DOCSLIB.ORG

Proceedings of the 6Th National Small Farm Conference Promoting the Successes of Small Farmers and Ranches

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Proceedings of the 6Th National Small Farm Conference Promoting the Successes of Small Farmers and Ranches Proceedings of the 6th National Small Farm Conference Promoting the Successes of Small Farmers and Ranches Microsoft account MEMPHIS COOK CONVENTION CENTER SEPTEMBER 18 - 20, 2012 MEMPHIS, TN Proceedings of the 6th National Small Farm Conference The 6th National Small Farm Conference, "Promoting the Successes of Small Farmers and Ranchers", was hosted by Tennessee State University, College of Agricultural Human and Natural Sciences and the University of Tennessee. Successes in small farm activities were shared, as well as innovative ideas in research, extension and outreach to strengthen collaboration and partnership among state specialists who work to ensure that small farmers and ranchers not only survive, but also thrive in today’s economy. The conference was also served as a forum to discuss the results of research geared towards addressing challenges facing small farmers and ranchers. Strengthening partnerships created at the five previous National Small Farm Conferences was a priority for the Memphis meeting. This conference was consisted of short courses, oral and poster paper presentations, exhibits, success stories and educational tours within Memphis and vicinity 1 Dear Conference Participants: On behalf of the conference planning committees, our hosts Tennessee State University, the University of Tennessee, conference sponsors, land grant colleges and universities, community-based organizations, USDA Agencies, small farmers and ranchers, foundations, State Small Farm Program Coordinators, USDA Small Farm Coordinators and others, welcome to the Sixth National Small Farm Conference. The conference’s theme, “Promoting the Successes of Small Farmers and Ranchers,” provides a forum to promote the successes of small farmers and ranchers as well as discuss local, state, regional and national small farm research, extension and outreach issues identified by stakeholders from land grant colleges and universities, community-based organizations, farm communities and others working with small farmers and ranchers. Successful programs and projects will be shared so as to promote and encourage innovative ideas that can be replicated in order to enhance economic opportunities and improve the quality of life for small farmers and ranchers. This Conference builds upon the successes of previous conferences held in Nashville, Tennessee; St. Louis, Missouri; Albuquerque, New Mexico; Greensboro, North Carolina and Springfield, Illinois. This is a train-the-trainer conference consisting of several preconference short courses, and program tracks focusing on: Alternative and Traditional Enterprises; Marketing Opportunities; Outreach to Underserved Communities; Research and Extension Priorities; and Program Planning and Implementation. Tuesday’s opening reception begins with greetings and remarks to set the tone and direction of the conference while providing opportunities for you to network with participants. On Wednesday, the highlights include a keynote followed by farmers’ Panel on Small Farm Opportunities and Challenges, and closing out the afternoon with educational tours. Thursday highlights presentations from series of tracks, networking lunch followed by a closing reception, and drawings. Great thanks to the staff at Tennessee State University, the University of Tennessee, USDA Agencies, the local Planning Committee and the Conference Planning Committee and others for their hard work over the past two years in planning for the 6th National Small Farm Conference. Sincerely, Denis Ebodaghe, Ph.D. Executive Committee Chair & National Program Leader for Small Farms 2 Committees and Members Educational Tours Committee Organizes and conducts the conference tours; works with Program Committee to include tour schedule in the conference program; Chair: Fitzroy Bullock, Tennessee State University Members: Chris Robbins, Tennessee State University David Lockwood, University of Tennessee Kathy Faust, University of Tennessee Carolyn Banks, Alcorn State University Anthony Reed, Alcorn State University Alvin Wade, Tennessee State University Joshua Idassi, North Carolina A&T State University Success Stories Committee Develops guidelines for the submission of success stories, recruits success stories submissions; works with Linda Buchanan to lay out available exhibit space for success story layout on poster boards as well as input written success stories in conference proceedings. Chair: Alan Galloway, University of Tennessee Members: Savi Horne, Land Loss Prevention Project Cathea Simelton, USDA Office of Advocacy and Outreach Dorathy Barker, Operation Spring Plant Charles Smith, USDA Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Karla Martin, USDA Office of Advocacy and Outreach Evaluation Committee Develops outcomes and evaluation strategies; develops survey instrument; coordinates collection and summary of evaluation Chair: Mary Peabody, University of Vermont 3 Members: Debi Kelly, University of Missouri Alexandria Wilson, USDA-NIFA Grace Perry, Tennessee State University Tasha Hargrove, Tuskegee University Exhibit Committee Develops guidelines and policy criteria for selection of exhibitors, recruits new exhibitors, updates and circulates announcements; responds to inquiries; works with Linda Buchanan and conference venue to lay out available exhibit space. Chair: Solomon Haile, Tennessee State University Members: Louie Rivers, Kentucky State University Mocile Trotter, USDA Office of Communications Delores Taylor, USDA Foreign Agricultural Service Lisa Mason, USDA Office of Advocacy and Outreach Loretta Miles, USDA Office of Advocacy and Outreach Local Planning Committee Works with Fitzroy Bullock and Linda Buchanan to select the site city, hotels; works with Educational Tours Committee; designs and assembles registration packets; works with Marriott Hotel to determine equipment needs; recruits and coordinates on-site volunteers for moderators, A/V for each session, slide pre-viewing room, registration, etc.; secures food for reception and other meals; works with hotel and Program Committee Chair: Fitzroy Bullock, Tennessee State University Members: Linda Buchanan, Tennessee State University Arvazena Clardy, Tennessee State University Richard Powell, University of Tennessee Alan Galloway, University of Tennessee Cathy Faust, University of Tennessee Alvin Wade, Tennessee State University Solomon Haile, Tennessee State University 4 David Lockwood, University of Tennessee Martin Kool, University of Tennessee David Perril, University of Tennessee Rachel Hendricks, Tennessee State University John Ricketts, Tennessee State University Annette Wszelake, University of Tennessee Poster Presentation Committee Works with the Program Committee to develop the call for posters (includes the criteria for selection); reviews submitted abstracts; works with Program Committee on communications with submitters, poster room layout and time slots; coordinates the poster judging contest (including developing the criteria and the awards) Chair: Arvazena Clardy, Tennessee State University Members: Edoe Agbodjan, South Carolina State University Tasha Hargrove, Tuskegee University Kim Bradford, USDA-NRCS Tracy Jones, USDA-FSA Jimo Ibrahim, North Carolina A&T State University Robin Brumfield, Rutgers University Lavinia Panizo, USDA-Office of Advocacy and Outreach Proceedings Committee Compiles and edits poster and oral paper presentations and keynote session speeches; ensures that final product is forwarded to the Web Site Committee to be linked to small farm Web page Chair: Denis Ebodaghe, USDA–NIFA Co-Editors: Scott Elliott, USDA-NIFA Carolyn Banks, Alcorn State University Nii Tackie, Tuskegee University Beth Nelson, University of Minnesota Solomon Haile, Tennessee State University 5 Publicity Committee Identifies liaisons with key related organizations and media; drafts and executes media plan to publicize event; drafts and circulates announcements; arranges for media participation/coverage during event; promotes conference Chair: Kathryn Hill, USDA Office of Communications Members: Antonio McLaren, Virginia State University Shirley Brown, USDA-Office of the Chief Economist Jo Lynne Seufer, USDA-RMA Horace Hodge, Prairie View A&M University Sharon Hestvik, USDA-RMA Clifton Peters, Alcorn State University Jim Hafer, Chief Dull Knife Community College Willie Pittman, Farmer Debi Kelly, University of Missouri Steering Committee Meets monthly by conference call, increasing to bi-monthly during quarter preceding the event; drafts and meets timeline and budget; oversee committee work; drafts Committee call agendas; runs calls and drafts/circulates follow-up notes Co-Chairs: Denis Ebodaghe, USDA-NIFA and Fitzroy Bullock, Tennessee State University Members: Arvazena Clardy, Tennessee State University Albert Essel, Delaware State University Alan Galloway, University of Tennessee Anusuya Rangarajan, Cornell University Alvin Wade, Tennessee State University Annette Wszelake, University of Tennessee Carl Butler, USDA-Farm Service Agency Carmen Humphrey, USDA-Agricultural Marketing Service 6 Cathy Faust, University of Tennessee Cinda Williams, University of Idaho Deborah Cavanaugh Grant, University of Illinois David Wiggins, USDA-Risk Management Agency Dawn Mellion Patin, Southern University Chongo Mundende, Langston University Fitzroy Bullock, Tennessee State University Garry Stephenson, Oregon State University Geraldine Herring, USDA-Office of the Assistant Secretary for Agriculture Edmund Gomez, New Mexico State University Gladys Gary Vaughn, USDA-Office of the Assistant
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Stomach Contents of the Indian Pangolin Manis Crassicaudata (Mammalia: Pholidota: Manidae) in Tropical Forests of Southern India
    OPEN ACCESS The Journal of Threatened Taxa fs dedfcated to bufldfng evfdence for conservafon globally by publfshfng peer-revfewed arfcles onlfne every month at a reasonably rapfd rate at www.threatenedtaxa.org . All arfcles publfshed fn JoTT are regfstered under Creafve Commons Atrfbufon 4.0 Internafonal Lfcense unless otherwfse menfoned. JoTT allows unrestrfcted use of arfcles fn any medfum, reproducfon, and dfstrfbufon by provfdfng adequate credft to the authors and the source of publfcafon. Journal of Threatened Taxa Bufldfng evfdence for conservafon globally www.threatenedtaxa.org ISSN 0974-7907 (Onlfne) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Prfnt) Note Stomach contents of the Indfan Pangolfn Manfs crassfcaudata (Mammalfa: Pholfdota: Manfdae) fn tropfcal forests of southern Indfa Mohanarangan Ashokkumar, Dfpfka Valsarajan, M. Arjun Suresh, Anuraj R. Kafmal & George Chandy 26 May 2017 | Vol. 9| No. 5 | Pp. 10246–10248 10.11609/jot. 2873 .9. 5.10246-10248 For Focus, Scope, Afms, Polfcfes and Gufdelfnes vfsft htp://threatenedtaxa.org/About_JoTT For Arfcle Submfssfon Gufdelfnes vfsft htp://threatenedtaxa.org/Submfssfon_Gufdelfnes For Polfcfes agafnst Scfenffc Mfsconduct vfsft htp://threatenedtaxa.org/JoTT_Polfcy_agafnst_Scfenffc_Mfsconduct For reprfnts contact <[email protected]> Publfsher/Host Partner Threatened Taxa Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 May 2017 | 9(5): 10246–10248 Note Pangolins are scaly anteaters and Stomach contents of the are unique in being the world’s only Indian Pangolin Manis crassicaudata true scaly mammals, distributed in (Mammalia: Pholidota: Manidae) ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) Asia and Africa. Of the eight species in tropical forests of southern India ISSN 0974-7893 (Print) of pangolin, four species are found in Asia, the Chinese Pangolin Manis Mohanarangan Ashokkumar 1, Dipika Valsarajan 2, OPEN ACCESS pentadactyla, Indian Pangolin M.
    [Show full text]
  • Acacia Flat Mite (Brevipalpus Acadiae Ryke & Meyer, Tenuipalpidae, Acarina): Doringboomplatmyt
    Creepie-crawlies and such comprising: Common Names of Insects 1963, indicated as CNI Butterfly List 1959, indicated as BL Some names the sources of which are unknown, and indicated as such Gewone Insekname SKOENLAPPERLYS INSLUITENDE BOSLUISE, MYTE, SAAMGESTEL DEUR DIE AALWURMS EN SPINNEKOPPE LANDBOUTAALKOMITEE Saamgestel deur die MET MEDEWERKING VAN NAVORSINGSINSTITUUT VIR DIE PLANTBESKERMING TAALDIENSBURO Departement van Landbou-tegniese Dienste VAN DIE met medewerking van die DEPARTEMENT VAN ONDERWYS, KUNS EN LANDBOUTAALKOMITEE WETENSKAP van die Taaldiensburo 1959 1963 BUTTERFLY LIST Common Names of Insects COMPILED BY THE INCLUDING TICKS, MITES, EELWORMS AGRICULTURAL TERMINOLOGY AND SPIDERS COMMITTEE Compiled by the IN COLLABORATION WiTH PLANT PROTECTION RESEARCH THE INSTITUTE LANGUAGE SERVICES BUREAU Department of Agricultural Technical Services OF THE in collaboration with the DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ARTS AND AGRICULTURAL TERMINOLOGY SCIENCE COMMITTEE DIE STAATSDRUKKER + PRETORIA + THE of the Language Service Bureau GOVERNMENT PRINTER 1963 1959 Rekenaarmatig en leksikografies herverwerk deur PJ Taljaard e-mail enquiries: [email protected] EXPLANATORY NOTES 1 The list was alphabetised electronically. 2 On the target-language side, ie to the right of the :, synonyms are separated by a comma, e.g.: fission: klowing, splyting The sequence of the translated terms does NOT indicate any preference. Preferred terms are underlined. 3 Where catchwords of similar form are used as different parts of speech and confusion may therefore
    [Show full text]
  • The Forgotten Predators: Ant- and Termite-Eating Mammals Acknowledgements
    The forgotten predators: ant- and termite-eating mammals Acknowledgements Patchy Ubiquitous Prof. William Bond (ideas); Prof. Mark Robertson; Prof. Kate Parr and Dr. Paul Eggleton top-down bottom-up “Population density (of ants) is constrained by kinds of food and nest sites, as well as by predation.” “Predators, especially visually searching vertebrate predators, play a key role ... rivalling the maximization of net energetic yield as a natural selection factor.” Holldobler and Wilson. 1990. The Ants. 113 3 1 leaf-cutter ant nest size control exclosure Hirsch et al., 2014 1 VERY LARGE LARGE MEDIUM SMALL Hirsch et al., 2014 Terborgh et al., 2001 2 Terborgh et al., 2001 Trophic Cascade 2 Chinese Pangolin Nine-banded Armadillo Common Echidna Giant Anteater Aardvark Orycteropus afer Redford (1987) 216 extant species cross-continental comparison Our database (2019) 291 extant + 40 extinct species = 331 extinct mammals extant extinct # of species mass (kg) ANT DEFENCE AGAINST MAMMALS 1. Bites & Stings 2. Nest Design 3. Flight Response 2. NEST DESIGN Predator Digging Depth 0.18m Echidna Numbat Opiang, 2009 2.25m Aardvark Pangolin Aardwolf Taylor & Skinner, 2003 Milewski et al., 1994 Echidna Numbat Tschinkel, 2004; 2011 Nest design where predators only scratch the surface? Aardvark Pangolin Aardwolf Tschinkel, 2004; 2011 Nest design where predators are large and dig deep? FORMICINE DOLICHODERINE Anoplolepis custodiens Iridomyrmex purpureus 40cm 400cm Longitudinal section through A.custodiens nest on the island of Zanzibar Ettershank, 1968 TERMITE DEFENCE AGAINST MAMMALS 1. Mound Hardness 2. Soldier 3. Digging Morphology distance to the queen 1. MOUND HARDNESS Echidna Giant Anteater 50 x harder than soil at the base Cornitermes cumulans Negret and Redford CONCLUSIONS different 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Lycaenidae): Phylogeny, Ecology, and Conservation John Mathew Old Dominion University
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations Biological Sciences Summer 2003 Aphytophagy in the Miletinae (Lycaenidae): Phylogeny, Ecology, and Conservation John Mathew Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Entomology Commons, and the Genetics Commons Recommended Citation Mathew, John. "Aphytophagy in the Miletinae (Lycaenidae): Phylogeny, Ecology, and Conservation" (2003). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/v7rh-mb21 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/biology_etds/74 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. APHYTOPHAGY IN THE MILETINAE (LYCAENIDAE): PHYLOGENY, ECOLOGY, AND CONSERVATION by John Mathew B.Sc. June 1990, Madras Christian College M.Sc. June 1992, Madras Christian College M.Phil. May 1994, Madras University A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ECOLOGICAL SCIENCES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2003 Approved by: Deborah A. Waller (Co-Director) »mi E. Pierce (Co-Director) H. Savitzky (Member) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT APHYTOPHAGY IN THE MILETINAE (LYCAENIDAE): PHYTOGENY, ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION John Mathew Old Dominion University, 2003 Co-Directors of Advisory Committee: Dr. Deborah A. Waller Dr. Naomi E. Pierce Less than 1% of all Lepidoptera are aphytophagous; of these, a considerable proportion is found in the family Lycaenidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Factors Affecting the Feeding Behaviour of Pangolins (Manis Temminckii)
    J. Zool., Lond. (1999) 247, 281±292 # 1999 The Zoological Society of London Printed in the United Kingdom Ecological factors affecting the feeding behaviour of pangolins (Manis temminckii) J. M. Swart, P. R. K. Richardson and J. W. H. Ferguson Department of Zoology and Entomology, Pretoria University, Pretoria 0001, South Africa (Accepted 27 May 1998) Abstract The diet and foraging behaviour of 15 radio-tagged pangolins were studied in the Sabi Sand Wildtuin for 14 months, together with the community composition and occurrence of epigaeic ants and termites. Fifty- ®ve ant and termite species of 25 genera were trapped in pitfalls of which Pheidole sp. 2 was the most common (27% occurrence). Five termite and 15 ant species were preyed on by pangolins. Six of these species constituted 97% of the diet while ants formed 96% of the diet. Anoplolepis custodiens constituted the major component of the pangolins' diet (77% occurrence) while forming only 5% of the trapped ants. Above-ground ant and termite activity was higher during summer than during winter (an 11-fold difference for A. custodiens), and the above-ground activity was also higher during the day than at night. Pangolins fed for 16% of their foraging time. However, 99% of the observed feeding bouts (mean duration 40 s) were on subterranean prey. The mean dig depth was 3.8 cm. Prey from deeper digs were fed upon for longer periods. A model taking into account various ant characteristics suggests that ant abundance and ant size are the two most important factors determining the number of feeding bouts that pangolins undertake on a particular ant species.
    [Show full text]
  • Ant Management in Western Cape Vineyards
    ANT MANAGEMENT IN WESTERN CAPE VINEYARDS By Pia Addison (nee Ueckermann) Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy, in the School of Botany and Zoology University of KwaZulu-Natal Pietermaritzburg 2004 2 DECLARATION This study represents original work by the author and has not been submitted in any form to another University. Where use was made of the work of others it has been duly acknowledged in the text. P. ADDISON 3 CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 5 CHAPTER 1 A survey of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) that forage in vineyards in the Western Cape Province, South Africa 18 CHAPTER 2 Chemical stem barriers for the control of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Western Cape vineyards.......................................................................................... 36 CHAPTER 3 Integrated pest management using cover crops for managing the ant-mealybug (Formicidae - Pseudococcidae) mutualism in Western Cape vineyards 55 CHAPTER 4 Variation in ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) diversity, foraging behaviour and morphology in different structural habitats associated with vineyards 85 GENERAL DISCUSSION 102 CONCLUSiONS 113 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS lam most grateful to Ms E.C. du Toit (ARC Infruitec-Nietvoorbij) for all her technical assistance in collecting and sorting traps and with all the field trials. Without her it would not have been possible to work through all the samples. Many thanks also to the following people: Dr. H.G. Robertson (South African Museum, Cape Town) for identifying the many ant species and advice with trapping methods; Dr. I. Millar (ARC Biosystematics Division) for identifying mealybug species; Dr. V.M. Walton and Mr. Levocia Williams for sorting and identifying mealybug natural enemies; Or.
    [Show full text]
  • A Pugnacious Ant (Anoplolepis Custodiens)
    A Pugnacious ant (Anoplolepis custodiens) confounds ant assemblage responses to bush encroachment Thinandavha Munyai1, Stefan Foord2, Rob Slotow1, and Nomathamsanqa Mkhize1 1University of KwaZulu-Natal College of Agriculture Engineering and Science 2University of Venda November 25, 2020 Abstract Habitat structure is a key determinant of variation in biodiversity. The effects of increased vertical and horizontal vegetation structure can result in marked shifts in animal communities. This is particularly true for ants in response to woody thickening, with predicted negative impacts on ant diversity. We used pitfall traps to study the response of epigeic ants in two co-occurring dominant habitats (closed and open) of an African savanna biome experiencing extensive woody thickening. Although species richness was higher in open habitats, evenness was significantly lower. Thickening explained significant amounts of variation in ant composition, but site-specific characteristics and seasonality were more important. These site-specific characteristics were largely linked to Anoplolepis custodiens, a species that were locally abundant in open habitats with clayey soils, where they often accounted for more than 90% of all ant activity. As A. custodiens also responds positively to disturbance, indiscriminate bush clearing could lead to knock on effects associated with the numerical and behavioural dominance of this species. Introduction The savanna biome dominates southern Africa, and is characterised by continuous grassy understory, a discontinuous woody overstory (Archer et al., 2017; Bond, 2019), and, therefore, considered a largely open ecosystem (Pausas & Bond, 2020). However, various anthropogenic activities (Osborne et al., 2018) pose a threat to this biome. One pervasive threat is that of woody plant encroachment into savannas and grasslands, linked to climate change in particular (Criado, Myers-Smith, Bjorkman, Lehmann, & Stevens, 2020).
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Ants on the Insect Fauna of Broad
    THE INFLUENCE OF ANTS ON THE INSECT FAUNA OF BROAD - LEAVED, SAVANNA TREES. by SUSAN GRANT Thesis submitted to Rhodes University in partial fulfilment for the degree of Master of Science Department of Zoology and Entomology Rhodes University Grahamstown SOUTH AFRICA May 1984 TO MY PARENTS AND SISTER, ROSEMARY ---- '.,. ... .... ...... ;; ............. .... :.:..:.: " \ ... .:-: ..........~.~ . .... ~ ... .... ......... • " ".! . " \ ......... :. ........ .................... FRONTISPIECE TOP RIGHT - A map of Southern Africa indicating the position of the Nylsvley Provincial Nature Reserve. TOP LEFT One of the dominant ant species, Crematogaster constructor, housed in a carton nest in a Terminalia sericea tree. R BOTTOM RIGHT - A sticky band of Formex which was applied to the trunk of trees to exclude ants. BOTTOM LEFT - Populations of the scale insect Ceroplastes rusci on the leaves of an unbanded Ochna pulchra shrub. CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1. ABSTRACT 2. INTRODUCTION 1 - 4 3. STUDY AREA 5 - 10 3.1 Abiotic components 3.2 Biotic components 4. GENERAL MATERIALS AND METHODS 11 - 14 4.1 Ant exclusion 4.2 Effect of banding 5. THE RESULTS OF BANDING 15 - 17 5.1 Effect on plant phenology 5.2 Effect on the insect fauna 6. THE ANT COMMUNITY 18 - 29 6.1 The ant species 6.2 Ant distribution and nesting sites 6.3 Field observations 7. SAMPLING OF BANDED AND UNBANDED TREES 30 - 44 7.1 Non-destructive sampling 7.2 Destructive pyrethrum sampling 8. ASSESSMENT OF HERBIVORY 45 - 55 8.1 Damage records on .banded and unbanded trees 9. DISCUSSION 56 - 60 APPENDICES 61 - 81 REFERENCES 82 - 90 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere thanks to Professor V.C.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Myrmecophily in Ant Nest Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Paussinae): Linking Early Observations with Recent Findings
    Naturwissenschaften (2007) 94:871–894 DOI 10.1007/s00114-007-0271-x REVIEW A review of myrmecophily in ant nest beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Paussinae): linking early observations with recent findings Stefanie F. Geiselhardt & Klaus Peschke & Peter Nagel Received: 15 November 2005 /Revised: 28 February 2007 /Accepted: 9 May 2007 / Published online: 12 June 2007 # Springer-Verlag 2007 Abstract Myrmecophily provides various examples of as “bombardier beetles” is not used in contact with host how social structures can be overcome to exploit vast and ants. We attempt to trace the evolution of myrmecophily in well-protected resources. Ant nest beetles (Paussinae) are paussines by reviewing important aspects of the association particularly well suited for ecological and evolutionary between paussine beetles and ants, i.e. morphological and considerations in the context of association with ants potential chemical adaptations, life cycle, host specificity, because life habits within the subfamily range from free- alimentation, parasitism and sound production. living and predatory in basal taxa to obligatory myrme- cophily in derived Paussini. Adult Paussini are accepted in Keywords Evolution of myrmecophily. Paussinae . the ant society, although parasitising the colony by preying Mimicry. Ant parasites . Defensive secretion . on ant brood. Host species mainly belong to the ant families Host specificity Myrmicinae and Formicinae, but at least several paussine genera are not host-specific. Morphological adaptations, such as special glands and associated tufts of hair Introduction (trichomes), characterise Paussini as typical myrmecophiles and lead to two different strategical types of body shape: A great diversity of arthropods live together with ants and while certain Paussini rely on the protective type with less profit from ant societies being well-protected habitats with exposed extremities, other genera access ant colonies using stable microclimate (Hölldobler and Wilson 1990; Wasmann glandular secretions and trichomes (symphile type).
    [Show full text]
  • Orycteropus Aler
    THE FEEDING ECOLOGY AND HABITAT USE OF THE AARDVARK Orycteropus aler Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Wildlife Unit Faculty of Veterinary Science University of Pretoria Onderstepoort © University of Pretoria The Feeding Ecology and Habitat Use of the Aardvark (Orycteropus afer) J.D Skinner Wildlife Unit Private Bag X04 Faculty of Veterinary Science Onderstepoort 0110 The seasonal diet, feeding patterns, feeding selection and habitat selectivity of the aardvark were determined during summer and winter at Tussen die Riviere Nature Reserve in the southern Free State. Pitfall trapping, dig sampling and quadrat sampling were used to determine the resource base of three habitats in the summer and winter of 1998. A total of 44 ant species of 5 sub families and 17 genera, and two termite species of two sub families were recorded. Pitfall trapping was the most successful technique, followed by quadrat sampling (51.1%) and finally, dig sampling (48.8%). Abundance and diversity was higher during summer than winter. Monomorium albopilosum was the most abundant species in all habitats in winter, whilst Anoplolepis custodiens was the most abundant in summer. The grassland habitat yielded the highest abundance and diversity, followed by the steep slope and riverine areas. Seasonal diet and foraging patterns were determined through faecal analysis and observation of four habituated aardvarks. The Formicidae were more important than the Isoptera in both seasons. The feeding of the aardvark was highly selective, only 28.8% of the available species having been utilised. Prey selection was found to be most highly correlated with prey size, prey abundance, prey mobility, and prey calorific value.
    [Show full text]
  • Army Ants Such As Eciton Burchellii
    ADVENTURES AMONG ANTS The publisher gratefully acknowledges the generous support of the General Endowment Fund of the University of California Press Foundation. University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2010 by Mark W. Moffett Title page: A Bornean carpenter ant, Camponotus schmitzi, traveling along the spiral base of a pitcher plant. The ant fishes prey out of the liquid-filled pitcher of this carnivorous plant (see photograph on page 142). Ogden Nash’s “The Ant” © 1935 by Ogden Nash is reprinted with permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Design and composition: Jody Hanson Text: 9.5/14 Scala Display: Grotesque Condensed Indexing: Victoria Baker Printed through: Asia Pacific Offset, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Moffett, Mark W. Adventures among ants : a global safari with a cast of trillions / Mark W. Moffett. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-520-26199-0 (cloth : alk. paper) 1. Ants—Behavior. 2. Ant communities. 3. Ants—Ecology. I. Title. QL568.F7M64 2010 595.79'615—dc22 2009040610 Manufactured in China 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R 1997) This book celebrates a triumvirate of extraordinary human beings: Edward O.
    [Show full text]
  • The Host Genera of Ant-Parasitic Lycaenidae Butterflies: a Review
    Hindawi Publishing Corporation Psyche Volume 2012, Article ID 153975, 10 pages doi:10.1155/2012/153975 Review Article The Host Genera of Ant-Parasitic Lycaenidae Butterflies: A Review Konrad Fiedler Department of Tropical Ecology and Animal Biodiversity, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, 1030 Vienna, Austria Correspondence should be addressed to Konrad Fiedler, konrad.fi[email protected] Received 10 October 2011; Accepted 3 January 2012 Academic Editor: Volker Witte Copyright © 2012 Konrad Fiedler. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Numerous butterfly species in the family Lycaenidae maintain myrmecophilous associations with trophobiotic ants, but only a minority of ant-associated butterflies are parasites of ants. Camponotus, Crematogaster, Myrmica,andOecophylla are the most frequently parasitized ant genera. The distribution of ant-parasitic representatives of the Lycaenidae suggests that only Camponotus and Crematogaster have multiply been invaded as hosts by different independent butterfly lineages. A general linear model reveals that the number of associated nonparasitic lycaenid butterfly species is the single best predictor of the frequency of parasitic interactions to occur within an ant genus. Neither species richness of invaded ant genera nor their ecological prevalence or geographical distribution contributed significantly to that
    [Show full text]