I Phylogenetic, Taxonomic, and Functional Diversity of Wetland

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

I Phylogenetic, Taxonomic, and Functional Diversity of Wetland Phylogenetic, taxonomic, and functional diversity of wetland Diptera communities Amélie Grégoire Taillefer Department of Natural Resource Sciences McGill University Montreal, Quebec, Canada December 2016 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctorate of Philosophy © Amélie Grégoire Taillefer, 2016. All rights reserved i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................. v LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... v LIST OF APPENDICES .................................................................................. vii ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................... ix RÉSUMÉ .......................................................................................................... xi PREFACE ....................................................................................................... xiii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................... xv CHAPTER 1: Introduction and literature review 1.1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1 1.2. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................ 3 1.2.1. CONCEPTS ...................................................................................... 3 1.2.1.1. Community analysis.................................................................. 3 1.2.1.2. Phylogenetic structure ............................................................... 3 1.2.1.3. Functional traits ........................................................................ 4 1.2.1.4. Landscape structure .................................................................. 4 1.2.1.5. Scales ........................................................................................ 5 1.2.2. STUDY HABITATS AND ORGANISMS .............................................. 6 1.2.2.1. Wetlands in Canada ................................................................... 6 1.2.2.2. Arthropods in wetlands ............................................................. 8 1.2.2.3. Ecological diversity of wetland Diptera ................................... 9 1.2.2.4. Diptera phylogenetic relationships ........................................... 9 1.3. OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................... 11 1.4. HYPOTHESES AND PREDICTIONS..................................................... 12 1.5. REFERENCES ......................................................................................... 13 1.6. CONNECTING STATEMENT ................................................................ 23 CHAPTER 2: Effect of habitat type on taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity of wetland Diptera ii 2.1. ABSTRACT .............................................................................................. 24 2.2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 25 2.3. MATERIALS AND METHODS .............................................................. 28 2.4. STATISTICAL ANALYSES ..................................................................... 29 2.4.1. Diptera diversity and community structure .................................... 29 2.4.2. Phylogeny reconstruction ............................................................... 31 2.4.3. Phylogenetic and functional community structure ......................... 32 2.4.4. Phylobetadiversity .......................................................................... 33 2.5. RESULTS .................................................................................................. 34 2.5.1. Alpha taxonomic structure .............................................................. 34 2.5.2 Beta taxonomic structure ................................................................. 35 2.5.3. Alpha phylogenetic structure .......................................................... 35 2.5.4. Beta phylogenetic structure ............................................................ 36 2.6. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................... 37 2.6.1. Taxonomic structure ....................................................................... 37 2.6.2. Phylogenetic structure .................................................................... 38 2.6.3. Taxonomic vs phylogenetic structure ............................................. 40 2.6.4. Rarity effect .................................................................................... 41 2.7. CONCLUSIONS AND CONSERVATION IMPLICATIONS ................. 42 2.8. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......................................................................... 43 2.9. REFERENCES ......................................................................................... 43 2.10. CONNECTING STATEMENT .............................................................. 64 CHAPTER 3: Latitudinal patterns in phylogenetic and functional diversity of Diptera in temperate bogs 3.1. ABSTRACT .............................................................................................. 65 3.2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 65 3.3. MATERIALS AND METHODS .............................................................. 69 3.3.1. Study sites, sampling and processing ............................................. 69 3.3.2. Habitat and vegetation variables ..................................................... 70 3.4. STATISTICAL ANALYSES ..................................................................... 71 iii 3.4.1. Taxonomic and functional composition .......................................... 71 3.4.2. Phylogeny reconstruction ............................................................... 72 3.4.3. Phylogenetic community structure ................................................. 74 3.4.4. Phylogenetic signals in trait diversity ............................................. 74 3.5. RESULTS .................................................................................................. 76 3.5.1. Species and functional alpha and beta diversity ............................. 76 3.5.2. Phylogenetic alpha and beta composition ....................................... 77 3.6. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................... 79 3.7. CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................... 82 3.8. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......................................................................... 83 3.9. REFERENCES ......................................................................................... 84 CHAPTER 4: General discussion, conclusion and future directions 4.1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 108 4.2. SUMMARY OF RESEARCH ................................................................ 108 4.2.1. Phylogenetic and taxonomic responses of Diptera communities to wetland habitats ...................................................................................... 108 4.2.2. Spatial patterns of taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic structure in peatlands .............................................................................. 109 4.3. SYNTHESIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE WORK .. 109 4.4. REFERENCES ........................................................................................111 5. APPENDICES: Supplementary materials for Chapter 2 and 3 .......... 113 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1. Ground cover variables reduced with principal component analysis. Variables with loadings larger than 0.32 in principal components (PC) 1 to 4 are in bold ..... 55 Table 2.2. Abundance (N), species richness (Sobs) and rarefied species richness ± standard error (Sest) for each of the 12 wetland sites. Rarefied species richness was standardized at 196 individuals (PIN_BG) ...................................................................................... 57 Table 3.1. Life-history and ecological traits considered in this study including categories, abbreviations and trait determination notes. Traits were assigned at the species level and adult stage except for feeding habits and specialization (larval stage) ...................98 Table 3.2. Abundance (Abun), observed species richness (S), Chao1 indices (Chao1), rarefied species richness (Srare), functional richness (FRic), functional evenness (FEve) and functional divergence (FDiv) for all sites and mean diversity for each ecoregion .........100 Table 3.3. Dominant functional composition of each site, represented by community-level weighted means (CWM). For continuous traits the mean trait value is weighted by abundance, while for categorical traits the dominant class is returned. For description of traits and associated codes refer to table 3.1 ...................................................................................101 Table 3.4. Phylogenetic diversity (PD), net relatedness index (NRI) and nearest taxon index (NTI) for Diptera communities in 15 sites across three ecoregions at three spatial scales (trap, site, ecoregion). Fisher’s combined probability tests were performed to assess if overall P-values were significant at the trap and site scales.
Recommended publications
  • The Diversity of Insects Visiting Flowers of Saw Palmetto (Arecaceae)
    Deyrup & Deyrup: Insect Visitors of Saw Palmetto Flowers 711 THE DIVERSITY OF INSECTS VISITING FLOWERS OF SAW PALMETTO (ARECACEAE) MARK DEYRUP1,* AND LEIF DEYRUP2 1Archbold Biological Station, 123 Main Drive, Venus, FL 33960 2Univ. of the Cumberlands, Williamsburg, KY 40769 *Corresponding author; E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT A survey of insect visitors on flowers ofSerenoa repens (saw palmetto) at a Florida site, the Archbold Biological Station, showed how nectar and pollen resources of a plant species can contribute to taxonomic diversity and ecological complexity. A list of 311 species of flower visitors was dominated by Hymenoptera (121 spp.), Diptera (117 spp.), and Coleoptera (52 spp.). Of 228 species whose diets are known, 158 are predators, 47 are phytophagous, and 44 are decomposers. Many species that visited S. repens flowers also visited flowers of other species at the Archbold Biological Station. The total number of known insect-flower relation- ships that include S. repens is 2,029. There is no evidence of oligolectic species that are de- pendent on saw palmetto flowers. This study further emphasizes the ecological importance and conservation value of S. repens. Key Words: pollination, flower visitor webs, pollinator diversity, floral resources, saw pal- metto, Serenoa repens RESUMEN Un estudio sobre los insectos que visitan las flores de Serenoa repens (palma enana ameri- cana o palmito de sierra) en un sitio de la Florida, la Estación Biológica Archbold, mostró cómo los recursos de néctar y polen de una especie vegetal puede contribuir a la diversidad taxonómica y complejidad ecológica. Una lista de 311 especies de visitantes de flores fue dominada por los Hymenóptera (121 spp.), Diptera (117 spp.) y Coleoptera (52 spp.).
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity and Resource Choice of Flower-Visiting Insects in Relation to Pollen Nutritional Quality and Land Use
    Diversity and resource choice of flower-visiting insects in relation to pollen nutritional quality and land use Diversität und Ressourcennutzung Blüten besuchender Insekten in Abhängigkeit von Pollenqualität und Landnutzung Vom Fachbereich Biologie der Technischen Universität Darmstadt zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doctor rerum naturalium genehmigte Dissertation von Dipl. Biologin Christiane Natalie Weiner aus Köln Berichterstatter (1. Referent): Prof. Dr. Nico Blüthgen Mitberichterstatter (2. Referent): Prof. Dr. Andreas Jürgens Tag der Einreichung: 26.02.2016 Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 29.04.2016 Darmstadt 2016 D17 2 Ehrenwörtliche Erklärung Ich erkläre hiermit ehrenwörtlich, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit entsprechend den Regeln guter wissenschaftlicher Praxis selbständig und ohne unzulässige Hilfe Dritter angefertigt habe. Sämtliche aus fremden Quellen direkt oder indirekt übernommene Gedanken sowie sämtliche von Anderen direkt oder indirekt übernommene Daten, Techniken und Materialien sind als solche kenntlich gemacht. Die Arbeit wurde bisher keiner anderen Hochschule zu Prüfungszwecken eingereicht. Osterholz-Scharmbeck, den 24.02.2016 3 4 My doctoral thesis is based on the following manuscripts: Weiner, C.N., Werner, M., Linsenmair, K.-E., Blüthgen, N. (2011): Land-use intensity in grasslands: changes in biodiversity, species composition and specialization in flower-visitor networks. Basic and Applied Ecology 12 (4), 292-299. Weiner, C.N., Werner, M., Linsenmair, K.-E., Blüthgen, N. (2014): Land-use impacts on plant-pollinator networks: interaction strength and specialization predict pollinator declines. Ecology 95, 466–474. Weiner, C.N., Werner, M , Blüthgen, N. (in prep.): Land-use intensification triggers diversity loss in pollination networks: Regional distinctions between three different German bioregions Weiner, C.N., Hilpert, A., Werner, M., Linsenmair, K.-E., Blüthgen, N.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Oscinellinae (Diptera: Chloropidae) in the Danish Landscape Lise Brunberg Nielsen
    Distribution of Oscinellinae (Diptera: Chloropidae) in the Danish landscape Lise Brunberg Nielsen Nielsen, Lise Brunberg: Distribution of Oscinellinae (Diptera: Chloropidae) in the Danish Landscape. Ent. Meddr 82: 39-62, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2014. ISSN 0013-8851 Abstract About 29,700 Oscinellinae were collected by means of sweep net, water traps and pitfalls in a variety of uncultivated habitats in Denmark mainly in Jutland. So far 75 species belonging to 21 genera are re­ corded from Denmark. Eleven species are new to the Danish fauna. Morphological details of Aphanotrigonum brachypterum, A. hungaricum, A. nigripes, Conioscinella gallarum, lncertella albipalpis, I. nigrifrons, I. kerteszi, I. scotica and Oscinella angustipennis are presented. The distribu­ tion of Oscinellinae in the Danish landscape is discussed. In Denmark, farmland dominates, so the two most abundant Oscinellarspecies of ara­ ble land, Oscinella frit and 0. vastator, are also predominant in most nat­ ural habitats. Small and larger uncultivated areas, however, making up only 25 % of the Danish landscape, contain a rich fauna of Oscinel­ lines. The advantage of different sampling methods combined is demonstrated. Sammendrag Fordelingen af fritf1uer (Diptera: Chloropidae) i det danske landskab. De fa millimeter lange, sorte eller sort-gule fritf1uer (Chloropidae) er nogle af de mest almindelige fluer pa gr<esarealer i Danmark. Et start materiale indsamlet med ketcher, i fangbakker og nedgravede fangglas pa forskellige udyrkede gr<esarealer er artsbestemt. Hovedparten af materialet, ea. 29.700 individer tilh0rer underfamilen Oscinellinae, der i Danmark omfatter 21 sl<egter og 75 arter. Elleve arter er nye for den danske fauna. Alle arter er beskrevet i Nartshuk & Andersson (2013), men supplerende morfologiske detaljer er her tilf0jet for 9 af dem: Aphanotrigonum brachypterum, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera: Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae), an Almost Entirely
    A review of the Archiceroptera Papp genus complex (Diptera: Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae) by Steven Mark Paiero A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Sciences Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Steven Mark Paiero, December, 2017 ABSTRACT: A review of the Archiceroptera Papp genus complex (Diptera: Sphaeroceridae: Limosininae) Steven Mark Paiero Advisor: University of Guelph, 2017 Dr. S.A. Marshall This thesis has two parts. The first part investigates the relationships between the Archiceroptera genus complex and other members of the Limosininae (Diptera: Sphaeroceridae). A focus is placed on the relationships within the larger epandrial process group, which contains Bitheca, Bromeloecia, Pterogramma, Aptilotella, and Robustagramma, along with Archiceroptera, Rudolfina and several previously unplaced species groups. Molecular and morphological data sets provide the first phylogeny of the group, and were used to support the inclusion of several unplaced species groups within Rudolfina and Archiceroptera, while one new genus is described. Pectinosina gen. nov. includes two species: P. prominens (Duda), previously placed in Rudolfina, and P. carro n. sp. The second part of the thesis deals with revisions of Archiceroptera Papp and Rudolfina Roháček. Rudolfina now includes 13 described species, nine of which are newly described here (R. bucki, R. exuberata, R. howdeni, R. megepandria, R. pauca, R. pilosa, R. newtoni, R. remiforma, and R. tumida). Archiceroptera now includes 29 species, of which 27 are newly described here (A. adamas, A. addenda, A. barberi, A. basilia, A. bilobata, A. bisetosus, A. braziliensis, A. brevivilla, A. browni, A. caliga, A. calligraphia, A. cobolorum, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Sarcophagidae De Interés Forense En El Parque
    SARCOPHAGIDAE DE INTERÉS FORENSE EN EL PARQUE NACIONAL SOBERANÍA, PROVINCIA DE PANAMÁ SARCOPHAGIDAE OF FORENSIC INTEREST IN THE SOBERANIA NATIONAL PARQUE, PROVINCE OF PANAMA Garcés, Percis A.; Arias, Lia N.; Medina, Meybis Percis A. Garcés Resumen: Se estudiaron las Sarcophagidae en dos áreas: una [email protected] boscosa y en otra no boscosa, con el propósito de conocer las Universidad de Panamá,, Panamá especies que pudieran tener importancia forense en nuestro país. Litza N. Arias Esta familia contiene algunas especies que han sido registradas [email protected] como insectos forenses importantes, debido a que son uno de Ministerio de Educación, Panamá los primero que detecta y encuentra un cadáver fresco. Por lo que, resultan importantes en las investigaciones criminales, Meybis Medina principalmente en la estimación del intervalo postmortem (IPM). Ministerio de Educación, Panamá En el presente estudio se colectaron 169 ejemplares que fueron agrupados en nueve géneros y 11 especies. Las especies más frecuentemente capturadas fueron, Pekia (Pantonella) Tecnociencia intermutans, Sarcodexia sp, Boettcheria sp, Pekia sp, Helicobia sp Universidad de Panamá, Panamá . En cuanto a la preferencia de las áreas, en ISSN: 1609-8102 y Sarcofahrtiopsis sp2 ISSN-e: 2415-0940 nuestro estudio, las moscas mostraron mayor preferencia por el Periodicidad: Semestral área boscosa que por el área no boscosa y, por el corazón que por vol. 22, núm. 2, 2020 el hígado. [email protected] Recepción: 21 Febrero 2020 Palabras clave: Sarcophagidae, área boscosa, área no boscosa, Aprobación: 23 Marzo 2020 Pekia (Pantonella) intermutans, Sarcodexia sp, Boettcheria sp. URL: http://portal.amelica.org/ameli/ Abstract: Sarcophagidae were studied in two areas: wooded jatsRepo/224/2241149007/index.html and non-wooded with the purpose to learn about species that could have forensic importance in our country.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Leaf-Mining Flies (Diptera, Agromyzidae) of Finland
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 441: 291–303Checklist (2014) of the leaf-mining flies( Diptera, Agromyzidae) of Finland 291 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7586 CHECKLIST www.zookeys.org Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Checklist of the leaf-mining flies (Diptera, Agromyzidae) of Finland Jere Kahanpää1 1 Finnish Museum of Natural History, Zoology Unit, P.O. Box 17, FI–00014 University of Helsinki, Finland Corresponding author: Jere Kahanpää ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Salmela | Received 25 March 2014 | Accepted 28 April 2014 | Published 19 September 2014 http://zoobank.org/04E1C552-F83F-4611-8166-F6B1A4C98E0E Citation: Kahanpää J (2014) Checklist of the leaf-mining flies (Diptera, Agromyzidae) of Finland. In: Kahanpää J, Salmela J (Eds) Checklist of the Diptera of Finland. ZooKeys 441: 291–303. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7586 Abstract A checklist of the Agromyzidae (Diptera) recorded from Finland is presented. 279 (or 280) species are currently known from the country. Phytomyza linguae Lundqvist, 1947 is recorded as new to Finland. Keywords Checklist, Finland, Diptera, biodiversity, faunistics Introduction The Agromyzidae are called the leaf-miner or leaf-mining flies and not without reason, although a substantial fraction of the species feed as larvae on other parts of living plants. While Agromyzidae is traditionally placed in the superfamily Opomyzoidea, its exact relationships with other acalyptrate Diptera are poorly understood (see for example Winkler et al. 2010). Two subfamilies are recognised within the leaf-mining flies: Agromyzinae and Phytomyzinae. Both are now recognised as natural groups (Dempewolf 2005, Scheffer et al. 2007). Unfortunately the genera are not as well defined: at least Ophiomyia, Phy- toliriomyza and Aulagromyza are paraphyletic in DNA sequence analyses (see Scheffer et al.
    [Show full text]
  • (Diptera: Calliphoridae, Oestridae, Rhinophoridae, Sarcophagidae) De Colombia
    Biota Colombiana 5 (2) 201 - 208, 2004 Los califóridos, éstridos, rinofóridos y sarcofágidos (Diptera: Calliphoridae, Oestridae, Rhinophoridae, Sarcophagidae) de Colombia Thomas Pape1, Marta Wolff2 y Eduardo C. Amat3 1 Swedish Museum of Natural History, PO Box 50007 SE-10405 Stockholm, Sweden [email protected] 2 Instituto de Biología, Universidad de Antioquia, AA1226 Medellín [email protected] 3 Instituto de Investigación de recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt, [email protected] Palabras Clave: Califóridos, Éstridos, Rinofóridos, Sarcofágidos, Lista de Especies, Colombia Califóridos, éstridos, rinofóridos y sarcofágidos ovis y una o dos especies del género Gasterophilus. Apa- conforman junto con los Taquínidos la superfamilia rentemente las especies cosmopolitas Hypoderma bovis y Oestroidea (Mc Alpine 1989). Hypoderma lineatum no se han establecido en Suramérica ecuatorial (Guimarães & Papavero 1999), pero es posible Según datos morfológicos la familia Calliphoridae es un que puedan ser introducidas por medio del ganado impor- clado parafilético o aun, polifilético (Rognes 1997). Las de- tado. El último catálogo de la familia para la región más familias al parecer exhiben una monofilia bien corrobo- Neotropical fue escrito por Guimarães & Papavero (1999). rada (Rognes 1997; Pape & Arnaud 2001). La familia Rhinophoridae es comparable en tamaño con Calliphoridae consta de aproximadamente 1000 especies en Oestridae; consta de 142 especies en 23 géneros. La biolo- el mundo, de las cuales solo 126 se encuentran en el gía de este grupo es conocida para algunas especies euro- Neotrópico (Amorin et al. 2002). La biología de los califóridos peas y afrotropicales, todas parásitas de isópodos. La mor- es muy variada: generalmente necrófagos, también los hay fología de la larva sugiere que las especies neotropicales predadores y parasitoides de caracoles y lombrices de tie- pueden presentar una biología similar (Pape & Arnaud 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Parasites of the Agromyzidae (Diptera)
    Beitr. Ent. • Bd. 18 • 1968- H. 1/2 * S. 5 -6 2 • Berlin University of Alberta Department of Entomology Edmonton, Alberta (Canada) G r a h a m C. D. G r i f f i t h s The Alysiinae (Hym. Braconidae) parasites of the Agromyzidae (Diptera) V. The parasites of Liriomyza Mik and certain small genera of Phytomyzinae1 With textfigures 171-185 Contents Introduction ........................................ 5 Previous Records............................................................................................................................ 6 Dapsilarthra F o r s t e r ................................................................................................................................... 6 Pseudopezomachus M a n t b r o ...........................................................................................................................10 D a c n u sin i.............................................................................................................................................. 11 Ooloneura F o r s t e r .....................................................................................................................................11 Dacnusa H a l i d a y .....................................................................................................................................17 Chorebus H a l i d a y .....................................................................................................................................28 Keys to the Dacnusini Parasites of particular Host-Groups
    [Show full text]
  • A Five-Year Research Program Is Proposed to Expand the Theory of Community Assembly from Its Current Base of Correlative Inferen
    PROJECT SUMMARY A five-year research program is proposed to expand the theory of community assembly from its current base of correlative inferences to one grounded in process-based conclusions derived from controlled field and laboratory experiments. Northern pitcher plants, Sarracenia purpurea, and their community of inquiline arthropods and rotifers, will be used as the model system for the proposed experiments. There are three goals to the proposed research. (1) Inquiline assemblages that colonize pitcher plants will be developed as a model system for understanding community assembly and persistence. (2) Field and laboratory experiments will be used to elucidate causes of inquiline community colonization, assembly, and persistence, and the consequences of inquiline community dynamics for plant leaf allocation patterns, growth, and reproduction, as well as within-plant nutrient cycling. Reciprocal interactions of plant dynamics on inquiline community structure will also be investigated experimentally. (3) Matrix models will be developed to describe reciprocal interactions between inquiline community assembly and persistence, and inquilines’ living host habitats. As an integrated whole, the proposed experiments and models will provide a complete picture of linkages between pitcher-plant inquiline communities and their host plants, at individual leaf and whole-plant scales. This focus on measures of plant performance will fill an apparent lacuna in prior studies of pitcher plant microecosystems, which, with few exceptions, have focused almost exclusively on inquiline population dynamics and interspecific interactions. Plant demography of S. purpurea will be described and modeled for the first time. Complementary, multi-year field and greenhouse experiments will reveal effects of soil and pitcher nutrient composition on leaf allocation, plant growth, and reproduction.
    [Show full text]
  • ARTHROPODA Subphylum Hexapoda Protura, Springtails, Diplura, and Insects
    NINE Phylum ARTHROPODA SUBPHYLUM HEXAPODA Protura, springtails, Diplura, and insects ROD P. MACFARLANE, PETER A. MADDISON, IAN G. ANDREW, JOCELYN A. BERRY, PETER M. JOHNS, ROBERT J. B. HOARE, MARIE-CLAUDE LARIVIÈRE, PENELOPE GREENSLADE, ROSA C. HENDERSON, COURTenaY N. SMITHERS, RicarDO L. PALMA, JOHN B. WARD, ROBERT L. C. PILGRIM, DaVID R. TOWNS, IAN McLELLAN, DAVID A. J. TEULON, TERRY R. HITCHINGS, VICTOR F. EASTOP, NICHOLAS A. MARTIN, MURRAY J. FLETCHER, MARLON A. W. STUFKENS, PAMELA J. DALE, Daniel BURCKHARDT, THOMAS R. BUCKLEY, STEVEN A. TREWICK defining feature of the Hexapoda, as the name suggests, is six legs. Also, the body comprises a head, thorax, and abdomen. The number A of abdominal segments varies, however; there are only six in the Collembola (springtails), 9–12 in the Protura, and 10 in the Diplura, whereas in all other hexapods there are strictly 11. Insects are now regarded as comprising only those hexapods with 11 abdominal segments. Whereas crustaceans are the dominant group of arthropods in the sea, hexapods prevail on land, in numbers and biomass. Altogether, the Hexapoda constitutes the most diverse group of animals – the estimated number of described species worldwide is just over 900,000, with the beetles (order Coleoptera) comprising more than a third of these. Today, the Hexapoda is considered to contain four classes – the Insecta, and the Protura, Collembola, and Diplura. The latter three classes were formerly allied with the insect orders Archaeognatha (jumping bristletails) and Thysanura (silverfish) as the insect subclass Apterygota (‘wingless’). The Apterygota is now regarded as an artificial assemblage (Bitsch & Bitsch 2000).
    [Show full text]
  • Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, Version 2018-07-24
    Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, version 2018-07-24 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge biology staff July 24, 2018 2 Cover image: map of 16,213 georeferenced occurrence records included in the checklist. Contents Contents 3 Introduction 5 Purpose............................................................ 5 About the list......................................................... 5 Acknowledgments....................................................... 5 Native species 7 Vertebrates .......................................................... 7 Invertebrates ......................................................... 55 Vascular Plants........................................................ 91 Bryophytes ..........................................................164 Other Plants .........................................................171 Chromista...........................................................171 Fungi .............................................................173 Protozoans ..........................................................186 Non-native species 187 Vertebrates ..........................................................187 Invertebrates .........................................................187 Vascular Plants........................................................190 Extirpated species 207 Vertebrates ..........................................................207 Vascular Plants........................................................207 Change log 211 References 213 Index 215 3 Introduction Purpose to avoid implying
    [Show full text]
  • Leaf Miner Species CP
    Contingency Plan – Cereal Leafminers (Agromyza ambigua, A. megalopsis, Cerodontha denticornis, Chromatomyia fuscula, Ch. nigra) Industry Biosecurity Plan for the Grains Industry Threat Specific Contingency Plan Cereal Leafminers Agromyza ambigua, Agromyza megalopsis, Cerodontha denticornis, Chromatomyia fuscula, Chromatomyia nigra Prepared by Dr Peter Ridland and Plant Health Australia January 2009 Disclaimer: The scientific and technical content of this document is current to the date published and all efforts were made to obtain relevant and published information on the pest. New information will be included as it becomes available, or when the document is reviewed. The material contained in this publication is produced for general information only. It is not intended as professional advice on any particular matter. No person should act or fail to act on the basis of any material contained in this publication without first obtaining specific, independent professional advice. Plant Health Australia and all persons acting for Plant Health Australia in preparing this publication, expressly disclaim all and any liability to any persons in respect of anything done by any such person in reliance, whether in whole or in part, on this publication. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of Plant Health Australia. Page 1 of 40 Contingency Plan – Cereal Leafminers (Agromyza ambigua, A. megalopsis, Cerodontha denticornis, Chromatomyia fuscula, Ch. nigra) 1 Purpose of this Contingency Plan.........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]