DOCSLIB.ORG

Page ‹#› at Lower Elevation Sites, the Beeflies Are Present and the Plant Sets More Seed When Greya Is Excluded

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Page ‹#› at Lower Elevation Sites, the Beeflies Are Present and the Plant Sets More Seed When Greya Is Excluded B. Mutualism in one environment may be parasitism in a different environment End of mutualism lecture… Cheaters in mutualisms highlight the An example with a yucca moth relative, Greya close evolutionary relationship and a wildflower in the Northwest, between mutualism and parasitism Lithophragma For example lycaenid butterfly mutualists may evolve into parasites But also, mutualism in one environment may be parasitism in another B. Mutualism in one environment may be B. Mutualism in one environment may be parasitism in a different environment parasitism in a different environment Greya, like yucca moths, lay eggs in some Unlike yucca, however, Lithophragma may be ovules and pollinate others pollinated by other pollinators, such as bee- flies Bee-flies are efficient pollinators and do not lay eggs in any flowers Mutualism in one environment may be parasitism in a different environment Lithophragma occurs in several mountain At high elevation sites, Greya is the only valleys and at different elevations in Oregon pollinator, and here it serves as a mutualist - the plant benefits by its presence Page ‹#› At lower elevation sites, the beeflies are present and the plant sets more seed when Greya is excluded. So whether the interaction between Greya and Lithophragma should be termed a mutualism Here Greya is or parasitism of the plant by Greya depends a parasite, on the presence of a third species! reducing plant fitness. IV. Mutualism/parasitism - closely related IV. Mutualism/parasitism - closely related interactions interactions Mutualism may evolve into parasitism C. A story of parasitism leading to mutual Parasitism may evolve into mutualism dependency And some relationships may be difficult to classify 1. Parasitic wasps may be infected with a bacterium called Wolbachia 1. Parasitic wasps may be infected with a bacteria called Wolbachia The bacteria are transmitted only in the eggs It is not in the evolutionary interests of the bacteria to end up in a male wasp. Why Infected egg Uninfected egg not? Page ‹#› The bacteria ‘do not want’ to end up in a Haplodiploidy male. n So.… they make all male eggs female! n n How do they do that? They manipulate the haplodiploid sex determination of their wasp hosts 2n Female Male How does it do that? When Wolbachia invades a population of parasitic wasps, eventually the males disappear So in haplodiploid systems Females develop from fertilized, diploid eggs Males develop from haploid, unfertilized eggs In this species, the only way to In Wolbachia infected wasps, the see a male is to chromosomes in the male eggs treat the females double and the egg develops as a with antibiotics! female that can transmit the bacteria... So the wasp is completely dependent on And because there’s no natural selection the bacterium for reproduction and the on male function, mutations accumulate strain of bacteria is completely dependent and the males produced when bacteria is on the wasp for a home. removed are sterile Is this a mutualism? When you treat these females with antibiotics, It may be difficult to categorize an you get males interaction if you cannot compare with no mature species with and without the interacting sperm species Page ‹#› Pop quiz Today: Parasitism and disease Grading: 5 points for name (being present in I. Introduction to parasites and lecture), and 5 points for correct answer to disease the question (10 total pts.) On one side of card, write your 4-digit code a worm’s eye view (you will use this for picking up your quiz) On the other side write your name, and answer this question: Define competitive displacement A. Parasitism - the most common A. Parasitism - the most common lifestyle? animal lifestyle? Why so many parasites? Estimates suggest that as many as half of all species are parasites Because most free-living species have parasites associated with them Parasite load (worms only) of North American mammals (76 mammal spp. sampled) Why so many parasites? Mean no. of No. of parasites per species of individual parasite per Because most free-living species host host population have parasites associated with Platyhelminthes Trematodes 108 1.8 them Cestodes 140 2.8 Nematodes 117 5.3 AND, most parasites are specialists Acanthocephalans 1 0.3 (they attack few or maybe just one Mean no. of species) parasite species 3 10 Page ‹#› Remember how two species obligate mutualisms Why are most parasites specialists? can lead to co-speciation? The same is true for specialist parasites and their hosts... Parasites must Coevolution of primates and parasitic 1) establish on/in host - may need to cross skin, nematodes gut wall 2) evade host immune system, or if ectoparasite, behavioral defense (grooming, swatting) 3) grow and reproduce in host 4) disperse from and find new host Adaptations for one species unlikely to be Nematodes Primates effective on another B. Types of parasites Simply grouped by size... B. Types of parasites Simply grouped by size... Microparasites - viruses or single cells includes viruses, bacteria, protists, and Microparasites - viruses or single cells simple fungi includes viruses, bacteria, protists, and simple (unicellular) fungi Macroparasites - multicellular includes multicellular fungi, arthropods, and parasitic worms (e.g. nematodes and flatworms) B. Types of parasites B. Types of parasites Human diseases caused by microparasites Size influences the way the host is used... Viruses - influenza, HIV Microparasites generally infect cells, while macroparasites are usually external or in Bacteria- tuberculosis, plague the gut Protists - malaria (trypanosome), amoebic dysentery (amoeba) Page ‹#› III. Parasite transmission B. Types of parasites Human macroparasites How are parasites transmitted? Arthropods - lice, mosquitoes, ticks Direct or indirect transmission Nematodes - Onchocerca (River blindness), intestinal roundworms Platyhelminthes - Schistosoma, tapeworms III. Parasite transmission III. Parasite transmission How are parasites transmitted? How are parasites transmitted? Direct or indirect transmission Direct or indirect transmission 1. Direct transmission - from one host to 1. Direct transmission - from one host to another without vectors or intermediate another without vectors or intermediate hosts hosts 2. Indirect transmission - transmission via another species 1. Direct transmission may be vertical or horizontal or both 1. Direct transmission may be vertical or horizontal or both Vertical transmission - from parent to offspring in early development. Generally Examples of vertically-transmitted human mother-offspring. Why? diseases - •through infected gametes (most often rubella, syphilis, hepatitis B, HIV eggs) •through birth process: mother-offspring - these are also horizontally transmitted Page ‹#› 1. Direct transmission may be vertical or horizontal or both 2. Indirect transmission (horizontal only) b. Horizontal transmission - transfer via When parasite is transmitted from one host contact with infected individuals or to the other host via another species. contaminated products The other species may be vectors or intermediate hosts. Vectors - ectoparasites of the host, serve as a hypodermic of pathogen Intermediate hosts house the parasite for part of its life cycle, Definitive host where reproduction occurs Intermediate hosts may live in proximity to Mosquito definitive hosts (e.g. Schistosoma), or may biting human be prey of the final hosts Mosquitoes Video clip: trematodes, snails and birds vector …? The snail-trematode example IV. Selection on parasites to maximize transmission Which was the intermediate host? Which was the definitive host? The problem - how to get you or your progeny off the host ‘island?’ Example also illustrates host behavior modification, whereby the parasite increases its transmission by changing the behavior of its host Page ‹#› IV. Selection on parasites to maximize transmission IV. Selection on parasites to maximize A. For direct, horizontally-transmitted transmission parasites, exit routes may be feces, body fluids, lesions A. For direct, horizontally-transmitted parasites transmission dependent on: density of hosts and frequency of encounters between infected and uninfected individuals IV. Selection on parasites to maximize transmission IV. Selection on parasites to maximize transmission D. Virulence and transmission - more A. For indirect parasites transmission What’s virulence? dependent on: a whole bunch of factors concerned with biology and ecology of both hosts What’s virulence? What’s virulence? X X X X How sick the host gets... How sick the host gets... Generally - virulence is related to the speed at which host is converted to parasites… For example - 48 -72 h cycle of fever and chills of malaria Page ‹#› IV. Selection on parasites to maximize transmission 1. The conventional (and not necessarily correct) wisdom: parasites become less D. Virulence and transmission virulent over evolutionary time 1. The conventional (and not necessarily Why is this sometimes true? correct) wisdom: parasites become less virulent over evolutionary time a. Hosts evolve resistance Why is this sometimes true? 1. The conventional (and NOT always So if more virulent parasites reproduce correct) wisdom: parasites become less more, why doesn’t selection always lead to virulent over evolutionary time greater virulence? But if more virulent parasites reproduce Generally, dead hosts don’t transmit the more, why doesn’t selection on parasites parasite… lead to greater virulence? Natural selection acts to maximize transmission of the parasite
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Big Creek Lepidoptera Checklist
    Big Creek Lepidoptera Checklist Prepared by J.A. Powell, Essig Museum of Entomology, UC Berkeley. For a description of the Big Creek Lepidoptera Survey, see Powell, J.A. Big Creek Reserve Lepidoptera Survey: Recovery of Populations after the 1985 Rat Creek Fire. In Views of a Coastal Wilderness: 20 Years of Research at Big Creek Reserve. (copies available at the reserve). family genus species subspecies author Acrolepiidae Acrolepiopsis californica Gaedicke Adelidae Adela flammeusella Chambers Adelidae Adela punctiferella Walsingham Adelidae Adela septentrionella Walsingham Adelidae Adela trigrapha Zeller Alucitidae Alucita hexadactyla Linnaeus Arctiidae Apantesis ornata (Packard) Arctiidae Apantesis proxima (Guerin-Meneville) Arctiidae Arachnis picta Packard Arctiidae Cisthene deserta (Felder) Arctiidae Cisthene faustinula (Boisduval) Arctiidae Cisthene liberomacula (Dyar) Arctiidae Gnophaela latipennis (Boisduval) Arctiidae Hemihyalea edwardsii (Packard) Arctiidae Lophocampa maculata Harris Arctiidae Lycomorpha grotei (Packard) Arctiidae Spilosoma vagans (Boisduval) Arctiidae Spilosoma vestalis Packard Argyresthiidae Argyresthia cupressella Walsingham Argyresthiidae Argyresthia franciscella Busck Argyresthiidae Argyresthia sp. (gray) Blastobasidae ?genus Blastobasidae Blastobasis ?glandulella (Riley) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.1) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.2) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.3) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.4) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.5) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.6) Blastobasidae Holcocera gigantella (Chambers) Blastobasidae
    [Show full text]
  • Generalized Olfactory Detection of Floral Volatiles in the Highly Specialized Greya-Lithophragma Nursery Pollination System
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2021 Generalized olfactory detection of floral volatiles in the highly specialized Greya-Lithophragma nursery pollination system Schiestl, Florian P ; Wallin, Erika A ; Beck, John J ; Friberg, Magne ; Thompson, John N Abstract: Volatiles are of key importance for host-plant recognition in insects. In the pollination system of Lithophragma flowers and Greya moths, moths are highly specialized on Lithophragma, in whichthey oviposit and thereby pollinate the flowers. Floral volatiles in Lithophragma are highly variable between species and populations, and moths prefer to oviposit into Lithophragma flowers from populations of the local host species. Here we used gas chromatography coupled with electroantennographic detection (GC-EAD) to test whether Greya moths detect specific key volatiles or respond broadly to many volatiles of Lithophragma flowers. We also addressed whether olfactory detection in Greya moths varies across populations, consistent with a co-evolutionary scenario. We analyzed flower volatile samples from three different species and five populations of Lithophragma occurring across a 1400 km range intheWestern USA, and their sympatric female Greya politella moths. We showed that Greya politella detect a broad range of Lithophragma volatiles, with a total of 23 compounds being EAD active. We chemically identified 15 of these, including the chiral 6, 10, 14-trimethylpentadecan-2-one (hexahydrofarnesyl acetone), which was not previously detected in Lithophragma. All investigated Lithophragma species produced the (6R, 10R)-enantiomer of this compound. We showed that Greya moths detected not only volatiles of their local Lithophragma plants, but also those from allopatric populations/species that they not encounter in local populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Slide Show Coevolution of Prodoxid Moths
    One of the Classic Examples of Coevolution Prodoxid Moths and Their Host Plants Yucca Greya moths moths G. variabilis Some unknown G. subalbaancestor G. enchrysa G. obscura G. mitellae G. politella G. piperella Moderately Highly Antagonist Commensal/ Inefficient Efficient Efficient Obligate Antagonist Mutualist Mutualist Mutualist, mutualist (What we knew in 1979) Sometimes Exclusive Thompson, Pellmyr, Segraves, Althoff, Brown,… What We Now Know: Diversification of Traits and Ecological Outcomes Prodoxid Moths and Their Host Plants Yucca Greya moths moths G. variabilis G. subalba G. enchrysa G. obscura G. mitellae G. politella T. maculata G. piperella Antagonist Commensal/ Inefficient Moderately Highly Obligate Antagonist Mutualist Efficient Efficient mutualist Mutualist Mutualist, Sometimes Exclusive Thompson, Pellmyr, Harrison, Brown, Segraves, Althoff, Cunningham, Nuismer, Merg, Cuautle, Rich, Laine, Schwind, Friberg, Raguso,… Diversification of Derived Taxa in Drier Habitats Basal Prodoxidae Basal Greya Derived Greya Yucca moths Wahlberg et al. 2013 for Prodoxidae Pellmyr et al. (various) for Yucca moths Thompson et al. and Pellmyr et al (various) for Greya Pollination Mutualisms Evolved More than Once In Prodoxid Moths Pollinators 18 5 Monocot-feeders 5-6+ Eudicot-feeders Thompson 2014 in Grant and Grant, eds., In Search of the Causes of Evolution, Princeton Univ. Press These Mutualisms Involve Two Plant Families Agavaceae Agavaceae Saxifragaceae Thompson 2014 in Grant and Grant, eds., In Search of the Causes of Evolution, Princeton Univ. Press The Moths Ensure Developing Seeds for Their Offspring: Actively in Yucca Moths Apiaceae Agavaceae Passively in Greya moths: Greya politella on Woodland Stars (Lithophragma) Photos: John N Thompson Lithophragma (Woodland star) Traits Coevolved Unique traits in With Greya Moths Lithophragma parviflorum Variable stigma & style and height, shape, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Generalized Olfactory Detection of Floral Volatiles in the Highly Specialized Greya-Lithophragma Nursery Pollination System
    Arthropod-Plant Interactions https://doi.org/10.1007/s11829-021-09809-5 ORIGINAL PAPER Generalized olfactory detection of foral volatiles in the highly specialized Greya-Lithophragma nursery pollination system Florian P. Schiestl1 · Erika A. Wallin2 · John J. Beck3 · Magne Friberg4 · John N. Thompson5 Received: 20 October 2020 / Accepted: 2 February 2021 © The Author(s) 2021 Abstract Volatiles are of key importance for host-plant recognition in insects. In the pollination system of Lithophragma fowers and Greya moths, moths are highly specialized on Lithophragma, in which they oviposit and thereby pollinate the fowers. Floral volatiles in Lithophragma are highly variable between species and populations, and moths prefer to oviposit into Litho- phragma fowers from populations of the local host species. Here we used gas chromatography coupled with electroanten- nographic detection (GC-EAD) to test whether Greya moths detect specifc key volatiles or respond broadly to many volatiles of Lithophragma fowers. We also addressed whether olfactory detection in Greya moths varies across populations, consistent with a co-evolutionary scenario. We analyzed fower volatile samples from three diferent species and fve populations of Lithophragma occurring across a 1400 km range in the Western USA, and their sympatric female Greya politella moths. We showed that Greya politella detect a broad range of Lithophragma volatiles, with a total of 23 compounds being EAD active. We chemically identifed 15 of these, including the chiral 6, 10, 14-trimethylpentadecan-2-one (hexahydrofarnesyl acetone), which was not previously detected in Lithophragma. All investigated Lithophragma species produced the (6R, 10R)-enantiomer of this compound. We showed that Greya moths detected not only volatiles of their local Lithophragma plants, but also those from allopatric populations/species that they not encounter in local populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Concepts Should Not Conflict with Evolutionary History, but Often Do Author
    Title: Species Concepts Should Not Conflict with Evolutionary History, but often do Author: Joel D. Velasco Address: Joel D. Velasco Department of Philosophy Building 90 Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 [email protected] Abstract: Many phylogenetic systematists have criticized the Biological Species Concept (BSC) because it distorts evolutionary history. While defenses against this particular criticism have been attempted, I argue that these responses are unsuccessful. In addition, I argue that the source of this problem leads to previously unappreciated, and deeper, fatal objections. These objections to the BSC also straightforwardly apply to other species concepts that are not defined by genealogical history. What is missing from many previous discussions is the fact that the Tree of Life, which represents phylogenetic history, is independent of our choice of species concept. Some species concepts are consistent with species having unique positions on the Tree while others, including the BSC, are not. Since representing history is of primary importance in evolutionary biology, these problems lead to the conclusion that the BSC, along with many other species concepts, are unacceptable. If species are to be taxa used in phylogenetic inferences, we need a history-based species concept. Keywords: Biological Species Concept, Phylogenetic Species Concept, Phylogenetic Trees, Taxonomy 1. Introduction A central task in the field of biological systematics is the development of a theory to guide our taxonomic practices in constructing biological classifications. Systematics today is dominated by the phylogenetic perspective – the view that evolutionary history is of primary importance when delimiting taxa. These taxa are the formally named groups, such as Homo sapiens, that are hierarchically arranged in a classification system.
    [Show full text]
  • Multiple Occurrences of Mutualism in the Yucca Moth Lineage (Coevolution/Mutualism/Pollination) OLLE PELLMYR*T and JOHN N
    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 89, pp. 2927-2929, April 1992 Evolution Multiple occurrences of mutualism in the yucca moth lineage (coevolution/mutualism/pollination) OLLE PELLMYR*t AND JOHN N. THOMPSONt *Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221; and tDepartments of Botany and Zoology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164 Communicated by Peter H. Raven, January 3, 1992 (received for review July 2, 1991) ABSTRACT The complex mutualism between yuccas and sidered to be the result of long-term coevolution between the the moths that pollinate their flowers is regarded as one of the moths and their yucca hosts (1, 12-15). most obvious cases of coevolution. Studies of related genera The 16 recognized species of Greya, which are endemic to show that at least two of the critical behavioral and life history western North America (16), are the sister group offive small traits suggested to have resulted from coevolved mutualism in genera that include the yucca moths (Fig. 1; 17-19). Greya yucca moths are plesiomorphic to the family. Another trait, species are highly host-specific on members of the families oviposition into flowers, has evolved repeatedly within the Saxifragaceae and Umbelliferae, whereas yucca moths and family. One species with these traits, Greya politeUa, feeds on allies feed exclusively on the Agavaceae. The Agavaceae and pollinates plants of a different family, but pollination feeders include seed parasites, some of which also pollinate occurs through a different component of the oviposition be- their hosts, as well as stem borers and leaf miners (5, 19). havior than in the yucca moths.
    [Show full text]
  • Extreme Diversification of Floral Volatiles Within and Among Species of Lithophragma (Saxifragaceae)
    Extreme diversification of floral volatiles within and among species of Lithophragma (Saxifragaceae) Magne Friberga,1, Christopher Schwindb, Paulo R. Guimarães Jr.c, Robert A. Ragusod, and John N. Thompsonb aDepartment of Biology, Lund University, SE-223 62 Lund, Sweden; bDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95060; cDepartamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, 05508-090 São Paulo, Brazil; and dDepartment of Neurobiology and Behavior, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 Edited by May R. Berenbaum, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Urbana, IL, and approved January 15, 2019 (received for review June 16, 2018) A major challenge in evolutionary biology is to understand how insects (10–12). Single volatiles can mediate interactions be- complex traits of multiple functions have diversified and codiversified tween plants and pollinators (13, 14), but complex floral scent across interacting lineages and geographic ranges. We evaluate bouquets are common in many taxa (15). These bouquets may intra- and interspecific variation in floral scent, which is a heighten the attraction of preferred pollinators, but they may complex trait of documented importance for mutualistic and function simultaneously as cues for resource detection by seed antagonistic interactions between plants, pollinators, and herbi- predators or herbivores (16–19) and mediate interactions with vores. We performed a large-scale, phylogenetically structured microbes (20, 21). Hence, floral scent should be sensitive to se- study of an entire plant genus (Lithophragma, Saxifragaceae), of lection imposed by the local assemblage of mutualist and an- which several species are coevolving with specialized pollinating tagonist insects, and it may vary among populations within floral parasites of the moth genus Greya (Prodoxidae).
    [Show full text]
  • A Pollinating Seed-Consumer, and Lophocereus Schottii (Cactaceae)
    Ecology, 80(6), 1999, pp. 2074±2084 q 1999 by the Ecological Society of America MUTUALISTIC INTERACTIONS BETWEEN UPIGA VIRESCENS (PYRALIDAE), A POLLINATING SEED-CONSUMER, AND LOPHOCEREUS SCHOTTII (CACTACEAE) J. NATHANIEL HOLLAND1 AND THEODORE H. FLEMING Department of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida 33124 USA Abstract. Pollinating seed-consuming interactions are rare, but include ®g±®g wasp and yucca±yucca moth interactions, both of which are thought to be coevolved. Conditions favoring such mutualisms are poorly known but likely include plants and pollinators whose life cycles are synchronized. In this paper, we describe a new pollinating seed-consumer mutualism between a Sonoran Desert cactus, Lophocereus schottii (senita cactus), and a pyralid moth, Upiga virescens (senita moth). We compare this mutualism with the yucca mutualism in terms of life history traits, active pollination, and selective abortion. Senita cactus ¯owers were pollinated nearly exclusively by nocturnal senita moths, but a few halictid bees also pollinated ¯owers. Only 40% of ¯owers set fruit during the years of study, apparently due to resource limitation. All phases of the senita moth's life history were associated with the senita cactus. During ¯ower visitation, female senita moths col- lected pollen, actively pollinated ¯owers, and oviposited one egg. After ¯owers closed, emerging larvae bored into the tops of developing fruit, where they consumed seeds and fruit tissue. However, not all seeds/fruit were consumed by larvae because only 20% of eggs produced larvae that survived to be seed/fruit consumers. Senita cactus and senita moth interactions were mutualistic. Moths received food resources (seeds, fruit) for their progeny, and cacti had a 4.8 bene®t-to-cost ratio; only 21% of developing fruit were destroyed by larvae.
    [Show full text]
  • Sedgwick Field Notes Occasional Ramblings for Volunteers and Friends of the Sedgwick Reserve
    Sedgwick Field Notes Occasional Ramblings for Volunteers and Friends of the Sedgwick Reserve May 2006 Welcome to New Docent Class Graduates. left to right, Bruce Edwards, husband of Kate McGuiness; Mike Wil- liams, Director; Kate McGuiness; Linda Williams; Sheila Kornblum; and Genie Lauffenburger. Missing: Nancy Priestly. New additions to the docent family were celebrated with a pot luck graduation ceremony. Their backgrounds are varied ranging from the legal profession, teaching, and agriculture, to real estate. Please take some time to introduce yourself the next time you are with them at the Reserve. Joe Dabill’s Class on Native American Crafts Joe getting tinder ready Fire, as easy as that!! Pressure flaking an to make fire obsidian point Joe Dabill’s class on Native American Crafts was one of the highlights of this year’s docent classes. He demonstrated fire making, atlatls (throwing-sticks), and making stone tools. Participants who tried their hands at fire making using sticks found it a lot harder than Joe made it look. A number of people tried, with varying degrees of success, to hit various targets using atlatls. Featured Research Project Project title: Geographic mosaics in diversifying plant/insect interactions Project Principal Investigator: John N. Thompson, UC Santa Cruz, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Contact: John N. Thompson, [email protected] All things . moth Greya politella and Near or far, its major hostplant Litho- Hiddenly phragma parviflorumspans To each other linkèd are . the US Rockies and squeez- . thou canst not stir a flower es through the narrow gap Without troubling of a star .
    [Show full text]
  • Cecidonius Pampeanus, Gen. Et Sp. N.: an Overlooked and Rare, New Gall-Inducing Micromoth Associated with Schinus in Southern Brazil (Lepidoptera, Cecidosidae)
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 695: 37–74 (2017) An overlooked and rare new gall-inducing micromoth 37 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.695.13320 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Cecidonius pampeanus, gen. et sp. n.: an overlooked and rare, new gall-inducing micromoth associated with Schinus in southern Brazil (Lepidoptera, Cecidosidae) Gilson R.P. Moreira1, Rodrigo P. Eltz1, Ramoim B. Pase1, Gabriela T. Silva2, Sérgio A.L. Bordignon3, Wolfram Mey4, Gislene L. Gonçalves5,6 1 Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Bento Gonçalves 9500, 91501-970 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil 2 PPG Biologia Animal, Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Bento Gonçalves 9500, 91501-970 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil 3 Programa de Mestrado em Avaliação de Impactos Ambientais, Universidade La Salle, Av. Victor Barreto, 2288, 92010-000 Canoas, RS, Brazil 4 Museum für Naturkunde, Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science, Invalidenstraße 43, 10115 Berlin, Germany 5 PPG Genética e Biologia Molecular, Departamento de Genética, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Bento Gonçalves 9500, 91501-970 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil 6 Departamento de Recursos Ambientales, Facultad de Ciencias Agronómicas, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 6-D, Arica, Chile Corresponding author: Gilson R.P. Moreira ([email protected]) Academic editor: E. van Nieukerken | Received 20 April 2017 | Accepted 7 August 2017 | Published 4 September 2017 http://zoobank.org/F9D9BD39-1346-4F18-8EA1-7572C480F300 Citation: Moreira GRP, Eltz RP, Pase RB, Silva GT, Bordignon SAL, Mey W, Gonçalves GL (2017) Cecidonius pampeanus, gen.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity of Floral Visitors to Sympatric Lithophragma
    Oecologia (2010) 162:71–80 DOI 10.1007/s00442-009-1424-8 PLANT-ANIMAL INTERACTIONS - ORIGINAL PAPER Diversity of floral visitors to sympatric Lithophragma species differing in floral morphology Mariana Cuautle Æ John N. Thompson Received: 30 March 2009 / Accepted: 14 July 2009 / Published online: 11 August 2009 Ó The Author(s) 2009. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Most coevolving relationships between pairs of were low, and the asymptotic number of visitor species was species are embedded in a broader multispecific interaction less than 20 species in all populations. Lithophragma network. The mutualistic interaction between Litho- species shared some of the visitors, with visitor assem- phragma parviflorum (Saxifragaceae) and its pollinating blages differing between sites more for L. heterophyllum floral parasite Greya politella (Lepidoptera, Prodoxidae) than for L. parviflorum. Pollination efficacy experiments occurs in some communities as a pairwise set apart from showed that most visitors were poor pollinators. Single most other interactions in those communities. In other visits to flowers by this assemblage of species resulted in communities, however, this pair of species occurs with significantly higher seed set in Lithophragma heterophyl- congeners and with other floral visitors to Lithophragma. lum (30.6 ± 3.9 SE) than in L. parviflorum (4.7 ± 3.4 SE). We analyzed local and geographic differences in the net- This difference was consistent between sites, suggesting work formed by interactions between Lithophragma plants that these visitors provide a better fit to the floral mor- and Greya moths in communities containing two Litho- phology of L. heterophyllum. Overall, none of the non- phragma species, two Greya species, and floral visitors Greya visitors appears to be either sufficiently common or other than Greya that visit Lithophragma flowers.
    [Show full text]
  • Rana Cascadae)
    FGC - 670.1 (3/94) A PETITION TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION For action pursuant to Section 670.1, Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) and Sections 2072 and 2073 of the Fish and Game Code relating to listing and delisting endangered and threatened species of plants and animals. I. SPECIES BEING PETITIONED: Common Name: Cascades frog Scientific Name: (Rana cascadae) II. RECOMMENDED ACTION: (Check appropriate categories) a. List X As endangered or threatened b. Change Status □ c. Or Delist □ III. AUTHOR OF PETITION: Name: Jeff Miller Address: 1212 Broadway, Suite 800 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone Number: (510) 499-9185 I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, all statements made in this petition are true and complete. Signature: Date: March 1, 2017 BEFORE THE FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Petition to List the Cascades Frog (Rana cascadae) As Endangered or Threatened Under the California Endangered Species Act Photo by Tierra Curry, Center for Biological Diversity Submitted To: California Fish and Game Commission 1416 Ninth Street Box 944209 Sacramento, CA 94244-2090 [email protected] Submitted By: Center for Biological Diversity Date: March 1, 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Center for Biological Diversity is petitioning the California Fish and Game Commission to list the Cascades frog (Rana cascadae) as an endangered or threatened species under the California Endangered Species Act. The Cascades frog is a medium sized frog that inhabits lakes, ponds, wet meadows, and streams at moderate to high elevations in the Cascades Range. In California, Cascades frogs historically ranged from the Shasta-Trinity region to the Modoc Plateau, south through the Lassen National Forest to the upper Feather River.
    [Show full text]