See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318339461 Invertebrate Fauna of Namibia: Biodiversity and Bibliography Book · May 2017 CITATION READS 1 766 1 author: Grzegorz Kopij University of Namibia 430 PUBLICATIONS 942 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Birds of Namibia View project Vertebrate Fauna of Opole Silesia View project All content following this page was uploaded by Grzegorz Kopij on 11 July 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. INVERTEBRATE FAUNA OF NAMIBIA BIODIVERSITY AND BIBLIOGRAPHY GRZEGORZ KOPIJ DEPARTMENT OF INTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF NAMIBIA OGONGO 2017 1 Dedicated to Jan Klimaszewski, Marek Lipiński, Danuta Plisko and Wojciech Staręga, in the recongition of their contribution to African invertebrate zoology Author Published by Department of Integrated Environmental Sciences, University of Namibia Private Bag 5520 Oshakati, Ogongo Campus, Namibia First edition in 2017 Ccopright © by G. Kopij 2017 Cover design by G. Kopij Front cover: Upper left: Banded-legged Nephila Nephila senegalensis in Ogongo, Omustai Region Upper right: Common Garden Orb-web Spider Argiope australis in Ogongo, Omusati Region Middle left: Blue Pansy Precis oenone (Nymphalidae) Middle right: Belonogaster dubia (Vespidae) Lower left: Milkweed Locust Phymateus morbillosus (Pyrgomorphidae) in Katima Mulilo Lower right: Mopane Moth Gonimbrasia berlina (Saturnidae) in Ogongo, Omusati Region Back cover: From upper to lower, and from left to right: The author collecting insects from Welwitschia mirabilis in Damaraland Insect collection in the Hoanib Valley near Sesfontein, Kunene Region Raquet-shaped termite mound in Ogongo Deformation on a leaf caused by mites Nymphs of Cercopidae living in a ball of spittle on Zambezi River in Katima Mulilo Cicadidae sp., Buprestidae sp., Orthoptera sp., Sphingidae sp. Vine Hawk Moth Hippotion celerio (Sphingidae), Tenebrionidae sp., Dung Beetle (Scarabaeinae) All photographs by G. Kopij ISBN: 978 99945-79-75-4 2 CONTENT INTRODUCTION 5 Trichoptera 65 Myriapoda 69 BIODIVERSITY OF NAMBIAN ANIMALS 7 Arachnida 70 Amblypygi 70 ALL LITERATURE FROM 1991 TO 2010 37 Opiliones 70 General 37 Scorpiones 70 Porifera 37 Solifugae 71 Cnidaria 37 Acari 71 Helmintha 38 Araneae 72 Cestoda 38 Mollusca 75 Trematoda 38 Gastropoda 75 Bivalvia 76 Nematoda 38 Cephalopoda 77 Rotifera 39 Annelida 39 KEY LITERATURE BEFORE 1991 78 Tardigrada 39 General 78 Arthropoda 39 Porifera 78 Crustacea 39 Cnidaria 78 Branchiopoda 40 Helminthes 79 Euphasiacea 40 Platyhelminthes 79 Decapoda 40 Parasites 80 Mysidacea 41 Free-living 80 Isopoda 41 Nemathelminthes 80 Amphipoda 41 Parasites 80 Copepoda 42 Free-living 80 Ostracoda 42 Other groups 81 Branchiura 42 Annelida 81 Insecta 43 Oligochaeta 81 Thysanura 43 Polychaeta 81 Odonata 43 Hirudinea 81 Ephemeroptera 43 Gyphyrea 82 Plecoptera 44 Arthropoda 82 Orthoptera 44 Crustacea 82 Mantodea 45 Branchiopoda 82 Mantophasmatodea 45 Decapoda 82 Isoptera 45 Isopoda 82 Psocoptera 46 Amphipoda 83 Phthiraptera 46 Copepoda 83 Thysanoptera 46 Cirripedia 83 Hemiptera 46 Branchiura 83 Heteroptera 46 Ostracoda 83 ‘Homoptera’ 48 Enthognatha 83 Coleoptera 48 Collembola 83 Raphidioptera 54 Protura 84 Neuroptera 54 Diplura 84 Hymenoptera 55 Insecta 84 Mecoptera 59 Thysanura 84 Diptera 59 Ephemeroptera 84 Lepidoptera 65 Odonata 84 3 Embioptera 85 Diptera 105 Plecoptera 85 Trichoptera 111 Zoraptera 85 Lepidoptera 111 Phasmatodea 85 Myriapoda 112 Orthoptera 85 Chilopoda 112 Mantodea 86 Diplopoda 112 Blattodea 86 Symphyla 113 Isoptera 87 Pauropoda 113 Psocoptera 87 Chelicerata 113 Phthiraptera 87 Pycnogonida 113 Thysanoptera 88 Amblypygi 113 Hemiptera 88 Pedipalpi 113 Heteroptera 88 Opiliones 113 ‘Homoptera’ 91 Pseudoscorpionidea 113 Coleoptera 93 Scorpiones 114 Megaloptera 101 Solifugae 114 Neuroptera 101 Uropygi 114 Hymenoptera 102 Acari 114 Symphyta 102 Araneae 117 Parasitica 102 Mollusca 119 Aculeata 103 Gastropoda 119 Mecoptera 105 Bivalvia 120 Siphonaptera 105 Lophophorata 120 Strepsiptera 105 Echinodermata 120 4 INTRODUCTION Biodiversity is a technical term which made a tremendous ‘career’ in the last 30 years (with over 20 millions hits on Google Search). It may be defined as a diversity of all forms of life from genes to ecosystems (Haywood & Watson 1995). The basic unit of the biodiversity is, however, the species. It constitutes a focal points of studing life as well as conserving all its forms. In the light of Genesis (2: 19-20), describing new species is one of the oldest and the most prominent man’s duity and reponsibility. Despite intese research, the exact number of species living on Earth is still unknown, and estimates range form 10 millions to 100 millions. So far, only a small fraction of this enoromous richness has been documented. By the year 2009, a total of 1 004 898 insect species were discirbed in the world out of 1 750 000 all living species known to science (Foottit & Adler 2009). But it has been estimated that this constitutes only ca. 10-20% of all insect species living on Earth (Heywood & Watson 1998). Our knowledge on biodiversity is skewed towards vertebrates (ca. 90% of all species already described) and vascular plants (ca. 85%) and towards temperate regions of the world, while invertebrates in tropical regions are still poorly known. Biodiversity is, however, centred in these tropical regions, where the Amazon Basin and the sub-Saharan Africa are regarded as its main stongholds (Haywood & Watson 1995). Scientists who study biodiversity do so mainly out of a fascination for different forms of life; no economic incentive is needed for them. However, most other people require the service of biodiversity to appreciate its value. Species should be, therefore, not only discovered, described, placed in systematic order, and catalogued; but also studied and applied for their potential services in agriculture, forestry, medicine, veterinary, biotechnology, pharmacology, chemistry, ecosystem management, etc. Such a holisting approach to biodiversity migh further invigorate the interest in and economic support for biodiversity studies. Biodiversity inventory faces scientific and technical challenges (Footti & Adler 2009). Documenting biodiversity is the first step in understanding the world’s biodiversity, in utilizing and conserving it. Namibia, like most other African countries, urgently needs information on its existing described biodiversity to foster further studies. The rich biodiversity in Namibia, as in many other African countries, is not matched, however, by its research and scientific infrastructure. The number of species is very high, but the number of taxomomists describing the species is very low, if not existent in many countries. This is also partly because most biodiversity collections from Africa are housed in Europe (London, Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Tervuren, Oxford, Munich, Budapest, Florence, Stokholm, Lund, Bytom), USA (Washington, New York, Chiocago, San Francisco) and South Africa (Pretoria, Cape Town, Bloemfontein, Grahamstown, Pietermaritzbutg), and only in seven out of 50 African countries (Windhoek, Bulawayo, Maputo, Dundo, Nairobi, Kampala, Dakar) (Footti & Adler 2009). A vast amount of data on Namibian invertebrate diversity are incarcerated in these museum collections listed above. These data are difficult to access, as large amount of time and money is required for visiting and working in these museums. However, some of these museums, for example the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University, try to make the information readily available througth the network (mcz-28168.oeb.harvard.edu/mcztypedb.htm). The growing attemps of museums to make images of holoptypes deposited there, available through the worldwide web (together with their original disciptions), will greatly facilitate and improve biodiversity studies, especially in the tropical parts of the world. In that way enormous amount of time, energy and money could be saved, collections will remain better preserved (no need for shipments and direct hadling) and the rate of synonymy could be greatly reduced. Also most papers describing the Namibian biodiversity, and African at large, have been published in a vast number of journals and books scattered throughout the world over the last 260 years. Some of these desciptions were published in rather obscure journals, which copies are available today in merely few libraries. We have to unlock all these information to make it readily available for students and stakeholders interested to apply the biodiversity services in different sectors of our country’s economy. The goal can be partly fulfilled through compilation of a comprehensive regional biodiversity review and bibliography corresponding to this biodiversity. In that way it will also complement the Namibian vertebrate bibliography (Kopij 2014). The presented work fulfills this goal. It is composed of three parts. In the first part, a list of all invertebrate families ever recorded in Namibia are listed in systematic order from the most primitive to the most evolutionary advanced. For each such family, numbers of species and genera recorded in Namibia are given. This has been done to facilitate comparisons with the rest of southern Africa (south of Zambezi and Cunene rivers). Therefore, whenever appropriate data were available, the number of genera and species in southern Africa and in the world are also given. Such comparison