TAXONOMIC DIVERSITY OF HOVERFLIES (DIPTERA: SYRPHIDAE) IN THE SILINSKII PARK OF THE KOMSOMOLSK-NA-AMURE CITY

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 97-103
Author(s):  
V.A. Mutin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Taxonomic Diversity

Globally endangered butterflies (Lepidoptera) protected in the natural reserve «Dniprovsko-Orilsky»

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 47-54
Author(s):  
K. K. Holoborodko ◽  
V. O. Makhina ◽  
K. S. Buchnieva ◽  
O. E. Pakhomov
Keyword(s):  
Rare Species ◽  
Geographical Location ◽  
Taxonomic Diversity ◽  
Red List ◽  
River Valley ◽  
Number Of Species ◽  
Natural Reserve ◽  
Western Palearctic ◽  
Mediterranean Origin ◽  
Northern Species

Floodplain valley of the Dnieper river midstream is a unique natural complex, having a great bìogeographical, ecological, environmental, historical and recreational values. In 1990, the Natural reserve «Dniprovsko-Orilsky» was established within the area. The Natural reserve «Dniprovsko-Orilsky» is environmentally protected site within the Dnipropetrovsk region, Dnipropetrovsk oblast, Ukraine. This reserve occupies part of the Dnieper river valley and marshy and reedy banks of Protovch river (existing bed of Oril river). It was created by Regulation of the Council of Ministers of the USSR of 15 September 1990, No. 262, based on common zoological and ornitological Nature reserves «Taromskì plavni» and «Obukhovskie zaplavy». On the territory of the Natural reserve «Dniprovsko-Orilsky», they were registered 32 Lepidoptera species listed in the List of Threatened Species at different categories (5 species in IUCN Red List ; 18 in Red Data Book of Ukraine; 7 in European Red List of plants and animals endangered on a global scale; 31 in Red Book of Dnipropetrovsk oblast). The main scientific materials were author’s collections from area of research and materials of entomological funds, Department of Zoology and Ecology, Oles Honchar Dnipropetrovsk National University (mostly Memorial Collection of V. O. Barsov). Field surveys covered all the ecosystems basic on size and degree of protection. The author’s researches have conducted over the past decade during annual expeditions to the Reserve. Taxonomic structure of the complex is quite diverse, and represented by all the major families of higher millers and rhopalocera, having protectedstatus. In relation to taxonomy, this complex formed by representatives of five superfamilies (Zyganoidea, Noctuoidea, Bombycoidea, Hesperioidea, Papilionoidea) from 11 families (Zygaenidae, Saturniidae, Sphingidae, Noctuidae Arctiidae Hesperiidae, Papilionidae, Pieridae, Nymphalidae, Satyridae, Lycaenidae). High taxonomic diversity can be explained by unique geographical location of the reserve in azonal conditions of the Dnieper river valley. Such location allows to enter different zoogeographic Lepidoptera groups on the reserve territory. Zoogeographic analysis of species protected within the reserve territory selected 7 basic groups. It was found that most of the globally rare species have Mediterranean origin (39 %); species of Palearctic origin are in second place (22 %); Western Palearctic and Ponto-Kazakh types of areas are same of number of species, and come third (11 %); and others come 17 % (European, Euro-Siberian, and Holarctic). This fauna component is specific due to presence of so-called «northern» species that make up 40 % (representatives of Palearctic, Western Palearctic, Euro-Siberian, European and Holarctic groups). Their existence within the reserve territory is only possible due to development of boreal valley ecosystems. High taxonomic diversity can be explained by unique geographical location of the reserve in azonal conditions of the Dnieper river valley. Such location allows to enter different zoogeographic Lepidoptera groups on the reserve territory. Zoogeographic analysis of species protected within the reserve territory selected 7 basic groups. It was found that most of the globally rare species have Mediterranean origin (39 %); species of Palearctic origin are in second place (22 %); Western Palearctic and Ponto-Kazakh types of areas are same of number of species, and come third (11 %); and others come 17 % (European, Euro-Siberian, and Holarctic). This fauna component is specific due to presence of so-called «northern» species that make up 40 % (representatives of Palearctic, Western Palearctic, Euro-Siberian, European and Holarctic groups). Their existence within the reserve territory is only possible due to development of boreal valley ecosystems.

scholarly journals Do carabids (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and chironomids (Diptera: Chironomidae) exhibit similar diversity and distributional patterns along a spatio-temporal gradient on a glacier foreland?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauro Gobbi ◽  
Valeria Lencioni
Keyword(s):  
Species Richness ◽  
Species Turnover ◽  
Aquatic Insect ◽  
Taxonomic Diversity ◽  
Carabid Beetles ◽  
Species Assemblages ◽  
Glacier Foreland ◽  
Distributional Patterns ◽  
Glacier Front ◽  
Spatio Temporal

Carabid beetles and chironomid midges are two dominant cold-adapted taxa, respectively on glacier forefiel terrains and in glacial-stream rivers. Although their sensitivity to high altitude climate warming is well known, no studies compare the species assemblages exhibited in glacial systems. Our study compares diversity and distributional patterns of carabids and chironomids in the foreland of the receding Amola glacier in central-eastern Italian Alps. Carabids were sampled by pitfall traps; chironomids by kick sampling in sites located at the same distance from the glacier as the terrestrial ones. The distance from the glacier front was considered as a proxy for time since deglaciation since these variables are positively correlated. We tested if the distance from the glacier front affects: i) the species richness; ii) taxonomic diversity; and iii) species turnover. Carabid species richness and taxonomic diversity increased positively from recently deglaciated sites (those c. 160 m from the glacier front) to sites deglaciated more than 160yrs ago (those located >1300 m from glacier front). Species distributions along the glacier foreland were characterized by mutually exclusive species. Conversely, no pattern in chironomid species richness and turnover was observed. Interestingly, taxonomic diversity increased significantly: closely related species were found near the glacier front, while the most taxonomically diverse species assemblages were found distant from the glacier front. Increasing glacial retreat differently affect epigeic and aquatic insect taxa: carabids respond faster to glacier retreat than do chironomids, at least in species richness and species turnover patterns.

scholarly journals Animal welfare risks of global aquaculture

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (14) ◽  
pp. eabg0677
Author(s):  
Becca Franks ◽  
Christopher Ewell ◽  
Jennifer Jacquet
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Taxonomic Diversity ◽  
Aquatic Animal ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Aquatic Animals ◽  
Extreme Risk ◽  
Unknown Species ◽  
High Production ◽  
Species Specific ◽  
Number Of Individuals

The unprecedented growth of aquaculture involves well-documented environmental and public-health costs, but less is understood about global animal welfare risks. Integrating data from multiple sources, we estimated the taxonomic diversity of farmed aquatic animals, the number of individuals killed annually, and the species-specific welfare knowledge (absence of which indicates extreme risk). In 2018, FAO reported 82.12 million metric tons of farmed aquatic animals from six phyla and at least 408 species—20 times the number of species of farmed terrestrial animals. The farmed aquatic animal tonnage represents 250 to 408 billion individuals, of which 59 to 129 billion are vertebrates (e.g., carps, salmonids). Specialized welfare information was available for 84 species, only 30% of individuals; the remaining 70% either had no welfare publications or were of an unknown species. With aquaculture growth outpacing welfare knowledge, immediate efforts are needed to safeguard the welfare of high-production, understudied species and to create policies that minimize welfare risks.

scholarly journals Soil Diversity (Pedodiversity) and Ecosystem Services

Land ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena A. Mikhailova ◽  
Hamdi A. Zurqani ◽  
Christopher J. Post ◽  
Mark A. Schlautman ◽  
Gregory C. Post
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Taxonomic Diversity ◽  
Soil Survey ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Soil Taxonomy ◽  
Extrinsic Factors ◽  
Business Decision ◽  
Soil Diversity

Soil ecosystem services (ES) (e.g., provisioning, regulation/maintenance, and cultural) and ecosystem disservices (ED) are dependent on soil diversity/pedodiversity (variability of soils), which needs to be accounted for in the economic analysis and business decision-making. The concept of pedodiversity (biotic + abiotic) is highly complex and can be broadly interpreted because it is formed from the interaction of atmospheric diversity (abiotic + biotic), biodiversity (biotic), hydrodiversity (abiotic + biotic), and lithodiversity (abiotic) within ecosphere and anthroposphere. Pedodiversity is influenced by intrinsic (within the soil) and extrinsic (outside soil) factors, which are also relevant to ES/ED. Pedodiversity concepts and measures may need to be adapted to the ES framework and business applications. Currently, there are four main approaches to analyze pedodiversity: taxonomic (diversity of soil classes), genetic (diversity of genetic horizons), parametric (diversity of soil properties), and functional (soil behavior under different uses). The objective of this article is to illustrate the application of pedodiversity concepts and measures to value ES/ED with examples based on the contiguous United States (U.S.), its administrative units, and the systems of soil classification (e.g., U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Taxonomy, Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database). This study is based on a combination of original research and literature review examples. Taxonomic pedodiversity in the contiguous U.S. exhibits high soil diversity, with 11 soil orders, 65 suborders, 317 great groups, 2026 subgroups, and 19,602 series. The ranking of “soil order abundance” (area of each soil order within the U.S.) expressed as the proportion of the total area is: (1) Mollisols (27%), (2) Alfisols (17%), (3) Entisols (14%), (4) Inceptisols and Aridisols (11% each), (5) Spodosols (3%), (6) Vertisols (2%), and (7) Histosols and Andisols (1% each). Taxonomic, genetic, parametric, and functional pedodiversity are an essential context for analyzing, interpreting, and reporting ES/ED within the ES framework. Although each approach can be used separately, three of these approaches (genetic, parametric, and functional) fall within the “umbrella” of taxonomic pedodiversity, which separates soils based on properties important to potential use. Extrinsic factors play a major role in pedodiversity and should be accounted for in ES/ED valuation based on various databases (e.g., National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) databases). Pedodiversity is crucial in identifying soil capacity (pedocapacity) and “hotspots” of ES/ED as part of business decision making to provide more sustainable use of soil resources. Pedodiversity is not a static construct but is highly dynamic, and various human activities (e.g., agriculture, urbanization) can lead to soil degradation and even soil extinction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document