DOCSLIB.ORG

Arthropod Species List

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ARTHROPOD SPECIES LIST KINGDOM PHYLUM ANIMALIA ARTHROPODA CLASS ORDER FAMILY COMMON NAME GENUS SPECIES ✓ LIST 1 Arachnida Araneae Araneidae Black and yellow garden spider Argiope aurantia 2 Arachnida Araneae Araneidae Fishing spider Dolomedes tenebrosus 3 Arachnida Araneae Araneidae Basilica orbweaver Mecynogea lemniscata 4 Arachnida Araneae Araneidae Spined micrathena Micrathena gracilis 5 Arachnida Araneae Araneidae Arrow-shaped micrathena Micrathena sagittata 6 Arachnida Araneae Araneidae Arrowhead orbweaver Verrucosa arenata 7 Arachnida Araneae Linyphiidae Bowl and doily spider Frontinella communis 8 Arachnida Araneae Oxyopidae Green lynx spider Peucetia viridans 9 Arachnida Araneae Pisuaridae Nursery web spider Pisuarina mira 10 Arachnida Araneae Saltiidae Bold jumper Phidippus audax 11 Arachnida Araneae Tetragnathidae Orchard orbweaver Leucauge venusta 12 Arachnida Araneae Theridiidae Southern black widow Latrodectus mactans 13 Arachnida Araneae Theridiidae Common house spider Parasteatoda tepidariorum 14 Malacostraca Isopoda Armadillidiidae Common pillbug Armadillidium vulgare 15 Malacostraca Isopoda Porcellionidae Rough sowbug Porcellio scaber 16 Insecta Blattodea Rhinotermitidae Eastern subterranean termite Reticulitermes flavipes 17 Insecta Coleoptera Anthribidae Marbled fungus beetle Euparius marmoreus 18 Insecta Coleoptera Buprestidae Red-necked cane borer Agrilus ruficollis 19 Insecta Coleoptera Cantharidae Soldier beetle Atalantycha bilineata 20 Insecta Coleoptera Cantharidae Soldier beetle Chauliognathus marginatus 21 Insecta Coleoptera Cantharidae Goldenrod soldier beetle Chauliognathus pensylvanicus 22 Insecta Coleoptera Carabidae Bronzed tiger beetle Cicindela repanda repanda 23 Insecta Coleoptera Carabidae Six-spotted tiger beetle Cicindela sexguttata 24 Insecta Coleoptera Carabidae Ground beetle Mioptachys flavicauda 25 Insecta Coleoptera Carabidae Tunneling large pedunculata beetle Scarites subterraneus 26 Insecta Coleoptera Cerambycidae Longhorn beetle Hyperplatys aspersa 27 Insecta Coleoptera Cerambycidae Locust borer Megacyllene robiniae ARTHROPOD SPECIES LIST CLASS ORDER FAMILY COMMON NAME GENUS SPECIES ✓ LIST 28 Insecta Coleoptera Cerambycidae Pole borer Neandra brunnea 29 Insecta Coleoptera Chrysomelidae Leaf beetle Demolina modesta 30 Insecta Coleoptera Chrysomelidae Colorado potato beetle Leptinotarsa decemlineata 31 Insecta Coleoptera Chrysomelidae Locust leafminer Odontota dorsalis 32 Insecta Coleoptera Chrysomelidae Waterfern flea beetle Pseudolampsis guttata 33 Insecta Coleoptera Coccinellidae Seven-spotted lady beetle Coccinella septempunctata 34 Insecta Coleoptera Coccinellidae Multicolored Asian lady beetle Harmonia axyridis 35 Insecta Coleoptera Coccinellidae Twenty-spotted lady beetle Psyllobora viginitimaculata 36 Insecta Coleoptera Curculionidae Asiatic oak weevil Cytepistomus castaneus 37 Insecta Coleoptera Curculionidae Ligustrum weevil Ochyromera ligustri 38 Insecta Coleoptera Curculionidae Peach root weevil Oedophrys hilleri 39 Insecta Coleoptera Curculionidae Two-banded Japanese weevil Pseudocneorhinus bifasciatus 40 Insecta Coleoptera Curculionidae Cocklebur weevil Rhodobeanus quinquepunctatus 41 Insecta Coleoptera Curculionidae Weevil Rhodobeanus tredecimpunctatus 42 Insecta Coleoptera Elateridae Click beetle Megapenthes limbalis 43 Insecta Coleoptera Erotylidae Pleasing fungus beetle Ischryus quadripunctatus 44 Insecta Coleoptera Eucinetidae Plate-thigh beetle Eucinetus morio 45 Insecta Coleoptera Gyrinidae Whirligig beetle Dineutus emarginatus 46 Insecta Coleoptera Heteroceridae Variegated mud-loving beetle Tropicus pusillus 47 Insecta Coleoptera Lampyridae Big dipper firefly Photinus pyralis 48 Insecta Coleoptera Lucanidae Stag beetle Nicagus obscurus 49 Insecta Coleoptera Lycidae Net-winged beetle Calopteron reticulatum 50 Insecta Coleoptera Lycidae Net-winged beetle Dictyoptera aurora 51 Insecta Coleoptera Melyridae Soft-winged flower beetle Anthocomus equestris 52 Insecta Coleoptera Melyridae Soft-winged flower beetle Collops quadrimaculatus 53 Insecta Coleoptera Passalidae Bess beetle Odontotaenius disjunctus 54 Insecta Coleoptera Rhipiceridae Cicada parasite beetle Sandalus niger 55 Insecta Coleoptera Scarabaeidae Oriental beetle Exomala orientalis 56 Insecta Coleoptera Scarabaeidae Chafer Hoplia trivialis 57 Insecta Coleoptera Scarabaeidae Scarab beetle Parastasia brevipes ARTHROPOD SPECIES LIST CLASS ORDER FAMILY COMMON NAME GENUS SPECIES ✓ LIST 58 Insecta Coleoptera Scarabaeidae Japanese beetle Popillia japonica 59 Insecta Coleoptera Tenebrionidae Darkling beetle Alobates morio 60 Insecta Dermaptera Forficulidae European earwig Forficula auricularia 61 Insecta Diptera Ptychopteridae Phantom crane fly Bittacomorpha clavipes 62 Insecta Diptera Culicidae Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus 63 Insecta Diptera Culicidae Gallinipper Psorophora ciliata 64 Insecta Diptera Culicidae Elephant mosquito Toxorhynchites rutilus 65 Insecta Diptera Rhagionidae Ornate snipe fly Chrysopilus ornatus 66 Insecta Diptera Rhagionidae Gold-backed snipe fly Chrysopilus thorcicus 67 Insecta Diptera Scathophagidae Dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria 68 Insecta Diptera Tachinidae Tachinid fly Trichopoda pennipes 69 Insecta Hemiptera Aphididae Woolly alder aphid Prociphilus tessellatus 70 Insecta Hemiptera Cercopidae Two-lined spittlebug Prosapia bicincta 71 Insecta Hemiptera Cicadellidae Sharpshooter Oncometopia orbona 72 Insecta Hemiptera Cicadidae Northern dusk singing cicada Tibicen auletes 73 Insecta Hemiptera Cicadidae Swamp cicada Tibicen tibicen 74 Insecta Hemiptera Coreidae Leaf-footted bug Leptoglossus phyllopus 75 Insecta Hemiptera Flatidae Flatid hopper Anormenis chloris 76 Insecta Hemiptera Gelastocoridae Toad bug Gelastocoris oculatus 77 Insecta Hemiptera Gerridae Water strider Metrobates hesperius 78 Insecta Hemiptera Lygaeidae Small milkweed bug Lygaeus kalmii 79 Insecta Hemiptera Membracidae Oak treehopper Platycotis vittata 80 Insecta Hemiptera Pentatomidae Rough stink bug Brochymena quadripustulata 81 Insecta Hemiptera Pentatomidae Green stink bug Chinavia hilaris 82 Insecta Hemiptera Pentatomidae Brown marmorated stink bug Halyomorpha halys 83 Insecta Hemiptera Reduviidae Wheel bug Arilus cristatus 84 Insecta Hemiptera Reduviidae Assassin bug Pselliopus barberi 85 Insecta Hemiptera Rhopalidae Boxelder bug Boisea trivittata 86 Insecta Hymenoptera Apidae European honey bee Apis mellifera 87 Insecta Hymenoptera Apidae Eastern carpenter bee Xylocopa virginica ARTHROPOD SPECIES LIST CLASS ORDER FAMILY COMMON NAME GENUS SPECIES ✓ LIST 88 Insecta Hymenoptera Argidae Poison ivy sawfly Arge humeralis 89 Insecta Hymenoptera Formicidae Black carpenter ant Camponotus pennsylvanicus 90 Insecta Hymenoptera Halictidae Augochlora sweat bee Augochlora pura 91 Insecta Hymenoptera Pelecinidae American pelecinid wasp Pelecinus polyturator 92 Insecta Hymenoptera Sphecidae Steel-blue cricket hunter Chlorion aerarium 93 Insecta Hymenoptera Sphecidae Cicada killer Sphecius speciosus 94 Insecta Hymenoptera Sphecidae Great golden digger wasp Sphex ichneumoneus 95 Insecta Hymenoptera Sphecidae Organ pipe mud dauber Trypoxylon politum 96 Insecta Hymenoptera Vespidae Potter wasp Eumenes fraternus 97 Insecta Hymenoptera Vespidae Mason wasp Monobia quadridens 98 Insecta Hymenoptera Vespidae European hornet Vespa crabro 99 Insecta Mantodea Mantidae Brunner's mantis Brunneria borealis 100 Insecta Mantodea Mantidae Carolina mantis Stagmomantis carolina 101 Insecta Mantodea Mantidae Chinese mantis Tenodera aridifolia 102 Insecta Orthoptera Acrididae Carolina grasshopper Dissoteira carolina 103 Insecta Orthoptera Acrididae American grasshopper Schistocerca americana 104 Insecta Orthoptera Gryllidae Red-headed bush cricket Phyllopalpus pulchellus 105 Insecta Orthoptera Tettigoniidae Broad-winged katydid Microcentrum rhombifolium 106 Insecta Orthoptera Tettigoniidae True katydid Pterophylla camellifolia 107 Insecta Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Zebra caddisfly Macrostemum zebratum 108 Chilopoda Scolopendromorpha Scolopendridae Scolopendrid centipede Hemiscolopendra marginata 109 Diplopoda Polydesmida Paradoxosomatidae Greenhouse millipede Oxidus gracilis .
Recommended publications
  • Apis Mellifera)

    Apis Mellifera)

    Experimental and Applied Acarology https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-020-00525-y Electrotarsogram responses to synthetic odorants by Varroa destructor, a primary parasite of western honey bees (Apis mellifera) Michael Light1 · Dave Shutler1 · G. Christopher Cutler2 · N. Kirk Hillier1 Received: 21 September 2019 / Accepted: 8 July 2020 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 Abstract Olfaction is a key sensory modality for many arthropods and could be used as a tool in pest management through manipulation of pest behavior. Management of Varroa destructor, important parasitic mites of honey bees, could be improved through better understanding of the chemical ecology of this host-parasite relationship. We refned techniques of mount- ing mites to obtain electrophysiological recordings (electrotarsograms) of their responses to synthetic odor stimuli. Results of 271 electrotarsogram recordings from V. destructor revealed responses to 10 odorants relative to solvent controls. Electrotarsogram responses to methyl palmitate, ethyl palmitate, and 2-heptanol were highest at the lowest stimulus loading (10 ng) we tested, suggesting that V. destructor may have acute sensitivity to low concentrations of some odors. Results suggest that odorant origin (e.g., methyl oleate from honey bee larvae, geraniol from adult honey bee alarm pheromone, and α-terpineol, a plant secondary metabolite) can infuence the degree of electrophysiological response. Varroa destructor tended to be more responsive to known attractants and repellents relative to previously unexplored odorants and some repellent terpenes. Electrotarsograms ofer the potential for screening odors to determine their importance in V. destructor host detection. Keywords Acari · Apis mellifera · Electrophysiology · Electrotarsography · Semiochemicals Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https ://doi.org/10.1007/s1049 3-020-00525 -y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
  • Sexual Selection Research on Spiders: Progress and Biases

    Sexual Selection Research on Spiders: Progress and Biases

    Biol. Rev. (2005), 80, pp. 363–385. f Cambridge Philosophical Society 363 doi:10.1017/S1464793104006700 Printed in the United Kingdom Sexual selection research on spiders: progress and biases Bernhard A. Huber* Zoological Research Institute and Museum Alexander Koenig, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany (Received 7 June 2004; revised 25 November 2004; accepted 29 November 2004) ABSTRACT The renaissance of interest in sexual selection during the last decades has fuelled an extraordinary increase of scientific papers on the subject in spiders. Research has focused both on the process of sexual selection itself, for example on the signals and various modalities involved, and on the patterns, that is the outcome of mate choice and competition depending on certain parameters. Sexual selection has most clearly been demonstrated in cases involving visual and acoustical signals but most spiders are myopic and mute, relying rather on vibrations, chemical and tactile stimuli. This review argues that research has been biased towards modalities that are relatively easily accessible to the human observer. Circumstantial and comparative evidence indicates that sexual selection working via substrate-borne vibrations and tactile as well as chemical stimuli may be common and widespread in spiders. Pattern-oriented research has focused on several phenomena for which spiders offer excellent model objects, like sexual size dimorphism, nuptial feeding, sexual cannibalism, and sperm competition. The accumulating evidence argues for a highly complex set of explanations for seemingly uniform patterns like size dimorphism and sexual cannibalism. Sexual selection appears involved as well as natural selection and mechanisms that are adaptive in other contexts only. Sperm competition has resulted in a plethora of morpho- logical and behavioural adaptations, and simplistic models like those linking reproductive morphology with behaviour and sperm priority patterns in a straightforward way are being replaced by complex models involving an array of parameters.
  • A Review of Sampling and Monitoring Methods for Beneficial Arthropods

    A Review of Sampling and Monitoring Methods for Beneficial Arthropods

    insects Review A Review of Sampling and Monitoring Methods for Beneficial Arthropods in Agroecosystems Kenneth W. McCravy Department of Biological Sciences, Western Illinois University, 1 University Circle, Macomb, IL 61455, USA; [email protected]; Tel.: +1-309-298-2160 Received: 12 September 2018; Accepted: 19 November 2018; Published: 23 November 2018 Abstract: Beneficial arthropods provide many important ecosystem services. In agroecosystems, pollination and control of crop pests provide benefits worth billions of dollars annually. Effective sampling and monitoring of these beneficial arthropods is essential for ensuring their short- and long-term viability and effectiveness. There are numerous methods available for sampling beneficial arthropods in a variety of habitats, and these methods can vary in efficiency and effectiveness. In this paper I review active and passive sampling methods for non-Apis bees and arthropod natural enemies of agricultural pests, including methods for sampling flying insects, arthropods on vegetation and in soil and litter environments, and estimation of predation and parasitism rates. Sample sizes, lethal sampling, and the potential usefulness of bycatch are also discussed. Keywords: sampling methodology; bee monitoring; beneficial arthropods; natural enemy monitoring; vane traps; Malaise traps; bowl traps; pitfall traps; insect netting; epigeic arthropod sampling 1. Introduction To sustainably use the Earth’s resources for our benefit, it is essential that we understand the ecology of human-altered systems and the organisms that inhabit them. Agroecosystems include agricultural activities plus living and nonliving components that interact with these activities in a variety of ways. Beneficial arthropods, such as pollinators of crops and natural enemies of arthropod pests and weeds, play important roles in the economic and ecological success of agroecosystems.
  • Solanaceae) Flower–Visitor Network in an Atlantic Forest Fragment in Southern Brazil

    Solanaceae) Flower–Visitor Network in an Atlantic Forest Fragment in Southern Brazil

    diversity Article Bee Diversity and Solanum didymum (Solanaceae) Flower–Visitor Network in an Atlantic Forest Fragment in Southern Brazil Francieli Lando 1 ID , Priscila R. Lustosa 1, Cyntia F. P. da Luz 2 ID and Maria Luisa T. Buschini 1,* 1 Programa de Pós Graduação em Biologia Evolutiva da Universidade Estadual do Centro-Oeste, Rua Simeão Camargo Varela de Sá 03, Vila Carli, Guarapuava 85040-080, Brazil; [email protected] (F.L.); [email protected] (P.R.L.) 2 Research Centre of Vascular Plants, Palinology Research Centre, Botanical Institute of Sao Paulo Government, Av. Miguel Stéfano, 3687 Água Funda, São Paulo 04045-972, Brazil; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 9 November 2017; Accepted: 8 January 2018; Published: 11 January 2018 Abstract: Brazil’s Atlantic Forest biome is currently undergoing forest loss due to repeated episodes of devastation. In this biome, bees perform the most frequent pollination system. Over the last decade, network analysis has been extensively applied to the study of plant–pollinator interactions, as it provides a consistent view of the structure of plant–pollinator interactions. The aim of this study was to use palynological studies to obtain an understanding of the relationship between floral visitor bees and the pioneer plant S. didymum in a fragment of the Atlantic Forest, and also learn about the other plants that interact to form this network. Five hundred bees were collected from 32 species distributed into five families: Andrenidae, Apidae, Colletidae, Megachilidae, and Halictidae. The interaction network consisted of 21 bee species and 35 pollen types.
  • Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) 321-356 ©Entomofauna Ansfelden/Austria; Download Unter

    Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) 321-356 ©Entomofauna Ansfelden/Austria; Download Unter

    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Entomofauna Jahr/Year: 2007 Band/Volume: 0028 Autor(en)/Author(s): Yefremova Zoya A., Ebrahimi Ebrahim, Yegorenkova Ekaterina Artikel/Article: The Subfamilies Eulophinae, Entedoninae and Tetrastichinae in Iran, with description of new species (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) 321-356 ©Entomofauna Ansfelden/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Entomofauna ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR ENTOMOLOGIE Band 28, Heft 25: 321-356 ISSN 0250-4413 Ansfelden, 30. November 2007 The Subfamilies Eulophinae, Entedoninae and Tetrastichinae in Iran, with description of new species (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) Zoya YEFREMOVA, Ebrahim EBRAHIMI & Ekaterina YEGORENKOVA Abstract This paper reflects the current degree of research of Eulophidae and their hosts in Iran. A list of the species from Iran belonging to the subfamilies Eulophinae, Entedoninae and Tetrastichinae is presented. In the present work 47 species from 22 genera are recorded from Iran. Two species (Cirrospilus scapus sp. nov. and Aprostocetus persicus sp. nov.) are described as new. A list of 45 host-parasitoid associations in Iran and keys to Iranian species of three genera (Cirrospilus, Diglyphus and Aprostocetus) are included. Zusammenfassung Dieser Artikel zeigt den derzeitigen Untersuchungsstand an eulophiden Wespen und ihrer Wirte im Iran. Eine Liste der für den Iran festgestellten Arten der Unterfamilien Eu- lophinae, Entedoninae und Tetrastichinae wird präsentiert. Mit vorliegender Arbeit werden 47 Arten in 22 Gattungen aus dem Iran nachgewiesen. Zwei neue Arten (Cirrospilus sca- pus sp. nov. und Aprostocetus persicus sp. nov.) werden beschrieben. Eine Liste von 45 Wirts- und Parasitoid-Beziehungen im Iran und ein Schlüssel für 3 Gattungen (Cirro- spilus, Diglyphus und Aprostocetus) sind in der Arbeit enthalten.
  • Alien and Invasive Species of Harmful Insects in Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Alien and Invasive Species of Harmful Insects in Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Alien and invasive species of harmful insects in Bosnia and Herzegovina Mirza Dautbašić1,*, Osman Mujezinović1 1 Faculty of Forestry University in Sarajevo, Chair of Forest Protection, Urban Greenery and Wildlife and Hunting. Zagrebačka 20, 71000 Sarajevo * Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract: An alien species – animal, plant or micro-organism – is one that has been introduced as a result of human activity to an area it could not have reached on its own. In cases where the foreign species expands in its new habitat, causing environmental and economic damage, then it is classified as invasive. The maturity of foreign species in the new area may also be influenced by climate changes. The detrimental effect of alien species is reflected in the reduction of biodiversity as well as plant vitality. A large number of alien species of insects are not harmful to plants in new habitats, but there are also those that cause catastrophic consequences to a significant extent. The aim of this paper is to present an overview of newly discovered species of insects in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The research area, for this work included forest and urban ecosystems in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. For the purposes of this paper, an overview of the species found is provided: /HSWRJORVVXVRFFLGHQWDOLV Heidemann; (Hemiptera: Coreidae) - The western conifer seed bug, found at two sites in Central Bosnia, in 2013 and 2015; $UJHEHUEHULGLVSchrank; (Hymenoptera: Argidae) - The berberis sawfly, recorded in one locality (Central Bosnia), in 2015;
  • Exocrine Secretions of Wheel Bugs (Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Arilus Spp.): Clarifi Cation and Chemistry Jeffrey R

    Exocrine Secretions of Wheel Bugs (Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Arilus Spp.): Clarifi Cation and Chemistry Jeffrey R

    Exocrine Secretions of Wheel Bugs (Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Arilus spp.): Clarifi cation and Chemistry Jeffrey R. Aldricha,b,*, Kamlesh R. Chauhanc, Aijun Zhangc, and Paulo H. G. Zarbind a Affi liate Department of Entomology, University of California, Davis, CA, USA b J. R. Aldrich consulting LLC, 519 Washington Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, USA. E-mail: [email protected] c USDA-ARS Invasive Insect Biocontrol & Behavior Laboratory, 10300 Baltimore Avenue, Bldg. 007, rm301, BARC-West, Beltsville, MD 20705, USA d Universidade Federal do Paraná, Departamento de Química, Laboratório de Semioquímicos, CP 19081, 81531 – 980, Curitiba – PR, Brazil * Author for correspondence and reprint requests Z. Naturforsch. 68 c, 522 – 526 (2013); received August 21/November 6, 2013 Wheel bugs (Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Harpactorinae: Arilus) are general predators, the females of which have reddish-orange subrectal glands (SGs) that are eversible like the os- meteria in some caterpillars. The rancid odor of Arilus and other reduviids actually comes from Brindley's glands, which in the North (A. cristatus) and South (A. carinatus) American wheel bugs studied emit similar blends of 2-methylpropanoic, butanoic, 3-methylbutanoic, and 2-methylbutanoic acids. The Arilus SG secretions studied here are absolutely species- specifi c. The volatile SG components of A. carinatus include (E)-2-octenal, (E)-2-none- nal, (E)-2-decenal, (E,E)-2,4-nonadienal, (E)-2-undecenal, hexanoic acid, 4-oxo-nonanal, (E,E)-2,4-decadienal, (E,Z)-2,4- or (Z,E)-2,4-decadienal, and 4-oxo-(E)-2-nonenal; whereas in A. cristatus the SG secretion contains β-pinene, limonene, terpinolene, terpinen-4-ol, thy- mol methyl ether, α-terpineol, bornyl acetate, methyl eugenol, β-caryophyllene, caryophyllene oxide, and farnesol.
  • A New Dipteran Parasitoid of Rose Sawfly from Turkey

    A New Dipteran Parasitoid of Rose Sawfly from Turkey

    Kastamonu Uni., Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 2018, 18 (3): 288-291 Research Article Kastamonu Univ., Journal of Forestry Faculty Doi:10.17475/kastorman.341693 A New Dipteran Parasitoid of Rose Sawfly from Turkey: Vibrissina turrita (Meigen, 1824) Yafes YILDIZ Bartın University, Faculty of Forestry, Bartın, 74100, TURKEY [email protected] Received Date: 04.10.2017 Accepted Date: 22.10.2018 Abstract Aim of study: The aim of this study was to determine the parasitoid species of, Arge ochropus (Gmelin, 1790), which is an important pest of culture and wild roses. Area of study: Arge ochropus larvae were collected from Rosa canina in Bartın province. Material and Methods: Larvae collecting damages on Rosa canina species, which are distributed in different localities and were brought to the laboratory. Observations were continued and photographed under a microscope. Main results: Arge ochropus (Gmelin, 1790) is a significant pest of cultivated and wild roses in Turkey. Leaf surface is consumed as a result of intense damage of larvae and this affects growth and blooming in the plant. It was observed that the larvae collected from the field were infected by a new parasitoid in the laboratory. This tachinid parasitoid was defined as Vibrissina turrita. Research highlights: Vibrissina turrita (Meigen, 1824) was detected in Turkey as a Tachinidae fauna and Arge ochropus parasitoid for the first time in this study. Keywords: Vibrissina turrita, new record, Tachinidae, parasitoid, Arge ochropus, Turkey Türkiye’ den Gül Yaprak Arısının Yeni Bir Parazitoiti: Vibrissina turrita (Meigen, 1824) Öz Çalışmanın amacı: Kültür ve yabani güllerin önemli zararlısı Arge ochropus (Gmelin, 1790) yaprak arısının, parazitoid türünün tespiti amaçlanmıştır.
  • Arthropods of Elm Fork Preserve

    Arthropods of Elm Fork Preserve

    Arthropods of Elm Fork Preserve Arthropods are characterized by having jointed limbs and exoskeletons. They include a diverse assortment of creatures: Insects, spiders, crustaceans (crayfish, crabs, pill bugs), centipedes and millipedes among others. Column Headings Scientific Name: The phenomenal diversity of arthropods, creates numerous difficulties in the determination of species. Positive identification is often achieved only by specialists using obscure monographs to ‘key out’ a species by examining microscopic differences in anatomy. For our purposes in this survey of the fauna, classification at a lower level of resolution still yields valuable information. For instance, knowing that ant lions belong to the Family, Myrmeleontidae, allows us to quickly look them up on the Internet and be confident we are not being fooled by a common name that may also apply to some other, unrelated something. With the Family name firmly in hand, we may explore the natural history of ant lions without needing to know exactly which species we are viewing. In some instances identification is only readily available at an even higher ranking such as Class. Millipedes are in the Class Diplopoda. There are many Orders (O) of millipedes and they are not easily differentiated so this entry is best left at the rank of Class. A great deal of taxonomic reorganization has been occurring lately with advances in DNA analysis pointing out underlying connections and differences that were previously unrealized. For this reason, all other rankings aside from Family, Genus and Species have been omitted from the interior of the tables since many of these ranks are in a state of flux.
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U

    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U

    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
  • Woodlice in Britain and Ireland: Distribution and Habitat Is out of Date Very Quickly, and That They Will Soon Be Writing the Second Edition

    Woodlice in Britain and Ireland: Distribution and Habitat Is out of Date Very Quickly, and That They Will Soon Be Writing the Second Edition

    • • • • • • I att,AZ /• •• 21 - • '11 n4I3 - • v., -hi / NT I- r Arty 1 4' I, • • I • A • • • Printed in Great Britain by Lavenham Press NERC Copyright 1985 Published in 1985 by Institute of Terrestrial Ecology Administrative Headquarters Monks Wood Experimental Station Abbots Ripton HUNTINGDON PE17 2LS ISBN 0 904282 85 6 COVER ILLUSTRATIONS Top left: Armadillidium depressum Top right: Philoscia muscorum Bottom left: Androniscus dentiger Bottom right: Porcellio scaber (2 colour forms) The photographs are reproduced by kind permission of R E Jones/Frank Lane The Institute of Terrestrial Ecology (ITE) was established in 1973, from the former Nature Conservancy's research stations and staff, joined later by the Institute of Tree Biology and the Culture Centre of Algae and Protozoa. ITE contributes to, and draws upon, the collective knowledge of the 13 sister institutes which make up the Natural Environment Research Council, spanning all the environmental sciences. The Institute studies the factors determining the structure, composition and processes of land and freshwater systems, and of individual plant and animal species. It is developing a sounder scientific basis for predicting and modelling environmental trends arising from natural or man- made change. The results of this research are available to those responsible for the protection, management and wise use of our natural resources. One quarter of ITE's work is research commissioned by customers, such as the Department of Environment, the European Economic Community, the Nature Conservancy Council and the Overseas Development Administration. The remainder is fundamental research supported by NERC. ITE's expertise is widely used by international organizations in overseas projects and programmes of research.
  • Insecta Diptera) in Freshwater (Excluding Simulidae, Culicidae, Chironomidae, Tipulidae and Tabanidae) Rüdiger Wagner University of Kassel

    Insecta Diptera) in Freshwater (Excluding Simulidae, Culicidae, Chironomidae, Tipulidae and Tabanidae) Rüdiger Wagner University of Kassel

    Entomology Publications Entomology 2008 Global diversity of dipteran families (Insecta Diptera) in freshwater (excluding Simulidae, Culicidae, Chironomidae, Tipulidae and Tabanidae) Rüdiger Wagner University of Kassel Miroslav Barták Czech University of Agriculture Art Borkent Salmon Arm Gregory W. Courtney Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ent_pubs BoudewPart ofijn the GoBddeeiodivrisersity Commons, Biology Commons, Entomology Commons, and the TRoyerarle Bestrlgiialan a Indnstit Aquaute of Nticat uErcaol Scienlogyce Cs ommons TheSee nex tompc page forle addte bitioniblaiol agruthorapshic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ ent_pubs/41. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the Entomology at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Entomology Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Global diversity of dipteran families (Insecta Diptera) in freshwater (excluding Simulidae, Culicidae, Chironomidae, Tipulidae and Tabanidae) Abstract Today’s knowledge of worldwide species diversity of 19 families of aquatic Diptera in Continental Waters is presented. Nevertheless, we have to face for certain in most groups a restricted knowledge about distribution, ecology and systematic,