Vol. 110 - Part III - Zoological Survey of India

More documents

Recommendations

Info

MITRA & MEHTA : A preliminary note on the conservation of Saproxylic flies.............in Himachal Pradesh 3The Scatopsidae are a species-poor, cosmopolitanfamily of small dark nematocerans (0.6 mm to nearlyy 5mm) usually black, and wings with distinctly darkenedand thickened anteior radial veins contrasting with palerposterior veins. Of the 3 species of India only a speciesEctaetia nigronitida (Brunetti) is present in theHimachal Pradesh.Therevids (Stiletto flies) are more or less elongatedensely pubescent flies with slender non-prehensilelegs. They are brightly coloured, elongate, with largelyglabrous bodies. The antennae are sometimes verydistinctive. They are found in a variety of habitatsranging from rainforest to desert. The snake-like larvaeare very mobile and move with considerable speedthrough sand and loose soil. Larvae inhabit the soil inleaf-mould, fungi, decaying wood etc. The Therevidaeare represented by 16 species in India of them onlyThereva bilineata Brunetti known from HimachalPradesh.The Robber flies, or Asilidae, comprise one of thelargest and most abundant families of Diptera. Adultstages are medium to large flies often observed on stemsof plants, on the ground and grass or flying low. Speciesvary in apperance and some mimic wasps and bees.Most species are gray to black, hairy-bodied, have along, narrow, tapering abdomen containing segmentsthat may be banded, patterned or contrasting in color.The larva of Robber-flies is believed to be mostlyherbivorous (vegetarian) but the adult flies are highlyactive carnivores. Of the 482 species reported from India6 species are known from Himachal Pradesh.The family “Empididae” in the traditional sense is adiverse group of medium to small sized (1 to 15 mm),grey, yellowish or dark very rarely metallic colouredflies. The head is variously shaped and usually narrowerthan thorax. The wings are of varied shape and size.They are commonly called as “dance-flies” and gaintheir common name from their courtship behaviour.Empidoids breed in a variety of habitats, includingrunning water, tidal zones, decaying wood, and moistsoil. Adults are often found in various forest habitats,on leaves, tree trunks, aquatic vegetation, or in streambeds and seepage habitats. Larvae are soil inhabitants,but also sometimes found in decaying wood, humus,dungs, moss or in water. The family includes 57 speciesin India with only 13 species being reported fromHimachal Pradesh.Flower Flies or hover flies belong to the familySyrphidae are abundant everywhere except in arid areasof the Old World and in the extreme southern latitudes.Their size ranges from 4 mm to over 25 mm and theircoloration from bright coloration from bright yellow ororange to dull dark black or gray with a few iridescentforms. Larvae of the subfamily Syrphinae arepredaceous on soft-bodied arthropods, although somemay occasionally be scavengers. Most of the milesiinesare saprophagous and found in litter and dead wood,some of the rhingiines are mycetophagous, and a fewrhingiines and merodontines are phytophagous (asborers in tubers, stems, and wood, miners in leaves).46 species of hoverflies are reported from HimachalPradesh whereas 256 species known from India.DISCUSSIONInvariably, insects are overlooked when forestmanagement issues are discussed, because there areso many species, which are taxonomically intractableand so poorly known. Often people take the view thatif you look after the vegetation and vertebrates, theinsects will look after themselves. This may be true forsome functional groups, but for saproxylic insects, thisseems unlikely. Their study deserves high priority, sincethey are dependent on the very resource “wood” whoseremoval from the ecosystem is the usual object of forestmanagement (Grove S.J. and Stork N.E. 1999).The ecological value of dead wood is broadlyacknowledged worldwide. Recent research hashighlighted their sensitivity to forest management, withmanaged or secondary forests generally supportingfewer individuals, fewer species, and differentassemblages compared to old-growth or primary forests.this sensitivity is a product of their association with ahabitat that tends to diminish in managed forests. Manysaproxylic insect species have declining populationsand are regarded as threatened due to low habitatavailability in managed forests.The geographical area of Himachal Pradesh is 56,673km2. According to the State Forest Report, 1997 of FSI,the actual forest area in the state occupies only 22.5%of its area. Of them non-Forest : 74.2%, Very Dense
4 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaForest (VDF) : 2.0%. Open Forest : 9.7%, ModerateDense Forest (MDF) : 14.2%. Like all other parts ofIndia, the forest cover of Himachal Pradesh is alsodecreasing mostly due to man made hazards.To conserve the saproxylic flies there is a need ofchange of forest management in Himachal Pradesh. Inrecent years, data on the occurrence of Syrphidae inthe Netherlands suggested that many saproxylic specieshad increased. According Reemer et al. (2003), it hasbeen attributed to the tendency of leaving dead woodand ill trees in the forests. It is unfortunate that detailedstudies on saproxylic flies of Himachal Pradesh andtheir conservation for maintaining biodiversity of forestare rare, especially in our country, but hopefully thiswork can serve as baseline data for future researchwork.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWe are thankful to the Director, Zoological Surveyof India, for the necessary facilities and encouragement.The first author is also grateful to Dr. A.K. Sanyal,Addl. Director and Dr. A. Bal, Joint Director of TheZoological Survey of India, Kolkata for the preparationof the paper.REFERENCESCavalli, R. and Mason, F. 2003. Techniques for re-establishment of Dead wood for Saproxylic Fauna Conservation.LIFE Nature Project NAT/IT/99/6245 Bosco della Fontana (Mantova, Italy).Essen, P.A., Ehnström, B., Ericson, L., and Sjöberg, K. 1997. Boreal forests. Ecological Bullentins, 46 : 16-47.Fayt, P., Branquart, E., Dufrene, M., Henin, J.M., Pontegnic, C. and Versteirt, V. 2003. Xylobios : patterns, roles anddeterminants of saproxylic diversity in Belgian decisuous forests. In McManus L., Liebhold A.M. (eds.),Proceedings ecology, Survey and management of Forest Insects, USDA Forest service, Delaware, Pp. 128-129.Gilbertson, R.L., 1984. Relationships between insects and wood-rotting basidiomycetes. in Q.B. Wheeler, M.,editor. Fungus-insect relationships : Perspectives in ecology and evolution. Columbia University Press,New York, pp. 130-165.Grove S.J. and Stork N.E. 1999. The Conservation of Saproxylic Insects in Tropical Forests : A Research Agenda.Journal of Insect Conservation, 3(2) : 67-74.Hale, C.M., Pastor, J., and Rusterholz, K.A. 1999. Comparison of structural and compositional characteristics inold-growth and mature, managed hardwood forests of Minnesota, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of ForestResearch, 29 : 1479-1489.Harmon, M.E., Franklin, J.F., Swanson, F.J., Sollins, P., Gregory, S.V., Lattin, J.D., Anderson, N.H., Cline, S.P.,Aumen, N.G., Sedell, J.R., Lienkaemper, G.W., Cromack, K.J., and Cummins, K.W. 1986. Ecology of coarsewoody debris in temperate ecosystems. Advances in Ecological Research, 15 : 133-302.Komonen, A. 2001. Structure of insect communities inhabiting old-growth forest specialist bracket fungi. EcologicalEntomology, 26 : 63-75.Komonen, A., Jonsell, M., Økland, B., Sverdrup-Thygesonh, A. & Thunes, K. 2004. Insect assemblange associatedwith the polypore Fomitopsis pinicola : a comparison across Fennoscandia.Mason, F., Nardi, G., and Tisato M. (eds.) 2003. Proceedings of the International Symposium “Dead wood : a keyto biodiversity”, Mantova, Mayy 29-31st 2003. Sherwood 95 supplement, 2 : 1-100.McGee, G.G., Leopold, D.J., and Nyland, R.D. 1999. Structural characteristics of old-growth, maturing, and partiallycut northern hardwood forests. Ecological applications, 9 : 1316-1329.Økland, B. 1995. Insect fauna compared between six polypore species in a southern Norwegian spruce forest.Fauna Norvegica Serie B, 42 : 21-46.Rotheray, G.E. and MacGowan, I. 2000. Status and breeding sites of three presumed endangered Scottish saproxylicsyrphids (Diptera : Syrphidae). J. Insect Conserv. 4 : 215-223.
Page 3 and 4: COMPUTERISED DATA ON NATIONAL ZOOLO
Page 5: INSTRUCTION TO AUTHORSFrequency of
Page 10 and 11: MITRA & MEHTA : A preliminary note
Page 12 and 13: 8 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaSYSTEMATIC
Page 14 and 15: 10 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaTable-1 :
Page 16 and 17: 12 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaDistributi
Page 18 and 19: 14 Rec. zool. Surv. India132|——
Page 20 and 21: 16 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiawhite lanc
Page 22 and 23: 18 Rec. zool. Surv. India- Mid tibi
Page 24 and 25: 20 Rec. zool. Surv. Indialateral li
Page 26 and 27: 22 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaFigure 2 :
Page 28 and 29: 24 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaVertical b
Page 30 and 31: 26 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaFigure 8 :
Page 32 and 33: 28 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiathe ventra
Page 34 and 35: 30 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaTable 2 :
Page 36 and 37: 32 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaTable 2 :
Page 38 and 39: Rec. zool. Surv. India : 110(Part-3
Page 40 and 41: Rec. zool. Surv. India : 110(Part-3
Page 42 and 43: BAHUGUNA : Trichotaxonomy of Indian
Page 58 and 59:
BAHUGUNA : Trichotaxonomy of Indian
Page 60 and 61:
BAHUGUNA : Trichotaxonomy of Indian
Page 62 and 63:
60 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaFig. 1 : P
Page 64 and 65:
62 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaMaterials
Page 66 and 67:
64 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaDistributi
Page 68 and 69:
66 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiaof all lon
Page 70 and 71:
68 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiacarried ou
Page 72 and 73:
70 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaFamilyTRAP
Page 74 and 75:
72 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaPLATE-IIIq
Page 76 and 77:
74 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaPLATE-IVyz
Page 78 and 79:
76 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaHeller, C.
Page 80 and 81:
78 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiarotting th
Page 82 and 83:
80 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiaare about
Page 84 and 85:
82 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiahave been
Page 86 and 87:
84 Rec. zool. Surv. India92°400"E9
Page 88 and 89:
86 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaPLATE-IIa.
Page 90 and 91:
88 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaPLATE-IVa.
Page 92 and 93:
90 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaPLATE-VIa.
Page 94 and 95:
92 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaPLATE-VIII
Page 96 and 97:
94 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaTable-1 :
Page 98 and 99:
96 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaSl. Specie
Page 100 and 101:
98 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaSl. Specie
Page 102 and 103:
100 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaDISCUSSIO
Page 104 and 105:
102 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaPict. 1.
Page 106 and 107:
104 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaFig. 4. C
Page 108 and 109:
106 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiainvolve t
Page 110 and 111:
108 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiahave been
Page 112 and 113:
110 Rec. zool. Surv. India24. Antar
Page 114 and 115:
112 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaFig. 1. M
Page 116 and 117:
114 Rec. zool. Surv. IndiaFig. 1 :
Page 118 and 119:
116 Rec. zool. Surv. Indiaindoors,
Page 120 and 121:
Rec. zool. Surv. India : 110(Part-3
Page 122:
GHOSH, BASU ROY AND DUTTA : Occurre
show all

Vol. 110 - Part III - Zoological Survey of India

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?