Experimental Analysis of Microhabitat Selection in Water‐Striders (Heteroptera: Gerridae)

Abstract

Associations between water-strider species and particular types of vegetation structure result proximately from habitat fidelity at the time of spring colonization and from different preferences for habitats within lakes. Individual gerrids discriminate among lakes during prereproductive dispersal on a trial-and-error basis. Gerrid species differ with respect to preference for emergent cover. Wind and surface disturbance increase preference for sheltered habitats in all species studied but extent of response varies among species. Gerris pingreensis and G. comatus actively seek out emergent cover and open habitats, respectively. G. buenoi is a habitat generalist but distribution of this species is affected by a tendency to avoid other species. Habitat associations of these three common Gerris species are explained in terms of habitat preferences and species interactions. Foraging efficiency varies with habitat structure and species morphology and therefore surface habitats provide a variable selective background for the evolution of gerrid species.

Seasonal Dynamic Pattern Analysis in Service of Climate Change Research a Methodical Case-Study — Monitoring and Simulation Based on an Aquatic Insect Community

“…There are also known for a long time such kind of efforts, which try to describe individual habitats by aquatic and semiaquatic Heteroptera communities. Among others, Fairbairn [46], Spence [177,178,179], Nummelin & al. [127], Vepsäläinen & Nummelin [198], Oscarson [131] and Vásárhelyi [191] also deals with habitat selection.…”

The distributional patterns of surface-dwelling insects in a Tenerife stream (Canary Islands)

“…While the water surface of riffles usually lacks animals, that of pools may host a Larval and adult heteropteran water bugs (Gerromorpha) and adult whirligig beetles (Gyrinidae) are some of the most predominant members of the community of surface-dwelling species, which is sometimes referred to as the neustonic community (Anderson & Wallace 1984), being predators or scavengers on animals trapped on the surface film (Ekblom 1926, Usinger 1956). Although there is some information on habitat partitioning among species of gyrinids (Brinck 1955, Leech & Chandler (2) 1956, Istock 1966, Kolmes 1984 and water bugs (Vepsàlàinen 1973, Spence 1981, Spence 1983), we are not aware of any previous study that, in a reach of a river system, has included distributional patterns of the entire guild of surface-living insects and their potential interactions.…”

“…Information on habitats and food of these species is scanty, except for the widespread Hydromeira slagnorum and Gerris thoracicus. Extrapolating from studies on congeneric species, the ones in Tenerife all seem to fall broadly within the common guild of predatory/scavenging, surface-living insects which inhabit stream pools and other lentic waters (Ekblom 1926, Usinger 1956, Istock 1966, Vepsà-làinen 1973, Spence 1981.…”

Distribuição espacial de insetos aquáticos (Hemiptera: Notonectidae e Gerridae) e a influência sobre a comunidade zooplanctônica do Lago Monte Alegre

“…Sabe-se que gerrídeos estão associados com diferentes habitats, como regiões com alta densidade de macrófitas (Calabrese, 1977;Spence, 1981). Uma pergunta que surge é se a menor sobreposição espacial de diferentes fases de desenvolvimento pode diminuir a competição por alimento, ou ainda, diminuir o efeito de predação ou canibalismo.…”

“…Nossos resultados inicialmente apontaram essa mesma tendência de segregação etária para notonectídeo na zona litorânea, pois quanto mais velho o estádio do inseto maior sua freqüência nas coletas, e quanto mais jovens menor. Os principais fatores que podem levar à segregação entre indivíduos jovens e adultos é o efeito do canibalismo dos adultos sobre os jovens e da competição por presas semelhantes (Spence, 1981;Sih, 1982;Bailey, 1987;Gilbert et al, 1999 Scott (1984) que encontraram que o número de presas ingeridas por indivíduos adultos de noctonectídeos foi menor que o de presas ingeridas por indivíduos mais jovens. Teoricamente, a preferência alimentar dos predadores que manipulam e sugam suas presas começa a partir de um determinado tamanho, visto que presas muito pequenas apresentam baixo conteúdo nutritivo e dificuldade em sua detecção, captura e manuseio.…”