Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 22;287(1931):20201267. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1267

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Quantification of mid-forewing band (MFB) pattern in co-mimicking Heliconius erato and Heliconius melpomene colour pattern morphs. (a) Heatmaps demonstrate the consistency of MFB within colour pattern morphs with white indicating consistent presence of MFB patterns and blue gradient indicating less consistent presence. Inter-species differences in MFB are shown on the right, with red indicating higher presence of MFB in H. erato and blue indicating higher presence of MFB in H. melpomene. Values next to wings indicate the average proportion of the wing in which the MFB is present within colour pattern morphs and in which differences are found between co-mimics. As a positional reference of the MFB pattern variation, the column on the right overlays the H. e. demophoon (green outline) and H. m. rosina (yellow outline) WntA CRISPR KO phenotype as found in at least 50% of the KO samples with the differences between co-mimics. ‘P’, ‘B’, and ‘S’ indicate phenotypes commonly referred to as the ‘Postman’, ‘Broken’, and ‘Split’ band morphs, respectively. Coloured circles next to butterfly wing images correspond to distribution areas in figure 1. (b) Comparison of the difference in relative size of the MFB (as proportion of the wing in which MFB is present) and absolute mismatch between H. erato and H. melpomene MFB. (c) Wild-type and WntA CRISPR KO phenotype of H. e. demophoon and H. m. rosina. (Online version in colour.)