Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42084194›Full record

ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2026

Microclimate-based oviposition site selection in butterflies and moths.

Simon Braem, Thomas Fartmann, Hans Van Dyck

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Simon BraemBehavioural Ecology & Conservation Group, Earth & Life Institute, UCLouvain, SC12 - Carnoy, Floor 01 Office C 163, Croix du sud 4-5, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1348, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9520-9741
Thomas FartmannDivision of Biodiversity and Landscape Ecology, Osnabrück University, Barbarastraße 11, Osnabrück, 49076, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2050-9221
Hans Van DyckBehavioural Ecology & Conservation Group, Earth & Life Institute, UCLouvain, SC12 - Carnoy, Floor 01 Office C 163, Croix du sud 4-5, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1348, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2013-6824

Funding

Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles 17/22-086FNRS 40037736Fonds pour la Formation à la Recherche dans l'Industrie et dans l'Agriculture
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sites herbivorous insects select to deposit eggs determine to a variable degree the environment their larvae will experience during development. Therefore, oviposition site selection should be seen as a significant life-history trait affecting the survival of the offspring. While searching for suitable sites, egg-laying terrestrial insects are predicted to respond to environmental factors that function as indicators for larval development and survival. In herbivorous insects, such as butterflies and moths, microclimate may be of significance for the selection of a suitable host plant or specific host plant parts. Although the preference-performance hypothesis attracted much interest in insects to address host plant species generalism versus specialism, a synthetic review on the diversity and functional relevance of microclimate-based oviposition site selection (MBOSS) is lacking for the Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths). Temperature and humidity are of ecological significance throughout their life cycle, but the role of oviposition site selection for larval development and survival may vary considerably. In this review, we conducted a literature survey of studies on the Lepidoptera that analysed oviposition site selection in the field and that tested for MBOSS relationships in natural habitats. We focused on the following questions: (i) how common is MBOSS in butterflies and moths; (ii) to what extent does the preference-performance hypothesis apply for MBOSS in this group of insects; and (iii) what is the relevance of MBOSS relationships for conservation principles and conservation management? In 89% of the tested cases, evidence for MBOSS was found, although there was a strong bias towards studies on temperate-zone butterfly species. By contrast, moths and tropical butterflies were understudied. Several moth studies did not provide support for the MBOSS hypothesis. Whether MBOSS occurred relative to warmer, cooler or thermally more buffered sites depended on: (i) the spatial scale at which MBOSS was tested; and (ii) regional climatic conditions. Vegetation type (i.e. forest versus non-forest habitats) was not significantly predictive for the type of MBOSS. However, when analysed in a case-by-case manner, vegetation type often clarified the ecological circumstances under which MBOSS was observed. There was a high prevalence of oviposition site selection for warmer microclimates than the thermal conditions of the surrounding environment. Understanding microclimate-mediated behavioural interactions with the environment is a key component for understanding resource-centred functional habitat and movement patterns to spread eggs in herbivorous insects. This small-scale component of habitat heterogeneity (including post-disturbed early-successional microhabitats) is key for understanding functional habitat use in butterflies and moths and is of high relevance for conservation and restoration management of their habitats in natural and anthropogenic landscapes. We identify outstanding questions and discuss new perspectives for the ecology and evolution of oviposition site selection, as well as for species conservation under human-induced rapid environmental change.

Indexed as

ButterfliesMicroclimateMothsOvipositionAnimalsFemalebiodiversity conservationearly‐successional stageegg‐laying behaviourhumiditylarval developmentLepidopteralife‐history traitmicrohabitatpreference–performance hypothesistemperature

Identifiers

PMID42084194
PMCPMC13542312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.