ECOLOGICAL AND ZOOGEOGRAPHICAL GROUPS OF ROVE BEETLES (STAPHYLINIDAE, COLEOPTERA, INSECTA) OF SUBALPINE BELT OF NORTHEASTERN MACROSLOPE OF UKRAINIAN CARPATHIANS
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30970/sbi.1301.584
Abstract
The ecological and zoogeographical structure of rove beetles was analyzed in the biotope of crooked forest Pinus mugo Turra, 1764 of the Subalpine Belt of the North-Eastern macro-slope of the Ukrainian Carpathians. As a result of conducted study, the representatives of 24 species belonging to 19 genera and 10 subfamilies were detected within the biotope. The subfamilies Staphylinidae (25 %) which is characterized by the presence of representatives of 5 genera. The representatives of Ocypus genera (3 species), Atrecus, Emus, Philonthus, Quedius were identified within the studied biotope. Each of them was presented by the individuals of one species. A slightly lower number of identified species is typical for the Tachyporinae subfamily – 5 species belonging to the three genera Lordithon (1 species), Tachinus (2 species), Tachyporus (2 species). Subfamilies Omaliinae and Oxytelinae are presented by the genera Pycnoglypta, Omaliinae, Olophrum and Oxytelus, Anotylus, Deleaster. A part of subfamilies characterized by the presence of the representatives of only one species equals 50%. This group of subfamilies includes: Oxyporinae, Paederinae, Pselaphinae, Steninae, Xantholininae, Olistaerinae that are represented by one species.
According to Margaleff and Mennicin a display number of the species abundance are rather high (4.19 and 1.60,). This aspect indicates a small number of eudominant and dominant species. Simpson index (0.09) indicates a significant diversity of representatives of subdomains and retsendents. The Berger Parker index is low (0.18) that indicates a minor quantity of representatives of the most numerous species – Pycnoglypta lurida (Gyllenhal, 1813).
Staphylinidae group is characterized by the presence of representatives of four classes of domination (eudominants, dominants, subdominants and recedants) within the biotope of mountainous pines. The representatives of eudominants (Deleaster dichrous (Gravenhorst, 1802), Olophrum rotundicollе Sahlberg,1830 and Pycnoglypta lurida Gyll., 1813) and dominants (Emus hirtus Linnaeus, 1758, Tachinus elongatus Gyllenhal., 1810) groups form the centerpiece of the researched group.
The groups of subdominants and recedants are characterized by a presence of representatives of 13 species and 6 species, respectively.
As a result of analysis of ecological and morphological groups, it was revealed that the largest number of species belongs to a group of epibionts (58.34 %), borers (28.14 %), cryptobionts (12.51 %).
A vast majority of species detected by trophic specialization are the predators (65 %). A slightly smaller number of species belongs to a group of micsophages that combine peculiarities of both nutrition predators and mycetophages or saprophages.
According to area analysis, most of the detected species belong to the Holarctic and Palaearctic types of the zoogeographical zones.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Bey-Bienko G.Ya. The determinant of insects of the European part of the USSR in five volumes. Vol. 2. Higher School, 1965; 111-156. (In Russian) | |
| |
2. Bogach Yu. A. Beetles-stafilins as bioindicators of ecological balance in the landscape, and human influence on the example of the city of Prague. Bioindication in cities and suburban areas. Coll. scientific tr., 1993; 41-48. (In Russian) | |
| |
3. Engelmann H.D. Zur Dominanzklassifizierung von Bodenartropoden. Pedobiologia, 1978; 5-6(18): 378-380. | |
| |
4. Gorodkov C. B. Types of insect ranges of tundra and forest zones of the European part of the USSR. Areas of insects of the European part of the USSR, maps 179-221. Leningrad, Science,1984, p. 3-20. | |
| |
5. Kascheev V.A. Classification of morphoecological types of imago staphilinids. Reports of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR. Biological series, 1985; 1: 157-170. (In Russian) | |
| |
6. Löbl I., Smetana A. Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera. Volume 2: Hydrophiloidea-Histeroidea-Staphylinoidea. Stenstrup. Apollo Books: 2004, P. 942. | |
| |
7. Magura T., Nagy D., Tóthmérész B. Rove beetles respond heterogeneously to urbanization. Journal of Insect Conservation, 2013: 17(4): 715-724. | |
| |
8. Mateleshko O. Yu. Faunistic records of the Staphylinidae (Coleoptera) from Transcarpathia. Visnyk of the Uzhgorod University. Series Biology, 2007; 21: 182-186. (In Ukrainian) | |
| |
9. Örgel S., Anlas S. Faunistic studies on the subfamily Paederinae (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) in Uşak Province, Western Anatolia. Acta Biologyca Turcica, 2016; 29(2): 61-66. | |
| |
10. Petrenko A.A. Rove Beetles (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae) in the Red Book of Ukraine. Collection of scientific works (on the basis of reports of the scientific conference). 2005; 1: 93-97. (In Ukrainian) | |
| |
11. Petrenko A., Sheshurak P. To the study of species composition of Rove-beetles (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae) of the National natural park “Desnyansko-Starogutsky”. Ukrainian Entomological Journal, 2013; 1(6): 50-64. (In Ukrainian) | |
| |
12. Pietrykowska-Tudruj E., Staniec B. Comparative larval morphology of Platydracus and Staphylinus (Staphylinidae: Staphylinini: Staphylinina) with notes on their biology and redescription of the pupa of Staphylinus. Zootaxa, 2012; 24(42): 24-42. | |
| |
13. Sushko G. Species composition and zoogeography of the rove beetles (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) of raised bogs of Belarus. North-Western Journal of Zoology, 2016; 12 (2): 220-229. (In Russian) | |
| |
14. Yin, Zi-Wei, Joseph Parker, Chenyang Cai, Di-Ying Huang, Li-Zhen Li. A new stem bythinine in Cretaceous Burmese amber and early evolution of specialized predatory behaviour in pselaphine rove beetles (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae). Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, 2017; 2: 55-60. | |
| |
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2019 Studia biologica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.