2012
DOI: 10.1590/s1984-46702012000200009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Setting the reference for the use of Chironomus sancticaroli (Diptera: Chironomidae) as bioindicator: Ontogenetic pattern of larval head structures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, we suggest an alternative way to ascertain the larval instars: the variation in the number of striae present on the ventromental plates. This method makes it unnecessary to use morphometric data, as in the present study (REBECHI & NAVARRO-SILVA 2012). Beyond the length of the head capsule from ventral view, measurements of the antennae, mandibles, mentum and ventromental plates are efficient alternatives for the determination of the larval instars, as found by FORD (1959) for antennae and mandibles of Clinotanypus nervosus Meigen, 1818; Anatopynia trifascipennis Zetterstedt, 1838 and Procladius choreus Meigen, 1804 and by FROUZ et al (2002) for the mentum of Chironomus crassicaudatus Malloch, 1915 andGlyptotendipes paripes (Edwards, 1929).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Furthermore, we suggest an alternative way to ascertain the larval instars: the variation in the number of striae present on the ventromental plates. This method makes it unnecessary to use morphometric data, as in the present study (REBECHI & NAVARRO-SILVA 2012). Beyond the length of the head capsule from ventral view, measurements of the antennae, mandibles, mentum and ventromental plates are efficient alternatives for the determination of the larval instars, as found by FORD (1959) for antennae and mandibles of Clinotanypus nervosus Meigen, 1818; Anatopynia trifascipennis Zetterstedt, 1838 and Procladius choreus Meigen, 1804 and by FROUZ et al (2002) for the mentum of Chironomus crassicaudatus Malloch, 1915 andGlyptotendipes paripes (Edwards, 1929).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Chironomids are good bioindicators of the aquatic environment because they spend most of their life in bottom sediments, where they are exposed to toxic substances such as heavy metals, radioactive substances, pesticides and other xenobiotics, originating from sources such as industrial waste and agricultural runoff. Chironomids have been shown to be valuable models for research on morphological deformity, trophic classification of lakes and paleolimnology, and in toxicity studies (Meregalli et al 2000;De Bisthoven et al 2005;Lee & Choi 2009;Weltje et al 2010;Rebechi & Navarro-Silva 2012). Studies of their behavior and life history, as well as biomonitoring studies, have been carried out at population and ecosystem levels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, Dornfeld (2006); evaluating the toxicity of cadmium and copper in C. xanthus assays, observed only 2.0% deformity in control larvae. In laboratory culturing, Rebechi and Silva (2012) observed 9% of mentum deformity in C. sancticaroli (instar II) reared in standard conditions and 48% in III instar, while Viveiros (2012) observed an average of 13% for the same specie (IV instar). Despite these data, the criteria used for field studies should not be applied directly to laboratories tests, because the environmental conditions are different.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%