DOCSLIB.ORG

Spatial and Temporal Effects of Fire on Insect Herbivore Community Structure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spatial and Temporal Effects of Fire on Insect Herbivore Community Structure SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL EFFECTS OF FIRE ON INSECT HERBIVORE COMMUNITY STRUCTURE By TANIA N. KIM A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006 1 Copyright 2006 by Tania N. Kim 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I thank my committee members, Bob Holt, Scott Robinson, and Emilio Bruna, for reading my thesis and providing critical feedback at every stage of my research study. I also thank the scientists at Archbold Biological Station, particularly Hilary Swain, Eric Menges, Carl Weekley, Mark Deyrup, Patrick Bohlen, Adam Peterson, Jenny Schafer, and Marcia Rickey, for logistical support and encouragement. In addition, I thank the Bruna lab for allowing me to use their facilities while on-campus and I thank Pedro Mendez for aiding me with laboratory work. This project was funded by various sources, such as the Garden Club of America, the Florida Native Plant Society, and the Department of Zoology. Finally, I thank my family and friends for their love and encouragement, and of course, I thank Brian J. Spiesman and Reginald P. Doggie for their constant love, patience, humor, and emotional support over the past 6 years. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................3 LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................................................6 LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................13 Conceptual Model...................................................................................................................15 The Lake Wales Scrub: A Fire-Dominated Ecosystem..........................................................16 Study Site................................................................................................................................18 Study Organisms.....................................................................................................................19 Insect Herbivores....................................................................................................................20 Overview.................................................................................................................................20 2 EFFECTS OF FIRE ON INSECT HERBIVORE COMMUNITY STRUCTURE................23 Introduction.............................................................................................................................23 Methods ..................................................................................................................................27 Plot Establishment and Sampling Regime ......................................................................28 Leaf traits and Tannin Analyses......................................................................................29 Vegetation Sampling .......................................................................................................30 Fire Regime and Landscape Heterogeneity.....................................................................30 Arthropod Identification..................................................................................................31 Data Analysis...................................................................................................................31 Differences in insect community structure...............................................................31 Determinants of insect community structure ...........................................................32 Results.....................................................................................................................................33 Mixed Models..................................................................................................................33 Discriminant Analyses.....................................................................................................35 Principal Component Analyses .......................................................................................35 Path Analysis...................................................................................................................36 Effects of fire on leaf, plant, and plot architecture...................................................36 Effects of fire on insect communities.......................................................................37 Discussion...............................................................................................................................37 Herbivores of Q. chapmanii ............................................................................................39 Herbivores of Q. inopina.................................................................................................40 Herbivores of Q. geminata ..............................................................................................42 Concluding Comments ....................................................................................................42 3 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL EFFECTS OF FIRE ON PLANT DAMAGE IN THE FLORIDA SCRUB.................................................................................................................81 4 Introduction.............................................................................................................................81 Methods ..................................................................................................................................85 Plot Establishment and Sampling Regime ......................................................................86 Data Analysis...................................................................................................................88 Mapping damage patterns ........................................................................................88 Path analysis.............................................................................................................88 Results.....................................................................................................................................89 Inverse Distance Weighting Maps...................................................................................91 Factors Influencing Leaf Tissue Damage........................................................................92 Discussion...............................................................................................................................92 4 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................117 LIST OF REFERENCES.............................................................................................................119 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................................128 5 LIST OF TABLES Table page 2-1 Variables used in PCA for path analysis............................................................................44 2-2 The number of arthropods by order sustained on the 3 species of oaks dominant in the Florida scrub. ...............................................................................................................46 2-3 Number of arthropod herbivores found on the three dominant oak species in the Florida scrub. .....................................................................................................................47 2-4 Mixed model results comparing insect herbivore abundance on three dominant oaks (Q. chapmanii, Q. geminata, and Q. inopina) in the Florida scrub. ..................................49 2-5 Mixed model results comparing insect herbivore richness on three dominant oaks (Q. chapmanii, Q. geminata, and Q. inopina) in the Florida scrub. ........................................50 2-6 Mixed model results comparing Simpson’s diversity of insect herbivores on three dominant oaks (Q. chapmanii, Q. geminata, and Q. inopina) in the Florida scrub...........51 2-7 MANOVA results examining differences in the abundance of herbivores as a function of time since fire, season, and oak species. .........................................................52 2-8 Results from discriminant analysis of insect species grouped according to oak species................................................................................................................................54 2-9 Structure matrix from discriminant analysis......................................................................55 2-10 Chi-square statistic results comparing default model with a fully saturated model. .........57 2-11 Direct and indirect effects of fire on insect herbivore abundance. ....................................58 3-1 Differences in leaf damage as a function of seasonal stage and time-since-fire. ..............98 3-2 Differences in the average number of leaves consumed per plant as a function of seasonal stage and time-since-fire .....................................................................................99 3-3 Multi-scale patterns of plant damage as a function of stand age .....................................100 3-4 Variation in the magnitude of leaf
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Diversidad De Artrópodos En España 235
    DiversiDaD De artrópoDos en españa 235 Diversidad de Artrópodos en España Diversity of Arthropods in Spain Vicente M. Ortuño 1 y Francisco David Martínez-Pérez 1 1) Departamento de Zoología y Antropología Física. Facultad de Biología. Universidad de Alcalá. E-28871. Alcalá de Henares (Madrid, Spain). e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] Palabras clave: Arthropoda, España, biodiversidad, fauna invasora, endemismo. Key words: Arthropoda, Spain, biodiversity, invasive fauna, endemic fauna. resumen Se realiza una aproximación al conocimiento global de los Arthropoda en España, para lo que se abordan dos aspectos. En primer lugar, las peculiaridades geográficas e históricas que condicionan el paisaje, y en segundo lugar, las características anatómicas y fisiológicas más relevantes que convierten a este Filo en un grupo taxonómico de gran éxito evolutivo. Seguidamente se ofrecen datos concretos sobre la diversidad de los Arthropoda en España, y para ello se hace ordenando la información en tres bloques temáticos (biodiversidad, fauna invasora y endemismos). El primer bloque, “biodiversidad”, se vale de cuatro tablas (una por cada subfilo) que aportan información sobre el número de especies, por grupos taxonómicos basales (clase, subclase u orden) y por diferentes regiones geográficas y geopolíticas (España, -disociando ámbito íbero-balear y Canarias-, Italia, Europa y mundo). Además, en el texto se exponen algunas características generales (morfológicas y/o etológicas) que singularizan a cada grupo de Arthropoda. Del mismo modo, se citan las especies, o los géneros, relevantes y más conspicuos de la fauna española. El segundo bloque, “fauna invasora”, expone información acerca de especies alóctonas que han conseguido expandirse ampliamente por el territorio español o, en otros casos, especies que han alcanzado relevancia mediática por algún aspecto concreto de su biología.
    [Show full text]
  • Scope: Munis Entomology & Zoology Publishes a Wide Variety of Papers
    _____________ Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 2, No. 1, January 2007___________ I MUNIS ENTOMOLOGY & ZOOLOGY Ankara / Turkey II _____________ Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 2, No. 1, January 2007___________ Scope: Munis Entomology & Zoology publishes a wide variety of papers on all aspects of Entomology and Zoology from all of the world, including mainly studies on systematics, taxonomy, nomenclature, fauna, biogeography, biodiversity, ecology, morphology, behavior, conservation, pa!eobiology and other aspects are appropriate topics for papers submitted to Munis Entomology & Zoology. Submission of Manuscripts: Works published or under consideration elsewhere (including on the internet) will not be accepted. At first submission, one double spaced hard copy (text and tables) with figures (may not be original) must be sent to the Editors, Dr. Hüseyin Özdikmen for publication in MEZ. All manuscripts should be submitted as Word file or PDF file in an e-mail attachment. If electronic submission is not possible due to limitations of electronic space at the sending or receiving ends, unavailability of e-mail, etc., we will accept ―hard‖ versions, in triplicate, accompanied by an electronic version stored in a floppy disk, a CD-ROM. Review Process: When submitting manuscripts, all authors provides the name, of at least three qualified experts (they also provide their address, subject fields and e-mails). Then, the editors send to experts to review the papers. The review process should normally be completed within 45-60 days. After reviewing papers by reviwers: Rejected papers are discarded. For accepted papers, authors are asked to modify their papers according to suggestions of the reviewers and editors. Final versions of manuscripts and figures are needed in a digital format.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Economically and Ecologically Sustainable Pollinator Habitat District 2 Demonstration Research Project Summary Updated for Site Visit in April 2019
    Creating Economically and Ecologically Sustainable Pollinator Habitat District 2 Demonstration Research Project Summary Updated for Site Visit in April 2019 The PIs are most appreciative for identification assistance provided by: Arian Farid and Alan R. Franck, Director and former Director, resp., University of South Florida Herbarium, Tampa, FL; Edwin Bridges, Botanical and Ecological Consultant; Floyd Griffith, Botanist; and Eugene Wofford, Director, University of Tennessee Herbarium, Knoxville, TN Investigators Rick Johnstone and Robin Haggie (IVM Partners, 501-C-3 non-profit; http://www.ivmpartners.org/); Larry Porter and John Nettles (ret.), District 2 Wildflower Coordinator; Jeff Norcini, FDOT State Wildflower Specialist Cooperator Rick Owen (Imperiled Butterflies of Florida Work Group – North) Objective Evaluate a cost-effective strategy for creating habitat for pollinators/beneficial insects in the ROW beyond the back-slope. Rationale • Will aid FDOT in developing a strategy to create pollinator habitat per the federal BEE Act and FDOT’s Wildflower Program • Will demonstrate that FDOT can simultaneously • Create sustainable pollinator habitat in an economical and ecological manner • Reduce mowing costs • Part of national effort coordinated by IVM Partners, who has • Established or will establish similar projects on roadside or utility ROWS in Alabama, Arkansas, Maryland, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Idaho, Montana, Virginia, West Virginia, and Tennessee; studies previously conducted in Arizona, Delaware, Michigan, and New Jersey • Developed partnerships with US Fish & Wildlife Service, Army Corps of Engineers, US Geological Survey, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Chesapeake Wildlife Heritage, The Navajo Nation, The Wildlife Habitat Council, The Pollinator Partnership, Progressive Solutions, Bayer Crop Sciences, Universities of Maryland, Ohio, West Virginia, and the EPA.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthoptera: Acrididae)
    204 Florida Entomologist 88(2) June 2005 MANDIBULAR MORPHOLOGY OF SOME FLORIDIAN GRASSHOPPERS (ORTHOPTERA: ACRIDIDAE) TREVOR RANDALL SMITH AND JOHN L. CAPINERA University of Florida, Department of Entomology and Nematology, Gainesville, FL 32611 The relationship between mouthpart structure zen until examination. Mandibles were removed and diet has been known for years. This connec- from thawed specimens by lifting the labrum and tion between mouthpart morphology and specific pulling out each mandible separately with for- food types is incredibly pronounced in the class In- ceps. Only young adults were used in an effort to secta (Snodgrass 1935). As insects have evolved avoid confusion of mandible type due to mandible and adapted to new food sources, their mouthparts erosion (Chapman 1964; Uvarov 1977). An exam- have changed accordingly. This is an extremely im- ple of moderate erosion can be seen in Figure 1 (I). portant trait for evolutionary biologists (Brues This process was replicated with 10 individuals 1939) as well as systematists (Mulkern 1967). from each species. After air-drying, each mandi- Isley (1944) was one of the first to study grass- ble was glued to the head of a #3 or #2 insect pin, hopper mouthparts in detail. He described three depending on its size, for easier manipulation, groups of mandibles according to general struc- and examined microscopically. ture and characteristic diet. These three groups, We used Isley’s (1944) description of mandible still used today, were graminivorous (grass-feed- types and their adaptive functions to divide the ing type) with grinding molars and incisors typi- mandibles into 3 major categories: forbivorous cally fused into a scythe-like cutting edge, for- (forb-feeding), graminivorous (grass-feeding), bivorous (forb or broadleaf plant-feeding type) and herbivorous (mixed-feeding).
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Hemipterous Fauna
    ACTA ENTOMOLOGICA FENNICA julkaissut - Edidit SUOMEN HYONTEISTIETEELLINEN SEURA - SOCIETAS ENTOMOLOGICA FENNICA 21 Studies on the South- and Eastmediterranean Hemipterous Fauna R. LINNAVUORI 24 figures SELOSTUS: Tietoja etelaisten ja itdisten Valimerenmaiden nivelkarsaisista HELSINKI 1965 RECEIVED 22. III. 1965 PRINTED 27.Vl. 1965 Helsingissa 1965 Sanoma Osakeyhtia TABLE OF CONTENTS I. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HEMIPTEROUUS FAUNA OF LIBYA .... .......... 7 SURVEY OF THE COLLECTING BIOTOPES ........ .......................... 7 SPECIES LIST ..................................................... .... 8 Cydnidae ................................................................. 8 Pentatomidae ........ 8 Coreidae .......... 9 Alydidae ......... 9 Rhopalidae ......... 9 Lygaeidae ......... 9 Reduviidae ......... 10 Anthocoridae ........... ................................................... 11 Miridae ................................................................... 11 Cicadidae .................................................................... 13 Cercopidae .................................... 13 Cicadellidae ................................................................ 13 Dictyopharidae .............................................................. 17 Cixiidae ................................................................... 18 Delphacidae ................................................................ 18 Issidae .................................................................. 18 Tettigometridae.19 Flatidae.19 II. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE
    [Show full text]
  • Myrica Faya: Review of the Biology, Ecology, Distribution, and Control, Including an Annotated Bibliography Candace J
    COOPERATIVE NATIONAL PARK RESOURCES STUDIES UNIT UNIWRSITY OF HAWAI'I AT MANOA Department of Botany 3190 Maile Way Honolulu, Hawai'i 96822 (808) 956-821 8 Technical Report 94 Myrica faya: Review of the Biology, Ecology, Distribution, and Control, Including an Annotated Bibliography Candace J. Lutzow-Felling, Donald E. Gardner, George P. Markin, Clifford W. Smith UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I AT MANOA NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Cooperative Agreement CA 8037-2-0001 April 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS ... LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... 111 ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... v INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 DESCRIPTIVE BIOLOGY ............................................................................................. 2 Systematics .................................... ............................................................................ 2 Anatomy ..................................................................................................................... 4 Growth Form ................................................................................................................ 4 Reproductive Structures ...............................................................................................5 Inflorescence ...................... ... ..........................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Meiotic Karyotypes and Testis Structure of 14 Species of the Planthopper Tribe Issini (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea, Issidae)
    Eur. J. Entomol. 107: 465–480, 2010 http://www.eje.cz/scripts/viewabstract.php?abstract=1557 ISSN 1210-5759 (print), 1802-8829 (online) Meiotic karyotypes and testis structure of 14 species of the planthopper tribe Issini (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea, Issidae) VALENTINA G. KUZNETSOVA1, ANNA MARYAēSKA-NADACHOWSKA2 and VLADIMIR M. GNEZDILOV1 1Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaya nab. 1, 199034 St. Petersburg, Russia; e-mails: [email protected]; [email protected] 2Institute of Systematics and Evolution of Animals, Polish Academy of Sciences, Sáawkowska 17, 30-016 Kraków, Poland; e-mail: [email protected] Key words. Hemiptera, Fulgoroidea, Issidae, Issini, testes, karyotypes, C-banding, NORs, fluorochrome staining Abstract. Karyotypes and testis structure of 14 species representing 9 genera (Latissus, Bubastia, Falcidius, Kervillea, Mul- santereum, Mycterodus, Scorlupaster, Scorlupella and Zopherisca) of the planthopper tribe Issini (Issidae) are presented. All the karyotypes are illustrated by meiotic and occasionally mitotic figures. The male karyotypes of most of the species analyzed are 2n = 26 + X, the exception being Falcidius limbatus, which has a karyotype of 2n = 24 + neo-XY. The latter is the first report of the neo-XY system in the family Issidae. The species studied are found to be similar in having NORs on the largest pair of autosomes, but differ significantly in the amount and distribution of C-heterochromatin along the chromosomes. In contrast to the conserved chromosome numbers, the highly variable follicle number in the testes suggests rapid evolution of the tribe Issini. On the basis of its specific follicle number, it is proposed that Zopherisca tendinosa skaloula Gnezdilov & Drosopoulos, 2006 be upgrade to a species: Z.
    [Show full text]
  • Responses of Insect Herbivores and Herbivory to Habitat Fragmentation: a Hierarchical Meta-Analysis
    Ecology Letters, (2017) 20: 264–272 doi: 10.1111/ele.12723 REVIEW AND SYNTHESIS Responses of insect herbivores and herbivory to habitat fragmentation: a hierarchical meta-analysis Abstract Marıa Rosa Rossetti,1,* Teja Loss and fragmentation of natural habitats can lead to alterations of plant–animal interactions Tscharntke,2 Ramiro Aguilar3,4 and and ecosystems functioning. Insect herbivory, an important antagonistic interaction is expected to Peter Batary 2 be influenced by habitat fragmentation through direct negative effects on herbivore community richness and indirect positive effects due to losses of natural enemies. Plant community changes with habitat fragmentation added to the indirect effects but with little predictable impact. Here, we evaluated habitat fragmentation effects on both herbivory and herbivore diversity, using novel hierarchical meta-analyses. Across 89 studies, we found a negative effect of habitat fragmentation on abundance and species richness of herbivores, but only a non-significant trend on herbivory. Reduced area and increased isolation of remaining fragments yielded the strongest effect on abun- dance and species richness, while specialist herbivores were the most vulnerable to habitat frag- mentation. These fragmentation effects were more pronounced in studies with large spatial extent. The strong reduction in herbivore diversity, but not herbivory, indicates how important common generalist species can be in maintaining herbivory as a major ecosystem process. Keywords Body size, effect size, feeding type, fragment area, generalist herbivores, insect herbivory, isola- tion, spatial extent, species richness. Ecology Letters (2017) 20: 264–272 may trigger alterations in plant community structure and an INTRODUCTION array of ecosystem functions (Maguire et al. 2015). The loss and fragmentation of natural habitats caused by Habitat fragmentation can influence insect herbivory human activities represent the most severe threats for biodi- through direct effects on herbivore community, but also versity (Brooks et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies in Hemiptera in Honour of Pavel Lauterer and Jaroslav L. Stehlík
    Acta Musei Moraviae, Scientiae biologicae Special issue, 98(2) Studies in Hemiptera in honour of Pavel Lauterer and Jaroslav L. Stehlík PETR KMENT, IGOR MALENOVSKÝ & JIØÍ KOLIBÁÈ (Eds.) ISSN 1211-8788 Moravian Museum, Brno 2013 RNDr. Pavel Lauterer (*1933) was RNDr. Jaroslav L. Stehlík, CSc. (*1923) born in Brno, to a family closely inter- was born in Jihlava. Ever since his ested in natural history. He soon deve- grammar school studies in Brno and loped a passion for nature, and parti- Tøebíè, he has been interested in ento- cularly for insects. He studied biology mology, particularly the true bugs at the Faculty of Science at Masaryk (Heteroptera). He graduated from the University, Brno, going on to work bri- Faculty of Science at Masaryk Univers- efly as an entomologist and parasitolo- ity, Brno in 1950 and defended his gist at the Hygienico-epidemiological CSc. (Ph.D.) thesis at the Institute of Station in Olomouc. From 1962 until Entomology of the Czechoslovak his retirement in 2002, he was Scienti- Academy of Sciences in Prague in fic Associate and Curator at the 1968. Since 1945 he has been profes- Department of Entomology in the sionally associated with the Moravian Moravian Museum, Brno, and still Museum, Brno and was Head of the continues his work there as a retired Department of Entomology there from research associate. Most of his profes- 1948 until his retirement in 1990. sional career has been devoted to the During this time, the insect collections study of psyllids, leafhoppers, plant- flourished and the journal Acta Musei hoppers and their natural enemies.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomia De Fulgoroidea No Brasil (Insecta: Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha), Com Ênfase Em Dictyopharidae
    MARCELO DA SILVA BAPTISTA TAXONOMIA DE FULGOROIDEA NO BRASIL (INSECTA: HEMIPTERA: AUCHENORRHYNCHA), COM ÊNFASE EM DICTYOPHARIDAE Tese apresentada à Universidade Federal de Viçosa, como parte das exigências do Programa de Pós- Graduação em Entomologia, para obtenção do título de Doctor Scientiae. VIÇOSA MINAS GERAIS – BRASIL 2006 Ficha catalográfica preparada pela Seção de Catalogação e Classificação da Biblioteca Central da UFV T Baptista, Marcelo da Silva, 1971- B222t Taxonomia de Fulgoroidea no Brasil ( Insecta: 2006 Hemiptera: Auchenorrhyncha ), com ênfase em Dictyopharidae / Marcelo da Silva Baptista. – Viçosa : UFV, 2006. x, 274f. : il. (algumas col.) ; 29cm. Texto em português e inglês. Orientador: Paulo Sérgio Fiuza Ferreira. Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Federal de Viçosa. Inclui bibliografia. 1. Fulgoroidea - Identificação. 2. Fulgoroidea - Catálogos e coleções. 3. Fulgoroidea - Distribuição geográfica. 4. Hemíptera. I. Universidade Federal de Viçosa. II.Título. CDD 22.ed. 595.754 MARCELO DA SILVA BAPTISTA TAXONOMIA DE FULGOROIDEA NO BRASIL (INSECTA: HEMIPTERA: AUCHENORRHYNCHA), COM ÊNFASE EM DICTYOPHARIDAE Tese apresentada à Universidade Federal de Viçosa, como parte das exigências do Programa de Pós- Graduação em Entomologia, para obtenção do título de Doctor Scientiae. APROVADA: 16 de setembro de 2006 Prof. Elidiomar Ribeiro da Silva Prof. José Eduardo Serrão (Co-Orientador) (Co-Orientador) Prof. Lucio Antonio de Oliveira Campos Profa. Milene Faria Vieira Prof. Paulo Sérgio Fiuza Ferreira (Orientador) Aos meus pais, Aldo Baptista e Sidnéa da Silva Baptista, que sempre fizeram de tudo para que eu alcançasse e conquistasse mais essa etapa na vida. À minha filha Victoria Nolding Barros Baptista, que sonho estar sempre ao meu lado. Amo vocês. ii AGRADECIMENTOS Em primeiro lugar gostaria de agradecer a cinco pessoas, que me concederem o privilégio de desenvolver a este trabalho no Laboratório de Insetos Aquáticos na Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Patterns of Host Plant Use by Delphacid Planthoppers
    population dynamics. Plant de­ specificity are considered with 1 crop varieties resistant to del- plant architecture on the abun­ n Chapter 3 (Denno). Species­ Evolutionary Patterns of Host Plant ' geographic and plant patch Use by Delphacid Planthoppers and density and plant diversity on l. The causal mechanisms for Their Relatives 1 and persistence are discussed its such as dispersal ability and ization and persistence. Stephen W. Wilson, Charles Mitter, Robert F. Denno and Michael R. Wilson Introduction Planthoppers (Homoptera: Fulgoroidea) are found on every continent ex­ cept Antarctica and in all major biomes, including tropical rainforests, deserts, grasslands, and the arctic tundra (O'Brien and Wilson 1985). The more than 9000 described species are divided into 19 families (O'Brien and Wilson 1985; Wheeler and Wilson 1987). All species of Fulgoroidea are phytophagous, sucking fluids from leaves, stems, roots, or fungal hyphae. There are species which feed on woody plants (both angiosperms and gymnosperms), herbs, ferns, and even fungi (O'Brien and Wilson 1985). The largest and most studied family of planthoppers is the Delphacidae which includes more than 2000 species in approximately 300 genera and 6 subfamilies (Asche 1985, 1990). Most continental delphacids are associated with monocots, particularly grasses and sedges (Wilson and O'Brien 1987; Denno and Roderick 1990 ), whereas some species, especially those on oceanic archipelagos, have radiated on dicots as well (Giffard 1922; Zim­ merman 1948). Their predilection for monocots, phloem-feeding habit, oviposition behavior and ability to transmit pathogens have contributed to the severe pest status of several delphacid species on rice, corn, sugarcane, and several cereal crops (Wilson and O'Brien 1987).
    [Show full text]
  • Hemiptera): New Phylogenetic Evidence
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Cicadina = Beiträge zur Zikadenkunde Jahr/Year: 2011 Band/Volume: 12 Autor(en)/Author(s): Hamilton K.G. Andrew Artikel/Article: Making sense of Fulgoroidea (Hemiptera): new phylogenetic evidence. 57-79 Cicadina 12: 57-79 (2011)©Arbeitskreis Zikaden Mitteleuropas e.V. - download unter www.biologiezentrum.at 57 Making sense of Fulgoroidea (Hemiptera): new phylogenetic evidence K.G. Andrew Hamilton1 Abstract: Antennal sensilla in more than 450 genera o f all 21 putative families o f Fulgoroidea provide characters that correlate well with other characters, including those of nymphal wax filaments and adult behaviour. Together, these characters indicate that Issidae, Lophopidae and Tropiduchidae are polyphyletic taxa, and suggest that Achilidae, Caliscelidae, Cixiidae and Dictyopharidae are paraphyletic. Two strongly supported monophyletic lineages comprise six plesiomorphic taxa (Achilidae+ Cixiidae+ Achilixiidae+ Derbidae+ Kinnaridae+ Meenoplidae) and five apomorphic taxa (Eurybrachidae+ Gengidae+ Lophopidae tribes Acarnini+ Colpopterini+ Elasmoscelini). Tetdgometridae share the most highly modified antennal type with Ahomocnemiellinae (of Caliscelidae). Weaker evidence suggests that Trypetomorphini (of Tropiduchidae) together with Augilini (of Lophopidae) is the basal lineage of Delphacidae, that Fulgoridae together with Dictyopharidae and Hiraciini (of Tropiduchidae) form a fifth monophyly, and that the remainder of Fulgoroidea are related to Issidae and to Nogodinidae. The most characteristic antennal sensilla type (known since 1890) is shared by seven putative families (Acanaloniidae, Flatidae, Hypochthonellidae, Ricaniidae, Issidae, Lophopidae and Tropiduchidae). The unexpected relationships of Issidae to various other such families support a 1977 hypothesis by Fennah that derive an “issid” wing type in Mithjmna Stal from that of Nogodinidae.
    [Show full text]