapatnam (17°42'N - 83° 20'E), South India. The females tested Asystasia gangetica, Dipteracanthus prostratus (Acanthaceae), Pupalia lappacea (Amaranthaceae), Sida cordata (Malvaceae), and Triumfetta pentandra (Tiliaceae) but oviposited selectively on S. cordata. Total larval development time, length and weight of fifth instar, pupal weight and, the growth and nutritional parameters like consumption index (CI), growth rate (GR), approximate digestibility (AD), efficiency of conversion of ingested food to body substance (ECI) and efficiency of conversion of digested food to body substance (ECD) were studied to assess the relative suitability of the five plant species as host plants. The hatchlings raised on S. cordata were used in all the tests conducted in the laboratory with 28 ± 20 C temperature, 80 ± 10% relative humidity and the natural light conditions of 12 - 14 h duration. The five plant species were found to be physiologically suitable for the growth and the development of larvae but they differed significantly in their effects on the nine parameters studied. Giving five credits to the top performer and reducing one credit in the subsequent host, the established order of their suitability with their total credits was A. gangetica (32) > P. lappacea (30) > D. prostratus (27) > T. pentandra (26) > S. cordata (20). Evidently the criteria of larval performance were not involved in host selection. The prostrate habit of S. cordata and its occurrence in open places with exposure to sun and the female's behaviour of laying eggs close to the ground were implicated as the ecological and behavioural factors in the selection of the host plant for oviposition. This kind of specialization is described as ecological monophagy.
Bell, T. R., 1910, Common Butterflies of the Plains of India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 20(2): 287-289.
Dethier, V. G., 1954, Evolution of feeding preferences in phytophagous insects. Evolution, 8: 33-54.
Grossmueller, D. W., Lederhouse, R. C., 1985, Oviposition site selection: an aid to rapid growth and development in the tiger swallowtail butterfly, Papilio glaucus, Oecologia, 66: 68-73.
Jaenike, J., 1990, Host specialization in phytophagous insects. Annual Review Entomology, 21: 243-273.
Janz, N., Nylin, S., Wedell, N., 1994, Host plant utilization in the comma butterfly: sources of variation and evolutionary implications, Oecologia, 99: 132- 140.
Jermy, T., 1984, Evolution of insect/host plant relationships. American Naturalist, 124: 609-630.
Kemp, D. J., 1998, Oviposition behaviour of post-diapause Hypolimnas bolina (L.) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) in tropical Australia, Australian Journal of Zoology, 46(5): 451-459.
Kunte, K., 2000, Butterflies of Peninsular India. Universities Press (India) Ltd., Hyderabad, 248.
Kunte, K., 2006, Additions to the known larval host plants of Indian butterflies. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 103(1): 119-121.
Kushwaha, K. S., Sharma, J. C., Sharma, L. S., 1963, Common lepidopteran fauna of Udaipur (Rajasthan). Indian Journal of Entomology, 25: 141-146.
Mayhew, P. J., 1997, Adaptive patterns of host-plant selection by phytophagous insects. Oikos, 79: 417-428.
Moore, C., Menash, R. K., 2000, Behaviour modifying chemistry, semichemicals and insect chemical ecology - principles and relevance. Australian Cotton CRC: 213-217.
Rajagopalan, A., 2005, A new food plant of the Great Eggfly. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 102(3): 355.
Rausher, M. D., 1979, Larval habitat suitability and oviposition preference in the three related butterflies. Ecology, 60: 503-511.
Scriber, J. M., 1986, Origins of the regional feeding abilities in the tiger swallowtail butterfly:ecological monophagy and the Papilio glaucus australis subspecies in Florida. Oecologia, 71: 94-103.
Sevastopulo, D. G., 1973, The food plants of Indian Rhopalocera. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, 70: 156-183.
Singer, M. C., 1971, Evolution of food-plant preferences in the butterfly Euphydryas editha. Evolution, 25: 383-389.
Singer, M. C., 1984, Butterfly-hostplant relationships: host quality, adult choice and larval success. In: R.I. Vane-Wright, P.R. Ackery (Eds). The Biology of Butterflies. Academic Press, London, 81-88.
Turlure, C., Van Dyck, H., 2009, On the consequences of aggressive male- locating behaviour and micro-climate for female host plant use in the butterfly Lycaena hippothoe. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 63(11): 1581-1591.
Urquhart, F. A., 1960, The monarch butterfly. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada, 232.
Varshney, R. K., 1994, Index Rhopalocera Indica Part III. Genera of Butterflies from India and Neighbouring Countries [Lepidoptera: (B) Satyridae, Nymphalidae, Libytheidae and Riodinidae]. Oriental Insects, 28: 151-198.
Waldbauer, G. P., 1968, The consumption and utilization of food by insects. In: J. W. L. Beament, J. E. Treherne, V. B. Wigglesworth (Eds.) Advances in insect physiology. Academic Press, London and New York, 229-288.
Wiklund, C., 1975, The evolutionary relationship between adult oviposition, preferences and larval host plant range in Papilio machaon L. Oecologia, 18: 185-197.
Wynter-Blyth, M. A, 1957, Butterflies of the Indian Region. The Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay, 523.