Dispersal costs can be classified into energetic, time, risk and opportunity costs and may be levied directly or deferred during departure, transfer and settlement. They may equally be incurred during life stages before the actual dispersal event through investments in special morphologies. Because costs will eventually determine the performance of dispersing individuals and the evolution of dispersal, we here provide an extensive review on the different cost types that occur during dispersal in a wide array of organisms, ranging from micro-organisms to plants, invertebrates and vertebrates. In general, costs of transfer have been more widely documented in actively dispersing organisms, in contrast to a greater focus on costs during departure and settlement in plants and animals with a passive transfer phase. Costs related to the development of specific dispersal attributes appear to be much more prominent than previously accepted. Because costs induce trade-offs, they give rise to covariation between dispersal and other life-history traits at different scales of organismal organisation. The consequences of (i) the presence and magnitude of different costs during different phases of the dispersal process, and (ii) their internal organisation through covariation with other life-history traits, are synthesised with respect to potential consequences for species conservation and the need for development of a new generation of spatial simulation models.

Since their discovery in the late 1980s, neonicotinoid pesticides have become the most widely used class of insecticides worldwide, with large-scale applications ranging from plant protection (crops, vegetables, fruits), veterinary products, and biocides to invertebrate pest control in fish farming. In this review, we address the phenyl-pyrazole fipronil together with neonicotinoids because of similarities in their toxicity, physicochemical profiles, and presence in the environment. Neonicotinoids and fipronil currently account for approximately one third of the world insecticide market; the annual world production of the archetype neonicotinoid, imidacloprid, was estimated to be ca. 20,000 tonnes active substance in 2010. There were several reasons for the initial success of neonicotinoids and fipronil: (1) there was no known pesticide resistance in target pests, mainly because of their recent development, (2) their physicochemical properties included many advantages over previous generations of insecticides (i.e., organophosphates, carbamates, pyrethroids, etc.), and (3) they shared an assumed reduced operator and consumer risk. Due to their systemic nature, they are taken up by the roots or leaves and translocated to all parts of the plant, which, in turn, makes them effectively toxic to herbivorous insects. The toxicity persists for a variable period of time—depending on the plant, its growth stage, and the amount of pesticide applied. A wide variety of applications are available, including the most common prophylactic non-Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) application by seed coating. As a result of their extensive use and physicochemical properties, these substances can be found in all environmental compartments including soil, water, and air. Neonicotinoids and fipronil operate by disrupting neural transmission in the central nervous system of invertebrates. Neonicotinoids mimic the action of neurotransmitters, while fipronil inhibits neuronal receptors. In doing so, they continuously stimulate neurons leading ultimately to death of target invertebrates. Like virtually all insecticides, they can also have lethal and sublethal impacts on non-target organisms, including insect predators and vertebrates. Furthermore, a range of synergistic effects with other stressors have been documented. Here, we review extensively their metabolic pathways, showing how they form both compound-specific and common metabolites which can themselves be toxic. These may result in prolonged toxicity. Considering their wide commercial expansion, mode of action, the systemic properties in plants, persistence and environmental fate, coupled with limited information about the toxicity profiles of these compounds and their metabolites, neonicotinoids and fipronil may entail significant risks to the environment. A global evaluation of the potential collateral effects of their use is therefore timely. The present paper and subsequent chapters in this review of the global literature explore these risks and show a growing body of evidence t...

We assessed the state of knowledge regarding the effects of large-scale pollution with neonicotinoid insecticides and fipronil on non-target invertebrate species of terrestrial, freshwater and marine environments. A large section of the assessment is dedicated to the state of knowledge on sublethal effects on honeybees (Apis mellifera) because this important pollinator is the most studied non-target invertebrate species. Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths), Lumbricidae (earthworms), Apoidae sensu lato (bumblebees, solitary bees) and the section “other invertebrates” review available studies on the other terrestrial species. The sections on freshwater and marine species are rather short as little is known so far about the impact of neonicotinoid insecticides and fipronil on the diverse invertebrate fauna of these widely exposed habitats. For terrestrial and aquatic invertebrate species, the known effects of neonicotinoid pesticides and fipronil are described ranging from organismal toxicology and behavioural effects to population-level effects. For earthworms, freshwater and marine species, the relation of findings to regulatory risk assessment is described. Neonicotinoid insecticides exhibit very high toxicity to a wide range of invertebrates, particularly insects, and field-realistic exposure is likely to result in both lethal and a broad range of important sublethal impacts. There is a major knowledge gap regarding impacts on the grand majority of invertebrates, many of which perform essential roles enabling healthy ecosystem functioning. The data on the few non-target species on which field tests have been performed are limited by major flaws in the outdated test protocols. Despite large knowledge gaps and uncertainties, enough knowledge exists to conclude that existing levels of pollution with neonicotinoids and fipronil resulting from presently authorized uses frequently exceed the lowest observed adverse effect concentrations and are thus likely to have large-scale and wide ranging negative biological and ecological impacts on a wide range of non-target invertebrates in terrestrial, aquatic, marine and benthic habitats.

Summary 1.The relationship between maximal acceleration capacity and flight morphology was tested experimentally in the butterfly Pararge aegeria . Such relations are often assumed but seldom tested. 2. In both sexes acceleration capacity was positively correlated with total body mass, thorax mass, forewing area, forewing length, wing loading, aspect ratio and centre of forewing area (centroid). Relationships with total body mass, forewing area, forewing length and wing loading were stronger in males. This can be explained by different mass allocation: males allocate proportionally more mass to the thorax, females more to the abdomen. 3. Evidence for the combined effect of morphological traits on acceleration capacity was found by multivariate analysis. In males and females, a more distant relative centroid and higher relative thorax mass were related to a higher flight capacity. In addition, aspect ratio was positively related to acceleration capacity in males only. 4. Our results support the assumed mechanism behind the relationship between flight morphology and mate-locating behaviour.

Tese submetida como requisito parcial para a obtenção do grau de Doutor em Ciências Ambientais e Florestais, no Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Ambientais e Florestais, Área de Concentração em Conservação da Natureza DEDICATÓRIA Dedico este trabalho à minha avó, Lurdinha, pois estou realizando o desejo e sonho dela, ter um Doutor em casa. Corre menino, corre... e o menino voou... AGRADECIMENTOS Agradeço primeiramente a Deus, por ter me abençoado em tudo que fiz até o momento e, que continue a me fortalecer e abençoar ao longo do caminhar de minha vida.A minha avó, Maria de Lourdes Peixoto Trotta, que mesmo em outro plano permanece ainda ao meu lado, me acompanhando e estimulando minha vitória "corre meu filho, corre".A minha mãe Andréa Peixoto de Lima e irmã, Thais Barros de Lima pela compreensão e respeito à minhas ideias.Ao Amigo Prof. Paulo Cesar Rodrigues Cassino, por orientar-me pelos caminhos da Ciência, me ensinando a andar com as próprias pernas, tornando-me um "jacaré" médio... Aos Amigos Prof. Acácio Geraldo de Carvalho e Roberto Carlos Costa Lelis por me acolherem num momento difícil e crucial para minha vida acadêmica.Ao meu irmão Luis Henrique Soares Alves, que mesmo com tantos afazeres sempre esteve por perto, palavras faltariam para dizer o quanto foi importante para mim.Ao Coordenador do Curso de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Ambientais e Florestais por toda colaboração.À equipe LABIN, pois todos ajudaram de alguma forma. E a todos que de alguma forma colaboraram para a realização deste trabalho.