Comparative morphology of immatures of neotropical Chauliognathinae (Coleoptera, Cantharidae)

Biffi, Gabriel; Casari, Sônia A.

doi:10.1016/j.jcz.2017.02.003

Cited by 8 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These later are entirely unpigmented, a common feature in fossorial beetle larvae ( e.g. , cantharid Macromalthinus Pic, 1919 ( Biffi & Casari, 2017 ) and Jurasaidae species ( Rosa et al, 2020 )). Under laboratory conditions, Psilocladus larvae of two species studied by our group readily ate termite workers, consistent with the possibility that their relatives live on termites in the field ( Vaz, Silveira & Rosa, 2020 ; S Rosa, 2021, pers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comprehensive review and call for studies on firefly larvae

Riley

Rosa

Silveira

2021

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Fireflies (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) are commonly recognized by adult traits, such as a soft exoskeleton, lanterns and associated glow and flash patterns, but their larval stage is far less appreciated. However, fireflies spend most of their lives as larvae, and adults of most species rely solely on resources previously obtained. Therefore, studying the immature stages is imperative towards a comprehensive understanding of fireflies. This paper reviews and indicates key gaps in the biology of firefly larvae based on available literature. Methodology We reviewed the literature on firefly larvae to identify key issues and important taxonomic, geographic, and subject biases and gaps. Results We found 376 papers that included information on firefly larvae. Only 139 species in 47 genera across eight of eleven lampyrid subfamilies have been studied during larval stages. These numbers reveal a staggering gap, since 94% of species and over half of the genera of fireflies were never studied in a crucial stage of their life cycle. Most studies on firefly larvae focus on two subfamilies (Luciolinae and Lampyrinae) in four zoogeographic regions (Sino-Japanese, Oriental, Nearctic, and Palearctic), whereas the other subfamilies and regions remain largely unstudied. These studies mainly dealt with morphology and behavior, other subjects remaining greatly understudied by comparison, including habitats, life cycle, physiology and interactions. Conclusions Together, these literature biases and gaps highlight how little is known about firefly larvae, and warmly invite basic and applied research, in the field and in the lab, to overcome these limitations and improve our understanding of firefly biology to better preserve them.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comprehensive review and call for studies on firefly larvae

Riley

Rosa

Silveira

2021

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Morphological terminology used in the descriptions follows Ramsdale (2010), Lawrence et al (2010) and Biffi & Casari (2017).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cantharidae larvae are usually easily recognised by their soft body densely covered with short pubescence, giving them a velvety appearance; other characters, like the prognathous and slightly flattened head, and body with lateral and transversal ampullae with pairs of glandular pores are also diagnostic (Crowson 1972;Ramsdale 2010). They have a rich diversity of structures useful for characterising lineages of Cantharidae and have enabled the production of identification keys, the recognition of genera and groups of species, and the definition of subfamilies (cf., Bøving & Craighead 1931;Striganova 1962;Fitton 1976;Klausnitzer 1997;Biffi & Casari 2017;Biffi & Rosa 2019;Biffi et al 2022). As highlighted by Crowson (1972), the known Cantharidae larvae seem to fall readily into groups corresponding to the four commonly accepted subfamilies of the adults at that time (Cantharinae Imhoff, Malthininae Kiesenwetter, Chauliognathinae LeConte, and Silinae Mulsant) apart from one, an 'aberrant' cantharid larva.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The systematics of Dysmorphocerinae (Cantharidae) based on larvae

Biffi

Leschen²,

Hsiao

et al. 2022

Insect Syst. Evol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dysmorphocerinae is a subfamily of Cantharidae erected for a group of genera with a mainly gondwanan distribution whose adult forms could not be reliably assigned to any other subfamily. The systematic position and monophyly of Dysmorphocerinae remains questionable, as recent molecular and morphological studies have produced conflicting results. Despite the importance of immature morphology for characterising lineages of Cantharidae, so far, the larvae of only two dysmorphocerine species had been briefly described: Neoontelus sp., from New Zealand, and Afronycha picta (Wiedemann), from South Africa. Their morphologies considerably differ from one another, and the larvae cannot be readily attributed to any subfamily, as usually occurs with cantharid larvae. Here, we fully describe for the first time the larvae of Asilis Broun (New Zealand) and Plectonotum laterale Pic (Brazil) and redescribe Neoontelus Wittmer (New Zealand). We also diagnose larvae of Heteromastix Boheman (Australia) and A. picta. Dysmorphocerinae cannot be clearly diagnosed because each genus has a unique combination of features, though Neoontelus is the most divergent. We conclude that the Dysmorphocerinae may not be monophyletic with Plectonotum laterale, Asilis, Neoontelus, Heteromastix showing a closer relationship to Malthininae and Afronycha more aligned with Silinae or Cantharinae. The double gland openings present on the body of Neoontelus reported by Crowson (1972) are reinterpreted as a complex character involving a single posterior pore linked to a gland and an anterior sensillum that may serve as a trigger for the release of defensive chemicals. These are also reported in Asilis and Heteromastix and may be a potential synapomorphy for part of the Dysmorphocerinae. Neoontelus has a series of unique features, including a cotyliform glandular pore on abdominal segment IX.

show abstract

“…Immatures of the subfamily Chauliognathinae were recently characterized based on 13 species of Chauliognathus Hentz, 1830, Daiphron Gorham, 1881, Macromalthinus Pic, 1919, and Belotus Gorham, 1881(BIFFI & CASARI 2017. Larvae inhabit a wide variety of environments and can be found in the leaf litter, on the ground, deep inside humid soil, under the bark of fallen trees, inside bracket fungi, and amongst bromeliad leaves.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Larvae inhabit a wide variety of environments and can be found in the leaf litter, on the ground, deep inside humid soil, under the bark of fallen trees, inside bracket fungi, and amongst bromeliad leaves. All known larvae are predatory (BIFFI & CASARI 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphology of bromeliad-associated immature stages of Daiphron bipartitus and its adults confirms the non-monophyly of the genus (Coleoptera: Cantharidae)

Biffi

Rosa

2019

aemnp

Self Cite

310

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Daiphron bipartitus Pic, 1934 is a poorly known species whose systematic position in the subfamily Chaulioganthinae is still controversial. In this paper we describe immature stages of D. bipartitus which were found inhabiting fallen bromeliads Vriesea bituminosa in southeastern Brazilian Atlantic forest. Adults are redescribed, including the first study of male and female genitalia. Larva, pupa and adult are illustrated in detail and compared with other species of Daiphron Gorham, 1881 and Chauliognathus Hentz, 1830. We discuss the systematic position of Daiphron bipartitus within Chauliognathinae on the basis of morphological comparison of its immature and adult characters. Both were found to be more similar to species of Chauliognathus than to Daiphron mediofasciatum Pic, 1949, which supports the hypothesis of polyphyly of Daiphron. Aspects of the species biology and occasional association with bromeliads are discussed.

show abstract

Comparative morphology of immatures of neotropical Chauliognathinae (Coleoptera, Cantharidae)

Cited by 8 publications

References 5 publications

A comprehensive review and call for studies on firefly larvae

A comprehensive review and call for studies on firefly larvae

The systematics of Dysmorphocerinae (Cantharidae) based on larvae

Morphology of bromeliad-associated immature stages of Daiphron bipartitus and its adults confirms the non-monophyly of the genus (Coleoptera: Cantharidae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About