Reproductive Potential Within the Landscape: a Spatially-Explicit, Agent-Based Model of Asynchrony

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Reproductive Potential Within the Landscape: a Spatially-Explicit, Agent-Based Model of Asynchrony ABSTRACT Title: REPRODUCTIVE POTENTIAL WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE: A SPATIALLY-EXPLICIT, AGENT-BASED MODEL OF ASYNCHRONY Christopher Roland Guenther, Master of Science, 2005 Directed By: Professor William F. Fagan, Department of Biology Reproductive asynchrony, which can be a beneficial life-history strategy in healthy insect populations, may contribute to an Allee effect at small population densities. A spatially explicit, agent-based model is used to investigate quantitative effects of asynchrony on reproductive potential. Temporal and spatial isolation effects are treated independently and together. Three behaviors are explored: clustered emergence from host plants, hilltopping, and mating discretion by females. The magnitude of the reduction in overall spatial overlap within the simulated population is shown to be governed by the radius of circular, random-walk movement and potential interaction distance. Hilltopping behavior and clustered emergence partially alleviate detrimental effects of spatial isolation; female selectivity in mating can exacerbate the loss of reproductive potential. Among these three behaviors, hilltopping produced the largest differential in spatial/temporal overlap. REPRODUCTIVE POTENTIAL WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE: A SPATIALLY- EXPLICIT, AGENT-BASED MODEL OF ASYNCHRONY By Christopher Roland Guenther Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science 2005 Advisory Committee: Professor William F. Fagan, Chair/Advisor Professor David Levermore Professor James Reggia Table of Contents Table of Contents.......................................................................................................... ii List of Figures.............................................................................................................. iv Chapter 1: Introduction................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Reproductive Asynchrony .................................................................................. 1 1.2 The Allee Effect.................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Agent-Based Models........................................................................................... 4 Chapter 2: Simulation ................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Behaviors ............................................................................................................ 6 2.1.1 Hilltopping................................................................................................... 6 2.1.2 Host Plants and Clustered Emergence ......................................................... 6 2.1.3 Female Mate Selectivity .............................................................................. 7 2.2 Emergence Location and Clustered Emergence ................................................. 7 2.3 Emergence Time ................................................................................................. 8 2.4 Time Iteration Actions ........................................................................................ 8 2.4.1 Overlap......................................................................................................... 8 2.4.2 Movement - Explicit versus Implicit ........................................................... 9 2.4.3 Movement - Algorithm .............................................................................. 11 2.5 Boundaries ........................................................................................................ 13 2.6 Female Selectivity and Attractiveness Rank..................................................... 13 2.7 Statistics............................................................................................................ 14 2.8 Implementation and Runtime............................................................................ 15 2.8.1 Pseudocode ................................................................................................ 15 2.8.2 Sorting and Bookmarks.............................................................................. 17 Chapter 3: Results....................................................................................................... 21 3.1 Default Parameters............................................................................................ 21 3.2 Isolating Temporal Effects................................................................................ 21 3.3 Random Movement, Random Emergence ........................................................ 25 3.3.1 Isolating Spatial Effects ............................................................................. 25 3.3.2 Temporal and Spatial Effects Combined ................................................... 27 3.4 Female Selectivity............................................................................................. 29 3.4.1 Selective Days versus Population Size ...................................................... 29 3.4.2 Selective Days versus Ratio Accepted....................................................... 31 3.5 Host Plant Emergence....................................................................................... 32 3.5.1 Number of Clusters versus Population Size............................................... 32 3.5.2 Number of Clusters versus Maximum Movement Distance...................... 35 3.6 Hilltopping........................................................................................................ 36 3.6.1 Movement Bias versus Population Size..................................................... 37 3.6.2 Movement Bias versus Maximum Movement Distance............................ 39 ii 3.7 Combinations of Life History Behaviors.......................................................... 40 3.7.1 Hilltopping versus Host Plant Emergence ................................................. 40 3.7.2 Hilltopping versus Female Selectivity....................................................... 41 3.7.3 Host Plant Emergence versus Female Selectivity...................................... 42 Chapter 4: Discussion ................................................................................................. 44 4.1 Temporal Effects............................................................................................... 44 4.2 Intrinsically Spatial Effects............................................................................... 45 4.3 Female Selectivity............................................................................................. 45 4.4 Host Plant Emergence....................................................................................... 46 4.5 Hilltopping........................................................................................................ 47 4.6 Combination of Behaviors ................................................................................ 48 4.7 Further Study .................................................................................................... 48 4.7.1 Real-World Data ........................................................................................ 50 4.8 Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 51 Bibliography ............................................................................................................... 53 iii List of Figures Figure 1: Allee Effect.................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Time Overlap Metric..................................................................................... 9 Figure 3: Mate Overlap Metric ..................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Explicit Movement...................................................................................... 10 Figure 5: Implicit Movement...................................................................................... 11 Figure 6: Random Movement ..................................................................................... 12 Figure 7: Distribution of Population During Hilltopping ........................................... 12 Figure 8: Several Possible States of the Bookmarking Algorithm ............................. 20 Figure 9: Mate Overlap Ratio vs. Population Size for different values of w/W; Movement = 500; MID = 1500................................................................................... 23 Figure 10: Time Overlap Ratio vs. Population Size for different values of w/W; Movement = 500; MID = 1500................................................................................... 23 Figure 11: Ratio Unisolated vs. Population Size for different values of w/W; Movement = 500; MID = 1500................................................................................... 24 Figure 12: Ratio Mated vs. Population Size for different values of w/W; Movement = 500; MID = 1500................................................................................... 24 Figure 13: Time Overlap Ratio vs. w/W for different values of Population Size; Movement = 500; MID = 1500................................................................................... 25 Figure 14: Time Overlap Ratio vs. Population Size for different values of MID; Movement = 500;
Recommended publications
  • 2010 Season Summary Index NEW WOFTHE~ Zone 1: Yukon Territory
    2010 Season Summary Index NEW WOFTHE~ Zone 1: Yukon Territory ........................................................................................... 3 Alaska ... ........................................ ............................................................... 3 LEPIDOPTERISTS Zone 2: British Columbia .................................................... ........................ ............ 6 Idaho .. ... ....................................... ................................................................ 6 Oregon ........ ... .... ........................ .. .. ............................................................ 10 SOCIETY Volume 53 Supplement Sl Washington ................................................................................................ 14 Zone 3: Arizona ............................................................ .................................... ...... 19 The Lepidopterists' Society is a non-profo California ............... ................................................. .............. .. ................... 2 2 educational and scientific organization. The Nevada ..................................................................... ................................ 28 object of the Society, which was formed in Zone 4: Colorado ................................ ... ............... ... ...... ......................................... 2 9 May 1947 and formally constituted in De­ Montana .................................................................................................... 51 cember
    [Show full text]
  • Family LYCAENIDAE: 268 Species GOSSAMERWINGS
    Family LYCAENIDAE: 268 species GOSSAMERWINGS Subfamily Miletinae: 1 (hypothetical) species Harvesters Feniseca tarquinius tarquinius Harvester Hypothetical, should occur in N Tamaulipas, but currently unknown from Mexico Subfamily Lycaeninae: 6 species Coppers Iophanus pyrrhias Guatemalan Copper Lycaena arota arota Tailed Copper Lycaena xanthoides xanthoides Great Copper Lycaena gorgon gorgon Gorgon Copper Lycaena helloides Purplish Copper Lycaena hermes Hermes Copper Subfamily Theclinae: 236 species Hairstreaks Tribe Theclini: 3 species Hairstreaks Hypaurotis crysalus crysalus Colorado Hairstreak Habrodais grunus grunus Golden Hairstreak verification required for Baja California Norte Habrodais poodiae Baja Hairstreak Tribe Eumaeini: 233 Hairstreaks Eumaeus childrenae Great Cycadian (= debora) Eumaeus toxea Mexican Cycadian Theorema eumenia Pale-tipped Cycadian Paiwarria antinous Felders' Hairstreak Paiwarria umbratus Thick-tailed Hairstreak Mithras sp. undescribed Pale-patched Hairstreak nr. orobia Brangas neora Common Brangas Brangas coccineifrons Black-veined Brangas Brangas carthaea Green-spotted Brangas Brangas getus Bright Brangas Thaeides theia Brown-barred Hairstreak Enos thara Thara Hairstreak Enos falerina Falerina Hairstreak Evenus regalis Regal Hairstreak Evenus coronata Crowned Hairstreak Evenus batesii Bates’ Hairstreak Atlides halesus corcorani Great Blue Hairstreak Atlides gaumeri White-tipped Hairstreak Atlides polybe Black-veined Hairstreak Atlides inachus Spying Hairstreak Atlides carpasia Jeweled Hairstreak Atlides
    [Show full text]
  • Specimen Records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895
    Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 2019 Vol 3(2) Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895 Jon H. Shepard Paul C. Hammond Christopher J. Marshall Oregon State Arthropod Collection, Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR 97331 Cite this work, including the attached dataset, as: Shepard, J. S, P. C. Hammond, C. J. Marshall. 2019. Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895. Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 3(2). (beta version). http://dx.doi.org/10.5399/osu/cat_osac.3.2.4594 Introduction These records were generated using funds from the LepNet project (Seltmann) - a national effort to create digital records for North American Lepidoptera. The dataset published herein contains the label data for all North American specimens of Lycaenidae and Riodinidae residing at the Oregon State Arthropod Collection as of March 2019. A beta version of these data records will be made available on the OSAC server (http://osac.oregonstate.edu/IPT) at the time of this publication. The beta version will be replaced in the near future with an official release (version 1.0), which will be archived as a supplemental file to this paper. Methods Basic digitization protocols and metadata standards can be found in (Shepard et al. 2018). Identifications were confirmed by Jon Shepard and Paul Hammond prior to digitization. Nomenclature follows that of (Pelham 2008). Results The holdings in these two families are extensive. Combined, they make up 25,743 specimens (24,598 Lycanidae and 1145 Riodinidae).
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of Yavapai County, Arizona, United States
    Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail
    [Show full text]
  • MATINGS WITHOUT SPERMATOPHORE TRANSFER and with TRANSFER of TWO SPERMATOPHORES in CALLOPHRYS XAMI (LYCAENIDAE) in Lepidoptera, M
    106 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY (Vitoria Da Riva Carvalho and her son Edson), for extensive and Thesis, University of Florida, xvi + 361 pp. patient logistic support, housing and food during work in this re­ FREITAS, A. V. L. 1991. Varia<;ao morfologica, cielo de vida e sis­ gion in February and June 2000. Gerardo Lamas, Annette Aiello tematica de Tegosa claudina (Eschscholtz) (Lepidoptera, and Carla Penz made valuable comments on the manuscript. This Nymphalidae, Melitaeinae) no estado de Sao Paulo, Brasil. research was partly supported by fellowships from the Brazilian Revta. bras. Ent. 35:301-306. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico ---. 1993. Biology and population dynamics of Placidula eu­ (CNPq) and the Fundac;ao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de rljanassa , a relict ithomiine butterfly (Lepidoptera: Ithomiinae). Sao Paulo (BIOTNFAPESP program, grants 98105101-8 and J. Lepid. Soc. 47:87-105. 00/01484-1). LAMAS , G. 1994. Los Danainae e Ithomiinae descritos por H. Haensch (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Shilap 22:271-297. LITERATURE CITED MOTTA , P. C. 198D. Analise filogenetica de Ithomiinae (Lep.: Nymphalidae) com base nos ovos: Hela<;ao com plantas hos­ ACKERY, P. R. 1987. The dan aid genus Tellervo (Lepidoptera: pedeiras. MS Thesis. Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Nymphalidae)-a cladistic approach. Zool. J Linn. Soc. Campinas, SP, Brazil. 89:273-294. BROWN In., K. S. & A. V. L. FREITAS. 1994. Juvenile stages of Ithomiinae: ovelview and systematics (Lepidoptera: Nymphali­ ANDRE V. I,. FF:EITAS AND KEITH S. BROWN JR., Museu de dae). Trop. Lepid. 5:9-20. Hist6ria Natural and Departamento de Zoologia, lnstituto de Biolo­ DEVR[ES , P.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexual Differences in Age-Dependent Survival and Life Span of Adults in A
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Sexual diferences in age- dependent survival and life span of adults in a natural butterfy population Marcin Sielezniew1 ✉ , Agata Kostro-Ambroziak1 & Ádám Kőrösi2,3 Adult survival and longevity in insects are key life-history traits, but their variation between sexes and individuals in natural populations is largely unexplored. Sexual divergence in senescence, the decline in survival with age is also poorly understood. Based on an intensive mark-recapture dataset of the butterfy Polyommatus daphnis, we aimed to assess whether adult survival is age-dependent, and to estimate life span distribution and abundance of males and females using Cormack-Jolly-Seber and Jolly-Seber models. Female survival slightly increased with date of emergence and slightly decreased with age, while male survival considerably declined with age. Mean life span of females (12.7 days) was ~50% higher than that of males (8.5 days), but two times higher if only the oldest 5% of each sex was considered (39 vs.19 days). Abundance of females (358 ± 14) and males (359 ± 11) was similar, but peak abundance of males preceded that of females by 11 days. Our results suggest that senescence is much more rapid in males than in females in this butterfy, which is in agreement with sexual selection theory. We also conclude that estimating life span distributions provides much more valuable information on the demography of natural populations than simply reporting the mean life span. In holometabolous insects, the adult stage is dedicated mostly to reproduction. Tis stage can be very short in many species which do not feed during this stage at all, but several others are able to acquire some nutrients to increase their fecundity and potential to fnd a mate, colonize new sites or migrate1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of a Female Genital Trait Widely Distributed in the Lepidoptera: Comparative Evidence for an Effect of Sexual Coevolution
    The Evolution of a Female Genital Trait Widely Distributed in the Lepidoptera: Comparative Evidence for an Effect of Sexual Coevolution Vı´ctor Sa´nchez1, Blanca Estela Herna´ndez-Ban˜ os2, Carlos Cordero3* 1 Posgrado en Ciencias Biolo´gicas, Instituto de Ecologı´a, Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico, Mexico City, Distrito Federal, Mexico, 2 Departamento de Biologı´a Evolutiva, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico, Mexico City, Distrito Federal, Mexico, 3 Instituto de Ecologı´a, Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico, Mexico City, Distrito Federal, Mexico Abstract Background: Sexual coevolution is considered responsible for the evolution of many male genital traits, but its effect on female genital morphology is poorly understood. In many lepidopterans, females become temporarily unreceptive after mating and the length of this refractory period is inversely related to the amount of spermatophore remaining in their genital tracts. Sperm competition can select for males that delay female remating by transferring spermatophores with thick spermatophore envelopes that take more time to be broken. These envelopes could select for signa, sclerotized sharp structures located within the female genital tract, that are used for breaking spermatophores. Thus, this hypothesis predicts that thick spermatophore envelopes and signa evolve in polyandrous species, and that these adaptations are lost when monandry evolves subsequently. Here we test the expected associations between female mating pattern and presence/ absence of signa, and review the scant information available on the thickness of spermatophore envelopes. Methodology/Principal Findings: We made a literature review and found information on female mating pattern (monandry/polyandry), presence/absence of signa and phylogenetic position for 37 taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Do Some Male Callophrys Xami (Lycaenidae) Shift Their Territories?
    Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 51(4), 1997, 295-303 WHY DO SOME MALE CALLOPHRYS XAMI (LYCAENIDAE) SHIFT THEIR TERRITORIES? CARLOS CORDERO Centro de Ecologfa, Universidad Nacional Aut6noma de Mexico, Apdo. Post. 70-275, Delegaci6n Coyoacan, D. F., Mexico ABSTRACT. In a Mexican population of the butterfly Callophrys xami at least 130/0 of the male s defended two or more te rritories sequentially. There were two observed causes of territOlY shifts by males: aggressive displacement from their territories by other males (n = 2), and spontaneous shift to a diffe rent territory (n = 3); however, in 26 terri­ tory shifts the causes were not determined. Evidence suggests that te rritories were in short supply during the study and, the refore , more territory shifts may have been the re­ sult of aggressive displacement. The spontaneous shifts suggest that some males may move in search of a better territOlY after occupying one of low quality. Additional key words: behavioral variation, male competition, territOriality. In several butterfly species, males defend territories that are em­ ployed exclusively for male display, mate location and courtship (Ru­ towski 1991). Variation in territorial behavior in butterflies has been studied mainly in the context of alternative mate location strategies within a species (Davies 1978, Dennis 1982, Wickman 1985, 1988, Al­ cock & O'Neill 1986, Dennis & Williams 1987, Alcock 1994), although some authors have also discussed the basis for differences between spe­ cies in territorial vs. nonterritorial mating systems (Alcock 1985, Dennis & Shreeve 1988, Cordero & Sober6n 1990, Wickman 1992). Although intraspecific variation in the number of territories sequen­ tially defended by male butterflies has been documented (Alcock 1985, Knapton 1985, Alcock & O'Neill 1986), it has been speCifically discussed in only one study (Robbins 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • I =- I - 1-----• 47 Red-Spotted Purple 1 __ 2] -=- ~2 3 ! ~Oy --
    .- A B c 0 E South Total 1 --~.-----=-- _ _S_PE_C_l_ES____ -+- __..North ±-Central -i------- -- 23 7/14/2001 -t- I -- I 4 5 Swallowtails -- -------·- -- 6 Black Swallowta-il - -- ------1--- - -4 -·-- 27 11T 42 7 Eastern Tiger Swallowtail _____.,_; -· - -- 5 7 --- 31 1;4 -·· ·--- 5 : $plcebush Swa_n_owt- ail ___ +:---=:2:===-·-----+--·- 10 Whites -f- _.._ ___ 11 Cabbage W_h_ite_ __________ I 156 _ 90 97 343 12 ,---~-- - 13 Sulphurs ----------- -- ·- 14 CloudedSulphur -- -- I 9 - 10 42 15 Orange Sulphur ·--·. -36 9 115 ~t-1 -- I 16 -- - ~:-_ ----.-----I -l 2 3 5 r- ... I --- - .. -·--- 1 1 26 28 2 4 1-· I I ---·-- 31 Brush-foots - Heliconians/Frltiiiaries ].[ Great ~angled Fritillary_ -_-+-_- =_1 _8__ _ --·~ ~~ Meadow Fritillary___ ___ ·-;E 1 Ts True Brush-to~ - - -- I 36 Pearl Cres~ent - - _ - 1~5 _ _ 86 , 77 37 Baltimore Checkerspot 1 1 Ts OLiestion Mark-- i - 11: 2· -- 3 -·-:rs 39 Eastern Comma -- -- 1 - 2~· 6 - 4 35 40 Mourning Cloak -- I~ - 2 2 1 5 41 Milberfs Tortoiseshell _ ~ -= 12 . ·- ~ 1 r 18 42 American Lady 11 -- 11 _ - 8 30 43 Painted Lady ·-- - 5 2 7 Ts44~ Red- Admiral----- -- -· - 1210 - 394- 103.....~ 1767 ~ ~dmlrals and ReiiiiVOs _ I =- I - 1-----• 47 Red-spotted Purple 1 __ 2] -=- ~2 3 ! ~oy -- - . - . - ·:·=--- ~ I---~ 1---==·_-3..... 50 Satyrs , ;~ ~~=:~r~=~a-rly_-e_v_e ·_ --~ l - r ---_-1-+l; ____=---_- :1+,!--~~---_-_-1 -:~· 53 Appalachian Brown -, _ ~ Little Wood satv-r- -· . .. A B C D E ;~ Common Wood-nymph 2~ -- ~~- 127 181 57 Monarch -----1-- -- + 1- -j- 58 MOilarc_h____ -·1-·- 15j - ~1- 16 1 -- 4 2 ~~ Skippers - S readwing_! r:= ,-- ~ -=r- r - =- 61 Silver-spotted Skipper _____,_ ·- 4 ::::::::_ _!_._ __ _1 1 ---~--- ~- 62 Common Checkered Skipper 1 5 5 ~! Common Sootywin9 ~:.===.+= F-- ~~ _ 2 65 Skippers - Grass Skippers I - t ·-- .
    [Show full text]
  • Bionomics of the African Apefly (Spalgis Lemolea)
    sustainability Article Bionomics of the African Apefly (Spalgis lemolea) as A Potential Natural Enemy of the Papaya Mealybug (Paracoccus marginatus) in Tanzania Sayuni P. Nasari 1,*, Anna C. Treydte 1, Patrick A. Ndakidemi 1 and Ernest R. Mbega 1 Department of Sustainable Agriculture, Biodiversity and Ecosystems Management, Nelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology, Arusha P. O. Box 447, Tanzania * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 20 February 2020; Accepted: 2 April 2020; Published: 14 April 2020 Abstract: The African apefly (Spalgis lemolea Druce) is a potential natural enemy of the papaya mealybug (Paracoccus marginatus Williams and Granara de Willink). We studied the life history of apeflies in the laboratory at a temperature of 25–27 ◦C and a relative humidity of 55%–65% under a 12 h photoperiod condition. The papaya mealybugs and apefly larvae were collected from papaya plants in Tengeru, Arusha, Tanzania. The papaya mealybugs were introduced and allowed to multiply on potted sprouting potato plants in screened cages. In order to study the life cycle and predation of apeflies, an apefly egg was placed on an open screen-covered petri dish containing a moist blotter paper and observed for larva emergence. After the apefly larva emergence, a mixture of mealybug eggs (up to 1500), nymphs (200–250) and adults (100–150) was introduced in the petri dish each day and the consumption rate by the apefly larvae was quantified until the larvae reached pupal stage. Then, the apefly adults were collected and put into cages 30 cm 30 cm 30 cm containing × × cotton wool soaked in water, for observation of pre-mating, mating, egg-laying and life span.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of Uvalde County, Texas, United States
    Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail
    [Show full text]
  • Species Risk Assessment
    Ecological Sustainability Analysis of the Kaibab National Forest: Species Diversity Report Ver. 1.2 Prepared by: Mikele Painter and Valerie Stein Foster Kaibab National Forest For: Kaibab National Forest Plan Revision Analysis 22 December 2008 SpeciesDiversity-Report-ver-1.2.doc 22 December 2008 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 PART I: Species Diversity.............................................................................................................. 1 Species List ................................................................................................................................. 1 Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 2 Assessment Sources................................................................................................................ 3 Screening Results.................................................................................................................... 4 Habitat Associations and Initial Species Groups........................................................................ 8 Species associated with ecosystem diversity characteristics of terrestrial vegetation or aquatic systems ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]