Dung beetle communities: a neotropical-north temperate comparison

Abstract

-Dung beetle communities have been compared across north temperate latitudes. Tropical dung beetle communities appear to be more diverse based on studies using different methodologies. Here, we present results from a standardized sampling protocol used to compare dung beetle communities across five neotropical forests in Brazil and Ecuador and two warm, north temperate forests in Mississippi and Louisiana. Species richness in the tropical forests was three to seven times higher than the temperate forests, as would be expected by studies of other taxa across tropical and temperate latitudes. Average body size in the temperate forests was larger than the tropical forests, as predicted by Bergmann's rule. Dung beetle abundance and volume per trap-day were generally higher in Ecuador than Brazil, and higher in Mississippi than Louisiana, but there were no tropical-temperate differences. Species rank-abundance curves were similar within countries and between countries. Rank-volume distributions indicated a smaller range of beetle body sizes in Ecuador versus Brazil or the USA. Community similarity was high within countries and low between countries. Community differences between Brazil and Ecuador sites may be explained by differences in productivity based on geological age of the soils.

Beetle Species–Area Relationships and Extinction Rates in Protected Areas

“…In accordance with the general latitudinal pattern of biodiversity in Europe, tenebrionid richness in Italy is known to increase southwards [ 16 ], in response to variations in rainfall and temperatures, and in consequence of the refugial role played by Southern Italy during the Pleistocene [ 101 ]. There is no previous study on the latitudinal gradient of dung beetles in Europe or in Italy, but studies on dung beetle communities in Europe and North America [ 102 , 103 , 104 ] indicate that northern communities have fewer species than the southern ones. The increase in dung beetle richness with decreasing latitude in Italy can be explained by both historical reasons (i.e., the refugial role of southern areas during Pleistocene glaciations) and current climate (for example, while Aphodiini are able to colonize even cold areas, most Scarabaeinae are thermophilic animals) and land use (extensive grazing in southern Italian regions).…”

Altitudinal gradient in species richness and composition of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in an eastern Euro-Mediterranean locality: Functional, seasonal and habitat influences

“…These results partially contradict the results of other studies carried out under Mediterranean conditions (Lumaret & Kirk, 1987;Zamora et al, 2007;Numa et al, 2012;Errouissi & Jay Robert, 2019), in which only a few species show preferences for either forest or scrubland, probably because of biogeographical and/or historical factors (Cambefort & Walter, 1991;Martín-Piera & Lobo, 1996). The generally few species in the closed biomes in the Palaearctic region contrast with the high diversity of dung beetles in tropical forests (Radtke et al, 2010). The preference of dung beetles for open habitats in the Palaearctic is thought to be linked with the arrival of faunal elements from Asia during the Oligocene-Miocene in parallel with the expansion of grasslands and the diversifi cation of ruminant Artiodactyla that produce soft fi brous droppings (Sole & Scholtz, 2010;Strömberg, 2011).…”

Optimización del muestreo de invertebrados tropicales: Un ejemplo con escarabajos coprófagos (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) en Venezuela

“…Existen varios ejemplos de protocolos de observación y detección de vertebrados e invertebrados en zonas templadas o subtropicales que han sido aplicados exitosamente en escalas geográficas amplias, como parte de programas de inventario y monitoreo (Ward & Lariviere 2004, Carr III & de Stoll 2005, Schieck & Stelfox 2006, BBS 2010, Watson 2010. Sin embargo, existen pocos ejemplos en regiones tropicales (Villarreal et al 2004, Noriega & Fagua 2009, Ahumada et al 2011) y particularmente para invertebrados, resulta difícil implementar protocolos de muestreo efectivos dada la gran variabilidad en la probabilidad de detección de los individuos (Fisher 1999, Walpole & Sheldon 1999, Ward & Lariviere 2004, Cardoso et al 2008, Gardner et al 2008, Radtke et al 2010.…”