DOCSLIB.ORG

Untersuchung Der Insektenvielfalt Und Des Nützlingspotenzials – Projekt Der Absatzzentrale Kempen 2017-2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Untersuchung Der Insektenvielfalt Und Des Nützlingspotenzials – Projekt Der Absatzzentrale Kempen 2017-2019 Förderung der Biodiversität im Gemüseanbau mittels mehrjähriger Blühflächen – Untersuchung der Insektenvielfalt und des Nützlingspotenzials – Projekt der Absatzzentrale Kempen 2017-2019 AZ Kempen: Förderung der Biodiversität 2017-2019 – Abschlussbericht 2 Titelbild: Eine Auswahl der auf den Untersuchungsflächen nachgewiesenen Insektenarten. AZ Kempen: Förderung der Biodiversität 2017-2019 – Abschlussbericht 3 Inhalt 1 PROJEKTZIELE – WARUM BLÜHFLÄCHEN? ...................................................................................4 2 BIODIVERSITÄT – WELCHE ARTEN KÖNNEN GEFÖRDERT WERDEN? .......................................5 3 MODELLBIOTOP AUF DEM GELÄNDE DER ABSATZZENTRALE ..................................................6 4 MILLIONEN INSEKTENINDIVIDUEN JE HEKTAR BLÜHFLÄCHE! ................................................ 10 5 ERFOLG DER BLÜHFLÄCHEN – HILFE FÜR VIELE, ABER NICHT FÜR ALLE ........................... 11 6 POTENZIAL ZUR NÜTZLINGSFÖRDERUNG .................................................................................. 13 7 DIE INSEKTENVIELFALT DER BLÜHFLÄCHEN IM DETAIL .......................................................... 16 7.1 ÜBERSICHT ................................................................................................................................... 16 7.2 DIE SPEZIFISCHEN GEGENSPIELER DER WILDBIENEN UND ACULEATEN WESPEN ............................... 17 7.3 WILDBIENEN .................................................................................................................................. 18 7.4 ECHTE GRABWESPEN .................................................................................................................... 38 7.5 LANGSTIEL-GRABWESPEN ............................................................................................................. 43 7.6 WEGWESPEN ................................................................................................................................ 44 7.7 FALTENWESPEN ............................................................................................................................ 47 7.8 GOLDWESPEN ............................................................................................................................... 50 7.9 KEULENWESPEN ............................................................................................................................ 52 7.10 AMEISENWESPEN .......................................................................................................................... 53 7.11 ROLLWESPEN ................................................................................................................................ 54 7.12 SCHMALBAUCHWESPEN ................................................................................................................. 55 7.13 WOLLSCHWEBER ........................................................................................................................... 56 7.14 DICKKOPFFLIEGEN ......................................................................................................................... 57 7.15 BIENEN-FÄCHERFLÜGLER .............................................................................................................. 59 7.16 WESPEN-FÄCHERFLÜGLER ............................................................................................................ 60 7.17 ECHTE SCHLUPFWESPEN ............................................................................................................... 61 7.18 BRACKWESPEN ............................................................................................................................. 63 7.19 ERZWESPEN .................................................................................................................................. 64 7.20 TAGFALTER ................................................................................................................................... 67 7.21 SCHWEBFLIEGEN ........................................................................................................................... 71 7.22 RAUPENFLIEGEN ........................................................................................................................... 79 7.23 BOHRFLIEGEN ............................................................................................................................... 85 8 ZUSAMMENFASSUNG ...................................................................................................................... 88 9 ANHANG ............................................................................................................................................. 89 9.1 BLÜHMISCHUNG ............................................................................................................................ 89 9.2 BLÜHFLÄCHEN, UNTERSUCHUNGSSTANDORTE UND ERFASSUNGSTERMINE ...................................... 90 9.3 METHODEN ................................................................................................................................. 104 9.4 INSEKTENARTEN IN DEUTSCHLAND ............................................................................................... 107 9.5 LITERATUR .................................................................................................................................. 108 9.6 ABKÜRZUNGEN ............................................................................................................................ 114 9.7 TABELLENVERZEICHNIS ................................................................................................................ 114 9.8 ABBILDUNGSVERZEICHNIS ............................................................................................................ 115 10 IMPRESSUM ..................................................................................................................................... 117 AZ Kempen: Förderung der Biodiversität 2017-2019 – Abschlussbericht 4 1 PROJEKTZIELE – WARUM BLÜHFLÄCHEN? Verarmte Agrarlandschaft Die Biodiversität oder Biologische Vielfalt bildet unsere Lebensgrundlage, sie sichert uns Ernährung, Rohstoffe, saubere Luft und sauberes Wasser; sie zu erhalten ist somit kein Selbstzweck. In Deutschland sind jedoch nach den aktuellen Roten Listen bereits 6 % aller Arten ausgestorben, 30 % sind in ihrem Bestand gefährdet und nur 37 % gelten als ungefährdet. Besonders dramatisch sind die Biodiversitätsverluste in der Agrarlandschaft, zurückzuführen auf die Industrialisierung der Landwirtschaft und den dort oft vollständigen Verlust naturnaher Flächen. Wie hoch die Verluste sind, ist abzulesen am Rückgang der am Ende der Nahrungskette stehenden Vogelarten der Agrarlandschaft: zwischen 1980 und 2010 sind die Bestände der Feldvögel in Europa um etwa die Hälfte (entsprechend 300 Millionen Vögel) zurückgegangen. Und seit 2010 hat sich die Situation leider weiter verschlechtert. Blühstreifen neben Wirsingfeld Um den weiteren Rückgang zu stoppen, müssen der Natur wieder dauerhaft Flächen zurückgegeben werden, und wo dies nicht möglich ist, können – wie in dem vorliegenden Projekt – mehrjährige Blühflächen zur Förderung der Biodiversität eingesetzt werden. Sie sind zum einen ein Mittel, die extreme Verknappung der Ressource „Nektar und Pollen“ in der Agrarlandschaft zu mildern, und zum anderen helfen die sich in der Vegetation der Blühflächen vermehrenden Insekten, die unterbrochene Nahrungskette wiederherzustellen. Darüber hinaus können die Blühflächen auch als Schutz-, Brut- und Rückzugsflächen für größere Wildtiere dienen, sie unterstützen den Biotopverbund und nicht zuletzt bereichern sie auch in ästhetischer Hinsicht das Landschaftsbild. Ein bislang vernachlässigter Punkt ist die Förderung von Nützlingen mittels Blühflächen. Schadschwellen werden bei Anwesenheit von Nützlingen später erreicht, der Einsatz von Pflanzenschutzmitteln kann reduziert werden. Aktuelle Gefährdungssituation der Tiere, Pflanzen und Pilze in Deutschland 6% 15% 30% 37% 8% 4% ausgestorben oder verschollen bestandsgefährdet extrem selten Feldsperling (Passer montanus) Vorwarnliste ungefährdet Asphaltierte Feldwege und monotone Randstreifen bieten nur wenig Nahrung – auch deshalb ist der Bestand des Feldsperlings in Europa zwischen 1980 und 2010 um Daten ungenügend 57 % zurückgegangen. Alle Singvögel – auch ansonsten vegetarische Arten - füttern ihre Jungen mit Insekten, ohne Insekten ist eine erfolgreiche Brut nicht möglich. Die Blühflächen verbessern deutlich das Angebot an Insekten und helfen damit dem Feldsperling und auch allen anderen Vögeln der Agrarlandschaft. Literatur: [33, 42]. AZ Kempen: Förderung der Biodiversität 2017-2019 – Abschlussbericht 5 2 BIODIVERSITÄT – WELCHE ARTEN KÖNNEN Artenvielfalt in Deutschland GEFÖRDERT WERDEN? Biodiversität steht als Sammelbegriff für die Vielfalt der Arten (Tiere, Pflanzen, Pilze), die von diesen Arten gebildete Vielfalt der Ökosysteme und auch für die genetische Vielfalt der Arten, ohne die ein Überleben in einer sich beständig wandelnden Umwelt nicht möglich ist. Ein einfaches Maß für die Biodiversität ist die Anzahl der vorkommenden Arten; bezogen auf die Fläche Deutschlands sind dies nach derzeitigem Kenntnisstand ca. 74000 Arten. Mittels der Blühflächen kann naturgemäß nur ein Teil dieser Artendiversität gefördert werden, allerdings ist dieser Teil überraschend hoch. An erster Stelle stehen die Blütenbesucher. Wie viele Arten der Bienen, Wespen, Fliegen, Käfer, Schmetterlinge
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pohoria Burda Na Dostupných Historických Mapách Je Aj Cieľom Tohto Príspevku
    OCHRANA PRÍRODY NATURE CONSERVATION 27 / 2016 OCHRANA PRÍRODY NATURE CONSERVATION 27 / 2016 Štátna ochrana prírody Slovenskej republiky Banská Bystrica Redakčná rada: prof. Dr. Ing. Viliam Pichler doc. RNDr. Ingrid Turisová, PhD. Mgr. Michal Adamec RNDr. Ján Kadlečík Ing. Marta Mútňanová RNDr. Katarína Králiková Recenzenti čísla: RNDr. Michal Ambros, PhD. Mgr. Peter Puchala, PhD. Ing. Jerguš Tesák doc. RNDr. Ingrid Turisová, PhD. Zostavil: RNDr. Katarína Králiková Jayzková korektúra: Mgr. Olga Majerová Grafická úprava: Ing. Viktória Ihringová Vydala: Štátna ochrana prírody Slovenskej republiky Banská Bystrica v roku 2016 Vydávané v elektronickej verzii Adresa redakcie: ŠOP SR, Tajovského 28B, 974 01 Banská Bystrica tel.: 048/413 66 61, e-mail: [email protected] ISSN: 2453-8183 Uzávierka predkladania príspevkov do nasledujúceho čísla (28): 30.9.2016. 2 \ Ochrana prírody, 27/2016 OCHRANA PRÍRODY INŠTRUKCIE PRE AUTOROV Vedecký časopis je zameraný najmä na publikovanie pôvodných vedeckých a odborných prác, recenzií a krátkych správ z ochrany prírody a krajiny, resp. z ochranárskej biológie, prioritne na Slovensku. Príspevky sú publikované v slovenskom, príp. českom jazyku s anglickým súhrnom, príp. v anglickom jazyku so slovenským (českým) súhrnom. Členenie príspevku 1) názov príspevku 2) neskrátené meno autora, adresa autora (vrátane adresy elektronickej pošty) 3) názov príspevku, abstrakt a kľúčové slová v anglickom jazyku 4) úvod, metodika, výsledky, diskusia, záver, literatúra Ilustrácie (obrázky, tabuľky, náčrty, mapky, mapy, grafy, fotografie) • minimálne rozlíšenie 1200 x 800 pixelov, rozlíšenie 300 dpi (digitálna fotografia má väčšinou 72 dpi) • každá ilustrácia bude uložená v samostatnom súbore (jpg, tif, bmp…) • používajte kilometrovú mierku, nie číselnú • mapy vytvorené v ArcView je nutné vyexportovať do formátov tif, jpg,..
    [Show full text]
  • Description of Mature Larvae and Ecological Notes on Gasteruption Latreille
    JHR 65: 1–21 (2018)Description of mature larvae and ecological notes on Gasteruption Latreille... 1 doi: 10.3897/jhr.65.26645 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://jhr.pensoft.net Description of mature larvae and ecological notes on Gasteruption Latreille (Hymenoptera, Evanioidea, Gasteruptiidae) parasitizing hymenopterans nesting in reed galls Petr Bogusch1, Cornelis van Achterberg2, Karel Šilhán1, Alena Astapenková1, Petr Heneberg3 1 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, University of Hradec Králové, Rokitanského 62, CZ-500 03 Hra- dec Králové, Czech Republic 2 Department of Terrestrial Zoology, Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Pesthuislaan 7, 2333 BA Leiden, The Netherlands 3 Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Ruská 87, CZ-100 00 Praha, Czech Republic Corresponding author: Petr Bogusch ([email protected]) Academic editor: M. Ohl | Received 13 May 2018 | Accepted 19 June 2018 | Published 27 August 2018 http://zoobank.org/D49D4029-A7DA-4631-960D-4B4D7F512B8D Citation: Bogusch P, van Achterberg C, Šilhán K, Astapenková A, Heneberg P (2018) Description of mature larvae and ecological notes on Gasteruption Latreille (Hymenoptera, Evanioidea, Gasteruptiidae) parasitizing hymenopterans nesting in reed galls. Journal of Hymenoptera Research 65: 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.65.26645 Abstract Wasps of the genus Gasteruption are predator-inquilines of bees nesting in cavities in wood, stems, galls, and vertical soil surfaces. During studies of hymenopterans associated with reed galls caused by flies of the genus Lipara we recorded three species. We provide the evidence that a rare European species Gasteruption phragmiticola is a specialized predator-inquiline of an equally rare wetland bee Hylaeus pectoralis. Gasteruption nigrescens is a predator-inquiline of bees of the family Megachilidae, using the common bee Hoplitis leucomelana as the main host.
    [Show full text]
  • Micro-Moth Grading Guidelines (Scotland) Abhnumber Code
    Micro-moth Grading Guidelines (Scotland) Scottish Adult Mine Case ABHNumber Code Species Vernacular List Grade Grade Grade Comment 1.001 1 Micropterix tunbergella 1 1.002 2 Micropterix mansuetella Yes 1 1.003 3 Micropterix aureatella Yes 1 1.004 4 Micropterix aruncella Yes 2 1.005 5 Micropterix calthella Yes 2 2.001 6 Dyseriocrania subpurpurella Yes 2 A Confusion with fly mines 2.002 7 Paracrania chrysolepidella 3 A 2.003 8 Eriocrania unimaculella Yes 2 R Easier if larva present 2.004 9 Eriocrania sparrmannella Yes 2 A 2.005 10 Eriocrania salopiella Yes 2 R Easier if larva present 2.006 11 Eriocrania cicatricella Yes 4 R Easier if larva present 2.007 13 Eriocrania semipurpurella Yes 4 R Easier if larva present 2.008 12 Eriocrania sangii Yes 4 R Easier if larva present 4.001 118 Enteucha acetosae 0 A 4.002 116 Stigmella lapponica 0 L 4.003 117 Stigmella confusella 0 L 4.004 90 Stigmella tiliae 0 A 4.005 110 Stigmella betulicola 0 L 4.006 113 Stigmella sakhalinella 0 L 4.007 112 Stigmella luteella 0 L 4.008 114 Stigmella glutinosae 0 L Examination of larva essential 4.009 115 Stigmella alnetella 0 L Examination of larva essential 4.010 111 Stigmella microtheriella Yes 0 L 4.011 109 Stigmella prunetorum 0 L 4.012 102 Stigmella aceris 0 A 4.013 97 Stigmella malella Apple Pigmy 0 L 4.014 98 Stigmella catharticella 0 A 4.015 92 Stigmella anomalella Rose Leaf Miner 0 L 4.016 94 Stigmella spinosissimae 0 R 4.017 93 Stigmella centifoliella 0 R 4.018 80 Stigmella ulmivora 0 L Exit-hole must be shown or larval colour 4.019 95 Stigmella viscerella
    [Show full text]
  • Contribution to the Lepidoptera Fauna of the Madeira Islands Part 2
    Beitr. Ent. Keltern ISSN 0005 - 805X 51 (2001) 1 S. 161 - 213 14.09.2001 Contribution to the Lepidoptera fauna of the Madeira Islands Part 2. Tineidae, Acrolepiidae, Epermeniidae With 127 figures Reinhard Gaedike and Ole Karsholt Summary A review of three families Tineidae, Epermeniidae and Acrolepiidae in the Madeira Islands is given. Three new species: Monopis henderickxi sp. n. (Tineidae), Acrolepiopsis mauli sp. n. and A. infundibulosa sp. n. (Acrolepiidae) are described, and two new combinations in the Tineidae: Ceratobia oxymora (MEYRICK) comb. n. and Monopis barbarosi (KOÇAK) comb. n. are listed. Trichophaga robinsoni nom. n. is proposed as a replacement name for the preoccupied T. abrkptella (WOLLASTON, 1858). The first record from Madeira of the family Acrolepiidae (with Acrolepiopsis vesperella (ZELLER) and the two above mentioned new species) is presented, and three species of Tineidae: Stenoptinea yaneimarmorella (MILLIÈRE), Ceratobia oxymora (MEY­ RICK) and Trichophaga tapetgella (LINNAEUS) are reported as new to the fauna of Madeira. The Madeiran records given for Tsychoidesfilicivora (MEYRICK) are the first records of this species outside the British Isles. Tineapellionella LINNAEUS, Monopis laevigella (DENIS & SCHIFFERMULLER) and M. imella (HÜBNER) are dele­ ted from the list of Lepidoptera found in Madeira. All species and their genitalia are figured, and informa­ tion on bionomy is presented. Zusammenfassung Es wird eine Übersicht über die drei Familien Tineidae, Epermeniidae und Acrolepiidae auf den Madeira Inseln gegeben. Die drei neuen Arten Monopis henderickxi sp. n. (Tineidae), Acrolepiopsis mauli sp. n. und A. infundibulosa sp. n. (Acrolepiidae) werden beschrieben, zwei neue Kombinationen bei den Tineidae: Cerato­ bia oxymora (MEYRICK) comb.
    [Show full text]
  • Millichope Park and Estate Invertebrate Survey 2020
    Millichope Park and Estate Invertebrate survey 2020 (Coleoptera, Diptera and Aculeate Hymenoptera) Nigel Jones & Dr. Caroline Uff Shropshire Entomology Services CONTENTS Summary 3 Introduction ……………………………………………………….. 3 Methodology …………………………………………………….. 4 Results ………………………………………………………………. 5 Coleoptera – Beeetles 5 Method ……………………………………………………………. 6 Results ……………………………………………………………. 6 Analysis of saproxylic Coleoptera ……………………. 7 Conclusion ………………………………………………………. 8 Diptera and aculeate Hymenoptera – true flies, bees, wasps ants 8 Diptera 8 Method …………………………………………………………… 9 Results ……………………………………………………………. 9 Aculeate Hymenoptera 9 Method …………………………………………………………… 9 Results …………………………………………………………….. 9 Analysis of Diptera and aculeate Hymenoptera … 10 Conclusion Diptera and aculeate Hymenoptera .. 11 Other species ……………………………………………………. 12 Wetland fauna ………………………………………………….. 12 Table 2 Key Coleoptera species ………………………… 13 Table 3 Key Diptera species ……………………………… 18 Table 4 Key aculeate Hymenoptera species ……… 21 Bibliography and references 22 Appendix 1 Conservation designations …………….. 24 Appendix 2 ………………………………………………………… 25 2 SUMMARY During 2020, 811 invertebrate species (mainly beetles, true-flies, bees, wasps and ants) were recorded from Millichope Park and a small area of adjoining arable estate. The park’s saproxylic beetle fauna, associated with dead wood and veteran trees, can be considered as nationally important. True flies associated with decaying wood add further significant species to the site’s saproxylic fauna. There is also a strong
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin of the Dipterists Forum
    BULLETIN OF THE Dipterists Forum Bulletin No. 56 Affiliated to the British Entomological and Natural History Society Autumn 2003 Scheme Organisers Tipuloidea & Ptychopteridae - Cranefly Dr. R.K.A.Morris Mr A E Stubbs [email protected] 181 Broadway Peterborough PE1 4DS Summer 2003: Please notify Dr Mark Hill of changes: Ivan Perry BRC (CEH) [ ][ ] 27 Mill Road, Lode, Cambridge, CB5 9EN. Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, co-organiser: John Kramer Tel: 01223 812438 Cambridgeshire PE28 2LS (Tel. 01487 772413) 31 Ash Tree Road Autumn 2003, Summer 2004: [email protected] Oadby, Leicester, LE2 5TE Peter Chandler Recording Schemes Sciomyzidae - Snail-killing Flies Symposium Graham Rotheray This year will see some substantial changes in the National Museums of Scotland, Chambers Street, Dr I F G McLean ways in which some Recording Scheme Organisers Edinburgh EH1 1JF, 0131.247.4243 109 Miller Way, Brampton, Huntingdon, Cambs archive and exchange records. Whilst all will read- [email protected] ily accept records in written form the following PE28 4TZ Membership symbols are used to indicate some of the known (or [email protected] surmised) methods by which Scheme Organisers [email protected] may currently receive records electronically: Mr A.P. Foster Mr M. Parker 23 The Dawneys, Crudwell, Malmesbury, Wiltshire 9 East Wyld Road, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 0RP Recorder SN16 9HE Dipterists Digest MapMate [][][] Microsoft Access Darwyn Sumner Peter Chandler 606B Berryfield Lane, Melksham, Wilts SN12 6EL Spreadsheet
    [Show full text]
  • Species List
    Species List for <vice county> [Staffordshire (VC 39)] Code Taxon Vernacular 1.001 Micropterix tunbergella 1.002 Micropterix mansuetella 1.003 Micropterix aureatella 1.004 Micropterix aruncella 1.005 Micropterix calthella 2.001 Dyseriocrania subpurpurella 2.003 Eriocrania unimaculella 2.004 Eriocrania sparrmannella 2.005 Eriocrania salopiella 2.006 Eriocrania cicatricella 2.006 Eriocrania haworthi 2.007 Eriocrania semipurpurella 2.008 Eriocrania sangii 3.001 Triodia sylvina Orange Swift 3.002 Korscheltellus lupulina Common Swift 3.003 Korscheltellus fusconebulosa Map-winged Swift 3.004 Phymatopus hecta Gold Swift 3.005 Hepialus humuli Ghost Moth 4.002 Stigmella lapponica 4.003 Stigmella confusella 4.004 Stigmella tiliae 4.005 Stigmella betulicola 4.006 Stigmella sakhalinella 4.007 Stigmella luteella 4.008 Stigmella glutinosae 4.009 Stigmella alnetella 4.010 Stigmella microtheriella 4.012 Stigmella aceris 4.013 Stigmella malella Apple Pygmy 4.015 Stigmella anomalella Rose Leaf Miner 4.017 Stigmella centifoliella 4.018 Stigmella ulmivora 4.019 Stigmella viscerella 4.020 Stigmella paradoxa 4.022 Stigmella regiella 4.023 Stigmella crataegella 4.024 Stigmella magdalenae 4.025 Stigmella nylandriella 4.026 Stigmella oxyacanthella 4.030 Stigmella hybnerella 4.032 Stigmella floslactella 4.034 Stigmella tityrella 4.035 Stigmella salicis 4.036 Stigmella myrtillella 4.038 Stigmella obliquella 4.039 Stigmella trimaculella 4.040 Stigmella assimilella 4.041 Stigmella sorbi 4.042 Stigmella plagicolella 4.043 Stigmella lemniscella 4.044 Stigmella continuella
    [Show full text]
  • Pristop K Obvladovanju Prenamnožitev Lazarjev Iz Rodu Arion
    Zbornik predavanj in referatov 13. Slovenskega posvetovanje o varstvu rastlin z mednarodno udeležbo Rimske Toplice, 7.-8. marec 2017 ZAČASEN ZNAČAJ KARANTENSKE KATEGORIJE NA ZGLEDU PLODOVIH MUH (Tephritidae) Vlasta KNAPIČ1, Gabrijel SELJAK2 1Ministrstvo za kmetijstvo, gozdarstvo in prehrano, Uprava RS za varno hrano, veterinarstvo in varstvo rastlin, Ljubljana 2 Kmetijsko gozdarski zavod Nova Gorica IZVLEČEK Plodove muhe so med najpomembnejšimi škodljivci v pridelavi sadja in zelenjave na svetu. Opisanih je nad 4000 vrst. Mnoge so polifagne. Družina Tephritidae ima kar 500 rodov, ki imajo vsak svoje domorodno območje. Med gospodarsko najpomembnejše rodove spadajo: Anastrepha (domorodne vrste pretežno v Južni in Srednji Ameriki), Bactrocera (Bližnji vzhod in območje Avstralazije), Ceratitis (tropska Afrika) in Rhagoletis (domorodne vrste v zmerno toplem pasu Amerike, Evrope in Azije). Mnoge vrste iz teh rodov so tudi invazivne in povzročajo veliko škodo ob vnosu na nova območja, kar se zaradi mednarodne trgovine dogaja vse pogosteje. Po tej poti so se k nam verjetno vnesle breskova muha (Ceratitis capitata), oljkova muha (Bactrocera oleae), višnjeva muha (Rhagoletis cingulata) in orehova 254 muha (Rh. completa). Od skoraj 200 znanih škodljivih vrst plodovih muh pa jih večina še ni zastopanih v Evropi, zato jih je mogoče obdržati na karantenski listi in predpisati uvozne zahteve za plodove, s katerimi se v EU lahko vnesejo. V prispevku so opisane regulirane vrste plodovih muh v Sloveniji in v Evropski uniji za obdobje 1977 do 2017 in posebnosti pri tem preventivnem ukrepu varstva rastlin. Ključne besede: plodove muhe, Tephritidae, karantenski ukrepi, uvoz, zdravje rastlin ABSTRACT TEMPORARY NATURE OF QUARANTINE PEST CATEGORIES USING THE EXAMPLE OF THE Tephritidae FRUIT FLIES Globally, fruit flies belong to the most significant pests in the production of fruits and vegetables.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural History of Lepidoptera Associated with Bird Nests in Mid-Wales
    Entomologist’s Rec. J. Var. 130 (2018) 249 NATURAL HISTORY OF LEPIDOPTERA ASSOCIATED WITH BIRD NESTS IN MID-WALES D. H. B OYES Bridge Cottage, Middletown, Welshpool, Powys, SY21 8DG. (E-mail: [email protected]) Abstract Bird nests can support diverse communities of invertebrates, including moths (Lepidoptera). However, the understanding of the natural history of these species is incomplete. For this study, 224 nests, from 16 bird species, were collected and the adult moths that emerged were recorded. The majority of nests contained moths, with 4,657 individuals of ten species recorded. Observations are made on the natural history of each species and some novel findings are reported. The absence of certain species is discussed. To gain deeper insights into the life histories of these species, it would be useful to document the feeding habits of the larvae in isolation. Keywords : Commensal, detritivore, fleas, moths, Tineidae. Introduction Bird nests represent concentrated pockets of organic resources (including dead plant matter, feathers, faeces and other detritus) and can support a diverse invertebrate fauna. A global checklist compiled by Hicks (1959; 1962; 1971) lists eighteen insect orders associated with bird nests, and a study in England identified over 120 insect species, spanning eight orders (Woodroffe, 1953). Moths are particularly frequent occupants of bird nests, but large gaps in knowledge and some misapprehensions remain. For example, Tineola bisselliella (Hummel, 1823) was widely thought to infest human habitations via bird nests, which acted as natural population reservoirs. However, it has recently been discovered that this non-native species seldom occurs in rural bird nests and can be regarded as wholly synanthropic in Europe, where it was introduced from Africa around the turn of the 19th century (Plarre & Krüger- Carstensen, 2011; Plarre, 2014).
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Gaps, Training Needs and Bio-Ecological Studies on Fruit-Infesting Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Northern Ghana
    University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh KNOWLEDGE GAPS, TRAINING NEEDS AND BIO-ECOLOGICAL STUDIES ON FRUIT-INFESTING FLIES (DIPTERA: TEPHRITIDAE) IN NORTHERN GHANA BY BADII KONGYELI BENJAMIN MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY IN ENTOMOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, LEGON, GHANA THIS THESIS IS SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, LEGON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY CROP SCIENCE (ENTOMOLOGY) DEGREE JULY, 2014 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh DECLARATION I hereby declare that this thesis is the result of my own original research, and that it has neither in whole nor in part been presented for a degree elsewhere. Works of others which served as sources of information have been duly acknowledged by reference to the authors. Candidate ………………………… Badii Kongyeli Benjamin Principal Supervisor …………………. Co-supervisor ………………….. Prof. Daniel Obeng-Ofori Prof. Kwame Afreh-Nuamah Co-supervisor …………………… Dr. Maxwell Kevin Billah University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis could not have been accomplished without the guidance of my dear supervisors and academic mentors. My supervisors (Prof. Daniel Obeng-Ofori, Prof. Kwame Afreh-Nuamah and Dr. Maxwell K. Billah) offered me the needed encouragement, support and guidance throughout the study. Also, Prof. Gebriel A. Teye (Pro-Vice Chancellor), Prof. George Nyarko (Dean, Faculty of Agriculture), Dr. Elias N. K. Sowley (Director, Academic Quality Assurance Directorate) and Dr. Isaac K. Addai (Head, Department of Agronomy) all of the University for Development Studies (UDS) approved of my leave of study, supported and encouraged me throughout my study. The Head of Department (Mrs. Dr C.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 10 Phylogeny and Divergence Estimates for the Gasteruptiid Wasps (Hymenoptera : Evanioidea) Reveals a Correlation
    Invertebrate Systematics 2020, 34, 319–327 © CSIRO 2020 doi:10.1071/IS19020_AC Supplementary material Phylogeny and divergence estimates for the gasteruptiid wasps (Hymenoptera : Evanioidea) reveals a correlation with hosts Ben A. ParslowA,B,E, John T. JenningsC, Michael P. SchwarzA and Mark I. StevensB,D ABiological Sciences, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia. BSouth Australian Museum, North Terrace, GPO Box 234, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia. CCentre for Evolutionary Biology and Biodiversity, and School of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia. DSchool of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia. ECorresponding author. Email: [email protected] Fig. S1. Reconstruction ancestral state in phylogenies (RASP) analysis result, showing ancestral-state reconstruction of biogeography for all nodes. Main nodes discussed in the text are labelled with a letter. (See following page.) Page 1 of 10 Table S1. Specimen information Voucher numbers, species identification, GenBank accession numbers for C01, EF1-α and 28s gene fragments, collection localities and voucher location for all material used in this study are given. Abbreviations for collection locations are: PNG, Papua New Guinea; N.P., national park; C.P., conservation park; SA, South Australia; WA, Western Australia; Qld, Queensland; Tas., Tasmania; Vic., Victoria. Abbreviations for voucher location are: AMS, Australian Museum, Sydney, NSW, Australia; BPC,
    [Show full text]
  • Of the Vitosha Mountain
    Historia naturalis bulgarica 26: 1–66 ISSN 0205-3640 (print) | ISSN 2603-3186 (online) • http://www.nmnhs.com/historia-naturalis-bulgarica/ publication date [online]: 17 May 2018 The Dipterans (Insecta: Diptera) of the Vitosha Mountain Zdravko Hubenov Abstract. A total of 1272 two-winged species that belong to 58 families has been reported from theVitosha Mt. The Tachinidae (208 species or 16.3%) and Cecidomyiidae (138 species or 10.8%) are the most numerous. The greatest number of species has been found in the mesophylic and xeromesophylic mixed forests belt (707 species or 55.6%) and in the northern part of the mountain (645 species or 50.7%). The established species belong to 83 areographical categories. The dipterous fauna can be divided into two main groups: 1) species with Mediterranean type of distribution (53 species or 4.2%) – more thermophilic and distributed mainly in the southern parts of the Palaearctic; seven species of southern type, distributed in the Palaearctic and beyond it, can be formally related to this group as well; 2) species with Palaearctic and Eurosiberian type of distribution (1219 species or 95.8%) – more cold-resistant and widely distributed in the Palaearctic; 247 species of northern type, distributed in the Palaearctic and beyond it, can be formally related to this group as well. The endemic species are 15 (1.2%). The distribution of the species according to the zoogeographical categories in the vegetation belts and the distribution of the zoogeographical categories in each belt are considered. The dipteran fauna of the Vitosha Mt. is compared to this of the Rila and Pirin Mountains.
    [Show full text]