ACTA UNIVERSITATIS PALACKIANAE OLOMUCENSIS FACULTAS RERUM NATURALIUM (2001–2002) BIOLOGICA 39–40 DOMINANCY OF BEETLE FAMILIES AND SPECIES RECORDED IN FLOODPLAIN FOREST ECOTONE Ivan Horčičko Department of Zoology and Anthropology, Natural Science Faculty, Palacký University, Tř. Svobody 26, 771 46 Olomouc, Czech Republic (e-mail: [email protected]) Received March 5, 2002; accepted April 5, 2002 Key words: Coleoptera, dominancy of beetles, floodplain forest, ecotone. Abstract Author monitored the occurrence of beetle families and species on ten points in floodplain forest marginal zone. He collected the numerous material containing knowledge about ecotone entomocenosis. At the same time the research brings the faunistic knowledge about beetle imagoes from Litovelské Pomoraví Protected Landcape Area. The survey of recorded families and species is in tab. 1–3. Introduction Ecotone represents the transition between various cenosis, where special marginal life condition area is effective. These conditions are related to the changes of ecologi- cal factors like temperature, light and humidity. Both cenosis are influenced in structure and function not only by both neighbouring habitats but also by migrating species from more or less distant areas. Dark outline of the forest margin serves for the insect space orientation and there comes to the considerable changes in species spectrum of the animals who live there temporarily or permanently (Cortier, Robert – 1952). So far there was payed a little attention to the research of beetle population and its seasonal quantitative changes in herbal and shrubs strata of these marginal habi- tats. Ščerbinovskij (1939) was catching weevils in various distances from the edge of the forest. Tischler (1950) made quantitative and qualitative macrofauna analyses of edafone in marginal forest zone. Novák, Skuhravý, Hrdý a Hůrka (1957) monitored the influence of HCH disperse on insect population living in marginal zone. Insect 41 hibernating in marginal zone of the forest were studied by Renken (1956). He focused mainly on fauna in soil and on its surface, springtails were observed by Richter (1966). Novák and Grenarová (1967) monitored by knock down method the density of different species od Coccinellidae in transition zone of woodland and meadow habi- tats. Ecological meaning of beetles was studied by Fuchs (1969). Population dynamics of beetles on the bounday of wood and meadow habitats was also the topic of Horčičko (1979) work. Soil Nematoda in ecotons were observed by Háněl (1986), Testacea by Balík (1987), Oribatida by Starý (1987), Collembola and Protura by Eckschlagerová (1988). Dynamics of ecotone in space and time was observed by Delcourt P. and Delcourt H. (1992). Distribution and dynamics of soil organisms was observed by Rusek (1992). Hasík (1999) studied the beetle populations of meadows and forest margin. The special kind of margin biocenosis like shrubs around fields or meadows, with meadow, field a wood elements were studied by Tischler (1948, 1950, 1951, 1958). Material and methods For the research of marginal zone in floodplain forest we selected 10 points, on which the material was collected in three week intervals by sweeping method. The chosen points were situated on the line between Litovel town and the village Mladeč in Protected Lancape Area Litovelské Pomoraví. The differences among the selected places were mainly in forest walls exposition. The research of beetle imago cenosis in marginal forest zone was practised by sweeping of herbal strata by net with 45 cm in diametr on 60 cm long stick. The sampling was done during all vegetation season in afternoon hours. Results The survey of the data from flood-plain forest marginal zone is in tab. 1–3. 1. Dominancy of recorded families The survey of recorded families in floodplain forest marginal zone brings tab. 1. Together 6455 beetle imagoes were collected, which belonged to 30 families. From the table is visible, that in 1994 there were 3397 specimens and in 1995 there were 3058 imagoes of Coleoptera order. While during first research year there were 26 families, during second year were only 24 families. Generally eudominant were the families Curculionidae, Chrysomelidae, Cocci- nellidae and Cantharidae. Dominant were only the imagoes of the family Elateridae and subdominant were adults of the family Phalacridae, Nitidulidae and Ceram- bycidae. The rest 21 families were subrecedent. In 1994 the eudominant families were Curculionidae, Chrysomelidae and Cantha- ridae. Subdominant were the representatives of the families Elateridae and Phalacridae. 42 As recedent there were only members of the family Malachiidae and Cerambycidae, the remaining 19 families were recedent. In 1995 eudominant were again the families Curculionidae, Chrysomelidae, Cocci- nellidae and Cantharidae. As dominant there were the families Elateridae and Pha- lacridae, as subdominant appeared the families Nitidulidae, Malachiidae and Carabidae. The remaining 15 families were subrecedent. Table 1 Survey of dominancy of beetle families recorded in floodplain forest ecotone 1994 1995 Total FAMILY Number % Number % Number % Curculionidae 1250 36.80 837 27.37 2087 32.33 Chrysomelidae 861 25.35 804 26.29 1665 25.79 Coccinellidae 444 13.07 440 14.39 884 13.69 Cantharidae 353 10.39 400 13.08 753 11.67 Elateridae 168 4.95 202 6.61 370 5.73 Phalacridae 102 3.00 153 5.00 255 3.95 Malachiidae 60 1.77 42 1.37 102 1.58 Nitidulidae 23 0.68 61 1.99 84 1.30 Cerambycidae 45 1.32 26 0.85 71 1.10 Carabidae 18 0.53 33 1.08 51 0.79 Lagriidae 24 0.71 18 0.59 42 0.65 Staphylinidae 5 0.15 10 0.33 15 0.23 Dasytidae 10 0.29 4 0.13 14 0.22 Scraptidae 8 0.24 1 0.03 9 0.14 Pyrochroidae 1 0.03 8 0.26 9 0.14 Scarabaeidae 2 0.06 6 0.20 8 0.12 Byturidae 6 0.18 2 0.07 8 0.12 Anobiidae 2 0.06 3 0.10 5 0.08 Anthicidae 5 0.15 0 0.00 5 0.08 Buprestidae 3 0.09 1 0.03 4 0.06 Oedemeridae 1 0.03 2 0.07 3 0.05 Silphidae 0 0.00 2 0.07 2 0.03 Lathridiidae 2 0.06 0 0.00 2 0.03 Scaphidiidae 0 0.00 1 0.03 1 0.02 Lucanidae 0 0.00 1 0.03 1 0.02 Byrrhidae 0 0.00 1 0.03 1 0.02 Cleridae 1 0.03 0 0.00 1 0.02 Kateretidae 1 0.03 0 0.00 1 0.02 Endomychidae 1 0.03 0 0.00 1 0.02 Mycetophagidae 1 0.03 0 0.00 1 0.02 Celkem 3397 100.00 3058 100.00 6455 100.00 2. General species dominancy One hundred ninety five species in total were recorded in herbal strata of flood- plain forest ecotone (tab. 2). The most numerous and eudominant were the imagoes of the species Rhagonycha fulva, Sitona lineatus, Oulema melanopus, Coccinella septem- punctata and Apion apricans. As subdominant there were 9 species – Phyllotreta vittula, Psyllobora vigintiduopunctata, Apion virens, Oulema gallaeciana, Stilbus testaceus, 43 Psylliodes chrysocephala, Nedyus quadrimaculatus, Propylea quatuordecimpunctata and Athous vittatus. Then 7 recedent species followed, Athous haemorrhoidalis, Phyllobius pomaceus, Cantharis rustica, Chaetocnema concinna, Orsodacne cerasi, Apion trifolii and Phyllobius calcaratus. The remaining 174 were subrecedent. In the year 1994 as dominant species appeared Sitona linetaus, Phyllotreta vittula, Apion apricans, Rhagonycha fulva, Oulema melanopus and Coccinella septempunctata. Subdominant were the adults of the species Psyllobora vigintiduopunctata, Apion virens, Oulema gallaeciana, Stilbus testaceus, Nedyus quadrimaculatus and Chaetocnema concinna. As recedent there were 12 species – Cantharis rustica, Phyllobius pomaceus, Propylea quatuordecimpunctata, Athous haemorrhoidalis, Athous vittatus, Orsodacne cerasi, Phyllobius calcaratus, Apion trifolii, Eusomus ovulum, Malachius bipustulatus, Grammoptera ruficornis and Apion fulvipes. The rest of the 114 species were subrecedent. In the year 1995 the dominant were the adults of following species – Rhagonycha fulva, Oulema melanopus, Psylliodes chrysocephala, Sitona lineatus and Coccinella septempuncata. 8 species were subdominant – Stilbus testaceus, Nedyus quadrima- culatus, Psyllobora vigintiduopunctata, Apion virens, Oulema gallaeciana, Propylea quatuordecimpunctata, Apion apricans and Athous vittatus. As recedent appeared only 4 species – Athous haemorrhoidalis, Meligethes coracinus, Phyllobius pomaceus and Cantharis rustica. At the remainig 142 species the domination was under the level of 1 % and so it was subrecedent. Table 2 Survey of domination of beetle species recorded in flood-plain forest ecotone 1994 1995 Total SPECIES Number % Number % Number % Rhagonycha fulva (Scopoli, 1763) 229 6.74 293 9.58 522 8.09 Sitona lineatus (Linnaeus, 1758) 335 9.86 183 5.98 518 8.02 Oulema melanopus (Linnaeus, 1758) 223 6.56 261 8.53 484 7.50 Coccinella septempunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) 201 5.92 171 5.59 372 5.76 Apion apricans (Herbst, 1797) 233 6.86 101 3.30 334 5.17 Phyllotreta vittula (L. Redtenbacher, 1849) 286 8.42 28 0.92 314 4.86 Psyllobora vigintiduopunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) 160 4.71 138 4.51 298 4.62 Apion virens (Herbst, 1797) 155 4.56 135 4.41 290 4.49 Oulema gallaeciana (Heyden, 1870) 111 3.27 134 4.38 245 3.80 Stilbus testaceus (Panzer, 1797) 95 2.80 142 4.64 237 3.67 Nedyus quadrimaculatus (Linnaeus, 1758) 86 2.53 140 4.58 226 3.50 Psylliodes chrysocephala (Linnaeus, 1758) 0 0.00 226 7.39 226 3.50 44 Propylea quatuordecimpunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) 57 1.68 103 3.37 160 2.48 Athous vittatus (Fabricius, 1792) 56 1.65 73 2.39 129 2.00 Athous haemorrhoidalis (Fabricius, 1801) 56 1.65 56 1.83 112 1.74 Phyllobius pomaceus (Gyllenhal, 1824) 60 1.77 44 1.44 104 1.61 Cantharis rustica (Fallén, 1807) 60 1.77 40 1.31 100 1.55 Chaetocnema concinna (Marsham, 1802) 75 2.21 19 0.62 94 1.46 Orsodacne cerasi (Linnaeus, 1758) 55 1.62 18 0.59 73 1.13 Apion trifolii (Linnaeus, 1768) 46 1.35 23 0.75 69 1.07 Phyllobius calcaratus (Fabricius, 1792) 47 1.38 19 0.62 66 1.02 Malachius bipustulatus (Linnaeus, 1758) 37 1.09 20 0.65 57 0.88 Eusomus ovulum (Germar, 1824) 44 1.30 10 0.33 54 0.84 Meligethes coracinus (Sturm, 1845) 7 0.21 44 1.44 51 0.79 Apion fulvipes (Fourcroy, 1785) 34 1.00 13 0.43 47 0.73 Grammoptera ruficornis (Fabricius, 1781) 34 1.00 13 0.43 47 0.73 Sitona hispidulus (Fabricius, 1776) 33 0.97 12 0.39 45 0.70 Lagria hirta (Linnaeus, 1758) 24 0.71 18 0.59 42 0.65 Cantharis fusca (Linnaeus, 1758) 26 0.77 14 0.46 40 0.62 Cantharis nigricans (O.