DOCSLIB.ORG

Diversity and Abundance of Dung Beetles Across Different Land Use Types and Their Role in Soil Fertility Improvement in Kenya

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Diversity and Abundance of Dung Beetles Across Different Land Use Types and Their Role in Soil Fertility Improvement in Kenya DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE OF DUNG BEETLES ACROSS DIFFERENT LAND USE TYPES AND THEIR ROLE IN SOIL FERTILITY IMPROVEMENT IN KENYA HARRISON WARUI CHURU A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN SOIL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF LAND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI 2019 DECLARATION i DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my late Dad, Charles Gachunu. Your advice and prayers shaped my academic life. May your soul rest in eternal peace. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I am greatly indebted to my supervisors Dr. Fredrick O. Ayuke, Prof. Nancy Karanja and Dr. Kenneth O. Odhiambo who have tirelessly walked with me through this academic journey. Your inputs, guidance, encouragements and at times scolding cannot be taken for granted. This research could not be complete without the help of technical staff. I most sincerely thank John Kimotho and Ferdinand Anyika from Department of Land and Resource Management in Agricultural Technology (LARMAT), Solomon Kamau, Reuben Mwakodi from Kenya Museum, Robinson Ouko from Kabete Meteorological station, Francis Gikonyo, Brian Machote and all those who helped out in data collection. Your assistance and dedication moved me. Finally, I greatly appreciate the Netherlands Initiative for Capacity Building in Higher Education (NICHE-UoE) Project for funding this research work. I am greatly indebted to Prof. Julius Ochuodho, Dr. Abigail Otinga and Prof. Wilson Ngetich who trusted and believed in me. To my wife Rose and entire family, I appreciate your tireless support and prayers. God Almighty bless you all abundantly. To Him be the Glory. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION................................................................................................... i DEDICATION ...................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................. viii LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................. x LIST OF PLATES ............................................................................................... xi APPENDICES .................................................................................................... xii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................... xiii ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... xiv CHAPTER ONE .................................................................................................. 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background information .................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Statement of the problem and justification of study ........................................................ 2 1.3 Broad objective ................................................................................................................ 3 1.4 Specific objectives............................................................................................................ 3 1.5 Hypotheses ....................................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................. 5 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................... 5 2.1 Soil macrofauna diversity and their roles in ecosystem services ..................................... 5 2.2 Ecology of dung beetles ................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Factors influencing diversity and abundance of dung beetles .......................................... 8 2.4 Ecosystem functions and services of dung beetles ......................................................... 10 iv 2.4.1 Quantification of the roles of dung beetles in nutrients cycling, dung removal and decomposition ................................................................................................................... 13 2.5 Characterization of soils and animal dung ..................................................................... 14 2.6 Opportunities for utilization of dung beetles.................................................................. 14 2.7 Other macrofauna colonizing animal dung .................................................................... 15 2.8 Protocol for sampling dung beetles ................................................................................ 15 2.9 Existing information gaps in dung beetles studies ......................................................... 17 CHAPTER THREE ............................................................................................ 19 3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS ....................................................................... 19 3.1 Description of the study site ........................................................................................... 19 3.2 Study designs and data collection .................................................................................. 21 3.2.1 Monolith sampling protocol .................................................................................... 22 3.2.2 Pitfall traps ............................................................................................................... 22 3.2.3 Terrarium experiment .............................................................................................. 24 3.2.4 Treatments, coding and experimental designs ......................................................... 24 3.3 Data collection................................................................................................................ 26 3.4 Laboratory analysis of soil and dung ball samples ........................................................ 28 3.5 Data analysis .................................................................................................................. 30 CHAPTER FOUR .............................................................................................. 32 4.0 RESULTS ..................................................................................................... 32 4.1 soil chemical properties and macrofauna abundance across land use types .................. 32 4.1.0 Soil chemical properties across land use types ........................................................ 32 4.1.1 Effect of LUTs on abundance of soil macrofauna in Kabete and Chepkoilel soils . 33 4.1.2 Correlation of macrofauna abundance with soil chemical properties in Kabete and Chepkoilel soils ................................................................................................................ 35 v 4.2 Species abundance and distribution of dung beetles in Kabete and Chepkoilel soils .... 36 4.2.1 Abundance of dung beetles in Kabete soils as influenced by land use types and seasonality ........................................................................................................................ 41 4.2.2 Effect of land use types and seasons on the abundance of dung beetles in Chepkoilel soils ................................................................................................................ 42 4.2.3 Effect of seasonality and land use types on dung beetle diversity in Kabete soils .. 42 4.2.4 Effect of LUTs and season on dung beetle species richness and diversity in Chepkoilel soils ................................................................................................................ 44 4.2.5 Correlation coefficient of abundance, richness and diversity of dung beetles with rainfall and air temperature ............................................................................................... 46 4.3 Effect of selected dung beetle species and type of animal fecal material on the amount and rate of dung removal ...................................................................................................... 46 4.3.1 Effect of selected dung beetle species and type of animal fecal material on nutrients content of buried dung balls ............................................................................................. 47 CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................... 50 5.0 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................ 50 5.1 Abundance of soil macrofauna and their correlation with soil chemical properties ...... 50 5.1.1 Influence of land use types on abundance of soil macrofauna in Kabete and Chepkoilel soils ................................................................................................................ 50 5.1.2 Correlation between the abundance of soil macrofauna with soil chemical properties .......................................................................................................................... 51 5.2 Influence of land use types and seasonality on abundance and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Review of the Status of the Beetles of Great Britain
    Natural England Commissioned Report NECR224 A review of the status of the beetles of Great Britain The stag beetles, dor beetles, dung beetles, chafers and their allies - Lucanidae, Geotrupidae, Trogidae and Scarabaeidae Species Status No.31 First published 31 October 2016 www.gov.uk/natural-england Foreword Natural England commission a range of reports from external contractors to provide evidence and advice to assist us in delivering our duties. The views in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. Background Decisions about the priority to be attached to the conservation of species should be based upon objective assessments of the degree of threat to species. The internationally-recognised approach to undertaking this is by assigning species to one of the IUCN threat categories using the IUCN guidelines. This report was commissioned to update the national threat status of beetles within the Lucanidae, Geotrupidae, Trogidae and Scarabaeidae. It covers all species in these groups, identifying those that are rare and/or under threat as well as non-threatened and non- native species. Reviews for other invertebrate groups will follow. Natural England Project Manager – Jon Webb, [email protected] Contractor – Steve Lane [email protected] Authors – Steve A. Lane & Darren J. Mann Keywords – Scarabaeidae, Lucanidae, Geotrupidae, Trogidae, chafers, dung beetles, stag beetles, dor beetles, rhinoceros beetle, invertebrates, red list, IUCN, status reviews Further information This report can be downloaded from the Natural England Access to Evidence Catalogue: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/. For information on Natural England publications contact the Natural England Enquiry Service on 0300 060 3900 or e-mail [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Sæsonmæssig Og Substrat Variation I, Samt Betydningsfulde Miljøvariabler for Den Danske Gødningsbillefauna
    Speciale: Sæsonmæssig og substrat variation i, samt betydningsfulde miljøvariabler for den danske gødningsbillefauna Master Thesis: Seasonal and substrate variation in, and important environmental variables to the Danish dung beetle fauna Maja Møholt – 20092119 Institut for Bioscience – Biodiverstet, Aarhus Universitet September 2016 0 1 Datablad Projekt: Specielt, kandidat i biologi Omfang: 60 ECTS Danske titel: Engelsk titel: Forfatter: Maja Møholt, 20092119 Institution: Aarhus Universitet, Institut for Bioscience Vejleder: Rasmus Ejrnæs, Institut for Bioscience, Aarhus Universitet Morten D.D. Hansen, Naturhistorisk Museum, Aarhus Afleveret: Forsvares: 20. september 2016 Censor: Philip Francis Thomsen Assisterende professor Center for GeoGenetik Danmarks Naturhistoriske Museum København Universitet Nøgleord: Dung beetles, Management, Biodiversity, Seasonality, Dung, Environment, Geotrupidae, Aphodius Refereringsstil: Som i Oecologia Forside: (billede tage af??) Antal sider: 92 2 3 Indholdsfortegnelse Datablad ............................................................................................................................................................ 2 Forord ................................................................................................................................................................ 6 læsevejledning .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Tak ....................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop Document
    WORKSHOP DOCUMENT For the pilot Boreal Natura 2000 Workshop VERSION 11/01/2012 Prepared by N2K Group, namely Jan Dušek, Lenka Vokasová, Anja Finne, Helena Carská, Milan Janák, Pavel Marhoul & Kerstin Sundseth; (with further input and editing by Lawrence Jones-Walters and Mark Snethlage, ECNC and Lubos halada, ILE SAS). PILOT BOREAL NATURA 2000 SEMINAR Content Executive summary............................................................................................................................................3 1. Introduction and general information..........................................................................................................5 1.1 Objectives..................................................................................................................................................5 1.2 Introduction to the biogeographical process.......................................................................................5 1.3 Boreal biogeographical region...............................................................................................................8 1.4 Selection of habitat types and species ..............................................................................................12 2. Grasslands ....................................................................................................................................................14 Habitat type 6210 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) (* important orchid sites) ......................................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • El Relevo Microsucesional Entre Los Scarabaeoidea Copr~Fagos(Col.)
    EL RELEVO MICROSUCESIONAL ENTRE LOS SCARABAEOIDEA COPR~FAGOS(COL.) Lobo, J.M., 1992. El relevo rnicrosucesional entre los Scarabaeoidea coprófagos (Col.). Misc. Bol., 16: 45-59. The microsuccessional sequence among dung beetles Scarabaeoidea (Col.).- The successive appearance of fauna associated with the dispersion of an ephemeral food source, such as the drop- pings of large herbivorous mamrnals, is known as microsuccession or heterotrophic succession. The microsuccessive occurrence and permanence of dung-beetles (Scarabaeoidea) is studied under four different climatic conditions in the Central Massif of Gredos (Ibenc Central System). The timing of successional mean occurrence and permanence for different species of dung-beetles depends, among other factors, on environmental temperature and species abundance. An increase in environmental temperature reduces the average occurrence and permanence times for any given species, while there seems to be a higher probability that individuals from more numerous popula- tions will manage to colonize a given dung-pat. This faunistic group does not seem to select from among available dung pats according to quality cntena. It is supposed that any niche displacement in the microsuccessional dimension would require the modification of feeding habits due to the inestability and rapid alteration of tbe excrement food source. This study provides empirical evi- dence and the basis for theoretical arguments against the existence of competitive exclusion and niche displacement in this dimension among coprophagous Scarabaeoidea. Key words: Cow droppings, Dung beeties, Heterotrophic successions, Scarabaeoidea. (Rebut: 24 XI 92; Acceptació condicional 28 V 93; Acc. definitiva: 5 X 93) Jorge M. Lobo, U.E.I. de Entomología, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales - CSIC, c/José Gutiérrez Abascal2, 28006 Madrid, España (Spain).
    [Show full text]
  • The Beetle Fauna (Insecta, Coleoptera) of the Rawdhat Khorim National Park, Central Saudi Arabia
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 653: 1–78The (2017) beetle fauna (Insecta, Coleoptera) of the Rawdhat Khorim National Park... 1 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.653.10252 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research The beetle fauna (Insecta, Coleoptera) of the Rawdhat Khorim National Park, Central Saudi Arabia Mahmoud S. Abdel-Dayem1, Hassan H. Fad2, Ashraf M. El-Torkey3, Ali A. Elgharbawy1,4, Yousif N. Aldryhim1, Boris C. Kondratieff5, Amin N. Al Ansi1, Hathal M. Aldhafer1 1 King Saud University Museum of Arthropods (KSMA), Plant Protection Department, College of Food and Agri- culture Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460 Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia 2 Entomology Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt 3 Plant Protection Research Institute, Agriculture Research Center, Giza, Egypt 4 Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Al Azhar University, Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt 5 Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Campus Delivery 1177, Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.A. 80523 Corresponding author: Mahmoud S. Abdel-Dayem ([email protected]) Academic editor: C. Majka | Received 22 August 2016 | Accepted 17 January 2017 | Published 7 February 2017 http://zoobank.org/8ECC0674-017A-4858-8BE8-DDD05C0D7CF6 Citation: Abdel-Dayem MS, Fad HH, El-Torkey AM, Elgharbawy AA, Aldryhim YN, Kondratieff BC, Al Ansi AN, Aldhafer HM (2017) The beetle fauna (Insecta, Coleoptera) of the Rawdhat Khorim National Park, Central Saudi Arabia. ZooKeys 653: 1–78. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.653.10252 Abstract This study was conducted as a part of a comprehensive baseline survey of insect biodiversity of Rawdhat Khorim National Park (RKNP), Central Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).
    [Show full text]
  • Number 70 April, 2017
    ARAB AND NEAR EAST PLANT PROTECTION NEWSLETTER Number 70 April, 2017 Editor-in-Chief Ibrahim Al-JBOORY – Faculty of Agriculture, Baghdad University, Iraq. Editorial Board Bassam BAYAA – Faculty of Agriculture, University of Aleppo, Aleppo, Syria. Khaled MAKKOUK – National Council for Scientific Research, Beirut, Lebanon. Shoki AL-DOBAI – Food and Agriculture Organization, Cairo, Egypt. Ahmed DAWABAH – College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Ahmed EL-HENEIDY – Plant Protection Research Institute, ARC, Giza, Egypt. Safaa KUMARI – International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), Tunis, Tunisia. Mustafa HAIDAR – Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, AUB, Lebanon. Ahmed KATBEH – Faculty of Agriculture, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. Bouzid NASRAOUI – INAT, University of Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia. Wa’el ALMATNI – Ministry of Agriculture, Damascus, Syria. Editorial Assistant Tara ALFADHLI – P.O. Box 17399, Amman11195, Jordan. The Arab Society for Plant Protection and the Near East Regional Office of the FAO jointly publishes the Arab and Near East Plant Protection Newsletter (ANEPPNEL), three times per year. All correspondence should be sent by email to the Editor ([email protected]). Material from ANEPPNEL may be reprinted provided that appropriate credits are given. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this newsletter do not necessarily imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations or the Arab Society for Plant Protection (ASPP), concerning the legal or constitutional status of any country, territory, city or area, or its authorities or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Checklist to the Beetles of VC55
    An annotated Checklist to the Beetles of VC55 Atholus bimaculatus Lineaus 1758 (photograph GL Finch) An annotated Checklist to the Beetles of VC55 Special thanks and respect must go to Derek Lott, who had solely been responsible for maintaining the database for many years on which this checklist draws so heavily upon. Forever helpful to all, regardless of ability or knowledge Derek was always happy to give advice on his favourite subject. Ever enthusiastic to promote the study of our beetles using any means he could. Although perhaps not quite up to Derek’s standard, it would be nice to think this checklist gets his approval and we are doing our bit. First edition 28th March 2015, included all known records to the end of 2014 GL Finch Revised edition February 28th 2018, includes an additional 9200 records to end of 2017 GL Finch 2 Contents Introduction 5 Sphaeriusidae 10 Elmidae 188 Gyrinidae 10 Dryopidae 189 Haliplidae 11 Limnichidae 189 Noteridae 13 Heteroceridae 190 Hygrobidae 13 Psephenidae 190 Dytiscidae 13 Ptilodactylidae 190 Carabidae 23 Eucnemidae 190 Helophoridae 49 Throscidae 191 Georissidae 51 Elateridae 191 Hydrochidae 51 Drilidae 196 Spercheidae 52 Lycidae 196 Hydrophilidae 52 Lampyridae 196 Sphaeritidae 59 Cantharidae 197 Histeridae 57 Derodontidae 201 Hydraenidae 63 Dermestidae 201 Ptilidae 65 Bostrichidae 203 Leiodae 70 Ptinidae 203 Silphidae 78 Lymexylidae 206 Staphylinidae 80 Phloiophilidae 207 Geotrupidae 174 Trogossitidae 207 Trogidae 174 Cleridae 207 Lucanidae 175 Dasytidae 208 Scarabaeidae 175 Malachiidae 209 Eucinetidae
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea)
    Bollettino dell’Associazione Romana di Entomologia, 69 (1-4) (2014): 47-65. DEBORA NUCCI (*), CARLA CORALLINI (**) e EMANUELE PIATTELLA (***) ANALISI DI UNA COMUNITÀ DI COLEOTTERI SCARABEOIDEI COPROFAGI IN UN PASCOLO DELL’APPENNINO UMBRO (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea) INTRODUZIONE Nel quadro di un programma di esplorazione faunistica dell’antiappenni- no e appennino dell’Italia centrale, impostato su nuovi criteri agli inizi degli anni ’70 del secolo scorso da entomologi afferenti al Dipartimento di Biologia e Biotecnologie “Charles Darwin” dell’Università degli Studi “Sapienza” di Roma e all’Associazione Romana di Entomologia, il presente lavoro continua l’indagine sui Coleotteri Scarabeoidei (cfr. Ahrens, Fabrizi & Piattella, 2000; Carpaneto, 1975, 1983; Carpaneto et al., 1998, 2001; Carpaneto, Ciceroni & Piattella, 1999; Carpaneto, Migliaccio & Piattella, 1997; Carpaneto & Piattel- la, 1986, 1988; Carpaneto, Piattella & Sabatinelli, 1994; Carpaneto, Piattella & Spampinato, 1996; Gobbi & Piattella, 2008; Piattella, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007) sia sulla base di nuove raccolte che attraverso la revisione critica dei dati di letteratura. Questi ultimi, per quanto riguarda l’appennino umbro, sono estre- mamente scarsi e praticamente inesistenti per l’area presa in esame; altrettanto inesistenti materiali reperibili in collezioni sia private che di enti pubblici. In questo contributo viene descritta una comunità di Scarabeoidei copro- fagi attualmente presente all’interno di un Sito Natura 2000 (ZSC IT5210073 “Alto Bacino del Torrente Lama”) ubicato interamente nella provincia di Pe- rugia nell’Appennino Umbro. Le ZSC o Zone Speciali di Conservazione sono zone naturali e seminaturali protette a livello comunitario per la conservazione della flora e della fauna. L’area è stata campionata mensilmente e analizzata dal punto di vista eco-faunistico.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera) Coprofagos De Las Deyecciones De Conejo [Oryctolagus Cuniculus (L.)] Y De Otros Mamiferos
    ANALISIS COMPARATIVO DE LOS SCARABAEOIDEA (COLEOPTERA) COPROFAGOS DE LAS DEYECCIONES DE CONEJO [ORYCTOLAGUS CUNICULUS (L.)] Y DE OTROS MAMIFEROS. ESTUDIO PRELIMINAR F. Sánchez-Piiiero y J. M. Avila * RESUMEN Se aportan datos sobre los Scarabaeoidea coprófagos que explotan las letrinas de cone- jo. Se estudia la composición faunística encontrada en estos excrementos en Chiclana de la Frontera (Cádiz) entre diciembre de 1986 y enero de 1989. Se comentan las características de esta fauna y se relacionan con los datos aportados por los autores en la misma área de estudio en excrementos de vacuno y equino, y con los hallados en las heces de conejo en la provincia de Granada. Por otra parte, se estudia la relación existente entre la composi- ción faunística de diferentes tipos de excrementos (vacuno, equino, ovino/caprino y cone- jo) y distintas localidades (Chiclana de la Frontera, Sierra Nevada, Sierra de Alfacar, Pu- jaire y las provincias de Granada y Albacete) de acuerdo con los datos de muestreos efec- tuados por nosotros mismos o los aportados por la bibliografía. Se concluye la existencia de una fauna asociada a los excrementos de conejo y la influencia de factores como la proxi- midad geográfica y las características del tipo de excrementos sobre los escarabeidos copró- fagos. Palabras clave: Scarabaeoidea, coprófagos, procedencia del excremento, conejo. ABSTRACT in the faecal pellets of Comparative analysis of coprophagous Scarabaeoidea (Coleoptera) other mammals. Preliminary re- rabbit [Oryctolagus cuniculus (L.)] and in the excrements of port. Records about coprophagous scarabs from faecal pellets of rabbit are reported. Faunis- to Ja- tic composition of faecal pellets is studied during the period from December 1986 of this fauna and the nuary 1989 in Chiclana de la Frontera (Cádiz).
    [Show full text]
  • Dung-Insect Community Composition in Arid Zones of South-Eastern Spain
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Journal of Arid Environments Journal of Arid Environments 56 (2004) 303–327 www.elsevier.com/locate/jnlabr/yjare Dung-insect communitycomposition in arid zones of south-eastern Spain Francisco Sanchez! Pin˜ ero*, Jose M. Avila Departamento de Biolog!ıa Animal y Ecolog!ıa, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain Received 14 February2002; received in revised form 23 September 2002; accepted 2 April 2003 Abstract Dung-insect communitycomposition was studied at three sites for 1 year,and for a further 8 months at one site, in an arid region of Spain. The insect communitywas dominated byants, dung flies and beetles. Ants were abundant and flies relativelyscarce at all three sites, whereas beetle diversityand abundance differed among sites and between years.Community composition varied along the year in species richness, abundance and biomass. Although dung-insect communities of arid Spain share some traits with dung-insect assemblages in other deserts, diversityand trophic structure of these communities are highlyvariable, a common but underappreciated feature of communities in arid regions. r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Desert; Dung-insect community; Inter-annual variability; Seasonality; Spain; Spatial variability 1. Introduction Insects associated with dung form a highlydiverse communityincluding specialized coprophagous and predatoryspecies of beetles and flies, as well as an arrayof generalist consumers, which colonize feces during the different stages of decomposition (Koskela and Hanski, 1977; Hanski, 1987, pp. 837–884, 1990, pp. 127–145, 1991, pp. 5–21). The activityof these insects, speciallyscarab beetles, is crucial to dung decomposition (Anderson and Coe, 1974; Holter, 1977, 1982; Gitting et al., 1994) and therebysignificantlyenhances primaryproductivity( Bornemissza *Corresponding author.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleoptera) Superfamily on the Krakow-Czestochowa Upland
    POLISH JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY POLSKIE P I S M O ENTOMOLOGICZNE VOL. 76 : 199-206 Bydgoszcz 30 September 2007 Changes in the coprofagous beetle fauna of the S сarabaeoidea (Coleoptera) superfamily on the Krakow-Czestochowa Upland ANDRZEJ GÓRZ Pedagogical University of Cracow, Institute of Biology, Podbrzezie 3, 31-054 Kraków, Poland, e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT. The research was conducted between 1994 and 2004 on the area of the Krakow- Czestochowa Upland. Insects were collected using the floatation and baited trap methods. Based on the data from the Catalogue of Polish Fauna, it was determined that 63 species of coprofagous Scarabaeoidea occurred in the Upland between 1866 and 1983. The current research confirmed the presence of 36 species of coprofagous beetles. Of the 63 species found in the past, 26 species were not confirmed as present. It turned out that 13 species of this group were found between 1866 and 1910, but their presence in this area was not confirmed until 2004. The disappearance of many spe- cies applies mainly to taxa with higher habitat requirements. KEY WORDS: Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea, dung beetles. INTRODUCTION The Krakow-Czestochowa Upland features a specific geological structure, geomorphologic relief and climatic conditions. This set of abiotic conditions leads to a large diversity of habitats and vegetation, and consequently differentiates fauna groupings on this area. The first faunistic research of beetles was conducted in the Upland area in the 19th cen- tury. At that time, 49 species of coprofagous beetles were identified. Further studies in 1950s and 1970s led to finding another 14 new species of coprofags in the Upland.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Environment and Human Impact at Gamla Uppsala, SE Sweden, During the Iron Age, As Inferred from Fossil Beetle Remains
    Journal of Nordic Archaeological Science 14, pp. 89–99 (2004) Local environment and human impact at Gamla Uppsala, SE Sweden, during the Iron Age, as inferred from fossil beetle remains Magnus Hellqvist Högskolan Dalarna, Institutionen för Ekonomi och Samhälle, SE-791 88 Falun, Sweden ([email protected]) Analyses of subfossil insect remains was used to study the environmental his- tory of Gamla Uppsala, south-eastern Sweden. The samples studied, most of which were collected in a smaller depression, Myrby träsk, are dated to a period from the Roman Iron Age (0–400 ) to the Early Viking Age ( 800). Beetles living in aquatic environments and waterside situations are re- lated to the former permanent open water situation of the depression. Several host plants for beetles were probably growing either in the surrounding open areas or close to the wet or moist environment. The dominant beetles, occur- ring during more or less all the time periods studied, are dung beetles, gener- ally indicating grazing. Keywords: Late Holocene, beetles, land-use history, human impact, Iron Age, Gamla Uppsala Introduction earlier investigations has been the lack of suitable sites Gamla Uppsala is one of the most prominent and fa- for such purposes. mous historical places in Sweden, and probably played An interdisciplinary project, including archaeolo- an important role in the establishment of the early gical and palaeoecological investigations, was started Swedish state. The demesne of the Crown for the re- in 1992 with the aim of reconstructing the environ- gion was situated here, and the area was above all an mental and cultural history and prehistoric economy important administrative centre.
    [Show full text]