DOCSLIB.ORG

The Effect of Plant Patch Size and Spatial Pattern on Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functions, and Grassland Community Structure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Effect of Plant Patch Size and Spatial Pattern on Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functions, and Grassland Community Structure The Effect of Plant Patch Size and Spatial Pattern on Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functions, and Grassland Community Structure by Shannon E. Seahra A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Biology Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Shannon E. Seahra, September, 2015 ABSTRACT THE EFFECT OF PLANT PATCH SIZE AND SPATIAL PATTERN ON BIODIVERSITY, ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS, AND GRASSLAND COMMUNITY STRUCTURE Shannon E. Seahra Advisor: University of Guelph, 2015 Professor J. A. Newman The interactions between plants that determine competition and coexistence are strongly influenced by their fine-scale spatial pattern. These interactions also ultimately influence diversity, function, and structure in plant communities. In areas that have undergone extensive land-use or anthropogenic degradation, such as North American grasslands, there is a critical need to understand how spatial patterning of plant species can be manipulated to maximize diversity and restoration success. The research presented in this thesis employed a novel planting strategy using conspecific patch sizes at seeding to spatially manipulate inter- and intraspecific interactions among native grassland plant species. I found that seeded patch size had strong effects on diversity maintenance, biodiversity effects, productivity, and invasion, and that the typical uniformly mixed seeding approach in biodiversity ecosystem function studies and restoration applications may not maximize these responses. Smaller patch plots tend to have strong selection effects from dominant forb species, although this may change over time. Additionally, there were species-specific and plant functional group-specific responses to patch size that should be considered in restoration of low-diversity sites. The initial fine-scale plant pattern of had measurable effects on the spatial abundance of species, functional groups, and invasion. Finally, I found that initial patch size had strong effects on the abundance several insect families that are ecologically relevant. Furthermore, the abundance of arthropod herbivores, parasitoids, and predators were significantly influenced as well, with variable relationships to patch size. These findings help to further our understanding of how plant species spatial pattern affects biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and community structure, as well as provide novel ideas for planting strategies in grassland restoration. Acknowledgments I will always have tremendous gratitude for my advisor, Jonathan Newman, for taking a chance on me, and inviting me into his lab to study biodiversity. His guidance, knowledge, and calm reassurance throughout the years were no doubt integral to my accomplishments. Thank you to my committee member Kathryn Yurkonis, who always went above and beyond to help in all aspects of my research, despite being in another country. Her advice and encouragement, whether in person, online, or last minute, was a valuable part of my progress throughout the years. Thanks to my parents who introduced me to science at a very young age (Billions and Billions!), and never stopped pushing me forward. Their immense support over the years, throughout all of my mistakes, will never be forgotten. Thanks to my sister, Nicole, for being a great friend, although to me you will always be little Coee. To my partner, Rick Thompson, thank you for putting up with me, for always making dinner when I was too occupied, for all the morning coffees, and for making me a better person. Thank you as well for helping with biomass drying, and for learning to appreciate insects (and Collembola) the way I do. Thanks to our Lagomorpha babies/monsters for distracting me at the best of times, and the worst of times. My life would be incomplete without Jezebel, Rocco, and Garth. Thank you to the Newman lab group, both past and present members, for their support and camaraderie. Dr. Kim Bolton was an esteemed supervisor both in the field and the lab, and hosted some of the best parties. Thanks to Aurora Patchett for being an important field member in nearly all projects, and for entertaining my insect interests, no matter how obsessive. Thanks to Dr. Heather Hager for sharing her expertise in multivariate stats. Thanks to Dr. Simone Harri, Dr. Emily Robinson, Dr. Gerry Ryan, and Kruti Shukla for welcoming me into the lab all those years ago. Thank you to Neil Rooney, my co-advisor, for his outgoing help and support since my undergraduate years. Without him, I would have not applied to graduate studies at SES. Thank you to my committee member Alex Smith, for providing guidance in my arthropod research, and helpful feedback during the grueling writing stage. Finally, thank you to my sweet Haze. I dedicate my thesis to him. iv List of Tables Table 2.1. Results from repeated measures ANOVA of seeded species patch size treatment effects on aboveground biomass (natural log transformed), proportion of invaders (arcsine square root transformed), overyielding ln(Di), biodiversity effects (selection and complementarity, square root transformed with sign preserved), and Simpson’s diversity. Linear contrasts between patch size treatments were based on the natural-log of the seeded patch edge to area ratio and excluded mixed seeding plots. Values are F-statistics and degrees of freedom, which were reduced for variables with two growing seasons of data. Table 2.2. Results from repeated measures ANOVA of patch size treatment effects on interspecific association, the natural-log of total conspecific patches and the natural-log of total interspecific edges. Mixed plot treatment was not included in the analyses. Linear contrasts were based on the natural-log of the resident patch edge to area. Values are F-statistics and degrees of freedom. Table 3.1. Species loadings from the RDA of relative spatial abundance of seeded species in relation to patch treatment and time for 2011-2012. Response variable (Resp.) coordinates correspond to axes in Fig 3.1 composition biplot. Table 3.2. Species loadings from the RDA of relative spatial abundance of seeded species in relation to patch treatment for 2011. Response variable (Resp.) coordinates correspond to axes in Fig 3.2 composition biplot. Table 3.3. Species loadings from the RDA of relative spatial abundance of seeded species in relation to patch treatment for 2012. Response variable (Resp.) coordinates correspond to axes in Fig 3.3 composition biplot. v Table 3.4. Standard least squares regression results from analysis of proportional change in number of conspecific clusters of seeded species and patch size, year, and patch × year. Table 3.5. Effect tests from repeated measures ANOVA for relative spatial abundance of plant functional groups and patch size treatment (m) (patch trt) across 2011-2012. Table 3.6. Standard least squares regression results from analysis of relative spatial abundance of functional groups and patch edge to area ratio (m/m2), year, and patch edge to area ratio × year. Table 3.7. Standard least squares regression results from analysis of invader species relative spatial abundance and number of clusters using terms: patch edge to area ratio (m/m2), year, and patch edge to area ratio × year. Table 4.1. Trophic group designations for arthropod taxon groups, based on published literature. Groupings were assigned based on the majority of described grassland species. Table 4.2. Species loadings from the RDA of arthropod family (or taxon group) abundance in relation to patch treatment, block, and year. Response variable (Resp.) coordinates correspond to axes in Fig 4.1 composition biplot. Table 4.3. Species loadings from the RDA of arthropod family (or taxon group) abundance in relation to patch treatment and block for year one (2011). Response variable (Resp.) coordinates correspond to axes in Fig 4.2 composition biplot. Table 4.4. Species loadings from the RDA of arthropod family (or taxon group) abundance in relation to patch treatment, block for year two (2012). Response variable (Resp.) coordinates correspond to axes in Fig 4.3 composition biplot. vi Appendix Table 1. Species list (n = 16) of grassland perennials selected for experiment, including authority, family, common name, seeds/g, plant functional and reproductive group, and distribution in Southern Ontario according to the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (Bradley, 2013). Seeds/g was calculated based on the mass of 100 seeds (n=10) for each species. All species are native to Southern Ontario except for S. arundinaceus. vii List of Figures Figure 2.1. Effect of initial patch edge to area ratio (m/m2) of seeded species on a) aboveground biomass (g) (untransformed mean ± SE) over three growing seasons, and b) the selection effect (square root transformed mean with sign preserved ± SE), in the second (2011) and third (2012) growing seasons. Means with the same letter are not significantly different (LSD, P < 0.05). Plots were divided into patches 1, 0.5, 0.25 and 0.125 m on an edge, which corresponds to an edge to area ratio of 4, 8, 16 and 32 m/m2 for the seeded patches. Mixed seed plots (represented by the × symbol) developed an average patch edge to area ratio of 28.2 m/m2. Figure 2.2. Effect of initial patch edge to area ratio (m/m2) of seeded species on a) Simpson’s diversity (mean ± SE) in the second (2011) and third (2012) growing seasons, and b) the proportion of non-seeded (invader) species (untransformed mean ± SE) over three growing seasons. Means with the same letter are not significantly different (LSD, P < 0.05). Plots were divided into patches 1, 0.5, 0.25 and 0.125 m on an edge, which corresponds to an edge to area ratio of 4, 8, 16 and 32 m/m2 for the seeded patches. Mixed seed plots (represented by the ×symbol) developed an average patch edge to area ratio of 28.2 m/m2. Figure 2.3a) Patch treatment (m) and interspecific association (mean ± SE) in 2010- 2012, see Methods for measurement and calculation of intersection association.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brooklyn, Cloudland, Melsonby (Gaarraay)
    BUSH BLITZ SPECIES DISCOVERY PROGRAM Brooklyn, Cloudland, Melsonby (Gaarraay) Nature Refuges Eubenangee Swamp, Hann Tableland, Melsonby (Gaarraay) National Parks Upper Bridge Creek Queensland 29 April–27 May · 26–27 July 2010 Australian Biological Resources Study What is Contents Bush Blitz? Bush Blitz is a four-year, What is Bush Blitz? 2 multi-million dollar Abbreviations 2 partnership between the Summary 3 Australian Government, Introduction 4 BHP Billiton and Earthwatch Reserves Overview 6 Australia to document plants Methods 11 and animals in selected properties across Australia’s Results 14 National Reserve System. Discussion 17 Appendix A: Species Lists 31 Fauna 32 This innovative partnership Vertebrates 32 harnesses the expertise of many Invertebrates 50 of Australia’s top scientists from Flora 62 museums, herbaria, universities, Appendix B: Threatened Species 107 and other institutions and Fauna 108 organisations across the country. Flora 111 Appendix C: Exotic and Pest Species 113 Fauna 114 Flora 115 Glossary 119 Abbreviations ANHAT Australian Natural Heritage Assessment Tool EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth) NCA Nature Conservation Act 1992 (Queensland) NRS National Reserve System 2 Bush Blitz survey report Summary A Bush Blitz survey was conducted in the Cape Exotic vertebrate pests were not a focus York Peninsula, Einasleigh Uplands and Wet of this Bush Blitz, however the Cane Toad Tropics bioregions of Queensland during April, (Rhinella marina) was recorded in both Cloudland May and July 2010. Results include 1,186 species Nature Refuge and Hann Tableland National added to those known across the reserves. Of Park. Only one exotic invertebrate species was these, 36 are putative species new to science, recorded, the Spiked Awlsnail (Allopeas clavulinus) including 24 species of true bug, 9 species of in Cloudland Nature Refuge.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Appendix 3. Grasslands National Park Taxonomy Report
    Appendix 3. Grasslands National Park Taxonomy Report Class Order Family Genus Species Arachnida Araneae Araneidae Metepeira Metepeira palustris Neoscona Neoscona arabesca Clubionidae Clubiona Clubiona kastoni Clubiona mixta Clubiona moesta Clubiona mutata Gnaphosidae Drassodes Drassodes neglectus Micaria Micaria gertschi Nodocion Nodocion mateonus Linyphiidae Erigone Erigone aletris Spirembolus Spirembolus mundus Lycosidae Alopecosa Alopecosa aculeata Pardosa Pardosa mulaiki Schizocosa Schizocosa mccooki Mimetidae Mimetus Mimetus epeiroides Philodromidae Ebo Ebo iviei Philodromus Philodromus cespitum Philodromus histrio Philodromus praelustris Titanebo Titanebo parabolis Salticidae Euophrys Euophrys monadnock 1 Habronattus Habronattus sp. 2GAB Phidippus Phidippus purpuratus Tetragnathidae Tetragnatha Tetragnatha laboriosa Thomisidae Mecaphesa Mecaphesa carletonica Xysticus Xysticus ampullatus Xysticus ellipticus Xysticus emertoni Xysticus luctans Mesostigmata Blattisociidae Cheiroseius Parasitidae Phytoseiidae Opiliones Phalangiidae Phalangium Phalangium opilio Sclerosomatidae Togwoteeus Trombidiformes Anystidae Bdellidae Erythraeidae Abrolophus Leptus Eupodidae Hydryphantidae Pionidae Piona Pygmephoridae Stigmaeidae Collembola Entomobryomorpha Entomobryidae Entomobrya Entomobrya atrocincta Lepidocyrtus Lepidocyrtus cyaneus Symphypleona Bourletiellidae Insecta Coleoptera Anthribidae 2 Brentidae Kissingeria Kissingeria extensum Microon Microon canadensis Trichapion Trichapion centrale Trichapion commodum Cantharidae Dichelotarsus Dichelotarsus
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Prairie Restoration on Hemiptera
    CAN THE ONE TRUE BUG BE THE ONE TRUE ANSWER? THE INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIE RESTORATION ON HEMIPTERA COMPOSITION Thesis Submitted to The College of Arts and Sciences of the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of Master of Science in Biology By Stephanie Kay Gunter, B.A. Dayton, Ohio August 2021 CAN THE ONE TRUE BUG BE THE ONE TRUE ANSWER? THE INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIE RESTORATION ON HEMIPTERA COMPOSITION Name: Gunter, Stephanie Kay APPROVED BY: Chelse M. Prather, Ph.D. Faculty Advisor Associate Professor Department of Biology Ryan W. McEwan, Ph.D. Committee Member Associate Professor Department of Biology Mark G. Nielsen Ph.D. Committee Member Associate Professor Department of Biology ii © Copyright by Stephanie Kay Gunter All rights reserved 2021 iii ABSTRACT CAN THE ONE TRUE BUG BE THE ONE TRUE ANSWER? THE INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIE RESTORATION ON HEMIPTERA COMPOSITION Name: Gunter, Stephanie Kay University of Dayton Advisor: Dr. Chelse M. Prather Ohio historically hosted a patchwork of tallgrass prairies, which provided habitat for native species and prevented erosion. As these vulnerable habitats have declined in the last 200 years due to increased human land use, restorations of these ecosystems have increased, and it is important to evaluate their success. The Hemiptera (true bugs) are an abundant and varied order of insects including leafhoppers, aphids, cicadas, stink bugs, and more. They play important roles in grassland ecosystems, feeding on plant sap and providing prey to predators. Hemipteran abundance and composition can respond to grassland restorations, age of restoration, and size and isolation of habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • Jervis Bay Territory Page 1 of 50 21-Jan-11 Species List for NRM Region (Blank), Jervis Bay Territory
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]
  • BÖCEKLERİN SINIFLANDIRILMASI (Takım Düzeyinde)
    BÖCEKLERİN SINIFLANDIRILMASI (TAKIM DÜZEYİNDE) GÖKHAN AYDIN 2016 Editör : Gökhan AYDIN Dizgi : Ziya ÖNCÜ ISBN : 978-605-87432-3-6 Böceklerin Sınıflandırılması isimli eğitim amaçlı hazırlanan bilgisayar programı için lütfen aşağıda verilen linki tıklayarak programı ücretsiz olarak bilgisayarınıza yükleyin. http://atabeymyo.sdu.edu.tr/assets/uploads/sites/76/files/siniflama-05102016.exe Eğitim Amaçlı Bilgisayar Programı ISBN: 978-605-87432-2-9 İçindekiler İçindekiler i Önsöz vi 1. Protura - Coneheads 1 1.1 Özellikleri 1 1.2 Ekonomik Önemi 2 1.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 2 2. Collembola - Springtails 3 2.1 Özellikleri 3 2.2 Ekonomik Önemi 4 2.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 4 3. Thysanura - Silverfish 6 3.1 Özellikleri 6 3.2 Ekonomik Önemi 7 3.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 7 4. Microcoryphia - Bristletails 8 4.1 Özellikleri 8 4.2 Ekonomik Önemi 9 5. Diplura 10 5.1 Özellikleri 10 5.2 Ekonomik Önemi 10 5.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 11 6. Plocoptera – Stoneflies 12 6.1 Özellikleri 12 6.2 Ekonomik Önemi 12 6.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 13 7. Embioptera - webspinners 14 7.1 Özellikleri 15 7.2 Ekonomik Önemi 15 7.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 15 8. Orthoptera–Grasshoppers, Crickets 16 8.1 Özellikleri 16 8.2 Ekonomik Önemi 16 8.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 17 i 9. Phasmida - Walkingsticks 20 9.1 Özellikleri 20 9.2 Ekonomik Önemi 21 9.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 21 10. Dermaptera - Earwigs 23 10.1 Özellikleri 23 10.2 Ekonomik Önemi 24 10.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 24 11. Zoraptera 25 11.1 Özellikleri 25 11.2 Ekonomik Önemi 25 11.3 Bunları Biliyor musunuz? 26 12.
    [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]
  • Insect Classification Standards 2020
    RECOMMENDED INSECT CLASSIFICATION FOR UGA ENTOMOLOGY CLASSES (2020) In an effort to standardize the hexapod classification systems being taught to our students by our faculty in multiple courses across three UGA campuses, I recommend that the Entomology Department adopts the basic system presented in the following textbook: Triplehorn, C.A. and N.F. Johnson. 2005. Borror and DeLong’s Introduction to the Study of Insects. 7th ed. Thomson Brooks/Cole, Belmont CA, 864 pp. This book was chosen for a variety of reasons. It is widely used in the U.S. as the textbook for Insect Taxonomy classes, including our class at UGA. It focuses on North American taxa. The authors were cautious, presenting changes only after they have been widely accepted by the taxonomic community. Below is an annotated summary of the T&J (2005) classification. Some of the more familiar taxa above the ordinal level are given in caps. Some of the more important and familiar suborders and families are indented and listed beneath each order. Note that this is neither an exhaustive nor representative list of suborders and families. It was provided simply to clarify which taxa are impacted by some of more important classification changes. Please consult T&J (2005) for information about taxa that are not listed below. Unfortunately, T&J (2005) is now badly outdated with respect to some significant classification changes. Therefore, in the classification standard provided below, some well corroborated and broadly accepted updates have been made to their classification scheme. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this classification.
    [Show full text]
  • LYGAEOIDEA La Superfamila Lygaeoidea (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Pentatomomorpha) Es Una De Las Mayores Y Más Diver- Sas, Con Más De 4000 Especies, De Heteroptera
    | 421 Resumen LYGAEOIDEA La superfamila Lygaeoidea (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Pentatomomorpha) es una de las mayores y más diver- sas, con más de 4000 especies, de Heteroptera. Los hábitats de las especies del grupo son variados, hay grupos arbóreos, geófilos y laminófilos. La mayoría se alimentan de semillas maduras, aunque las Blissidae y algunas Lygaeidae son succionadoras de savia, los Geocoridae son principalmente depredadoras y las Cle- radini (Rhyparochromidae) se alimentan de sangre de vertebrados. Las ninfas viven en los mismos hábitats que los adultos y se alimentan generalmente de las mismas plantas. Actualmente en los Lygaeoidea se reconocen 15 familias, de las cuales 12 han sido registradas de la región Neotropical y 11 de la Argentina: Berytidae, Blissidae, Colobathristidae, Cymidae, Geocoridae, Lygaeidae, Ninidae, Oxycarenidae, Pachygronthidae, Piesmatidae y Rhyparochromidae. Se presenta una breve historia taxonómica, aspectos filogenéticos y de la clasificación actual de la superfamilia, bibliografía de referencia y una clave para la identificación de las familias de la Argentina. Para cada familia se presenta una diagnosis, principales trabajos, aspectos de la bio- logía y la diversidad a nivel mundial y en la Argentina, así como claves para la determinación de los géneros presentes en el pais. Además, se reseña la importancia agroeconómica del grupo. Se adjunta un listado de las 154 especies citadas de Argentina. Pablo Matías DELLAPÉ Abstract The superfamily Lygaeoidea (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: División Entomología, Museo de La Plata, Paseo del Pentatomomorpha) is one of the most diverse within the Bosque, 1900 La Plata, Argentina. Heteroptera, with more than 4000 species described. [email protected] The Lygaeoid habitats are diverse; there are arboreal, geophile and laminophile species.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Distribution Ranking for the Multiple Projects Project Organism Group: Hemiptera Specimens
    Species Distribution Ranking for the Multiple Projects Project Organism Group: Hemiptera Specimens Family and Species Sum Of Sites Where Species Was Found Cercopidae Clastoptera obtusa (Spittlebug) 26 Cercopidae Prosapia bicincta (Two-lined spittle bug) 24 Delphacidae Liburniella ornata (Planthopper) 21 Cicadellidae Jikradia olitorius (Leafhopper) 18 Miridae Lygus lineolaris (Tarnished plant bug) 18 Cercopidae Philaenus spumarius (Meadow spittlebug) 18 Berytidae Jalysus spinosus (Stilt bug) 18 Cercopidae Clastoptera xanthocephala (Spittlebug) 16 Cicadellidae Graphocephala coccinea (Leafhopper) 15 Pentatomidae Mormidea lugens (Stink bug) 12 Alydidae Alydus eurinus (Broad-headed bug) 12 Cercopidae Lepyronia quadrangularis (Spittlebug) 11 Pentatomidae Euschistus tristigmus (Stink bug) 11 Rhyparochromidae Pseudopachybrachius basalis (Seed bug) 10 Lygaeidae Kleidocerys resedae (Seed bug) 10 Psyllidae Cacopsylla carpinicola (Psyllid plant bug) 9 Rhopalidae Niesthrea louisianica (Scentless plant bug) 9 Cydnidae Sehirus cinctus (Burrower bug) 9 Cercopidae Aphrophora saratogenesis (Spittlebug) 9 Flatidae Metcalfa pruinosa (Planthopper) 9 Flatidae Anormenis chloris (Planthopper) 9 Psyllidae Bactericera tripunctata (Jumping plant lice) 8 Delphacidae Isodelphax basivitta (Planthopper) 8 Delphacidae Delphacodes puella (Planthopper) 8 Psyllidae Bactericera species (Jumping plant lice) 8 Cercopidae Aphrophora quadrinotata (Spittlebug) 8 Cercopidae Aphrophora cribrata (Pine spittle bug) 7 Pentatomidae Euschistus servus (Stink bug) 7 Membracidae Acutalis
    [Show full text]
  • Building-Up of a DNA Barcode Library for True Bugs (Insecta: Hemiptera: Heteroptera) of Germany Reveals Taxonomic Uncertainties and Surprises
    Building-Up of a DNA Barcode Library for True Bugs (Insecta: Hemiptera: Heteroptera) of Germany Reveals Taxonomic Uncertainties and Surprises Michael J. Raupach1*, Lars Hendrich2*, Stefan M. Ku¨ chler3, Fabian Deister1,Je´rome Morinie`re4, Martin M. Gossner5 1 Molecular Taxonomy of Marine Organisms, German Center of Marine Biodiversity (DZMB), Senckenberg am Meer, Wilhelmshaven, Germany, 2 Sektion Insecta varia, Bavarian State Collection of Zoology (SNSB – ZSM), Mu¨nchen, Germany, 3 Department of Animal Ecology II, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany, 4 Taxonomic coordinator – Barcoding Fauna Bavarica, Bavarian State Collection of Zoology (SNSB – ZSM), Mu¨nchen, Germany, 5 Terrestrial Ecology Research Group, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, Technische Universita¨tMu¨nchen, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany Abstract During the last few years, DNA barcoding has become an efficient method for the identification of species. In the case of insects, most published DNA barcoding studies focus on species of the Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Hymenoptera and especially Lepidoptera. In this study we test the efficiency of DNA barcoding for true bugs (Hemiptera: Heteroptera), an ecological and economical highly important as well as morphologically diverse insect taxon. As part of our study we analyzed DNA barcodes for 1742 specimens of 457 species, comprising 39 families of the Heteroptera. We found low nucleotide distances with a minimum pairwise K2P distance ,2.2% within 21 species pairs (39 species). For ten of these species pairs (18 species), minimum pairwise distances were zero. In contrast to this, deep intraspecific sequence divergences with maximum pairwise distances .2.2% were detected for 16 traditionally recognized and valid species. With a successful identification rate of 91.5% (418 species) our study emphasizes the use of DNA barcodes for the identification of true bugs and represents an important step in building-up a comprehensive barcode library for true bugs in Germany and Central Europe as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Type Specimens of Heteroptera
    Zootaxa 3981 (3): 397–404 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2015 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3981.3.5 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:4FF410BD-9C8E-4815-AFB5-E41FA5ABC7CC Type specimens of Heteroptera (Insecta: Hemiptera) collected from North Korea and adjacent regions deposited at Insect Collections of Chungnam National University (CNU) in Daejeon, Republic of Korea SUNGHOON JUNG1,3,4, JUNGGON KIM1,3, SUMIN OH1 & ERNST HEISS2 1Laboratory of Systematic Entomology, Department of Applied Biology, College of Agriculture and life Sciences, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Korea 2Tiroler Landesmuseum, Josef-Schraffl-Strasse 2a, A-6020, Innsbruck, Austria. E-mail: [email protected] 3These authors contributed equally to this work 4Corresponding author. E-mail:[email protected] Abstract A list of type specimens of Heteroptera (Insecta: Hemiptera) collected from North Korea (mostly by the late Dr. Michail Josifov, Sofia, Bulgaria) acquired earlier by E. Heiss, now donated to and deposited in the insect collections of Chungnam National University (CNU), Deajeon, Korea, is presented. A total of 31 holotypes and 694 paratypes of 41 species and 1 subspecies in 6 families and 9 subfamilies are presented: Miridae (Deraeocorinae, Mirinae, Orthotylinae, Phylinae), Tingi- dae (Tinginae), Piesmatidae (Piesmatinae), Berytidae (Metacanthinae), Cymidae (Cyminae), Pentatomidae (Asopinae). Key words: type specimens, North Korea, true bugs, CNU Introduction Because of the political post World-War-II situation, North Korea was inaccessable for scientists and citizens of Western oriented countries except for those then belonging to the so called “Communist Block”.
    [Show full text]
  • SPECIES LIST and STATE RECORDS of INSECTS COLLECTED from HOBCAW BARONY, SOUTH CAROLINA** University of Guelph Field Entomology Class, Spring of 2004
    SPECIES LIST AND STATE RECORDS OF INSECTS COLLECTED FROM HOBCAW BARONY, SOUTH CAROLINA** University of Guelph Field Entomology Class, Spring of 2004. Gard Otis, Instructor; Steve Paiero, Assistant Instructor ORDER FAMILY Genus/Species Coleoptera Buprestidae Acmaeodera Coleoptera Buprestidae Brachys Coleoptera Buprestidae Buprestis salisburyensis Herbst, 1801 Coleoptera Buprestidae Haplanthaxia Coleoptera Buprestidae Haplanthaxia quercata (Fabricius) Coleoptera Buprestidae Taphrocerus Coleoptera Carabidae Calybe sallei (Chev.) Coleoptera Carabidae Panagaeus crucigerus Say Coleoptera Elateridae Alaus myops (Fabricius) Coleoptera Elateridae Cardiophorus Coleoptera Elateridae Melanotus Coleoptera Eucnemidae Dirrhagofarsus lewisi Reitter Coleoptera Monommidae Hyporhagus Coleoptera Oedemeridae Xanthochroa erythrocephala (Germar) Coleoptera Scarabaeidae Canthon laevis (Drury) Coleoptera Scarabaeidae Melanocanthon bispinatus (Robinson) Coleoptera Trogossitidae Tenebroides bimaculata Melsheimer Dermaptera Labiidae Labia Dermaptera Labiidae Labia cf. curvicauda (Motschulsky) Dermaptera Labiidae Vostox brunneipennis (Audinet-Serville, 1839) Diptera Asilidae Laphria saffrana Diptera Chloropidae Ectecephala Diptera Lauxaniidae Trigonometopus Diptera Micropezidae Grallipeza nebulosa (Loew) Diptera Micropezidae Taeniaptera Diptera Otitidae Chaetopsis Diptera Otitidae Delphinia picta (Fabricius) Diptera Otitidae Euxesta Diptera Otitidae Zacompsia fulva Coquillett Diptera Psilidae Loxocera cylindrica Say, 1823 Diptera Pyrgotidae Boreothrinax Diptera Syrphidae
    [Show full text]