ecology of phasmids - KLUEDO - Universität Kaiserslautern

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Community structure & host range 16 c = Number of plant families only accepted in feeding-trials but not recorded in line-transects Sørensen’s similarity coefficient is a qualitative measure usually used for matches in species composition between samples. As feeding-trials result in qualitative data (edible vs. inedible) this coefficient is also applicable to measure qualitative overlap between realized and absolute food niche. Sørensen’s similarity coefficient weighs matches more heavily than mismatches and thereby accounts for the fact that mismatches were over represented both 1) in line-transect data, as all recorded plant species were considered as potential host plants and 2) in feeding trials, as not all tested plant species that were edible occurred in line-transects. 2.3 Results 2.3.1 Phasmid diversity and density In 15 months of line-transect monitoring I recorded 307 specimens representing 11 phasmid species (Table 2-1). The species accumulation curve from line-transect records reached an asymptote after four months (Figure 2-1) suggesting that the phasmid fauna of forest edge and understory habitats was sampled adequately. This was supported by the fact that in field records other than along line-transects only one additional phasmid species was found (Pseudophasma menius; Table 2-1). One species (Otocrania sp.) has not been previously reported for Panamá (compare to Appendix 1). The local phasmid fauna was dominated by four common species comprising more than 89 % of the sampled specimens (Figure 2-2). Seven phasmid species were found in low numbers of 10 or less individuals. One of these species was represented by a singleton (Stratocles multilineatus). Line-transect data uncovered a clear spatial separation in the community structure. Diversity in phasmid species was higher in forest edges compared to the forest understory (Table 2-1). This higher diversity resulted from higher species richness and higher eveness along forest edges. The data indicate that phasmids were mainly restricted to forest edge habitats; ten out of eleven species and 93 % of the recorded individuals occurred here. In the forest understory phasmids were rare and singletons represented three out of four species. Only Metriophasma diocles was found regularly and comprised 86 % of the recorded specimens in the understory. As this habitat was poor in species and in individuals, similarity of phasmid communities between forest understory and forest edge was low (demonstrated by Morisita’s similarity index Cλ = 0.25; Table 2-1). Phasmid density was 35 times higher in forest edge habitats than in the understory (Table 2-1). Analogous population density for M. diocles was lower in the understory than at forest edges. While absolute abundances doubled population density trebled from 6.7 ind.*ha -1 in the understory to 21.6 ind.*ha -1 at forest edges after adjusting for size of the sampled area (with a respective total area searched of 0.096 and 0.048 ha).
Community structure & host range 17 no. of species 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Mar- 00 May- 00 Jun- 00 Aug- 00 Oct- 00 Nov- 00 Jan- 01 Feb- 01 Apr- 01 Figure 2-1: Species accumulation curve for phasmids recorded along line-transects on BCI (May 2000 to July 2001; N = 307). relative abundance [%] 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Oncotophasma martini Isagoras dentipes Bacteria ploiaria Metriophasma diocles species Otocrania sp. Figure 2-2: Relative abundances of phasmid species at forest edges (white bars) and in the forest understory (black bars) of BCI (line-transect data; N = 307). 2.3.2 Seasonality Absolute abundances of phasmids along forest edges were temporally heterogeneous (Figure 2-3) as demonstrated by comparison of cumulative frequencies per month (GOF, χ 2 = 40.17, df = 12, p < 0.01). This temporal heterogeneity in phasmid abundances held for phasmid adults (GOF, χ 2 = 40.25, df = 12, p < 0.01) but not for nymphs (GOF, χ 2 = 18.45, df = 14, p > 0.05). Heterogeneity largely resulted for Jun- 01 Jul- 01
Page 1 and 2: ECOLOGY OF PHASMIDS (PHASMATODEA) I
Page 5 and 6: ECOLOGY OF PHASMIDS (PHASMATODEA) I
Page 7 and 8: Acknowledgements I Acknowledgements
Page 9 and 10: Table of Contents III 3 Life cycle,
Page 11 and 12: List of Figures V List of Figures F
Page 13: List of Abbreviations VII List of A
Page 16 and 17: Introduction 2 Regardless whether s
Page 18 and 19: Introduction 4 Description of phasm
Page 20 and 21: Introduction 6 Solanum and Piper (T
Page 22 and 23: Introduction 8 1.3.4 Data analysis
Page 24 and 25: Community structure & host range 10
Page 46 and 47: Life history & potential population
Page 58 and 59: Adult female feeding preference & n
Page 80 and 81:
Adult female feeding preference & n
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Predation mediated mortality & migr
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 105 and 106:
Concluding remarks 91 6 Concluding
Page 107:
Abstract 93 7 Abstract Herbivory is
Page 110 and 111:
Literature cited 96 Basset, Y. 1997
Page 112 and 113:
Literature cited 98 Brown, B. J., M
Page 114 and 115:
Literature cited 100 Croat, T. B. 1
Page 116 and 117:
Literature cited 102 Hagerman, A. E
Page 118 and 119:
Literature cited 104 Kearsley, M. J
Page 120 and 121:
Literature cited 106 McNeill, S., T
Page 122 and 123:
Literature cited 108 Reich, P. B.,
Page 124 and 125:
Literature cited 110 Strong, D. R.,
Page 127:
Appendix 113 9 Appendix Please cont
Page 130 and 131:
Appendix 1: Phasmid species previou
Page 133 and 134:
Tabellarischer Lebenslauf Angaben z
Page 135:
Berger J., Schaefer, M., 1997. Wild
show all

ecology of phasmids - KLUEDO - Universität Kaiserslautern

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?