Research Article |
Corresponding author: Martin Štefánik ( stefanik16@uniba.sk ) Academic editor: Romain Julliard
© 2020 Martin Štefánik, Peter Fedor.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Štefánik M, Fedor P (2020) Environmental stress in Parnassius apollo reflected through wing geometric morphometrics in a historical collection with a possible connection to habitat degradation. Nature Conservation 38: 79-99. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.38.48682
|
Monitoring climate changes and habitat degradation in threatened species without negative impact to the populations can pose a considerable challenge. A rare chance to test the morphological response of wing shape and size to environmental factors on the mountain Apollo (Parnassius apollo) collected from 1938 to 1968 at a single location – Strečno mountain pass, N Slovakia presented itself in a historical collection. The canonical variate analysis showed a significant shift from a narrower to broader forewing, with more extremes in either extra broad or narrow forewings in the post- 1960 population. Analysis of existing data was conducted to determine the possible factors affecting this change. Generally, the comparative statistics of temperature and precipitation to morphology of individuals and their fluctuating asymmetry showed no, or weak, correlations. Two extreme weather events (ECEs), identified using the historical weather data, show no correlation of wing morphology to these events. Although no strong correlations can be drawn in case of the available weather data and morphology, the results of this study can be connected to strong anthropogenic effects of a large-scale road development project taking place in the vicinity of the collection site starting in November 1959 causing changes in the available habitat and therefore a shift in the wing morphology.
Anthropic impact, butterfly, geometric morphometry, historical collection, Parnassius Apollo, wing
Sudden or continual alterations to the environment caused by natural or anthropogenic processes have been of interest to the scientific community for some time (
Among bioindicators, detectors may provide an important material to detect response based on their body morphology (
Asymmetry in individuals’ morphology is often used to illustrate isolation effects, reduction in genetic diversity, and lower fitness of populations or environmental stress (
A reliable evaluation of insect morphology vs. environment interaction requires a long-term monitoring of a suitable model species with sufficient information on its autecology as well as environmental disturbance details (
The isolation effect on the phenotype of Parnassius apollo was previously tested on western European populations, showing similar levels of asymmetry throughout the region (
Although the pressures on selection in butterfly wing morphology remain largely unknown, the strongest factors seem to be habitat, predators and sex-specific behavior (
All 506 Parnassius apollo specimens used for this analysis belong to the historical collection (1938–1968) of the Slovak National Museum (Bratislava, Slovakia) and were mounted by Ján Zelný. Since the whole collection has been the work of a single collector it presents an ideal study opportunity, reducing the variable of multiple collectors or preparation techniques used. The material refers to a single location at Strečno mountain pass, N Slovakia (49°10'07.6"N, 18°52'51.6"E) (Fig.
Location of Strečno mountain pass in European context and a close-up of the collection site on a historic map from 1955.
Each individual was photographed from the dorsal side using a digital camera (Canon 60D, 50 mm lens) under standardized light conditions, with the added size standard (5cm with 1mm increments) fixed at the height of the wing. Geometric morphometric analysis was based on 17 landmarks (10 landmarks on forewing and 7 on hindwing), situated terminally or on vena intersection (Fig.
Left fore and hindwing of P. apollo used for the morphometric analysis, including the morphometric landmarks Forewing: 1 – R4 and R5 intersection, 2 – R4 terminally, 3 –R5 terminally, 4 –M2 terminally, 5 –M3 terminally, 6 –Cu1 terminally, 7 –Cu2 terminally, 8 –A2 terminally, 9 – Discal cell and Cu1 intersection, 10 – Discal cell and Cu2 intersection. Hindwing: 11 –Rs terminally, 12 – M1 terminally, 13 – M2 terminally, 14 – M3 terminally, 15 – Cu1 terminally, 16 – Discal cell and M1 intersection, 17 – Discal cell and Rs intersection.
A database (.TPS file) of all digitized specimens was created using tpsUtil64 (version 1.70) software (http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/soft-utility.html, accessed 23.11.2018) and imported to tpsDIG2×32 (version 2.26) software (http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/soft-dataacq.html, accessed 23.11.2018) where all landmarks were set. TPS file containing the landmarks for each specimen was imported to MorphoJ software (version 1.06d) (
To address the potential influence of digitization or setting of the landmarks on our results, individuals were tested for digitization and measurement error. To test for digitization error, 50 specimens were randomly selected, photographed twice, measured and the results compared. The measurement error was addressed by measuring the whole dataset twice by the same person and compared (
The weather data was obtained from the archives of the Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute (SHMI) for the locations closest to the collection site. The precipitation data was recorded at location Vrútky, Slovakia (49°06'42.7"N, 18°55'26.2"E), 7 km south from the collection site and Varín, Slovakia (49°12'05.4"N, 18°52'12.4"E) 3 km north of the collection site. The closest site collecting temperature data was maintained by the Slovak Army at the Žilina Airport, Slovakia (49°13'59.1"N, 18°36'47.4"E) located 20 km west of the collection site. All data on temperature prior to 1944 was probably lost, therefore comparative statistics between morphometric data and temperature was conducted only for the dataset 1944–1968. The data of monthly precipitation and temperature, and yearly precipitation and temperature, were correlated to symmetric and asymmetric components, centroid size and Procrustes FA scores of Procrustes coordinates exported from MorphoJ and analyzed using “corrr” package in R (
Data on the anthropic impact and road construction timeline was pieced together from articles and archives by The News Agency of the Slovak Republic (TASR), using mostly contemporary photographs with descriptions.
Statistics were conducted separately for the fore and hindwing to rule out the possible misalignment of wings during preparation (
All 506 Parnassius apollo specimens (Tab.
Collection year | Collection period | Female | Male | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|
1938 | 15.6.–20.7. | 10 | 16 | 26 |
1939 | 15.6.–20.7. | 0 | 18 | 18 |
1940 | 15.6.–20.7. | 9 | 10 | 19 |
1941 | 15.6.–20.7. | 8 | 17 | 25 |
1942 | 15.6.–20.7. | 9 | 16 | 25 |
1943 | 22.6.–20.7. | 7 | 21 | 28 |
1946 | 22.6.–20.7. | 8 | 15 | 23 |
1948 | 22.6.–20.7. | 8 | 11 | 19 |
1950 | 22.6.–20.7. | 9 | 11 | 20 |
1951 | 22.6.–20.7. | 7 | 10 | 17 |
1953 | 25.6.–24.7. | 10 | 15 | 25 |
1954 | 25.6.–24.7. | 0 | 15 | 15 |
1956 | 25.6.–24.7. | 0 | 13 | 13 |
1957 | 25.6.–24.7. | 5 | 16 | 21 |
1958 | 25.6.–24.7. | 3 | 10 | 13 |
1960 | 25.6.–24.7. | 5 | 14 | 19 |
1961 | 25.6.–24.7. | 4 | 4 | 8 |
1963 | 25.6.–24.7. | 7 | 6 | 13 |
1965 | 25.6.–24.7. | 52 | 86 | 138 |
1966 | 25.6.–24.7. | 1 | 9 | 10 |
1968 | 25.6.–24.7. | 2 | 9 | 11 |
Total | 164 | 342 | 506 |
ANOVA of shape, centroid size and fluctuating asymetry scores between males and females.
Forewing | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Df | Sum sq | Mean sq | F value | p |
Shape | ||||
1 | 0.000142379 | 0.000142379 | 1.238 | 0.2664 |
centroid size | ||||
1 | 0.00129255 | 0.00129255 | 0.6782 | 0.4106 |
fluctuating asymetry (FA) | ||||
1 | 0.0000686794 | 0.0000686794 | 1.446 | 0.2297 |
hindwing | – | – | – | – |
Shape | ||||
1 | 0.000221659 | 0.000221659 | 2.233 | 0.1357 |
centroid size | ||||
1 | 0.0000453208 | 0.0000453208 | 1.439 | 0.2308 |
fluctuating asymetry | ||||
1 | 0.0000592967 | 0.0000592967 | 0.8129 | 0.3677 |
Testing for digitization error by photographing 50 individuals under the same light conditions and digitization setup, no significant difference in landmark placement was detected (ANOVA, digitization error of forewing p = 0.76, hindwing p = 0.56). The same result of non-significant difference was recorded for the measurement error, remeasuring all 506 individuals twice (ANOVA, measurement error of forewing p = 0.59, hindwing p = 0.45).
Rejecting the null hypothesis using Procrustes ANOVA (p < 0.0001) for the fore and hindwing corresponds with statistically significant levels in wing asymmetry within each year measured. As there was no significant variance in asymetry throughout the years for the forewing (ANOVA, p = 0.417) as well as the hindwing (ANOVA, p = 0.0564), the asymmetry is statistically significant within each year, although with no fluctuation when comparing the time series.
The Mann-Whitney’s pairwise comparison, to test the significance of the differences in wing shape between each year of the time series (Appendix
Mountain Apollo forewing shape changes displayed on the canonical variate 1 and 2. The boxplots cover the upper and lower 25%, separated by a line showing median inside the box, whiskers cover remaining upper and lower 25%, the white circles represent outliers and black stars are extreme values.
Mountain Apollo hindwing shape changes displayed on the canonical variate 1 and 2. The boxplots cover the upper and lower 25%, separated by a line showing median inside the box, whiskers cover remaining upper and lower 25%, the white circles represent outliers and black stars are extreme values.
The shift observed starting in 1960 was tested using 2 factor analysis of variance where we tested the artificial pre/post 1960 datasets and the natural variation between years using CV1 (Tab.
Canonical variate 1 (CV1) used in the analysis of variance for comparison of natural variance in wing morphology between years and the shift observed around 1960.
Df | Sum sq | Mean sq | F value | Pr(>F) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CV1 forewing | pre vs post 1960 | 1 | 381.9 | 381.9 | 381.922 | < 2 x 10-16 | *** |
Years | 19 | 60.7 | 3.2 | 3.194 | 4.81 x 10-6 | *** | |
Residuals | 989 | 989 | 1 | ||||
CV1 hindwing | pre vs post 1960 | 1 | 117.6 | 117.6 | 117.601 | < 2 x 10-16 | *** |
Years | 19 | 64.8 | 3.41 | 3.412 | 1.14 x 10-6 | *** | |
Residuals | 993 | 993 | 1 |
Due to the results of the Mann-Whitney’s pairwise comparison (Appendix
Scatter plot of the P. apollo forewing shape change along the first two canonical variates as axes. CV1 and CV2 cumulatively displaying 81.12% of the variability with 80% confidence ellipses.
Scatter plot of the P. apollo hindwing shape change along the first two canonical variates as axes. CV1 and CV2 cumulatively displaying 76.39% of the variability with 80% confidence ellipses.
The scatter plots of CV1 and CV2 are displaying a shift from a narrower to broader forewing, with more extremes in either extra broad or narrow forewings in individuals from the 1960 – 1968 group (Fig.
For the hindwing (Fig.
Generally, the comparative statistics of temperature, precipitation and morphology of individuals and their FA showed no distinct correlation (r2 < 0. 04). The strongest correlation r2 = 0. 25 (forewing) and r2 = 0.30 (hindwing) of standard deviation of the centroid wing size to the average monthly temperature was observed during February. The other positive correlation refers to January temperature vs. wing size (r2 = 0.21 for forewing, r2 = 0.175 for hindwing) and March temperature vs. wing size (r2 = 0.18 for forewing, r2 = 0.16 for hindwing).
Using historical weather data (temperature and precipitation) and photographic documentation of ECEs, we identified two extreme weather events (ECE) and compared them with the morphometric data (symmetric and asymmetric components, centroid size and Procrustes FA scores). The first ECE (a deep drop in monthly temperature during February 1956: -11.5 °C) corresponds with no deviation from the average wing size despite the extremely cold weather, as the wing size parameter lies within the range of the dataset (Figs
The correlation of the Centroid size standard deviation of the P. apollo fore and hindwing to the average temperature in February (the extreme weather event highlighted with a green circle).
Similarly, the extreme weather event, in this case heavy rainfall in June 1958, does not show any correlation to wing morphology (R2 < 0.02), when comparing the daily, monthly, or annual precipitation total sum, average, min or max values at the study site. A weak positive correlation (R2 = 0.12) was found for standard deviation of monthly precipitation to the wing size, when the wings grew larger with increasing variation of monthly precipitation. (Figs
Since the changes in wing morphology show only weak correlations to temperature or precipitation, there is a strong suggestion of high anthropic effect. A large-scale road development project in November 1959 with heavy modification or complete destruction of some of the cliff faces was conducted in the immediate proximity of the collection site when constructing a new concrete road at Strečno castle, the Domašín meander and Žilina (Fig.
The Mann-Whitney’s pairwise comparison and the Canonical variate analysis (CVA) revealed a significant change in wing morphology starting between 1958 and 1960, continuing to the end of the dataset. This is supported by the analysis of variance and the breakpoint regression analysis. The fluctuating asymmetry was statistically significant in all tested years, however with no significant changes over the period of 30 years, proving previous results and the hypothesis that P. apollo populations are able to maintain low long-term effective populations despite the high but constant amounts of asymmetry (
In principle, any external factor can produce plastic responses in organisms with the most prominent factors being temperature, photoperiod and humidity, where a single population can display annual or even seasonal variation (
The second ECE with high short-term precipitation had little to no impact on the mountain Apollo populations at the study site; however we hypothesize that the abnormal rainfall may have had a negative impact on adults, pupas as well as host plants (
A road development in a complicated terrain of an incised meander of the Strečno mountain pass was carried out from 1959 to 1965. The populations of mountain Apollo were present along the cliff faces and the surrounding meadows, creating ideal conditions with all the essential properties present for this species. We hypothesize that the removal of large parts of cliff faces which were used for the leveling of the road and the use of the open meadows for storage of material or by movement of the construction machinery changed the habitat and reduced the number of habitable patches that the population can occupy and limited the resources at the location (
A more subtle, but lasting effect of the newly built road was a reported increase in the numbers of vehicles at the location. Since the morphological changes of the wings were observable until the end of our dataset in 1968 we here hypothesize that the newly built road could have continually affected the mountain Apollo and their host and nectar plants (
Due to its conservation status and the vulnerability of current populations of mountain Apollos, the historic collections often provide the only and possibly the last opportunity to analyze large numbers of these individuals. The populations collected by Ján Zelný at Strečno mountain pass were gathered in such numbers due to the attempts of discovering a new subspecies based on the wing color patterns, where the method of collection was to gather the largest number of individuals during each visit. In most cases the selective nature of the amateur collectors could include a bias by selecting the largest or subjectively most beautiful specimens. Due to the nonselective nature of the collection method used by Zelný and the fact that he was the only person collecting and mounting the specimens we concluded that even if he had a specific preference in collection of butterflies the bias is the same in all collected populations. The statistical analysis of environmental effects on the wing morphology of the 506 individuals of P. apollo from a single location, collected periodically almost at the same time in June and July, over 30 years creates a unique look into a historical population of Parnassius apollo no longer present at the location.
The asymmetry of wings did not significantly change over time, nor could it be correlated to the analyzed environmental factors. Only weak or no statistical correlation with the meteorological data within the analyzed timeseries was detected. There is a strong suggestion of anthropogenic impact due to road construction on the changes in wing morphology at the studied site.
We would like to extend our gratitude to the staff of the Slovak National Museum in Bratislava – Natural Science Museum and the archives of the Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute for providing the data and invaluable help during our research.We are also grateful to Ivana Cocherová, Júlia Haruštiaková, Vladimír Janský, Ľubomír Rajter, and Michal Vlačiha for their help during the digitization of the samples. The research was funded by VEGA 1/0286/20.
Mann-Whitney’s pairwise comparison using the results of the CVA of the differences in wing shape for the fore and hindwing shape change of each collection year of P. apollo from Strečno mountain pass; significant differences (< 0.0001) are marked grey;
Wing | df1 | df2 | F | P | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FW | 80 | 3892 | 8.41 | 0.000 | |||||||||||||||||
HW | 56 | 3908 | 4.94 | 0.000 | |||||||||||||||||
Wing | 1939 | 1940 | 1941 | 1942 | 1943 | 1946 | 1948 | 1950 | 1951 | 1953 | 1954 | 1956 | 1957 | 1958 | 1960 | 1961 | 1963 | 1965 | 1966 | 1968 | |
1938 | HW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
FW | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |
1939 | HW | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
FW | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | ||
1940 | HW | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||
FW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | |||
1941 | FW | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |||
HW | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||
1942 | FW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | ||||
HW | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |||||
1943 | FW | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | |||||
HW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||
1946 | FW | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||
HW | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |||||||
1948 | FW | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |||||||
HW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||
1950 | FW | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||
HW | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | |||||||||
1951 | FW | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |||||||||
HW | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | ||||||||||
1953 | FW | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||||
HW | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |||||||||||
1954 | FW | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |||||||||||
HW | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||||||
1956 | FW | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||||||
HW | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | |||||||||||||
1957 | FW | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |||||||||||||
HW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | ||||||||||||||
1958 | FW | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | ||||||||||||||
HW | > 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |||||||||||||||
1960 | FW | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.001 | < 0.05 | |||||||||||||||
HW | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||||||||||
1961 | FW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | ||||||||||||||||
HW | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | |||||||||||||||||
1963 | FW | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | |||||||||||||||||
HW | < 0.001 | > 0.05 | > 0.05 | ||||||||||||||||||
1965 | FW | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||||||||||||
HW | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |||||||||||||||||||
1966 | FW | > 0.05 | |||||||||||||||||||
HW | > 0.05 |