Volume-3 Issue-8

S. No

Page No.

1.

Authors:

Paper Title:

Abstract: India is a land of vast phsiogeographic variability. This subcontinent is rich in floral and faunal diversity. It is not surprising, therefore that the country is one of the richest in the world with respect to butterfly species. Butterflies are the foremost galore cluster of insects on earth that square measure simply recognizable by the overall public due their lovely colors and swish flight .They variate on the basis of sexual variations, individual, seasonal, geographical variations and races. These variations form the raw material for speciation and offer one of the most challenging aspects for the classification of these insects. The conventional morphological methods are of great help in separation of different species and genera. There is need to couple morphological, biological, behavioral and biochemical studies with available taxonomic information to separate insect taxa on the basis of discriminatory characteristics. Such supplementary characters come from biochemical and/ or molecular studies. Protein electrophoresis has emerged as a useful technique in population genetics and now a days been widely applied in systematics. Therefore, the present studies used this technique for the SDS-PAGE characterization and comparison of proteins in the both male and female of Pieris spp. (Pieris canidia indica and Pieris brassicae). It was interesting to note that after the comparison of the data, most of the protein fractions obtained in two species of P. canidia and P. brassicae were found to be common. And further, protein fraction were also common when they were compared within the same species male and female, confirming that these were the characteristic of the genus. So we can conclude that the proteins serve as good markers for the differentiation of species and also for the sexes in the same species. 

Keywords: Biodiversity, Protein profiling, Pieris spp.

References:

1. BURNS, J. M. (1975). Isozymes in evolutionary systematics. In Isozymes, Volume 4(pp. 49-62).
2. Cook, J. (1996). A beginner’s guide to molecular markers for entomologists. ANTENNA-LONDON-ROYAL ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY-, 20, 53-61.
3. Gurleen, K. 2006. Phospahatse relationship in Pieris MSc. Dissertation, Panjab University, Chandigarh.
4. Avise, J. C. (1974). Systematic value of electrophoretic data. Systematic Biology, 23(4), 465-481.
5. Berlocher, S. H. (1984). Insect molecular systematics. Annual review of entomology, 29(1), 403-433.
6. Loxdale, H. D., & Lushai, G. (1998). Molecular markers in entomology. Bulletin of Entomological Research, 88(6), 577-600.
7. Monteiro, A., Brakefield, P. M., & French, V. (1997). The relationship between eyespot shape and wing shape in the butterfly Bicyclus anynana: a genetic and morphometrical approach. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 10(5), 787-802.
8. Mattu, V. K., & Verma, L. R. (1984). Comparative morphometric studies on the Indian honeybee of the north-west Himalayas. 3. Hind leg, tergites and sternites. Journal of Apicultural Research, 23(3), 117-122.
9. Mattu, V. K., & Verma, L. R. (1984). Comparative morphometric studies on the Indian honeybee of the north-west Himalayas 2. Wings. Journal of Apicultural Research, 23(1), 3-10.
10. Mattu, V. K., & Verma, L. R. (1983). Comparative morphometric studies on the Indian honeybee of the north-west Himalayas 1. Tongue and antenna. Journal of Apicultural Research, 22(2), 79-85.
11. Sylvester, H. A. (1986). Biochemical genetics. Bee Genetics and Breeding, 177-203.
12. Sylvester, H. A. (1982). Electrophoretic identification of Africanized honeybees. Journal of Apicultural research, 21(2), 93-97.
13. Hagen, R. H. (1986). The evolution of host-plant use by the tiger swallowtail butterfly, Papilio glaucus. Cornell University, Aug.
14. Loxdale, H. D., Brookes, C. P., Woiwod, I. P., & Harrington, R. (1994). Another solution for preserving activity and integrity? Trends in ecology & evolution, 9(11), 441.
15. Queller, D. C., Strassmann, J. E., & Hughes, C. R. (1993). Microsatellites and kinship. Trends in ecology & evolution, 8(8), 285-288.
16. Jacobson, N. R., Hansens, E. J., Vrijenhoek, R. C., Swofford, D. L., & Berlocher, S. H. (1981). Electrophoretic detection of a sibling species of the salt marsh greenhead, Tabanus nigrovittatus. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 74(6), 602-605.
17. Ruttner, F., Tassencourt, L., & Louveaux, J. (1978). Biometrical-statistical analysis of the geographic variability of Apis mellifera LI Material and methods. Apidologie, 9(4), 363-381.
18. Eanes, W. F., & Koehn, R. K. (1978). An analysis of genetic structure in the monarch butterfly, Danaus plexippus L. Evolution, 32(4), 784-797.
19. Laemmli, U. K. (1970). Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature, 227(5259), 680.
20. Wahlberg, N., Braby, M. F., Brower, A. V., de Jong, R., Lee, M. M., Nylin, S. & Zakharov, E. (2005). Synergistic effects of combining morphological and molecular data in resolving the phylogeny of butterflies and skippers. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 272(1572), 1577-1586.
21. Rose, H. S., & Walia, V. K. (2003). Inventory of the Butterflies diversity of Chandigarh. Bionotes, 5(3), 58-60.
22. Monteiro, A., Brakefield, P. M., & French, V. (1997). The relationship between eyespot shape and wing shape in the butterfly Bicyclus anynana: a genetic and morphometrical approach. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 10(5), 787-802.
23. Kingsolver, J. G., & Wiernasz, D. C. (1987). Dissecting correlated characters: adaptive aspects of phenotypic covariation in melanization pattern of Pieris butterflies. Evolution, 41(3), 491-503.
24. Brakefield, P. M. (1984). The ecological genetics of quantitative characters in Maniola jurtina and other butterflies.

1-5