<i>The Natural History of Dung Beetles of the Subfamily Scarabaeinae (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae).</i>Gonzalo Halffter , Eric G. Matthews

Ritcher, Paul O.

doi:10.1086/405770

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, five other scarabaeine species were recorded by us in earlier studies as visitors and potential feeders of sauropsid dung in Madagascar and Mauritius (Supplementary Table 6). The widespread consumption of sauropsid dung has also been documented in New Zealand (Stavert et al, 2014), and hypothesized to have existed in the Caribbean, where only a single record has been found so far (Matthews, 1965;Halffter and Matthews, 1966). A lack of research into the feeding behavior of scarabaeines from New Caledonia precludes any conclusions regarding their diet.…”

Section: Discussion Insular Dung Beetles Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metagenomics reveals that dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) broadly feed on reptile dung. Did they also feed on that of dinosaurs?

Lopes

Rossini²,

Losacco³

et al. 2023

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The origin of the dung-feeding habits in dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) is debatable. According to traditional views, the evolution of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) and their feeding habits are largely attributed to mammal dung. In this paper, we challenge this view and provide evidence that many dung beetle communities are actually attracted to the dung of reptiles and birds (= Sauropsida). In turn, this indicates that sauropsid dung may have played a crucial evolutionary role that was previously underestimated. We argue that it is physiologically realistic to consider that coprophagy in dung beetles could have evolved during the Cretaceous in response to the dung produced by dinosaurs. Furthermore, we demonstrate that sauropsid dung may be one of the major factors driving the emergence of insular dung beetle communities across the globe. We support our findings with amplicon-metagenomic analyses, field observations, and meta-analysis of the published literature.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Insular Dung Beetles Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metagenomics reveals that dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) broadly feed on reptile dung. Did they also feed on that of dinosaurs?

Lopes

Rossini²,

Losacco³

et al. 2023

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Food preference was not considered because the vast majority (>70%) of dung beetles in our areas are coprophagous (authors' unpublished data). Nesting strategy based on genus was obtained from the literature (Beiroz et al, 2017; Correa, Braga, Puker, & Korasaki, 2019; Griffiths et al, 2015; Halffter & Matthews, 1966): (i) rollers, which roll dung away from the dung pile in balls; (ii) tunnelers, which take a bury dung directly below or around the dung pile; and (iii) dwellers, which nest inside the dung (Halffter & Matthews, 1966).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tropical savanna conversion to exotic pastures negatively affects taxonomic and functional diversity of dung beetle assemblages, but not dung removal

Maciel

Braga

Carvalho

et al. 2023

Insect Conserv Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract1. The replacement of natural systems with agricultural lands is the main factor resulting in land use change in tropical regions. Tropical savannas cover more than 20% of the global land surface, and one‐fifth of the world's population depends directly on these systems.2. Here, we aim to understand how the conversion of tropical savanna into exotic pastures affects the taxonomic and functional metrics of communities and dung removal, using dung beetles as a focal group in a biodiversity hotspot—the Brazilian Cerrado biome. We used species richness, abundance, total biomass, and species composition as assemblage metrics, and functional richness, equitability and dispersion indices, and functional composition as functional diversity metrics.3. The replacement of native savanna with exotic pastures negatively affected taxonomic and functional metrics, suggesting a simplified system where some disturbance‐tolerant species become dominant. However, the relationship between dung removal and functional richness was higher in pastures compared to savanna.4. Our results demonstrated that responses of dung beetle assemblages and dung removal to land use changes are decoupled, idiosyncratic and context‐dependent, presenting challenges for making predictions and generalisations about the effects of land use change on ecological processes mediated by animals.

show abstract

“…Dung beetles differ in their approach to dung manipulation and brood formation (nidification), with the main types being tunnelling, rolling, or dwelling (Halffter and Matthews 1966). The latter is uncommon and not easily morphologically distinguished so we do not consider it further.…”

Section: Strategies For Nidificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ecological community assemblages and interspecific competition can be inferred indirectly via the study of ecomorphology, how functional morphological traits such as form (shape and size) relate to an organism's environment (Williams 1972;Karr and James 1975). Dung beetles can be ecologically partitioned by their approach to dung manipulation and brood formation, called nidification, with the main types being tunnelling, rolling, or dwelling (Halffter and Matthews 1966). Their body form is well known to correlate with nidification strategy, particularly with respect to different body and limb proportions (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of ecomorphology between introduced and native Australian dung beetles

Harvey

Sherratt

2023

Aust. J. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among the many catastrophic introductions of exotic species to Australia, the Australian Dung Beetle Project stands apart as a success story. From 1965 dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) were introduced for biological control purposes, and 23 species survived to become integrated into the environment with apparently little-to-no competition with native species. To understand this, we investigated ecomorphological diversity in the Australian dung beetle fauna, examining variation in functional traits among rolling and tunnelling species that are native to Australia and introduced. We found that introduced species are, on average, larger than native species of the same nidification strategy, but the size ranges overlap. Native and introduced tunnellers are convergent in body shape, whereas introduced rollers have distinct body shape compared with native species. Rollers and tunnellers also have distinct allometric patterns, where shape variation predicted by size aligns along two diverging allometric trajectories between nidification strategies. Our results suggest that ecomorphological differences do not explain the apparent lack of competition between tunnellers, but this may be the factor for rollers. Also, these results indicate that body size and associated allometric scaling is an important aspect of the ecomorphology of dung beetles that should be considered in future studies.

show abstract

The Natural History of Dung Beetles of the Subfamily Scarabaeinae (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae).Gonzalo Halffter , Eric G. Matthews

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Metagenomics reveals that dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) broadly feed on reptile dung. Did they also feed on that of dinosaurs?

Metagenomics reveals that dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) broadly feed on reptile dung. Did they also feed on that of dinosaurs?

Tropical savanna conversion to exotic pastures negatively affects taxonomic and functional diversity of dung beetle assemblages, but not dung removal

A comparison of ecomorphology between introduced and native Australian dung beetles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About