A taxonomic revision of the Australian Chrysomelinae, with a key to the genera (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)

Reid, Chris A. M.

doi:10.11646/zootaxa.1292.1.1

Cited by 44 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It follows that phytophagous beetle species would commonly be specialised to the level of plant family rather than genus or species. This inference is confirmed for Australian Chrysomelinae (Leaf Beetles) where specialisation has been determined for particular plant families or large clades contained therein (Reid 2006;Jurado-Rivera et al 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Plant phylogeny as a surrogate for turnover in beetle assemblages

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to extrapolate from the known to the unknown is essential if we are to use the turnover of overall biodiversity, as opposed to a few well-known groups, to inform conservation planning. We investigated the usefulness of using evolutionary relationships of plants as a surrogate for the turnover of their associated beetle assemblages. If plant traits that are important to insects are phylogenetically conserved, it follows that there will be a positive relationship between insect faunal dissimilarity and plant evolutionary distance. We collected beetles using pyrethrum knock-down methods from 40 plant species belonging to four plant families in the Sydney region of Eastern Australia. We developed a novel approach for estimating variance in the dissimilarity of beetle assemblages, as explained by plant phylogeny, by using phylogenetic eigenvectors as explanatory variables in a distance-based redundancy analysis. We found a highly significant relationship between faunal dissimilarity and plant evolutionary distance for the entire beetle assemblage, the herbivorous component, and the non-herbivorous component, indicating that beetles generally showed some preference for particular plant clades as habitat, regardless of feeding guild. When comparing observed dissimilarities with those predicted from 40 jack-knife replicates of a Generalised Dissimilarity Model, we were often able to predict beetle turnover from plant phylogenetic relationships, although the reliability of this result was highly variable. Nevertheless, the broad response of beetle assemblages to plant evolutionary relatedness indicates real potential for plant phylogenetic pattern to act as a useful surrogate for insect biodiversity, especially when supplemented with other environmental correlates.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Plant phylogeny as a surrogate for turnover in beetle assemblages

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Let us quote some of them: metafemoral spring of flea beetles and jumping by David Furth (1988, Furth and Suzuki 1994, 1998), and Michael Schmitt (2004); meioformulae of Leaf Beetles by Petitpierre (1997, 1999, 2011), Virkki (1985, 1988, 1989) and others; larvae research, by Steinhausen (1985, 1994, 1995, 1996) and others; chemical defense by Jacques Pasteels (Pasteels and Hartmann 2004, Pasteels and Rowell-Rahier 1989, Pasteels et al 1986, 1988, 1989, 1994, 1996, 2004); cycloalexy, by Vasconcellos-Neto and Jolivet (1989, 1994); fossils by Santiago-Blay (1994; Santiago-Blay and Craig 1999, Santiago-Blay et al 1996, 2004), followed by many others; mimicry by Balsbaugh (1988, Balsbaugh and Fauske 1991) and many others; zoogeography by Verma (Verma and Jolivet 2004, 2006), Scherer (1988), Daccordi (1994, 1996, 2000, 2003a, b, c), and many more; egg bursters by Cox (1988, 1994); structure of ovaries and viviparity by Christian Bontems (1988, Bontemps and Lee 2008); Criocerinae biology, by Fredric Vencl (Vencl and Morton 1998, 1999, Vencl and Nishida 2008, Vencl et al 2004), M. Schmitt (1988), Yoko Matsumura (Matsumura and Akimoto 2009, Matsumura and Suzuki 2008, Matsumura and Yoshizawa 2010, 2012, Matsumura et al 2010, 2012); African fauna of Alticinae by Maurizio Biondi (1989, 1999, 2001a, b, Biondi and D’Alessandro 2008, 2010a, b, 2012); Australian fauna by Mauro Daccordi (2000, 2003a, b, c, Daccordi and DeLittle 2003), Chris Reid (1989, 1991a, b, 1992, 2003, 2006, Reid and Beat...…”

Section: Progress In Chrysomelidologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Together with 30 years of Symposia on Chrysomelidae! Memories and personal reflections on what we know more about leaf beetles

Jolivet¹,

Schmitt²

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Australica Chevrolat, 1836 has precedence over Calomela Hope, 1840 which is currently used as valid (e.g., Reid 2006: 53). Reversal of Precedence (ICZN 1999, Article 23.9) or an application to the Commission is necessary to conserve usage of the name Calomela Hope, 1840.…”

Section: List Of Genus-group Names In Dejean’s Second Catalogue (1833mentioning

confidence: 99%

The genera in the second catalogue (1833–1836) of Dejean’s Coleoptera collection

Bousquet¹,

Bouchard²

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All genus-group names listed in the second edition of the catalogue (1833-1836) of Dejean’s beetle collection are recorded. For each new genus-group name the originally included available species are listed and for generic names with at least one available species, the type species and the current status are given. Names available prior to the publication of Dejean’s second catalogue (1833-1836) are listed in an appendix.The following new synonymies are proposed: Cyclonotum Dejean, 1833 (= Dactylosternum Wollaston, 1854) [Hydrophilidae], Hyporhiza Dejean, 1833 (= Rhinaspis Perty, 1830) [Scarabaeidae], Aethales Dejean, 1834 (= Epitragus Latreille, 1802) [Tenebrionidae], Arctylus Dejean, 1834 (= Praocis Eschscholtz, 1829) [Tenebrionidae], Euphron Dejean, 1834 (= Derosphaerus Thomson, 1858) [Tenebrionidae], Hipomelus Dejean, 1834 (= Trachynotus Latreille, 1828) [Tenebrionidae], Pezodontus Dejean, 1834 (= Odontopezus Alluaud, 1889) [Tenebrionidae], Zygocera Dejean, 1835 (= Disternopsis Breuning, 1939) [Cerambycidae], and Physonota Chevrolat, 1836 (= Anacassis Spaeth, 1913) [Chrysomelidae]. Heterogaster pilicornis Dejean, 1835 [Cerambycidae] and Labidomera trimaculata Chevrolat, 1836 [Chrysomelidae] are placed for the first time in synonymy with Anisogaster flavicans Deyrolle, 1862 and Chrysomela clivicollis Kirby, 1837 respectively. Type species of the following genus-group taxa are proposed: Sphaeromorphus Dejean, 1833 (Sphaeromorphus humeralis Erichson, 1843) [Scarabaeidae], Adelphus Dejean, 1834 (Helops marginatus Fabricius, 1792) [Tenebrionidae], Cyrtoderes Dejean, 1834 (Tenebrio cristatus DeGeer, 1778) [Tenebrionidae], Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834 (Opatrum acutum Wiedemann, 1823) [Tenebrionidae], Charactus Dejean, 1833 (Lycus limbatus Fabricius, 1801) [Lycidae], Corynomalus Chevrolat, 1836 (Eumorphus limbatus Olivier, 1808) [Endomychidae], Hebecerus Dejean, 1835 (Acanthocinus marginicollis Boisduval, 1835) [Cerambycidae], Pterostenus Dejean, 1835 (Cerambyx abbreviatus Fabricius, 1801) [Cerambycidae], Psalicerus Dejean, 1833 (Lucanus femoratus Fabricius, 1775) [Lucanidae], and Pygolampis Dejean, 1833 (Lampyris glauca Olivier, 1790) [Lampyridae]. A new name, Neoeutrapela Bousquet and Bouchard [Tenebrionidae], is proposed for Eutrapela Dejean, 1834 (junior homonym of Eutrapela Hübner, 1809).The following generic names, made available in Dejean’s catalogue, were found to be older than currently accepted valid names: Catoxantha Dejean, 1833 over Catoxantha Solier, 1833 [Buprestidae], Pristiptera Dejean, 1833 over Pelecopselaphus Solier, 1833 [Buprestidae], Charactus Dejean, 1833 over Calopteron Laporte, 1836 [Lycidae], Cyclonotum Dejean, 1833 over Dactylosternum Wollaston, 1854 [Hydrophilidae], Ancylonycha Dejean, 1833 over Holotrichia Hope, 1837 [Scarabaeidae], Aulacium Dejean, 1833 over Mentophilus Laporte, 1840 [Scarabaeidae], Sciuropus Dejean, 1833 over Ancistrosoma Curtis, 1835 [Scarabaeidae], Sphaeromorphus Dejean, 1833 over Ceratocanthus White, 1842 [Scarabaeidae], Psalicerus Dejean, 1833 over Leptinopterus Hope...

show abstract

A taxonomic revision of the Australian Chrysomelinae, with a key to the genera (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)

Cited by 44 publications

References 5 publications

Plant phylogeny as a surrogate for turnover in beetle assemblages

Plant phylogeny as a surrogate for turnover in beetle assemblages

Together with 30 years of Symposia on Chrysomelidae! Memories and personal reflections on what we know more about leaf beetles

The genera in the second catalogue (1833–1836) of Dejean’s Coleoptera collection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About