Estudio Faunístico Y Ecológico De La Familia Phoridae En El P.N

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Estudio Faunístico Y Ecológico De La Familia Phoridae En El P.N Tesis doctoral Estudio faunístico y ecológico de la familia Phoridae en el P.N. del Montseny Carlos García Romera A Beatriz, Ivan y Sara. 1 Estudio faunístico y ecológico de la familia Phoridae en el P.N. del Montseny ÍNDICE AGRADECIMIENTOS ............................................................................................................................5 ABSTRACT/RESUMEN .........................................................................................................................6 1. INTRODUCCIÓN ............................................................................................................................8 1.1. Objetivos del trabajo .......................................................................................................9 1.2. La familia Phoridae .........................................................................................................10 1.2.1. Posición en el conjunto del Orden ..................................................................10 1.2.2. Antecedentes históricos ...................................................................................18 1.2.3. Morfología de los Phoridae .............................................................................20 1.2.4. Biología de los Phoridae .................................................................................28 1.2.5. Ecología de los Phoridae .................................................................................31 2. EL MONTSENY. ZONAS DE ESTUDIO ...........................................................................................36 2.1. El Montseny ...................................................................................................................37 2.1.1. Situación .........................................................................................................37 2.1.2. El relieve y las rocas .......................................................................................38 2.1.3. Suelos .............................................................................................................38 2.1.4. Clima ................................................................................................................38 2.1.5. Vegetación ......................................................................................................40 2.1.6. Cubiertas del suelo ..........................................................................................44 2.1.7. Fauna ...............................................................................................................45 2.2. Zonas de estudio ...........................................................................................................46 2.2.1. Localización y descripción de las zonas de estudio .........................................46 2.2.2. Datos climáticos ..............................................................................................48 3. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS ..............................................................................................................50 3.1. Métodos de muestreo ....................................................................................................51 3.1.1. Trampas de caída .............................................................................................51 3.1.2. Interceptores de vuelo ....................................................................................52 3.1.3. Trampas de agua .............................................................................................53 3.1.4. Trampas de emergencia ..................................................................................54 3.1.5. Biocenómetro ..................................................................................................54 2 Introducción 3.1.6. Mangueo y batido ...........................................................................................55 3.1.7. Trampas de luz ................................................................................................56 3.1.8. Fotoecleptos ....................................................................................................56 3.2. Datos meteorológicos ...................................................................................................59 3.3. Rotulación de muestras ................................................................................................59 3.4. Métodos de laboratorio ................................................................................................60 3.4.1. Separación primaria .......................................................................................60 3.4.2. Separación secundaria ...................................................................................60 3.4.3. Determinación de géneros de Phoridae ........................................................61 3.4.4. Determinación de especies de Phoridae ........................................................61 3.5. Tratamiento de los datos ..............................................................................................62 3.5.1. Estructura de dominancia ...............................................................................62 3.5.2. Clasificación zoogeográfica .............................................................................62 3.5.3. Grupos tróficos ................................................................................................63 3.5.4. Densidad ..........................................................................................................63 3.5.5. Diversidad alfa .................................................................................................63 3.5.6. Estimación de la riqueza específica ................................................................. 65 3.5.7. Diversidad beta ...............................................................................................67 3.5.8. Análisis estadísticos .........................................................................................68 4. RESULTADOS FAUNÍSTICOS Y TAXONÓMICOS ..........................................................................77 4.1. Pautas seguidas en el estudio taxonómico ...................................................................78 4.2. Especies encontradas en el Montseny (previamente descritas) ...................................80 4.2.1. Subfamilia Phorinae ........................................................................................80 4.2.2. Subfamilia Metopininae. Tribu Metopinini ...................................................106 4.2.3. Subfamilia Metopininae. Tribu Gymnophorini ..............................................110 4.3. Descripción de nuevos taxa .........................................................................................196 4.4. Datos globales .............................................................................................................223 4.4.1. Balances numéricos .......................................................................................223 4.4.2. Composición por grupos zoogeográficos ......................................................227 5. RESULTADOS ECOLÓGICOS. ESTRUCTURA DE LA COMUNIDAD DE PHORIDAE ......................228 5.1. Estudio comparativo de los hábitats ...........................................................................229 5.1.1. Importancia de los Phoridae en el conjunto de los Diptera .........................229 5.1.2. Abundancia relativa de las distintas familias de Diptera ..............................230 3 Estudio faunístico y ecológico de la familia Phoridae en el P.N. del Montseny 5.1.3. Estructura de dominancia ..............................................................................233 5.1.4. Grupos zoogeográficos ..................................................................................241 5.1.5. Grupos tróficos ..............................................................................................246 5.1.6. Densidad ........................................................................................................249 5.1.7. Estimación de la riqueza específica ...............................................................254 5.1.8. Diversidad alfa ...............................................................................................258 5.1.9. Diversidad beta ..............................................................................................261 5.2.Dinámica estacional .....................................................................................................268 5.2.1. Abundancia relativa de Phoridae ..................................................................268 5.2.2. Densidad ........................................................................................................269 5.2.3. Grupos tróficos ..............................................................................................270 5.2.4. Diversidad alfa ...............................................................................................272 5.2.5. Diversidad beta .............................................................................................274 5.2.6. Influencia de las variables meteorológicas ...................................................274 5.2.7. Fenología de las especies más abundantes ..................................................279 5.2.8. Dominancia estacional ..................................................................................295 5.3.
Recommended publications
  • Rediscovery and Reclassification of the Dipteran Taxon Nothomicrodon
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Rediscovery and reclassification of the dipteran taxon Nothomicrodon Wheeler, an exclusive Received: 07 November 2016 Accepted: 28 February 2017 endoparasitoid of gyne ant larvae Published: 31 March 2017 Gabriela Pérez-Lachaud1, Benoit J. B. Jahyny2,3, Gunilla Ståhls4, Graham Rotheray5, Jacques H. C. Delabie6 & Jean-Paul Lachaud1,7 The myrmecophile larva of the dipteran taxon Nothomicrodon Wheeler is rediscovered, almost a century after its original description and unique report. The systematic position of this dipteran has remained enigmatic due to the absence of reared imagos to confirm indentity. We also failed to rear imagos, but we scrutinized entire nests of the Brazilian arboreal dolichoderine ant Azteca chartifex which, combined with morphological and molecular studies, enabled us to establish beyond doubt that Nothomicrodon belongs to the Phoridae (Insecta: Diptera), not the Syrphidae where it was first placed, and that the species we studied is an endoparasitoid of the larvae of A. chartifex, exclusively attacking sexual female (gyne) larvae. Northomicrodon parasitism can exert high fitness costs to a host colony. Our discovery adds one more case to the growing number of phorid taxa known to parasitize ant larvae and suggests that many others remain to be discovered. Our findings and literature review confirm that the Phoridae is the only taxon known that parasitizes both adults and the immature stages of different castes of ants, thus threatening ants on all fronts. Ants are hosts to at least 17 orders of myrmecophilous arthropods (organisms dependent on ants), ranging from general scavengers to highly selective predators and parasitoids that attack either ants, their brood or other myr- mecophiles1–3.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera, Phoridae) from Iran
    Archive of SID J Insect Biodivers Syst 04(3): 147–155 ISSN: 2423-8112 JOURNAL OF INSECT BIODIVERSITY AND SYSTEMATICS Research Article http://jibs.modares.ac.ir http://zoobank.org/References/578CCEF1-37B7-45D3-9696-82B159F75BEB New records of the scuttle flies (Diptera, Phoridae) from Iran Roya Namaki Khameneh1, Samad Khaghaninia1*, R. Henry L. Disney2 1 Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, I.R. Iran. 2 Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EJ, U.K. ABSTRACT. The faunistic study of the family Phoridae carried out in northwestern of Iran during 2013–2017. Five species (Conicera tibialis Schmitz, Received: 1925, Dohrniphora cornuta (Bigot, 1857), Gymnophora arcuata (Meigen, 1830), 06 August, 2018 Metopina oligoneura (Mik, 1867) and Triphleba intermedia (Malloch, 1908)) are newly recorded from Iran. The genera Conicera Meigen, 1830, Dohrniphora Accepted: 14 November, 2018 Dahl, 1898, Gymnophora Macquart, 1835 and Triphleba Rondani, 1856 are reported for the first time from the country. Diagnostic characters of the Published: studied species along with their photographs are provided. 20 November, 2018 Subject Editor: Key words: Phoridae, Conicera, Dohrniphora, Gymnophora, Triphleba, Iran, New Farzaneh Kazerani records Citation: Namaki khameneh, R., Khaghaninia, S. & Disney, R.H.L. (2018) New records of the scuttle flies (Diptera, Phoridae) from Iran. Journal of Insect Biodiversity and Systematics, 4 (3), 147–155. Introduction Phoridae with about 4,000 identified insect eggs, larvae, and pupae. The adults species in more than 260 genera, is usually feed on nectar, honeydew and the considered as one of the largest families of exudates of fresh carrion and dung, Diptera (Ament & Brown, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Dipterists Digest
    Dipterists Digest 2019 Vol. 26 No. 1 Cover illustration: Eliozeta pellucens (Fallén, 1820), male (Tachinidae) . PORTUGAL: Póvoa Dão, Silgueiros, Viseu, N 40º 32' 59.81" / W 7º 56' 39.00", 10 June 2011, leg. Jorge Almeida (photo by Chris Raper). The first British record of this species is reported in the article by Ivan Perry (pp. 61-62). Dipterists Digest Vol. 26 No. 1 Second Series 2019 th Published 28 June 2019 Published by ISSN 0953-7260 Dipterists Digest Editor Peter J. Chandler, 606B Berryfield Lane, Melksham, Wilts SN12 6EL (E-mail: [email protected]) Editorial Panel Graham Rotheray Keith Snow Alan Stubbs Derek Whiteley Phil Withers Dipterists Digest is the journal of the Dipterists Forum . It is intended for amateur, semi- professional and professional field dipterists with interests in British and European flies. All notes and papers submitted to Dipterists Digest are refereed. Articles and notes for publication should be sent to the Editor at the above address, and should be submitted with a current postal and/or e-mail address, which the author agrees will be published with their paper. Articles must not have been accepted for publication elsewhere and should be written in clear and concise English. Contributions should be supplied either as E-mail attachments or on CD in Word or compatible formats. The scope of Dipterists Digest is: - the behaviour, ecology and natural history of flies; - new and improved techniques (e.g. collecting, rearing etc.); - the conservation of flies; - reports from the Diptera Recording Schemes, including maps; - records and assessments of rare or scarce species and those new to regions, countries etc.; - local faunal accounts and field meeting results, especially if accompanied by ecological or natural history interpretation; - descriptions of species new to science; - notes on identification and deletions or amendments to standard key works and checklists.
    [Show full text]
  • Local and Regional Influences on Arthropod Community
    LOCAL AND REGIONAL INFLUENCES ON ARTHROPOD COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AND SPECIES COMPOSITION ON METROSIDEROS POLYMORPHA IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ZOOLOGY (ECOLOGY, EVOLUTION AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGy) AUGUST 2004 By Daniel S. Gruner Dissertation Committee: Andrew D. Taylor, Chairperson John J. Ewel David Foote Leonard H. Freed Robert A. Kinzie Daniel Blaine © Copyright 2004 by Daniel Stephen Gruner All Rights Reserved. 111 DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to all the Hawaiian arthropods who gave their lives for the advancement ofscience and conservation. IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Fellowship support was provided through the Science to Achieve Results program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and training grants from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the National Science Foundation (DGE-9355055 & DUE-9979656) to the Ecology, Evolution and Conservation Biology (EECB) Program of the University of Hawai'i at Manoa. I was also supported by research assistantships through the U.S. Department of Agriculture (A.D. Taylor) and the Water Resources Research Center (RA. Kay). I am grateful for scholarships from the Watson T. Yoshimoto Foundation and the ARCS Foundation, and research grants from the EECB Program, Sigma Xi, the Hawai'i Audubon Society, the David and Lucille Packard Foundation (through the Secretariat for Conservation Biology), and the NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant program (DEB-0073055). The Environmental Leadership Program provided important training, funds, and community, and I am fortunate to be involved with this network.
    [Show full text]
  • Zootaxa, Diptera, Phoridae
    Zootaxa 554: 1–7 (2004) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ ZOOTAXA 554 Copyright © 2004 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Two new genera of Phoridae (Insecta: Diptera) from the Neotropical Region BRIAN V. BROWN & GIAR-ANN KUNG Entomology Section, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA, 90007, USA. Email: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Two new genera and species, Tapantia bicasa and Tayrona nitifrons, are described from Tapanti National Park, Costa Rica, and Tayrona National Park, Colombia, respectively. Tapantia bicasa is a basal lineage phorid of uncertain relationships, as it structurally resembles the genus Triphleba Rondani, but has male terminalia extremely similar to those of Dohrniphora Dahl. Tayrona niti- frons is highly unusual in many aspects, but especially in frontal setation, leg structure, wing struc- ture, and male terminalia. It is classified in the subfamily Metopininae, although its precise relationships are unknown. Key words: Diptera, Phoridae, new genus, Neotropical Introduction The phorid fauna of the Neotropical Region is still poorly known, but presumably the most diverse in the world. Recent revisionary papers by Brown (e.g. 1996, 1997, 2000, 2002, 2004) have documented huge numbers of undescribed Neotropical species, with many more expected in nearly all groups. Even less well-described is the diversity at the genus level. This is in part because of difficulties in resolving the subfamily level classification of the family (Brown 1992; Dis- ney 2003) and classifying the genera of subfamily Metopininae. Especially problematic are the Metopina-group of genera (sensu Brown 1992) and the large, probably paraphyl- etic genus Megaselia Rondani and its relatives.
    [Show full text]
  • (Diptera: Phoridae) Associated with Leaf-Cutter Ants and Army Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Argentina by R
    95 New Species and Records of Scuttle Flies (Diptera: Phoridae) Associated with Leaf-cutter Ants and Army Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Argentina by R. Henry L. Disney1, Luciana Elizalde2 & Patricia J. Folgarait2 ABSTRACT Lucianaphora folgaraitae Disney n. gen., n. sp., Macrocerides attophilus n. sp. are described, both being collected over leaf-cutter ants and Cremersia crassicostalis n. sp. from females collected over army ants. Some species col- lected with army ants are given code letters until they are linked up with their unknown sex. Host records for previously known species were all from colonies of army ants, whose myrmecophiles are better documented than those recorded from the colonies of leaf-cutter ants. Key Words: Phoridae, Argentina, Leaf-cutter ants, Army ants INTRODUCTION The numerous myrmecophile and parasitoidscuttle flies (Phoridae) associ- ated with army ants (Ecitoninae) have been reviewed by Disney & Kistner (2003), recently augmented by Disney & Rettenmeyer (2007) and Disney & Berghoff (2007). The far fewer records of those associated with leaf-cutter ants (Myrmicinae) were last reviewed by Disney (1994), but since then knowledge of the parasitoid species has increased for phorids of the genera Apocephalus, Neodohrniphora, and Myrmosicarius (Braganca et al. 1998, 2002; Brown 1997, 2001, Disney 1996, Disney et al. 2006, Feener & Brown 1993; Feener & Moss 1990, Tonhasca 1996, Tonhasca et al. 2001). During a study of the parasitoid genus Myrmosicarius Borgmeier (Diptera: Phoridae), whose preferred hosts are leaf-cutter ants (Disney et al. 2006), other mymecophilous and parasitoid species of scuttle fly were also observed and collected from colonies of the same ants. In addition, some phorids 1 Museum of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, ENGLAND Email: [email protected] 2 Centro de Estudios e Investigaciones, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes, R.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 a Checklist of Arthropods Associated with Rat Carrion in a Montane Locality
    1 A checklist of arthropods associated with rat carrion in a montane locality of northern Venezuela. Yelitza Velásquez Laboratorio de Biología de Organismos, Centro de Ecología, Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas. Apartado Postal 21827, Caracas 1020-A, Venezuela Tel.: +58-212-504.1052; fax: +58-212-504.1088; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract This is the first report of arthropods associated with carrion in Venezuela, using laboratory bred rats (Rattus norvegicus). Rat carcasses were exposed to colonization by arthropods in neighboring montane savanna and cloud forest habitats in the state of Miranda. The taxonomic composition of the arthropods varied between both ecosystems. Scarabaeidae, Silphidae, Micropezidae, Phoridae, Vespidae and one species of ant, were collected only in the cloud forest. Dermestes maculatus, Chrysomya albiceps, Termitidae and most species of ants, were found only in the savanna. Fourteen species were considered to be of primary forensic importance: Dermestes maculatus, Oxelytrum discicolle, Calliphora sp., Cochliomyia macellaria, Compsomyiops sp., Chrysomya albiceps, Phaenicia cuprina, P. sericata, P. eximia, Fannia sp., Puliciphora sp., Megaselia scalaris, Ravina sp. and Sarcophaga sp. Key words: Coleoptera, Diptera, Forensic entomology, Venezuela. Introduction There is relatively little information available regarding insects associated with animal carrion and human corpses in South America [1]. In Brazil, Moura et al. [2] made a preliminary analysis of the insects of medico-legal importance in Curitiba, in the state of 2 Paraná; Carvalho et al. [3] identified arthropods associated with pig carrion and human corpses in Campinas, in the state of São Paulo. Recently, forensic entomology was applied to estimate the postmortem interval (PMI) in homicide investigations by the Rio de Janeiro Police Department, Brasil [4].
    [Show full text]
  • Range Expansion of the Fire Ant Decapitating Fly, Pseudacteon Tricuspis, Eight to Nine Years After Releases in North Florida
    536 Florida Entomologist 89(4) December 2006 RANGE EXPANSION OF THE FIRE ANT DECAPITATING FLY, PSEUDACTEON TRICUSPIS, EIGHT TO NINE YEARS AFTER RELEASES IN NORTH FLORIDA ROBERTO M. PEREIRA AND SANFORD D. PORTER Center for Medical, Agricultural and Veterinary Entomology, USDA-ARS 1600 SW 23rd Drive, Gainesville, Florida, 32608, USA Pseudacteon tricuspis Borgmeier (Diptera: tions where fire ants were abundant. Geographi- Phoridae) was the first decapitating fly species re- cal coordinates of the surveyed locations were de- leased in the United States as a biological control termined with GPS equipment (GPS V, Garmin In- agent against imported Solenopsis fire ants. ternational, Inc., Olathe, KS), and survey loca- Early releases were made in and around Gaines- tions were mapped by ArcGIS (ESRI, Redlands, ville, FL on several occasions between Jul 1997 CA). and Nov 1999. The flies originated from collec- In Nov 2005, P. tricuspis were observed in tions made in Jaguariúna, State of São Paulo, East-Central Florida in Seminole Co. near San- Brazil in 1996 (Porter & Alonso 1999; Porter et al. ford, FL, at a distance of approximately 145 km 2004). Release methods varied and flies were ei- from the release sites around Gainesville (Fig. 1). ther introduced into the field as adult flies or as This represents an average expansion rate of ap- immatures in parasitized fire ant workers. By the proximately 26 km/year since the fall of 2001. In fall of 2001, the decapitating flies had expanded the northeast direction from the release sites, 35-60 km from the release sites, and occupied ap- flies were observed up to 275 km away, close to the proximately 8100 km2 (Porter et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera) Diversity in a Patch of Costa Rican Cloud Forest: Why Inventory Is a Vital Science
    Zootaxa 4402 (1): 053–090 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2018 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4402.1.3 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:C2FAF702-664B-4E21-B4AE-404F85210A12 Remarkable fly (Diptera) diversity in a patch of Costa Rican cloud forest: Why inventory is a vital science ART BORKENT1, BRIAN V. BROWN2, PETER H. ADLER3, DALTON DE SOUZA AMORIM4, KEVIN BARBER5, DANIEL BICKEL6, STEPHANIE BOUCHER7, SCOTT E. BROOKS8, JOHN BURGER9, Z.L. BURINGTON10, RENATO S. CAPELLARI11, DANIEL N.R. COSTA12, JEFFREY M. CUMMING8, GREG CURLER13, CARL W. DICK14, J.H. EPLER15, ERIC FISHER16, STEPHEN D. GAIMARI17, JON GELHAUS18, DAVID A. GRIMALDI19, JOHN HASH20, MARTIN HAUSER17, HEIKKI HIPPA21, SERGIO IBÁÑEZ- BERNAL22, MATHIAS JASCHHOF23, ELENA P. KAMENEVA24, PETER H. KERR17, VALERY KORNEYEV24, CHESLAVO A. KORYTKOWSKI†, GIAR-ANN KUNG2, GUNNAR MIKALSEN KVIFTE25, OWEN LONSDALE26, STEPHEN A. MARSHALL27, WAYNE N. MATHIS28, VERNER MICHELSEN29, STEFAN NAGLIS30, ALLEN L. NORRBOM31, STEVEN PAIERO27, THOMAS PAPE32, ALESSANDRE PEREIRA- COLAVITE33, MARC POLLET34, SABRINA ROCHEFORT7, ALESSANDRA RUNG17, JUSTIN B. RUNYON35, JADE SAVAGE36, VERA C. SILVA37, BRADLEY J. SINCLAIR38, JEFFREY H. SKEVINGTON8, JOHN O. STIREMAN III10, JOHN SWANN39, PEKKA VILKAMAA40, TERRY WHEELER††, TERRY WHITWORTH41, MARIA WONG2, D. MONTY WOOD8, NORMAN WOODLEY42, TIFFANY YAU27, THOMAS J. ZAVORTINK43 & MANUEL A. ZUMBADO44 †—deceased. Formerly with the Universidad de Panama ††—deceased. Formerly at McGill University, Canada 1. Research Associate, Royal British Columbia Museum and the American Museum of Natural History, 691-8th Ave. SE, Salmon Arm, BC, V1E 2C2, Canada. Email: [email protected] 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 13. Assessing Host Specificity and Field Release Potential of Fire Ant Decapitating Flies (Phoridae: Pseudacteon)
    ASSESSING HOST RANGES OF PARASITOIDS AND PREDATORS _________________________________ CHAPTER 13. ASSESSING HOST SPECIFICITY AND FIELD RELEASE POTENTIAL OF FIRE ANT DECAPITATING FLIES (PHORIDAE: PSEUDACTEON) S. D. Porter1 and L. E. Gilbert2 1USDA-ARS, Center for Medical, Agricultural and Veterinary Entomology, P.O. Box 14565, Gainesville, Florida 32604 USA [email protected] 2Brackenridge Field Laboratory and Section of Integrative Biology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712 USA BACKGROUND OF SYSTEM Fire ant populations in their South American homeland are about 1/5 to 1/10 as dense as popu- lations in North America (Porter et al., 1992; Porter et al., 1997a). This intercontinental differ- ence in fire ant densities was not explained by differences in climate, habitat, soil type, land use, plant cover, or sampling protocols (Porter et al., 1997a). Escape from numerous natural en- emies left behind in South America is the most apparent explanation for the intercontinental population differences. Natural enemies left behind in South America include two species of microsporidian pathogens, three species of nematodes, about 20 species of phorid decapitating flies, a eucharitid wasp, a parasitic ant, and numerous other microbes and arthropods of uncer- tain relationship to fire ants (Porter et al., 1997a). Escape from coevolved ant communities may also have been important. Ants in Brazil and Argentina, however, do not appear to be any more abundant than those in the United States, at least as indicated by their ability to find and occupy baits (Porter et al., 1997a). Classical or self-sustaining biological control agents are currently the only potential means for achieving permanent regional control of fire ants.
    [Show full text]
  • ARTHROPODA Subphylum Hexapoda Protura, Springtails, Diplura, and Insects
    NINE Phylum ARTHROPODA SUBPHYLUM HEXAPODA Protura, springtails, Diplura, and insects ROD P. MACFARLANE, PETER A. MADDISON, IAN G. ANDREW, JOCELYN A. BERRY, PETER M. JOHNS, ROBERT J. B. HOARE, MARIE-CLAUDE LARIVIÈRE, PENELOPE GREENSLADE, ROSA C. HENDERSON, COURTenaY N. SMITHERS, RicarDO L. PALMA, JOHN B. WARD, ROBERT L. C. PILGRIM, DaVID R. TOWNS, IAN McLELLAN, DAVID A. J. TEULON, TERRY R. HITCHINGS, VICTOR F. EASTOP, NICHOLAS A. MARTIN, MURRAY J. FLETCHER, MARLON A. W. STUFKENS, PAMELA J. DALE, Daniel BURCKHARDT, THOMAS R. BUCKLEY, STEVEN A. TREWICK defining feature of the Hexapoda, as the name suggests, is six legs. Also, the body comprises a head, thorax, and abdomen. The number A of abdominal segments varies, however; there are only six in the Collembola (springtails), 9–12 in the Protura, and 10 in the Diplura, whereas in all other hexapods there are strictly 11. Insects are now regarded as comprising only those hexapods with 11 abdominal segments. Whereas crustaceans are the dominant group of arthropods in the sea, hexapods prevail on land, in numbers and biomass. Altogether, the Hexapoda constitutes the most diverse group of animals – the estimated number of described species worldwide is just over 900,000, with the beetles (order Coleoptera) comprising more than a third of these. Today, the Hexapoda is considered to contain four classes – the Insecta, and the Protura, Collembola, and Diplura. The latter three classes were formerly allied with the insect orders Archaeognatha (jumping bristletails) and Thysanura (silverfish) as the insect subclass Apterygota (‘wingless’). The Apterygota is now regarded as an artificial assemblage (Bitsch & Bitsch 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • (Diptera, Phoridae) Visiting Flowers of Cryptogorynae Crispatula (Araceae), Including New Species, in China
    FRAGMENTA FAUNISTICA 63 (2): 81–118, 2020 PL ISSN 0015-9301 © MUSEUM AND INSTITUTE OF ZOOLOGY PAS DOI 10.3161/00159301FF2020.63.2.081 Records of scuttle flies (Diptera, Phoridae) visiting flowers of Cryptogorynae crispatula (Araceae), including new species, in China R. Henry L. DISNEY Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, England; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The collection of the scuttle flies (Diptera, Phoridae) visiting flowers of Cryptogorynae crispatula (Araceae) caught in Yunnan, China were studied. They were identified to 24 species of which only five were known, seven species are hereby described as new to science and next 13 species cannot be named until linked to their opposite sexes. The following are described. Conicera species female YG, cannot be named until linked to its male. Dohrniphora guangchuni n. sp., Megaselia duolobata n. sp., M. excrispatula n. sp., M. interstinctus n. sp., M. leptotibiarum n. sp., M. menglaensis n. sp., M. shooklinglowae n. sp., Megaselia species Y1 female that cannot be named until linked to its male. The recognition of M. chippensis (Brues, 1911), described from a single female, is augmented. Males of 6 species (Y1-Y6) of Puliciphora Dahl, cannot be named until linked to their females and 5 species of Woodiphora Schmitz. Key words: Phoridae, China, Yunnan, new species. INTRODUCTION Low Shook Ling (Paleoecology Group, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Menglun, Mengla) caught the insects visiting flowers of Cryptogorynae crispatula (Araceae) in Yunnan, China and sent me the scuttle flies (Diptera, Phoridae) for identification. These represent 24 species of which 5 were known species, 6 are new species that are described below and 13 species that cannot be named until linked to their opposite sexes.
    [Show full text]