VII. <i>Vocal Organs in the Coleopterous Families</i> Dytiscidae, Erotylidae <i>and</i> Endomychidae

Arrow, Gilbert J.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2311.1924.tb03353.x

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Freshwater aquatic insects have been used as indicators of water quality since the Berlin botanists Kolkwitz and Marsson described tolerance values in the Saprobien system over 100 years ago [90]. They are well catalogued internationally, and while rooted in the defence, mating Parfitt [30], Reeker [31], Sopp [32], Clainpanain [33], Arrow [29], Mukerji [34], Marku [35], Balfour-Browne [36], Leston et al [37], Smith [38] mating, defence Balfour-Browne [44], Buhk [45], Procher [46], White [47], Allen [48], Spangler [49], van Tassel, [50], Maillard [51], Britton [52], Maillard & Sellier [53], Meyer-Rochow [54], Ryker [55], Ryker [56], Hammond [42] air expulsion from spiracles mating Butler [59], Poisson [60], Moore [61], Finke [62], Jansson [63], Jansson [64], Jansson [65], Jansson [66], Aiken [67], Theiss [68] last century [91][92][93], many of these have recently been updated or adapted to different stressors [94]. While all of these assign tolerance values-measures of the sensitivity to various aspects of water pollution-to species, genera or sometimes higher taxonomic levels, extra research will be needed to overcome a key problem with the distribution of indicator values concerning aquatic insects.…”

Section: What Is the Sensitivity Of These Species To Environmental Co...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A typical stridulatory apparatus is made of a file (f) and a scraper (s). )orderfamilylife stagesexmechanismfrequency range (kHz)behavioural contextreferencesColeopteraAmphizoidaeadult?— f: wing patch??Arrow [29] — s: elytra ColeopteraDytiscidaebothboth— f: costal vein, wing patch, protibia, sternum, hind coxa0.2–10preparation for flight, defence, matingParfitt [30], Reeker [31], Sopp [32], Clainpanain [33], Arrow [29], Mukerji [34], Marku [35], Balfour-Browne [36], Leston et al . [37], Smith [38], Larson & Pritchard [39], Greenhalgh et al .…”

Section: Review Of Soniferous Aquatic Insectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The potential of acoustic monitoring of aquatic insects for freshwater assessment

Desjonquères,

Linke,

Greenhalgh

et al. 2024

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aquatic insects are a major indicator used to assess ecological condition in freshwater environments. However, current methods to collect and identify aquatic insects require advanced taxonomic expertise and rely on invasive techniques that lack spatio-temporal replication. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is emerging as a non-invasive complementary sampling method allowing broad spatio-temporal and taxonomic coverage. The application of PAM in freshwater ecosystems has already proved useful, revealing unexpected acoustic diversity produced by fishes, amphibians, submerged aquatic plants, and aquatic insects. However, the identity of species producing sounds remains largely unknown. Among them, aquatic insects appear to be the major contributor to freshwater soundscapes. Here, we estimate the potential number of soniferous aquatic insects worldwide using data from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. We found that four aquatic insect orders produce sounds totalling over 7000 species. This number is probably underestimated owing to poor knowledge of aquatic insects bioacoustics. We then assess the value of sound producing aquatic insects to evaluate ecological condition and find that they might be useful despite having similar responses in pristine and degraded environments in some cases. Both expert and automated identifications will be necessary to build international reference libraries and to conduct acoustic bioassessment in freshwaters. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Towards a toolkit for global insect biodiversity monitoring’.

show abstract