Aquatic Larvae and Pupae of Fidena (Laphriomyia) rufopilosa (Ricardo) (Diptera: Tabanidae) Developing in Bromeliad Phytotelmata in the Atlantic Forest of Southern Brazil

Zillikens, Anne; Gorayeb, Inocêncio de Sousa; Steiner, Josefina; Marcondes, Carlos Brisóla

doi:10.2317/0410.16.1

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the southeast region of Brazil, two common species of this genus are L. andromache (Muzon, Muñoz, & Campos, ) and L. elongatum (Costa, Oldrini, & Anjos‐Santos, ), the first being the dominant predator of the system (De Omena, ; P. A. P. Antiqueira, personal observations). The ecology of tabanids living in bromeliads has received little attention and remains poorly understood (Zillikens, Gorayeb, Steiner, & Marcondes, ). However, in other aquatic ecosystems, tabanids are known to be voracious predators of both invertebrates and small vertebrates (Jackman, Nowicki, Aneshansley, & Eisner, ; Nowicki & Eisner, ), living buried in the mud substrate and capturing their prey by ambush (Jackman et al., ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental change and predator diversity drive alpha and beta diversity in freshwater macro and microorganisms

Antiqueira

Petchey

Santos

et al. 2018

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global biodiversity is eroding due to anthropogenic causes, such as climate change, habitat loss, and trophic simplification of biological communities. Most studies address only isolated causes within a single group of organisms; however, biological groups of different trophic levels may respond in particular ways to different environmental impacts. Our study used natural microcosms to investigate the predicted individual and interactive effects of warming, changes in top predator diversity, and habitat size on the alpha and beta diversity of macrofauna, microfauna, and bacteria. Alpha diversity (i.e., richness within each bromeliad) generally explained a larger proportion of the gamma diversity (partitioned in alpha and beta diversity). Overall, dissimilarity between communities occurred due to species turnover and not species loss (nestedness). Nevertheless, the three biological groups responded differently to each environmental stressor. Microfauna were the most sensitive group, with alpha and beta diversity being affected by environmental changes (warming and habitat size) and trophic structure (diversity of top predators). Macrofauna alpha and beta diversity was sensitive to changes in predator diversity and habitat size, but not warming. In contrast, the bacterial community was not influenced by the treatments. The community of each biological group was not mutually concordant with the environmental and trophic changes. Our results demonstrate that distinct anthropogenic impacts differentially affect the components of macro and microorganism diversity through direct and indirect effects (i.e., bottom-up and top-down effects). Therefore, a multitrophic and multispecies approach is necessary to assess the effects of different anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental change and predator diversity drive alpha and beta diversity in freshwater macro and microorganisms

Antiqueira

Petchey

Santos

et al. 2018

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…), Argentina, and Brazil with evidence that they are aquatic and are restricted to this habitat. A recent report is of larvae of Fidena rufopilosa (Ricardo) developing in 8% of terrestrial bromeliads examined belonging to C. lindenii , Nidularium innocentii , and Vriesia friburgensis (Mez) in Santa Catarina, Brazil (Zillikens et al, 2005). Such larvae are predatory, but their diet has not been determined.…”

Section: Arthropods Using Bromeliad Phytotelmata As Habitat For Theirmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insects and allies associated with bromeliads: a review

Frank

Lounibos²

2009

Terr Arthropod Rev

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBromeliads are a Neotropical plant family (Bromeliaceae) with about 2,900 described species. They vary considerably in architecture. Many impound water in their inner leaf axils to form phytotelmata (plant pools), providing habitat for terrestrial arthropods with aquatic larvae, while their outer axils provide terraria for an assemblage of fully terrestrial arthropods. Many bromeliads are epiphytic. Dominant terrestrial arthropods with aquatic larvae inhabiting bromeliad phytotelmata are typically larvae of Diptera, of which at least 16 families have been reported, but in some circumstances are Coleoptera, of which only three families have been reported. Other groups include crabs and the insect orders Odonata, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera, plus Hemiptera with adults active on the water surface. The hundreds of arthropod species are detritivores or predators and do not harm their host plants. Many of them are specialists to this habitat.Terrestrial arthropods with terrestrial larvae inhabiting bromeliad terraria include many more arachnid and insect orders, but relatively few specialists to this habitat. They, too, are detritivores or predators.Arthropod herbivores, especially Curculionidae (Coleoptera) and Lepidoptera, consume leaves, stems, flowers, pollen, and roots of bromeliads. Some herbivores consume nectar, and some of these and other arthropods provide pollination and even seed-dispersal.Ants have complex relationships with bromeliads, a few being herbivores, some guarding the plants from herbivory, and some merely nesting in bromeliad terraria. A few serve as food for carnivorous bromeliads, which also consume other terrestrial insects.Bromeliads are visited by far more species of arthropods than breed in them. This is especially notable during dry seasons, when bromeliads provide moist refugia.

show abstract

“…(n=12). Whole plants were cut off at the base and examined leaf by leaf in the laboratory ( Zillikens et al 2005 ). The immature beetles were fixed in 70% ethanol, in Kahle’s solution, or in boiling water, and in the last case preserved in 80% ethanol; some larvae were kept alive to be reared.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life history and description of larva and pupa of Platyphileurus felscheanus Ohaus, 1910, a scarabaeid feeding on bromeliad tissues in Brazil, to be excluded from Phileurini (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Dynastinae)

Albertoni¹,

Krell²,

Steiner³

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The third instar larvae and the pupae of Platyphileurus felscheanus Ohaus, 1910 (Phileurini), recently synonymized with Surutu jelineki Endrődi, 1975 (Cyclocephalini), are described and illustrated, and some life history information is given. The larvae were collected and reared in bromeliads in rain forests of Santa Catarina state in southern Brazil. The systematic position of this monotypic genus is reassessed at the tribe level by considering larval and adult morphological characters. Both character sets, being described and illustrated, suggest the placement of Platyphileurus in the tribe Oryctini.

show abstract

Aquatic Larvae and Pupae of Fidena (Laphriomyia) rufopilosa (Ricardo) (Diptera: Tabanidae) Developing in Bromeliad Phytotelmata in the Atlantic Forest of Southern Brazil

Cited by 5 publications

References 9 publications

Environmental change and predator diversity drive alpha and beta diversity in freshwater macro and microorganisms

Environmental change and predator diversity drive alpha and beta diversity in freshwater macro and microorganisms

Insects and allies associated with bromeliads: a review

Life history and description of larva and pupa of Platyphileurus felscheanus Ohaus, 1910, a scarabaeid feeding on bromeliad tissues in Brazil, to be excluded from Phileurini (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Dynastinae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About