Life forms and adaptive radiation of ground beetle larvae (Coleoptera: Carabidae) of the World fauna

Sharova, I. Kh.; Макаров, К. В.

doi:10.15298/rusentj.21.3.01

Cited by 10 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most Carabidae (ground beetles) are considered generalist predators consuming a wide range of animal prey, but also occasionally feed on plant material (Soboleva‐Dokuchaeva, 1975; Thiele, 1977; Lindroth, 1992). The other two important trophic guilds of ground beetles comprise polyphagous phytophages (most belonging to the tribes Harpalini and Zabrini) and myrmecophilous forms (tribe Paussini) inhabiting colonies of ants (Sharova, 1981). Medium and large ground beetles predominantly feed on larger prey and rarely on microarthropods (Federmann, 1983).…”

Section: Synopsis Of Feeding Habitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding habits and multifunctional classification of soil‐associated consumers from protists to vertebrates

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil organisms drive major ecosystem functions by mineralising carbon and releasing nutrients during decomposition processes, which supports plant growth, aboveground biodiversity and, ultimately, human nutrition. Soil ecologists often operate with functional groups to infer the effects of individual taxa on ecosystem functions and services. Simultaneous assessment of the functional roles of multiple taxa is possible using food‐web reconstructions, but our knowledge of the feeding habits of many taxa is insufficient and often based on limited evidence. Over the last two decades, molecular, biochemical and isotopic tools have improved our understanding of the feeding habits of various soil organisms, yet this knowledge is still to be synthesised into a common functional framework. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the feeding habits of consumers in soil, including protists, micro‐, meso‐ and macrofauna (invertebrates), and soil‐associated vertebrates. We have integrated existing functional group classifications with findings gained with novel methods and compiled an overarching classification across taxa focusing on key universal traits such as food resource preferences, body masses, microhabitat specialisation, protection and hunting mechanisms. Our summary highlights various strands of evidence that many functional groups commonly used in soil ecology and food‐web models are feeding on multiple types of food resources. In many cases, omnivory is observed down to the species level of taxonomic resolution, challenging realism of traditional soil food‐web models based on distinct resource‐based energy channels. Novel methods, such as stable isotope, fatty acid and DNA gut content analyses, have revealed previously hidden facets of trophic relationships of soil consumers, such as food assimilation, multichannel feeding across trophic levels, hidden trophic niche differentiation and the importance of alternative food/prey, as well as energy transfers across ecosystem compartments. Wider adoption of such tools and the development of open interoperable platforms that assemble morphological, ecological and trophic data as traits of soil taxa will enable the refinement and expansion of the multifunctional classification of consumers in soil. The compiled multifunctional classification of soil‐associated consumers will serve as a reference for ecologists working with biodiversity changes and biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships, making soil food‐web research more accessible and reproducible.

show abstract

Section: Synopsis Of Feeding Habitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding habits and multifunctional classification of soil‐associated consumers from protists to vertebrates

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The GAC provides many carabidological papers in open access (see http://www.laufkaefer.de/gac ). Other published thematic studies, often including compilations of numerous papers from various authors, concern, amongst others: biotopes ( Heydemann 1962 ; Schjøtz-Christensen 1965 ), larvae ( Brandmayr and Zetto Brandmayr 1982 ; Arndt 1991 ; Luff 1993 ), biol ogy and periodicity ( Larsson 1939 ), agroecology (Holland 2002), biogeography ( Ball 1985 ; Noonan et al 1992 ), dispersal ecology ( Palmén 1944 ; Den Boer 1977 ; Baars 1982 ; Desender 1989b ; Aukema 1995 ), morphology ( Sharova 1981 ; Deuve 1993 ) and phylogeny ( Ball et al 1998 ). This listing is not exhaustive, especially in the fields of genetics and molecular biology, which are growing rapidly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe – from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation

Kotze¹,

Brandmayr²,

Casale³

et al. 2011

319

262

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Carabidologists do it all’ (Niemelä 1996a) is a phrase with which most European carabidologists are familiar. Indeed, during the last half a century, professional and amateur entomologists have contributed enormously to our understanding of the basic biology of carabid beetles. The success of the field is in no small part due to regular European Carabidologists’ Meetings, which started in 1969 in Wijster, the Netherlands, with the 14th meeting again held in the Netherlands in 2009, celebrating the 40th anniversary of the first meeting and 50 years of long-term research in the Dwingelderveld. This paper offers a subjective summary of some of the major developments in carabidology since the 1960s. Taxonomy of the family Carabidae is now reasonably established, and the application of modern taxonomic tools has brought up several surprises like elsewhere in the animal kingdom. Progress has been made on the ultimate and proximate factors of seasonality and timing of reproduction, which only exceptionally show non-seasonality. Triggers can be linked to evolutionary events and plausibly explained by the “taxon cycle” theory. Fairly little is still known about certain feeding preferences, including granivory and ants, as well as unique life history strategies, such as ectoparasitism and predation on higher taxa. The study of carabids has been instrumental in developing metapopulation theory (even if it was termed differently). Dispersal is one of the areas intensively studied, and results show an intricate interaction between walking and flying as the major mechanisms. The ecological study of carabids is still hampered by some unresolved questions about sampling and data evaluation. It is recognised that knowledge is uneven, especially concerning larvae and species in tropical areas. By their abundance and wide distribution, carabid beetles can be useful in population studies, bioindication, conservation biology and landscape ecology. Indeed, 40 years of carabidological research have provided so much data and insights, that among insects - and arguably most other terrestrial organisms - carabid beetles are one of the most worthwhile model groups for biological studies.

show abstract

“…All known Galeritini larvae (Sallé 1846; Candèze 1861 ; Hubbard 1875 ; van Emden 1942 ; Kawada 1959 ; Thompson 1979 ; Kirk 1980 ; Costa et al 1988 ; Arndt and Drechsel 1998 ; Makarov 2002 ; Dajoz 2005 ; dos Santos 2012 ) show a set of striking features related primarily to their lifestyle. The contrast coloration, long legs and urogomphi, and well-developed eyes are characteristic of epigeobiont runners ( Sharova 2008 ; Sharova and Makarov 2012 ). Due to the extremely long hind legs in Galeritini larvae, the apex of their abdomen does not touch the substrate during movement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The preimaginal stages of Galerita ruficollis Dejean, 1825 and the position of the tribe Galeritini in the classification of ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae)

Макаров¹,

Matalin²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The complete development cycle of Galerita (Galerita) ruficollis Dejean, 1825 was studied for the first time. In laboratory, at a temperature of 22 °C and long-day conditions, the development from egg to adult lasted 58–60 days. The development of the third instar larva lasted particularly long (on average, 19 days), and the most intense increase in biomass (from 20 to 100 mg) was observed at that phase as well. The extended embryonic development (11–20 days) and the relatively short development time of the third instar larva were found to be characteristic of G. ruficollis. The bifurcated protrusion of the anterior edge of the head was proven to represent an outgrowth of the frontal sclerite (frontale), but not of the nasale, as believed previously. The chaetotaxy of Galerita larvae is described in detail for the first time. Based on larval features, the monophyly of the Galeritini + Dryptini group is confirmed. Based on the morphology of the larvae and pupae, this group can be suggested as occupying a separate position within the Truncatipennia, possibly being related to the assemblage that includes Pterostichini, Harpalini, Licinini, Chlaenini, and Platynini. The monophyly of Zuphiitae (sensu Erwin and Sims 1984; Erwin 1985) and the Zuphiitae clade (sensu Ober and Maddison 2008) is confirmed.

show abstract

Life forms and adaptive radiation of ground beetle larvae (Coleoptera: Carabidae) of the World fauna

Cited by 10 publications

References 44 publications

Feeding habits and multifunctional classification of soil‐associated consumers from protists to vertebrates

Feeding habits and multifunctional classification of soil‐associated consumers from protists to vertebrates

Forty years of carabid beetle research in Europe – from taxonomy, biology, ecology and population studies to bioindication, habitat assessment and conservation

The preimaginal stages of Galerita ruficollis Dejean, 1825 and the position of the tribe Galeritini in the classification of ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About