DOCSLIB.ORG

Differential Responses of Grassland Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Communities to Conservation Reserve Program Management Practices

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSES OF GRASSLAND GROUND BEETLE (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE) COMMUNITIES TO CONSERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PRACTICES A Thesis by Evan Waite Bachelor of Science, University of Florida, 2017 Submitted to the Department of Biological Sciences and the faculty of the Graduate School of Wichita State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science July 2019 © Copyright 2019 by Evan Waite All Rights Reserved DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSES OF GRASSLAND GROUND BEETLE (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE) COMMUNITIES TO CONSERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PRACTICES The following faculty members have examined the final copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science with a major in Biological Sciences. __________________________________ Mary Jameson, Committee Chair __________________________________ Gregory Houseman, Committee Member __________________________________ Andrew Swindle, Committee Member iii “We should preserve every scrap of biodiversity as priceless while we learn to use it and come to understand what it means to humanity.”—E.O. Wilson iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research project would not have been possible without the contributions of numerous individuals who so kindly dedicated extensive amounts of time, expertise, and unwavering support throughout the entire process. I would first like to thank Dr. Mary Liz Jameson for being the best mentor that anyone could ever ask for; I would not be half the scientist or person I am today without your guidance. Thank you to Alex Morphew and Fraser Watson for being with me on this journey every step of the way; even while knee deep in CRP. Having friends willing to help with anything at the drop of a hat is truly something special, and I would not have made it through this without you two. For assistance with the gargantuan task of sorting the carabids from our traps, I thank Morgan Trible and Katie Slavenburg. Your willingness to sort through mountains of beetle biomass was a blessing. As a new carabidologist, this project would not have gone anywhere without the knowledge and hospitality of Bob Davidson at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Dr. Zack Falin at the Snow Entomological Museum Collection, Dr. Dave Kavanaugh at the California Academy of the Sciences, and Dr. Kip Will at the University of California at Berkeley. Without access to their specimens and the verification of my identifications, this project would have stayed where these beetles reside; on the ground. I would like to thank Dr. Andrew Swindle for his guidance on my committee, Dr. Gregory Houseman for his assistance and willingness to help an entomologist embrace his ecologist side, and Molly Reichenborn for her constant support as a friend and project manager that has the super- human ability to make things happen. Finally, I would like to thank the people that have been my support system since day one; my family. My mom, Cindy Connors, as well as my grandparents Peggy and Jim Waite have v always supported every weird, buggy adventure I have chosen to pursue. Even over 1,000 miles away I felt your love and belief in me every single day. The research “Linking CRP grassland management to plant, insect, and bird abundance and diversity”, which is the subject of this thesis, has been financed, in part, with federal funds from the Fish and Wildlife Service, a division of the United States Department of Interior, and administered by the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism. The contents and opinions, however, do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the United States Department of Interior or the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks, and Tourism. vi ABSTRACT Grasslands of the Great Plains have declined over 70% since European settlement due to conversion of natural habitats to cropland and urban centers. The federally supported Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) was created to improve water quality, reduce soil erosion, and increase native habitats for wildlife. Within these restored grassland ecosystems, ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) are a keystone invertebrate group that fill several crucial niches and may serve as bioindicators of successful land management strategies. Using pitfall traps at 108 CRP sites across 650 km and a precipitation gradient of 63.5 cm, we examined the response of carabid beetle richness and abundance to a low diversity (CP2) and relatively high diversity (CP25) initial seeding and a grazing treatment (grazed or ungrazed) over two field seasons. We captured 4,841 carabid beetles representing 48 species across this wide gradient. Overall, grazing and CP treatments did not have a detectable effect on carabid abundance, biomass, or diversity. However, we found significant, positive effects of grazing on all three metrics in tallgrass habitats (strongly correlated with precipitation and plant community diversity). There were no effects of CP on the ground beetle community. Additionally, we found that species turnover was correlated with habitat transitions found along the precipitation gradient. Our findings suggest that moderate grazing by cattle over two seasons does not negatively affect carabid communities and that carabid communities respond differently to the effects of land management across a precipitation gradient and grassland habitats. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1. INTRODUCTION…………………………….……………….………………….............1 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………..1 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………..………………………..…….....6 2.1 Site Selection…………………….……….……………………………………......6 2.2 Insect Sampling……...…………….……………………………………….……...9 2.3 Plant Sampling…………...……………………..………………………………..11 2.4 Laboratory Methods…..…..……………………………………………………...11 2.5 Habitat Designations……………………………………………………………..13 2.6 Data Analyses…………………………………………………………………….13 3. RESULTS…………………………………..…………………………………………....17 3.1 Carabid Beetles………………………..……………………………..………......17 3.2 Carabid Abundance………………………………..………………..……………20 3.3 Carabid Biomass…………………………………………………………………21 3.4 Carabid Diversity………………………………………………………………...22 3.5 Response of Carabid Community to Habitat……………………………………..24 3.6 Species Turnover…………………………………………………………………29 4. DISCUSSION………..…………………………………………………………….…….35 4.1 Discussion………………………………………..……………………………....35 4.2 Response of Carabid Communities to Grazing and CP Treatments………..…....35 4.3 Species Turnover in Carabid Communities……………………………………...39 4.4 Carabids as Bioindicators and Comparison with European Ecology……………42 4.5 Significance………………………………………………………………………43 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………..45 APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………….…………..57 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Taxon table with abundances and feeding guild….……………….……………………..18 2. Most abundant species in each region……..…………………………………………….19 3. Kruskal-Wallis for overall treatment effects…………………………………………….23 4. PERMANOVA results for region………………………………………………………..26 5. PERMANOVA results for two region effects…………..……………………………….27 6. PERMANOVA for grazing and CP combinations….…………………………………...27 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Plot layout……………………………………..…………………...…………...…………8 2. Overview of pit fall trap design……………………………………………………….....10 3. Rank abundance of carabid species………………………………………...……………20 4. Carabid abundances by treatment and region……………………………………………21 5. Carabid biomass by treatment and region………………………………...………………22 6. Carabid diversity by treatment and region……………………...………………………...23 7. Three-region NMS ordination……………………………….…………...………………25 8. Two-region NMS ordination……………..………………………………………………28 9. Total species turnover..………………………………………...………………………...30 10. Species turnover by Conservation Practice……………………………………………....31 11. Species turnover by grazing treatment…………………………………………………...32 12. Change in the dominant species………………………………………………………….33 13. Habitat designations of each site…………………………………………………………34 x LIST OF MAPS Map Page 1. Kansas map including all study sites……………...………………………………...……..7 xi LIST OF PLATES Plate Page 1. Pitfall trap in-situ………………….……………………………………………………..10 xii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction Over the past few years, a worrying trend has emerged in environmental ecology. Numerous reports demonstrate that insect populations are in severe decline due to anthropogenic stressors (Conrad et al. 2006, Fox et al. 2014, Hallmann et al. 2017, Lister and Garcia 2018, Benslimane et al. 2019). However, insect community reassembly is positively influenced by habitat restoration (Longcore 2003, Littlewood et al. 2006, Albrecht 2007). While restored habitats will never be the same as the original habitat, restoration efforts can mitigate some of the damage done to ecosystem processes. Restoring habitat is more important now than ever before, and focusing restorations on insect communities is crucial to maintaining healthy ecosystems because insects provide many necessary ecosystem services such as pollination, pest control, carrion and waste removal, and serving as food sources for other organisms (Ratcliffe 1996, Larochelle and Lariviere 2003, Kremen and Chaplin-Kramer 2007, Nichols et al. 2008). Ecosystem resiliency, or the ability to recover from disturbance, can be aided by the invertebrate community and the services they provide. One key invertebrate group that provides ecosystem services (Larochelle and Lariviere 2003), is heavily impacted by these human-imposed stressors (Koivula 2011), and responds positively to
Recommended publications
  • Effects of Pitfall Trap Preservative on Collections of Carabid Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae)

    Effects of Pitfall Trap Preservative on Collections of Carabid Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae)

    The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 40 Numbers 3 & 4 - Fall/Winter 2007 Numbers 3 & Article 6 4 - Fall/Winter 2007 October 2007 Effects of Pitfall Trap Preservative on Collections of Carabid Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Kenneth W. McCravy Western Illinois University Jason E. Willand U.S. Geological Survey Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation McCravy, Kenneth W. and Willand, Jason E. 2007. "Effects of Pitfall Trap Preservative on Collections of Carabid Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae)," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 40 (2) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol40/iss2/6 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. McCravy and Willand: Effects of Pitfall Trap Preservative on Collections of Carabid Be 15 4 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST Vol. 40, Nos. 3 & 4 EFFECTS OF PITFALL TRAP PRESERVATIVE ON COLLECTIONS OF CARABID BEETLES (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE) Kenneth W. McCravy1 and Jason E. Willand2 ABSTRACT Effects of six pitfall trap preservatives (5% acetic acid solution, distilled water, 70% ethanol, 50% ethylene glycol solution, 50% propylene glycol solution, and 10% saline solution) on collections of carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) were studied in a west-central Illinois deciduous forest from May to October 2005. A total of 819 carabids, representing 33 species and 19 genera, were collected. Saline produced significantly fewer captures than did acetic acid, ethanol, eth- ylene glycol, and propylene glycol, while distilled water produced significantly fewer captures than did acetic acid.
  • Coleoptera: Carabidae) Assemblages in a North American Sub-Boreal Forest

    Coleoptera: Carabidae) Assemblages in a North American Sub-Boreal Forest

    Forest Ecology and Management 256 (2008) 1104–1123 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Forest Ecology and Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foreco Catastrophic windstorm and fuel-reduction treatments alter ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages in a North American sub-boreal forest Kamal J.K. Gandhi a,b,1, Daniel W. Gilmore b,2, Steven A. Katovich c, William J. Mattson d, John C. Zasada e,3, Steven J. Seybold a,b,* a Department of Entomology, 219 Hodson Hall, 1980 Folwell Avenue, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA b Department of Forest Resources, 115 Green Hall, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA c USDA Forest Service, State and Private Forestry, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA d USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 5985 Hwy K, Rhinelander, WI 54501, USA e USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 1831 Hwy 169E, Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: We studied the short-term effects of a catastrophic windstorm and subsequent salvage-logging and Received 9 September 2007 prescribed-burning fuel-reduction treatments on ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages in a Received in revised form 8 June 2008 sub-borealforestinnortheasternMinnesota,USA. During2000–2003, 29,873groundbeetlesrepresentedby Accepted 9 June 2008 71 species were caught in unbaited and baited pitfall traps in aspen/birch/conifer (ABC) and jack pine (JP) cover types. At the family level, both land-area treatment and cover type had significant effects on ground Keywords: beetle trap catches, but there were no effects of pinenes and ethanol as baits.
  • Ground Beetle Assemblages on Illinois Algific Slopes: a Rare Habitat Threatened by Climate Change

    Ground Beetle Assemblages on Illinois Algific Slopes: a Rare Habitat Threatened by Climate Change

    Ground Beetle assemblages on Illinois algific slopes: a rare habitat threatened by climate change by: Steven J. Taylor, Ph.D. Alan D. Yanahan Illinois Natural History Survey Department of Entomology University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 320 Morrill Hall 1816 South Oak Street University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Champaign, IL 61820 505 S. Goodwin Ave [email protected] Urbana, IL 61801 report submitted to: Illinois Department of Natural Resources Office of Resource Conservation, Federal Aid / Special Funds Section One Natural Resources Way Springfield, Illinois 62702-1271 Fund Title: 375 IDNR 12-016W I INHS Technical Report 2013 (01) 5 January 2013 Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign William Shilts, Executive Director Illinois Natural History Survey Brian D. Anderson, Director 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-6830 Ground Beetle assemblages on Illinois algific slopes: a rare habitat threatened by climate change Steven J. Taylor & Alan D. Yanahan University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign During the Pleistocene, glacial advances left a small gap in the northwestern corner of Illinois, southwestern Wisconsin, and northeastern Iowa, which were never covered by the advancing Pleistocene glaciers (Taylor et al. 2009, p. 8, fig. 2.2). This is the Driftless Area – and it is one of Illinois’ most unique natural regions, comprising little more than 1% of the state. Illinois’ Driftless Area harbors more than 30 threatened or endangered plant species, and several unique habitat types. Among these habitats are talus, or scree, slopes, some of which retain ice throughout the year. The talus slopes that retain ice through the summer, and thus form a habitat which rarely exceeds 50 °F, even when the surrounding air temperature is in the 90’s °F, are known as “algific slopes.” While there are numerous examples of algific slopes in Iowa and Wisconsin, this habitat is very rare in Illinois (fewer than ten truly algific sites are known in the state).
  • From Characters of the Female Reproductive Tract

    From Characters of the Female Reproductive Tract

    Phylogeny and Classification of Caraboidea Mus. reg. Sci. nat. Torino, 1998: XX LCE. (1996, Firenze, Italy) 107-170 James K. LIEBHERR and Kipling W. WILL* Inferring phylogenetic relationships within Carabidae (Insecta, Coleoptera) from characters of the female reproductive tract ABSTRACT Characters of the female reproductive tract, ovipositor, and abdomen are analyzed using cladi­ stic parsimony for a comprehensive representation of carabid beetle tribes. The resulting cladogram is rooted at the family Trachypachidae. No characters of the female reproductive tract define the Carabidae as monophyletic. The Carabidac exhibit a fundamental dichotomy, with the isochaete tri­ bes Metriini and Paussini forming the adelphotaxon to the Anisochaeta, which includes Gehringiini and Rhysodini, along with the other groups considered member taxa in Jeannel's classification. Monophyly of Isochaeta is supported by the groundplan presence of a securiform helminthoid scle­ rite at the spermathecal base, and a rod-like, elongate laterotergite IX leading to the explosion cham­ ber of the pygidial defense glands. Monophyly of the Anisochaeta is supported by the derived divi­ sion of gonocoxa IX into a basal and apical portion. Within Anisochaeta, the evolution of a secon­ dary spermatheca-2, and loss ofthe primary spermathcca-I has occurred in one lineage including the Gehringiini, Notiokasiini, Elaphrini, Nebriini, Opisthiini, Notiophilini, and Omophronini. This evo­ lutionary replacement is demonstrated by the possession of both spermatheca-like structures in Gehringia olympica Darlington and Omophron variegatum (Olivier). The adelphotaxon to this sper­ matheca-2 clade comprises a basal rhysodine grade consisting of Clivinini, Promecognathini, Amarotypini, Apotomini, Melaenini, Cymbionotini, and Rhysodini. The Rhysodini and Clivinini both exhibit a highly modified laterotergite IX; long and thin, with or without a clavate lateral region.
  • Abundance and Diversity of Ground-Dwelling Arthropods of Pest Management Importance in Commercial Bt and Non-Bt Cotton Fields

    Abundance and Diversity of Ground-Dwelling Arthropods of Pest Management Importance in Commercial Bt and Non-Bt Cotton Fields

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Faculty Publications: Department of Entomology Entomology, Department of 2007 Abundance and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods of pest management importance in commercial Bt and non-Bt cotton fields J. B. Torres Universidade Federal Rural de Pernarnbuco, [email protected] J. R. Ruberson University of Georgia Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologyfacpub Part of the Entomology Commons Torres, J. B. and Ruberson, J. R., "Abundance and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods of pest management importance in commercial Bt and non-Bt cotton fields" (2007). Faculty Publications: Department of Entomology. 762. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/entomologyfacpub/762 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Entomology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications: Department of Entomology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Annals of Applied Biology ISSN 0003-4746 RESEARCH ARTICLE Abundance and diversity of ground-dwelling arthropods of pest management importance in commercial Bt and non-Bt cotton fields J.B. Torres1,2 & J.R. Ruberson2 1 Departmento de Agronomia – Entomologia, Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco, Dois Irma˜ os, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil 2 Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA, USA Keywords Abstract Carabidae; Cicindelinae; Falconia gracilis; genetically modified cotton; Labiduridae; The modified population dynamics of pests targeted by the Cry1Ac toxin in predatory heteropterans; Staphylinidae.
  • Relative and Seasonal Abundance of Beneficial Arthropods in Centipedegrass As Influenced by Management Practices

    Relative and Seasonal Abundance of Beneficial Arthropods in Centipedegrass As Influenced by Management Practices

    HORTICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY Relative and Seasonal Abundance of Beneficial Arthropods in Centipedegrass as Influenced by Management Practices S. KRISTINE BRAMAN AND ANDREW F. PENDLEY Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, College of Agriculture Experiment Stations, Georgia Station, Griffin, GA 30223 J. Econ. Entomol. 86(2): 494-504 (1993) ABSTRACT Pitfall traps were used to monitor the seasonal activity of arthropod preda­ tors, parasitoids, and decomposers in replicated plots of centipedegrass turf for 3 yr (1989-1991) at two locations. During 1990 and 1991, the influence of single or combined herbicide, insecticide, and fertilizer applications on these beneficials was assessed. In total, 21 species of carabids in 13 genera and 17 species of staphylinids in 14 genera were represented in pitfall-trap collections. Nonsminthurid collembolans, ants, spiders, and parasitic Hymenoptera were adversely affected in the short term by insecticide applica­ tions targeting the twolined spittlebug, Prosapia bicincta (Say). Other taxa, notably orib­ atid Acari, increased over time in response to pesticide or fertilizer applications. Although various taxa were reduced by pesticide application during three of four sample intervals, a lack ofoverall differences in season totals suggests that the disruptive influence ofcertain chemical management practices may be less severe than expected in the landscape. KEY WORDS Arthropoda, centipedegrass, nontarget effects CENTIPEDEGRASS, Eremochloa ophiuroides Potter 1983, Arnold & Potter 1987, Potter et al. (Munro) Hack, a native of China and Southeast 1990b, Vavrek & Niemczyk 1990). Asia introduced into the United States in 1916, Studies characterizing the beneficial arthropod has become widely grown from South Carolina community and assessing effects of management to Florida and westward along the Gulf Coast practices on those invertebrates are especially states to Texas (DubIe 1989).
  • Coleoptera: Carabidae) Diversity

    Coleoptera: Carabidae) Diversity

    VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AS INDICATORS OF GROUND BEETLE (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE) DIVERSITY BY ALAN D. YANAHAN THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Entomology in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2013 Urbana, Illinois Master’s Committee: Dr. Steven J. Taylor, Chair, Director of Research Adjunct Assistant Professor Sam W. Heads Associate Professor Andrew V. Suarez ABSTRACT Formally assessing biodiversity can be a daunting if not impossible task. Subsequently, specific taxa are often chosen as indicators of patterns of diversity as a whole. Mapping the locations of indicator taxa can inform conservation planning by identifying land units for management strategies. For this approach to be successful, though, land units must be effective spatial representations of the species assemblages present on the landscape. In this study, I determined whether land units classified by vegetative communities predicted the community structure of a diverse group of invertebrates—the ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Specifically, that (1) land units of the same classification contained similar carabid species assemblages and that (2) differences in species structure were correlated with variation in land unit characteristics, including canopy and ground cover, vegetation structure, tree density, leaf litter depth, and soil moisture. The study site, the Braidwood Dunes and Savanna Nature Preserve in Will County, Illinois is a mosaic of differing land units. Beetles were sampled continuously via pitfall trapping across an entire active season from 2011–2012. Land unit characteristics were measured in July 2012. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordinated the land units by their carabid assemblages into five ecologically meaningful clusters: disturbed, marsh, prairie, restoration, and savanna.
  • B a N I S T E R I A

    B a N I S T E R I A

    B A N I S T E R I A A JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE NATURAL HISTORY OF VIRGINIA ISSN 1066-0712 Published by the Virginia Natural History Society The Virginia Natural History Society (VNHS) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the dissemination of scientific information on all aspects of natural history in the Commonwealth of Virginia, including botany, zoology, ecology, archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, geology, geography, and climatology. The society’s periodical Banisteria is a peer-reviewed, open access, online-only journal. Submitted manuscripts are published individually immediately after acceptance. A single volume is compiled at the end of each year and published online. The Editor will consider manuscripts on any aspect of natural history in Virginia or neighboring states if the information concerns a species native to Virginia or if the topic is directly related to regional natural history (as defined above). Biographies and historical accounts of relevance to natural history in Virginia also are suitable for publication in Banisteria. Membership dues and inquiries about back issues should be directed to the Co-Treasurers, and correspondence regarding Banisteria to the Editor. For additional information regarding the VNHS, including other membership categories, annual meetings, field events, pdf copies of papers from past issues of Banisteria, and instructions for prospective authors visit http://virginianaturalhistorysociety.com/ Editorial Staff: Banisteria Editor Todd Fredericksen, Ferrum College 215 Ferrum Mountain Road Ferrum, Virginia 24088 Associate Editors Philip Coulling, Nature Camp Incorporated Clyde Kessler, Virginia Tech Nancy Moncrief, Virginia Museum of Natural History Karen Powers, Radford University Stephen Powers, Roanoke College C. L. Staines, Smithsonian Environmental Research Center Copy Editor Kal Ivanov, Virginia Museum of Natural History Copyright held by the author(s).
  • Abhnadlungen Aus Dem Westfälischen Museum Für

    Abhnadlungen Aus Dem Westfälischen Museum Für

    LWL-Museum für Naturkunde Westfälisches Landesmuseum mit Planetarium Abhandlungen aus dem Westfälischen Museum für Naturkunde 86. Band · 2017 Beiträge zur Entomofauna Nordrhein-Westfalens (Insecta: Coleoptera, Saltatoria) Karsten Hannig (Hrsg.) LWL-Museum für Naturkunde Westfälisches Landesmuseum mit Planetarium Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe Münster 2017 ISBN 978-3-940726-50-6 ISSN 0175-3495 Hinweise für Autoren In den Abhandlungen aus dem Westfälischen Museum für Naturkunde werden natur- wissenschaftliche Beiträge veröffentlicht, die den Raum Westfalen und angrenzende Regionen betreffen. Die Autoren werden gebeten, Manuskripte als WORD-Dokument per mail oder auf CD an das LWL-Museum für Naturkunde zu senden: Schriftleitung „Abhandlungen“ Dr. Bernd Tenbergen LWL-Museum für Naturkunde Sentruper Straße 285 48161 Münster [email protected] Das Manuskript sollte folgenden Aufbau haben: Überschrift, darunter Name (ausge- schrieben) und Wohnort des Autors, Inhaltsverzeichnis, kurze Zusammenfassung in deutscher und ggf. englischer Sprache, klar gegliederter Hauptteil, Literaturverzeichnis (Autoren alphabetisch geordnet), Anschrift des Verfassers. Lateinische Art- und Gattungs- namen sind kursiv zu schreiben. Alle Autorennamen im Text sowie im Literaturverzeichnis sind in Kapitälchen (z. B. RUNGE, F. (1976)) zu schreiben. Alle Tabellen und Abbildungen (Karten, Zeichnungen, Fotos) müssen eine Verkleinerung auf Satzspiegelgröße (12,6 x 19,8 cm) zulassen. Sie sollten als druckfertige pdf- und/oder Bild-Dateien eingereicht werden. Alle Abbildungen und Tabellen sind zusammen mit den Bildunterschriften bzw. Tabellenüberschriften nicht nur im Text eingebunden, sonderen auch als gesonderte Datei beizufügen. Fotos sind möglichst digital (Auflösung 300 dpi) oder in schwarzweißen Hochglanzab- zügen vorzulegen. Bei Farbaufnahmen sollte darauf geachtet werden, dass diese in der Regel schwarzweiß gedruckt werden. Das Literaturverzeichnis ist nach folgendem Muster anzufertigen: IMMEL, W.
  • Additions to the Checklist of Wisconsin

    Additions to the Checklist of Wisconsin

    66 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST Vol. 47, Nos. 1 - 2 Additions to the Checklist of Wisconsin Ground Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae), Including the Adventive Harpalus rubripes (Duftschmid) Among Seven New State Records Peter W. Messer1 Abstract Sixteen species are added to the checklist of Wisconsin Geadephaga. Of these, seven species are reported here as new to Wisconsin. Nine taxa from the list are affected by new information resulting in the removal of six names. The Eurasian beetle Harpalus rubripes was discovered as early as 2009 on annu- ally surveyed beaches along Lake Michigan in southeastern Wisconsin. This discovery greatly extends the species distribution westward from its presence in northeastern North America where it was first recorded in 1981. ____________________ There appears no end to the current accelerated pace of published faunal records and regional checklists. The vast majority of such endeavors are based arbitrarily on political geographic units rather than on well-defined natural systems. The scientific and esthetic allure of the ground beetles has contrib- uted greatly to the surge in publications (e.g., Erwin 2007, 2011; Erwin and Pearson 2008) on Western Hemisphere Caraboidea, the catalogue of North American Geadephaga (Bousquet 2012), and the concerted effort among users of BugGuide.net to supplement the latter catalogue by archiving new records at http://bugguide.net/node/view/744417. Bousquet (2012) updated all 2678 valid North American Geadephaga species-group taxa along with consolidating everything known about their geographic-political distributions. The present contribution adheres to Bous- quet’s nomenclature, classification, and phylogenetic order of the tribes. The relevant hierarchal classification descends according to order Coleoptera: suborder Adephaga: superfamily Caraboidea = Geadephaga: families Trachy- pachidae, Rhysodidae, and Carabidae.
  • Viewed in Barbosa Et Al

    Viewed in Barbosa Et Al

    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2018 Insects in Variable Plant Patches Andrew Charles Merwin Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES INSECTS IN VARIABLE PLANT PATCHES By ANDREW CHARLES MERWIN A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Biological Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2018 Andrew Merwin defended this dissertation on August 27, 2018. The members of the supervisory committee were: Nora Underwood Professor Co-Directing Dissertation Brian Inouye Professor Co-Directing Dissertation Nick Cogan University Representative Alice Winn Committee Member Scott Burgess Committee Member Joseph Travis Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii Dedicated to Anita Merwin and Art Fabian, whose curiosity for the natural world was contagious. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A staggering number of kind and brilliant people have helped me with my dissertation. I owe them a mountain of gratitude. Foremost, I would like to thank my advisers, Nora Underwood and Brian Inouye, for being incomparably generous with their time and for teaching me how to think more critically and communicate more clearly. They and the other members of my committee—Scott Burgess, Nick Cogan, Joe Travis, and Alice Winn—have all been exceptionally supportive of me, my research, and my passion for teaching. In particular, I thank Alice Winn for the opportunity to teach as instructor of record and for her insightful comments on both my teaching and research.

  • Coleoptera, Carabidae)

    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 416: 77–112Taxonomic (2014) review of Cratocerus Dejean, 1829 (Coleoptera, Carabidae)... 77 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.416.6455 RESEARCH ARTICLE www.zookeys.org Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Taxonomic review of Cratocerus Dejean, 1829 (Coleoptera, Carabidae) with the description of six new species Traci L. Grzymala1, Kipling W. Will1 1 ESPM Department and Essig Museum of Entomology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 Corresponding author: Traci L. Grzymala ([email protected]) Academic editor: T. Erwin | Received 18 October 2013 | Accepted 12 May 2014 | Published 17 June 2014 http://zoobank.org/D81E3809-5704-4DE7-AFEC-098E7773D528 Citation: Grzymala TL, Will KW (2014) Taxonomic review of Cratocerus Dejean, 1829 (Coleoptera, Carabidae) with description of six new species. ZooKeys 416: 77–112. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.416.6455 Abstract A diagnosis of the South and Central American genus Cratocerus Dejean (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and a key to all species is provided. Eight species are recognized including six species that are newly described: Cratocerus sinesetosus sp. n. from French Guiana and Peru; Cratocerus multisetosus sp. n. from Costa Rica and Panama; Cratocerus tanyae sp. n. from Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Mexico; Cratocerus indupalmensis sp. n. a species widely distributed throughout Central and South America; Cratocerus kavanaughi sp. n. from French Guiana and Peru; and Cratocerus culpepperi sp. n. from Peru. A lectotype for Cratocerus sulcatus Chaudoir is designated. Habitus images are provided along with illustrations and images of male genitalia, female genitalia, and diagnostic morphological characters. Keywords Pterostichinae, Harpalinae, Cratocerini, Cratocerina, revision, key Introduction The genus Cratocerus (Coleoptera: Carabidae) was originally described by Dejean (1829) based on two specimens collected from Brazil.