Printer Friendly

Functional groups of entomofauna associated to aquatic macrophytes in Correntoso river, Rio Negro sub-region, Pantanal, Mato Grosso do Sul State, Brazil/Grupos funcionais da entomofauna associada as macrofitas aquaticas no rio Correntoso, Pantanal do Negro, Estado do Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil.

Introduction

The Pantanal is located in the central portion of South America, in the Paraguai river Basin, comprising floodable areas of Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay, and is considered one of the largest floodplains of Latin America. This region is a floodplain influenced by the rivers that drain the upper Paraguai river Basin, where there is great diversity of fauna and flora, determined by the contribution of four biomes: Amazon, "Cerrado", "Chaco" and Atlantic Forest (ALHO; GONCALVES, 2005).

The floodplains are characterized by the presence of habitats ranging from aquatic to terrestrial, depending on their communication level with the main river (THOMAZ et al., 1997). These areas stand out by the complexity of their systems, as well as their functioning dynamism, clearly associated with the hydrological conditions that occur within these areas (ALHO, 2008; SILVA et al., 2009).

The aquatic entomofauna, mainly represented by specimens of the orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Odonata, Coleoptera and Diptera, is one of the most important groups found in lotic aquatic ecosystems, associated with aquatic plants and sediment, actively participates in the nutrient cycling and energy flow and is widely used as indicator of environmental quality (MERRITT; CUMMINS, 1996).

The distribution of aquatic organisms, especially insects, is directly influenced by food availability and chemical and physical conditions of the water (BISPO; OLIVEIRA, 1998; SILVA et al., 2008). An important factor in the distribution and availability of food for aquatic insects is the association between lotic environment and marginal vegetation (VANNOTE et al., 1980).

According to Kikuchi and Uieda (1998), the riparian vegetation contributes significantly to the functioning of the river as a system, by showing high productivity, resources availability and being an essential source of nutrients and organic matter, which is the base of heterotrophic food chain in aquatic environments.

Callisto and Esteves (1998) point out that the study of a natural biological community can be accomplished at different levels: density species-1, species diversity, food webs and energy flow. In this context, Odum (1988) states that the guild concept becomes useful, since it is considered a functional unit in the community analysis, dismissing the necessity of study each species as a separate entity. Accordingly, this approach allows for comparisons of functional organization of different communities, especially when they are not constituted by common species.

According to Simberloff and Dayan (1991), the functional groups of Cummins (1973, 1974) are trophic guilds that classify river macroinvertebrates, from where these groups use common resources in a similar morpho-behavioral manner. Therefore, their recognition may be based mainly on the diet type presented by the taxa and the feeding behavior associated to the substrate on which food is available.

According to Silva et al. (2009), the approach to the trophic guilds concept in ecological studies enables the understanding of the energy distribution within a community, in terms of complexity and diversity. Consequently, the biomass assessment in each trophic guild and the diversity of feeding items used by each taxon, provide information for the study of energy distribution within communities (AGUIARO; CARAMASCHI, 1998).

Regarding the importance of the entomofauna structure in aquatic ecosystems and the lack of available information about their feeding habits, especially in the Pantanal region, the present work aims to study the structure of the functional groups of aquatic entomofauna in a stretch of Correntoso river, Rio Negro sub-region, Pantanal, State of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil.

Material and methods

The study was conducted in a stretch of about 3,600 meters of the Correntoso river (located in the Negro river floodplain), which cross the Santa Emilia Farm (19[degrees] 30' 18" S and 55[degrees] 36' 45" W), and where is situated the Instituto de Pesquisa do Pantanal (IPPAN/ UNIDERP), Aquidauana municipality, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil (Figure 1). Six sites with three distinct phytophysiognomies of riparian formation were chosen for the insect sampling: (a) open riparian physiognomy (ORP), (b) intermediary riparian physiognomy (IRP) and (c) closed riparian physiognomy (CRP) (Appendix 1).

Six sampling sessions were performed in different seasonal periods: ebb, dry and wet, between March 2006 and February 2007, at six collection sites of the river.

The specimens were collected using a D net (300 [micro]m mesh), and sampling effort consisted of five sweeps in the roots of the macrophyte banks, composed of several species of aquatic plants.

The collected material was transferred to plastic bags, labeled and transported to the laboratory. The material was washed using a sieve with the same mesh and then the specimens were separated from the organic material on plastic trays under transilluminated light.

The found specimens were fixed in ethylic ethanol (70%), conditioned in glass jars and then identified using specific literature (BOUCHARD JR., 2004; COSTA et al., 2006; MERRITT; CUMMINS, 1996; PEREZ, 1988).

The absolute abundance and family richness were determined. Furthermore, the collected insects were separated by functional groups: predators, scrapers, filterers, collectors, collectors-filterers, piercers-herbivores, shredders-herbivores, shredders-detritivores, as proposed by Merritt and Cummins (1996).

Results and discussion

In the present study, were registered 60 families belonging to 12 orders of the class Insecta, totaling 19,773 specimens (Appendix 2). These values can be considered relatively high when compared to the work of Oliveira et al. (2006) in the same region of Pantanal.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

For better understanding of the structure, organization and energy distribution within the aquatic insect community, the captured specimens were separated into categories of functional groups, as proposed by Merritt and Cummins (1996). Accordingly, families and specimens were categorized into eight distinct groups for each studied environment: predators grouped 34 families, collectors 17, shredders-herbivores ten, scrapers eight, collectors-filterers three, piercers-herbivores three, filterers two and shredders-detritivores two (Appendix 3). Although all categories were represented in the studied environment, the proportion between them and the families represented in each category has changed according to the marginal vegetation structure and the study period.

During ebb season, were recorded 1,858 individuals from 43 families, corresponding to 9.4% of the sampled insects, the lowest abundance found during the study. Predators group showed the highest number of families in this period, 18 families were sampled in ORP, 20 in IRP and 23 in CRP. Followed by collectors group with eight families collected in ORP, seven in IRP and 13 in CRP, shredders-herbivores with six families in ORP, five in IRP and seven in CRP and scrapers with three families in ORP, four in IRP and six in CRP (Figure 2).

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Considering the specimen participation in each functional group, the predators were predominant with 368 collected individuals in ORP, 422 in IRP and 793 in CRP. Followed by the collectors (294 individuals captured in ORP, 258 in IRP and 695 in CRP) and the filterers (156 individuals in ORP, 118 in IRP and 442 in CRP). In this period, the collectors-filterers group had low participation in IRP and CRP with only two collected specimens in each site and the shredders-detritivores in CRP with only one individual (Figure 3).

According to Callisto and Esteves (1998), the highest or lowest guild number in a given ecosystem may be related to the variety of available and occupied microhabitats in the littoral and limnetic region, in different periods of the regional hydrological cycle.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

During the dry season, 3,573 individuals belonging to 50 families were collected, corresponding to 18.07% of the sampled organisms. The highest number of families were categorized into predators group, 23 captured families in ORP, 21 in IRP and CRP. Followed by collectors with 13 families captured in IRP, 14 in ORP and CRP, shredders-herbivores with eight families sampled in ORP, seven in IRP and six in CRP, scrapers with seven families in ORP and IRP, and six in CRP. Regarding the specimen participation in each functional group, predators were the most representative with 971 individuals captured in ORP, 810 in IRP and 1,090 in CRP, follow by the collectors group with 819 specimens sampled in ORP, 956 in IRP and 993 in CRP and the filterers with 617 individuals captured in ORP, 602 in IRP and 804 in CRP. During this period, only one specimen was categorized into shredders-detritivores group, collected in IRP.

According to Fidelis et al. (2008), in areas where the marginal vegetation has better environmental conditions, plant cover contributes large amount of organic material of allochthonous origin and shading reduces autotrophic production of the aquatic environment. In these areas there is a significant involvement of collectors and shredders group duo to the high availability of organic material deriving from the marginal vegetation. Alternatively, open areas and with higher light intensity favor the establishment of macrophytes and associated periphyton, providing major resources for the scrapers, piercers-herbivores and shredders-herbivores.

During wet season was registered the greatest insect abundance, 14,342 specimens of 54 families were captured, representing 72.53% of collected organisms. The largest family number was categorized into predators functional group, with 26 families sampled in ORP and IRP, 30 in CRP, followed by the collectors group with 14 families collected in ORP, 15 in IRP and CRP, scrapers with eight families captured in ORP and CRP, seven in IRP and shredders-herbivores with eight families in ORP and IRP, seven in CRP. The specimen participation in each functional group also showed the highest values, 4,077 specimens categorized into predators group were sampled in ORP and 3,408 in IRP, followed by the collectors with 3,422 individuals in ORP and 3,200 in IRP, filterers with 2,797 individuals ORP and 1,615 in IRP. Otherwise, in CRP the greatest specimen number was categorized into collectors group, 5,257 individuals sampled, followed by predators (3,571) and filterers (2,514). During this period was observed low participation of the collectors-filterers group, with six captured individuals in ORP, 50 in IRP and 196 in CRP, and shredders-detritivores group with only one individual collected in IRP and CRP.

Cummins and Klug (1979) state that seasonal and local differences, associated to entry, production and stocks of food resources available to the aquatic entomofauna, assign dynamics to the system, which varies in space and time. Therefore, the greatest abundance and richness of insect families in all study sites were recorded during the wet season, which can be attributed to the greater availability of resources found in this period.

Regarding the number of families, predators group was the most representative throughout the study period, confirming the results obtained by Oliveira et al. (2006) in the same region of the Pantanal. According to Nessimian (1997), the predator category demonstrates weak relationship with the marginal vegetation and strong with the existing macroinvertebrate community in the environment, that is, with the available feeding resources.

The predators group demonstrates relatively constant abundances, since they depend directly on the presence of other groups of organisms and not on the availability of particulate matter and environmental gradients (VANNOTE et al., 1980). Conversely, the group of collectors and scrapers is favored by the decaying organic matter availability, brought by the flood pulse during wet period (OLIVEIRA et al., 2006).

The collectors group was the second most representative. According to Callisto and Esteves (1998), this group feeds on small particles of organic matter (usually less than 1 mm in size), either by water filtering, or direct collection in sediment deposits at the rivers bottom.

Cheshire et al. (2005) emphasize that the participation of different categories of functional groups, in terms of individual and species numbers, varies between different habitat types.

According to Cummins et al. (1989), the shredders are more abundant in areas with high availability of plant resources, and their participation in the fragmentation of plant remains into smaller particles is greater after these resources suffer some kind of structural and/or biochemistry change.

The scrapers functional group showed low abundance of families and individuals, being more representative in dry and wet seasons, which may be related to the greater water velocity during the runoff process in the ebb season, when occurs greater transport of plant resources and nutrients.

Callisto and Esteves (1998) highlight that because of the rapid decomposition of plant remains may not have time for the periphytic community establishment. Hence, leaves and branches that fall in the rivers beds are rapidly fragmented and decomposed in such a manner that does not support a constant periphyton biomass, necessary to sustain the scrapers group.

The filterers and shredders-detritivores groups were less representative, in relation to family richness, throughout the study period. Each group did not exceed 2.53% of the collected families and were represented by only two taxa: filterers of Chironomidae and Culicidae (Diptera) and shredders-herbivores of Tipulidae (Diptera) and Odontoceridae (Trichoptera).

Conclusion

The greatest abundance was recorded during the wet season, when resource availability is higher. The largest family number was categorized into predators functional group, followed by collectors, shredders-herbivores and scrapers. The functional trophic categorization of insects associated with aquatic macrophytes performed in this study, emphasizes the importance of organic matter as food resource for aquatic entomofauna. In this context, the trophic guild concept enabled better understanding of the structure, organization and distribution of energy within the aquatic insect community, as well as the contribution of this community in nutrient cycling.

Doi: 10.4025/actascibiolsci.v34i1.7822

Received on July 29, 2009.

Accepted on May 26, 2010.

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to the Laboratorio de Pesquisa em Entomologia (LENT-Uniderp), Environmental and Regional Development Postgraduate Program of Uniderp, and Capes (Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal em Ensino Superior).

References

AGUIARO, T.; CARAMASCHI, E. P. Trophic guilds in fish assemblages in three coastal lagoons of Rio de Janeiro State (Brasil). Proceedings of the International Association of Theorical and Applied Limnology, v. 26, n. 5, p. 2166-2169, 1998.

ALHO, C. J. R. Biodiversity of the Pantanal: response to seasonal flooding regime and to environmental degradation. Brazilian Journal of Biology, v. 68, n. 4, p. 957-966, 2008.

ALHO, C. J. R.; GONCALVES, H. C. Biodiversidade do Pantanal: Ecologia e Conservacao. Campo Grande: Uniderp. 2005.

ANA-Agencia Nacional de Aguas. Programa de acoes estrategicas para o gerenciamento integrado do Pantanal e bacia do alto Paraguai. Brasilia: GEF/Pnuma/OEA/ANA, 2004. (Relatorio final).

BISPO, P. C.; OLIVEIRA, L. G. Distribuicao espacial de insetos aquaticos (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera e Trichoptera) em corregos de cerrado do Parque Ecologico de Goiania, Estado de Goias. In: NESSIMIAN, J. L; CARVALHO, A. L. E. (Ed.). Ecologia de insetos aquaticos, v. 5. Rio de Janeiro: PPGE-UFRJ, 1998. p. 175-189. (Series Oecologia Brasiliensis, cap. 13).

BOUCHARD JR., R. W. Guide to aquatic invertebrates of the upper Midwest. Minnesota: University of Minnesota, 2004.

CALISTO, M.; ESTEVES, F. A. Categorizacao funcional dos macroinvertebrados bentonicos em quatro ecossistemas loticos sob influencia das atividades de uma mineracao de bauxita na Amazonia Central (Brasil). Oecologia Brasiliensis, v. 5, n. 5, p. 223-234, 1998.

CHESHIRE, K.; BOYERO, L. E.; PEARSON, R. G. Food webs in tropical Australian streams: shredders are not scarce. Freshwater Biology, v. 50, n. 5, p. 748-769, 2005.

COSTA, C.; IDE, S.; SIMONKA, C. E. Insetos Imaturos: Metamorfose e Identificacao. Ribeirao Preto: Holos. 2006.

CUMMINS, K. W. Trophic relations of aquatic insects. Annual Review of Entomology, v. 18, n. 1, p. 183-206, 1973.

CUMMINS, K. W. Structure and function of stream ecosystems. Bioscience, v. 24, n. 11, p. 631-641, 1974.

CUMMINS, K. W.; KLUG, M. J. Feeding ecology on stream invertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematic, v. 10, n. 1, p. 147-172, 1979.

CUMMINS, K. W.; WILZBACH, M. A.; GATES, D. M.; TALIFERRO, W. B. Shredders and riparian vegetation. Leaf litter that falls into streams influences communities of stream invertebrates. Bioscience, v. 39, n. 1, p 24-30, 1989.

FIDELIS, L.; NESSIMIAN, J. L.; HAMADA, N. Distribuicao espacial de insetos aquaticos em igarapes de pequena ordem na Amazonia Central. Acta Amazonica, v. 38, n. 1, p.127-134, 2008.

KIKUCHI, R. M.; UIEDA, V. S. Composicao da comunidade de insetos aquaticos em um ambiente lotico tropical e sua variacao espacial e temporal. In: NESSIMIAN, J. L.; CARVALHO, A. L. E. (Ed.). Ecologia de insetos aquaticos. Rio de Janeiro: PPGE-UFRJ, 1998. cap. 12, p. 157-173.

MERRITT, R. W.; CUMMINS, K. W. An Introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. 4th ed. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt, 1996.

NESSIMIAN, J. L. Categorizacao funcional de macroinvertebrados de um brejo de dunas no Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Revista Brasileira de Biologia, v. 57, n. 1, p. 135-145, 1997.

ODUM, E. P. Ecologia. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara, 1988.

OLIVEIRA, I. A. D. V.; FAVERO, S.; OLIVEIRA, A. K. M.; SOUZA, C. C. Levantamento preliminar da entomofauna associada ao filme d'agua da Baia do Bacero e Corixo do Pau Seco, Pantanal do Negro. In: BRUM, E.; OLIVEIRA, A. K. M.; FAVERO, S. (Ed.). Meio ambiente e producao interdisciplinar: sociedade, natureza e desenvolvimento. Campo Grande: Uniderp, 2006. v. 1, cap. 4, p. 67-84.

PEREZ, G. R. Guia para el estudio de los macroinvertebrados acuaticos del Departamento de Antioquia. Bogota: Fen Colombia y Colciencias, 1988.

SILVA, F. H.; FAVERO, S.; SABINO, J.; GARNES, S. J. A. Estrutura da comunidade de insetos associados a macrofitas aquaticas, em um trecho do rio Correntoso, Pantanal do Negro, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil. In: OLIVEIRA, A. K. M.; GARNES, S. J. A.; FIGUEIREDO, R. S. (Ed). Meio ambiente e producao interdisciplinar: sociedade, natureza e desenvolvimento. Campo Grande: Uniderp, 2008, v. 2, cap. 6, p. 99-117.

SILVA, F. H.; FAVERO, S.; SABINO, J.; GARNES, S. J. A. Distribuicao da entomofauna associada as macrofitas aquaticas na vazante do rio Correntoso, Pantanal do Negro, Estado do Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil. Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences, v. 31, n. 2, p. 127-134, 2009.

SILVA, F. L.; PAULETO, G. M.; TALAMONI, J. L. B.; RUIZ, S. S. Categorizacao funcional trofica das comunidades de macroinvertebrados de dois reservatorios na regiao Centro-Oeste do Estado de Sao Paulo, Brasil. Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences, v. 31, n. 1, p. 73-78, 2009.

SIMBERLOFF, D.; DAYAN, T. The guild concept and the structure of ecological communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, v. 99, n. 1, p. 15-36, 1991.

THOMAZ, S. M.; ROBERTO, M. C.; BINI, L. M. Caracterizacao limnologica dos ambientes aquaticos e influencia dos niveis fluviometricos. In: VAZZOLER, A. E. A. M.; AGOSTINHO, A. A.; HAHN, N. S. (Ed.). A planicie de inundacao do alto rio Parana: aspectos fisicos, biologicos e socioeconomicos. Maringa: Eduem, 1997. p. 73-102.

VANNOTE, R. L.; MINSHALL, G. W.; CUMMINS, K. L. SEDELL, J. R.; CUSHING, C. E. The river continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 37, n. 1, p. 130-137, 1980.

Fabio Henrique da Silva *, Silvio Favero and Jose Sabino

Programa de Pos-graduacao em Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Regional, Universidade para o Desenvolvimento do Estado e da Regiao do Pantanal, Rua Alexandre Herculano, 1400, 79037-280, Jardim Veraneio, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. *Author for correnpondence. E-mail: ambientefhs@yahoo.com.br
Appendix 1

Description and location of the study areas, Correntoso river, Rio
Negro sub-region, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil.

Site        Coordinates         Riparian physiognomy

1        19[degrees]30'41"S             Open
         55[degrees]37'54"W            (ORP)

2        19[degrees]30T9"S          Intermediary
         55[degrees]37,4T'W            (IRP)

3        19[degrees]30T0"S             Closed
         55[degrees]37'40"W            (CRP)

4        19[degrees]30'04"S             Open
         55[degrees]37'30"W            (ORP)

5        19[degrees]29'48"S         Intermediary
         55[degrees]37'23"W            (IRP)

6        19[degrees]29'21"S            Closed
         55[degrees]37T3"W             (CRP)

Site    General features

1       Riparian vegetation is scarce or absent.
        Connected to floodable fields during wet period.
        Emergent trees up to 6 meters.
        Arboreal species: "Cambara" (Vochysia divergens),
        "lixeira" (Curatella americana), "embauba" (Cecropia
        pachystachya) and "acuri" (Scheelea phalerata).
        Aquatic species: "Erva-de-bicho" (Poligonum acuminatum),
        "aguape" (Eichhornia azurea)," alface d'agua" (Pistia
        stratiotes) and "orelha de onca" (Salvinia auriculata).
        Riparian vegetation is present and/or in low density.

2       No connection with floodable fields during wet period.
        Arboreal species: "Pimenteira" (Lioama parvifolia),
        "lixeira" (C. americana), "acuri" (S. phalerata),
        "cambara" (V. divergens) and "lianas" (Cissus erosa and
        Cissus spinosa).
        Aquatic species: "Aguape" (E. azurea), and "erva-de-bicho"
        (P. acuminatum).
        Riparian vegetation with high stature and density.

3       No connection with floodable fields during wet period.
        Arboreal species: "Lixeira" (C. americana), "pimenteira"
        (L. parvifolia), "acuri" (S. phalerata), "tucum"
        (Bactrisglaucescens) and "cambara" (V. divergens).
        Closed canopy, forming gallery forest.
        Aquatic species: "Erva capitao" (Hydrocotyle leucocephala),
        "erva-de-bicho" (P. acuminatum) and "aguape" (E. azurea).
        Riparian vegetation is scarce or absent.

4       Connected to floodable fields during wet period.
        Emergent trees up to 6 meters.
        Arboreal species: "Cambara" (V. divergens), "pimenteira"
        (L. parvifolia), "lixeira" (C. americana), "acuri" (S.
        phalerata), "embauba" (Cecropia pachystachya) and "lianas"
        (C. erosa and C. spinosa).
        Aquatic species: "Erva-de-bicho" (P. acuminatum), "aguape"
        (E. azurea) and "orelha de onca" (S. auriculata).
        Riparian vegetation is present and/or in low density.

5       No connection with floodable fields during wet period.
        Arboreal species: "Pimenteira" (L. parvifolia), "acuri"
        (S. phalerata) and "lianas" (C. erosa and C. spinosa).
        Aquatic species: "Dormideira" (Neptunia plena),
        "erva-de-bicho" (P. acuminatum) and "aguape" (E. azurea).
        Riparian vegetation with high stature and density.

6       No connection with floodable fields during wet period.
        Arboreal species: "Tucum" (Bactrisglaucescens), "acuri"
        (S. phalerata), "lixeira" (C. americana), "pimenteira"
        (L. parvifolia), "inga" (Inga uruguensis) and "cambara"
        (V. divergens).
        Closed canopy, forming gallery forest.
        Aquatic species: "Ninfea" (Nynphaea jamesoniana),
        "erva-de-bicho" (P. acuminatum), "orelha-de-onca" (S.
        auriculata), "dormideira" (N. plena) and "aguape"
        (E. azurea).

Appendix 2

Found taxa in Correntoso river, Rio Negro sub-region, Mato
Grosso do Sul State, Brazil.

                                                          Ebb

Taxa/sample                 Functional group           ORP    IRP

Hexapoda
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Coleoptera
Carabidae                         Pred
Chrysomelidae                   Shre-her
Curculionidae                   Shre-her                31     6
Dytiscidae                        Pred                  24     45
Elmidae                        Scra; Coll               2      5
Gyrinidae                         Pred                         2
Hydrochidae                     Shre-her
Hydrophilidae                  Pred; Coll               72     73
Noteridae                      Pred; Coll               25     45
Psephenidae                       Scra
Scarabeidae
Scirtidae            Scra; Coll; Pier-her; Shre-her     13     5
Staphylinidae                     Pred                  2      5
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae                   Pred                  24     4
Cecidomyiidae
Chironomidae                 Pred; Fil; Coll           155    108
Culicidae                       Fil; Coll               1      10
Dolichopodidae                    Pred                  1
Empididae                      Pred; Coll
Muscidae                          Pred
Psychodidae                       Coll                  19
Sciomyzidae                       Pred
Stratiomyiidae                    Coll
Tabanidae                         Pred                  1      3
Tipulidae                    Coll; Shre-her
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae                       Scra; Coll
Caenidae                       Scra; Coll               7      10
Leptophlebiidae                Scra; Coll
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae                    Pred                  1      1
Corixidae                    Pred; Pier-her             7      75
Gerridae                          Pred
Hebridae                          Pred
Hydrometridae                     Pred
Macroveliidae                     Pred                  1      1
Mesoveliidae                      Pred                         3
Naucoridae                        Pred                  12     13
Nepidae                           Pred
Notonectidae                      Pred                         1
Pleidae                           Pred                  1      6
Veliidae                          Pred                  8      4
Hymenoptera
Trichogrammatidae
Lepidoptera
Coleophoridae                   Shre-her                1
Noctuidae                       Shre-her                1      2
Pyralidae                       Shre-her                1      1
Megaloptera
Corydalidae                       Pred
Odonata
Coenagrionidae                    Pred                  13     5
Cordulegastridae                  Pred                  1      15
Libellulidae                      Pred                  18     9
Aeshnidae                         Pred                  2      2
Orthoptera
Acrididae                       Shre-her                10     20
Gryllidae                 Pred; Coll; Shre-her
Thysanoptera
Phloeothripidae
Trichoptera
Glossosomatidae                   Scra
Hydropsychidae               Pred; Coll-fil
Hydroptilidae             Scra; Coll; Pier-her                 2
Leptoceridae              Pred; Coll; Shre-her
Odontoceridae                Coll; Shre-det
Philopotamidae                  Coll-fil
Polycentropodidae            Pred; Coll-fil                    2
Total specimens                                        454    483
Total families                                          28     30

                     Ebb             Dry

Taxa/sample          CRP     ORP     IRP     CRP

Hexapoda
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Coleoptera
Carabidae             1               1       1
Chrysomelidae         2               1
Curculionidae         20     21       2      17
Dytiscidae            55     46      11      24
Elmidae               20      2       3       4
Gyrinidae             2       3
Hydrochidae
Hydrophilidae        112     39      18      68
Noteridae             64      2       8      26
Psephenidae           1       4
Scarabeidae
Scirtidae             12     47      34      35
Staphylinidae         1      29       1
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae       41     142     12      28
Cecidomyiidae                                 1
Chironomidae         438     595     600     783
Culicidae             4      22       2      21
Dolichopodidae                1
Empididae                             3       2
Muscidae              1
Psychodidae           5      11              14
Sciomyzidae           1
Stratiomyiidae        1
Tabanidae             4       2       3       5
Tipulidae                     1       3       1
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae              16     57      223     20
Caenidae              13     28      16      14
Leptophlebiidae               1      25       2
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae        5       5       5       2
Corixidae             3       7               3
Gerridae              3               1       1
Hebridae                      1
Hydrometridae
Macroveliidae         1       2
Mesoveliidae                  6               1
Naucoridae            18      3       8      12
Nepidae                               1       1
Notonectidae
Pleidae               1       2       3
Veliidae              3      13       4       3
Hymenoptera
Trichogrammatidae             1
Lepidoptera
Coleophoridae
Noctuidae             6       3               3
Pyralidae             17      2       4       3
Megaloptera
Corydalidae                           3       1
Odonata
Coenagrionidae        16     15              28
Cordulegastridae      4      12       8      18
Libellulidae          12     31       1      69
Aeshnidae
Orthoptera
Acrididae             6       5               4
Gryllidae             5       6       1
Thysanoptera
Phloeothripidae                               1
Trichoptera
Glossosomatidae                      12
Hydropsychidae                7      112     10
Hydroptilidae         4       6      20       2
Leptoceridae                  2
Odontoceridae         1                       1
Philopotamidae                3
Polycentropodidae     2               6       4
Total specimens      921    1185    1155    1233
Total families        38     39      33      37

                              Wet

Taxa/sample           ORP     IRP     CRP

Hexapoda
Blattodea
Blattellidae           2               1
Coleoptera
Carabidae                              1
Chrysomelidae
Curculionidae         49       8      25
Dytiscidae            86      177     139
Elmidae               12      13      12
Gyrinidae             42               2
Hydrochidae            3
Hydrophilidae         266     149     212
Noteridae             64      87      49
Psephenidae            4               2
Scarabeidae            1       1
Scirtidae             60      32      40
Staphylinidae         24       2       1
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae       469     47      82
Cecidomyiidae
Chironomidae         2772    1609    2508
Culicidae             25       6       6
Dolichopodidae         1       1       2
Empididae                              1
Muscidae
Psychodidae           31      18       9
Sciomyzidae
Stratiomyiidae
Tabanidae              4       5       2
Tipulidae              3       1
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae              56      113     65
Caenidae              71      26      102
Leptophlebiidae        1       1       2
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae         9       4       3
Corixidae             58      38      95
Gerridae               6      20      10
Hebridae                       1       4
Hydrometridae          3
Macroveliidae                          2
Mesoveliidae           9       8       7
Naucoridae            15      14      11
Nepidae                        3
Notonectidae           4               1
Pleidae               83      51      109
Veliidae               2      17       5
Hymenoptera
Trichogrammatidae      3
Lepidoptera
Coleophoridae
Noctuidae              6       1       6
Pyralidae                      3       7
Megaloptera
Corydalidae                    3       1
Odonata
Coenagrionidae        31      28      24
Cordulegastridae       3       8       5
Libellulidae          108     44      90
Aeshnidae              6       2       1
Orthoptera
Acrididae             16       7       3
Gryllidae              3       2       7
Thysanoptera
Phloeothripidae        4       2       1
Trichoptera
Glossosomatidae        1       1      21
Hydropsychidae         2       1       2
Hydroptilidae         55     1132    2242
Leptoceridae           3      10       1
Odontoceridae                  1       1
Philopotamidae                44
Polycentropodidae      4       5      194
Total specimens      4480    3746    6116
Total families        45      44      47

* Categories of functional groups of aquatic insect (Pred =
Predators, Scra = Scrapers; Fil = Filterers; Coll =
Collectors; Coll-fil = Collectors-filterers; Pier-her =
Piercers-herbivores; Shre-her = Shredders-herbivores;
Shre-det = Shredders-detritivores).

Appendix 3

Functional group of found taxa in Correntoso river, Rio Negro
sub-region, Mato Grosso do Sul State, Brazil.

Taxa                 Pred    Scra    Fil    Coll    Coll-fil
Hexapoda
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Coleoptera
Carabidae              X
Chrysomelidae
Curculionidae
Dytiscidae             X
Elmidae                        X              X
Gyrinidae              X
Hydrochidae
Hydrophilidae          X                      X
Noteridae              X                      X
Psephenidae                    X
Scarabeidae
Scirtidae                      X              X
Staphylinidae          X
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae        X
Cecidomyiidae
Chironomidae           X              X       X
Culicidae                             X       X
Dolichopodidae         X
Empididae              X                      X
Muscidae               X
Psychodidae                                   X
Sciomyzidae            X
Stratiomyiidae                                X
Tabanidae              X
Tipulidae                                     X
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae                       X              X
Caenidae                       X              X
Leptophlebiidae                X              X
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae         X
Corixidae              X
Gerridae               X
Hebridae               X
Hydrometridae          X
Macroveliidae          X
Mesoveliidae           X
Naucoridae             X
Nepidae                X
Notonectidae           X
Pleidae                X
Vellidae               X
Hymenoptera
Trichogrammatidae
Lepidoptera
Coleophoridae
Noctuidae
Pyralidae
Megaloptera
Corydalidae            X
Odonata
Coenagrionidae         X
Cordulegastridae       X
Libellulidae           X
Aeshnidae              X
Orthoptera
Acrididae
Gryllidae              X                      X
Thysanoptera
Phloeothripidae
Trichoptera
Glossosomatidae                X
Hydropsychidae         X                                X
Hydroptilidae                  X              X
Leptoceridae           X                      X
Odontoceridae                                 X
Philopotamidae                                          X
Polycentropodidae      X                                X
Taxa number           34       8      2      17         3

Taxa                 Pier-her    Shre-her    Shre-det
Hexapoda
Blattodea
Blattellidae
Coleoptera
Carabidae
Chrysomelidae                        X
Curculionidae                        X
Dytiscidae
Elmidae
Gyrinidae
Hydrochidae                          X
Hydrophilidae
Noteridae
Psephenidae
Scarabeidae
Scirtidae                X           X
Staphylinidae
Diptera
Ceratopogonidae
Cecidomyiidae
Chironomidae
Culicidae
Dolichopodidae
Empididae
Muscidae
Psychodidae
Sciomyzidae
Stratiomyiidae
Tabanidae
Tipulidae                                        X
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
Caenidae
Leptophlebiidae
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae
Corixidae                X
Gerridae
Hebridae
Hydrometridae
Macroveliidae
Mesoveliidae
Naucoridae
Nepidae
Notonectidae
Pleidae
Vellidae
Hymenoptera
Trichogrammatidae
Lepidoptera
Coleophoridae                        X
Noctuidae                            X
Pyralidae                            X
Megaloptera
Corydalidae
Odonata
Coenagrionidae
Cordulegastridae
Libellulidae
Aeshnidae
Orthoptera
Acrididae                            X
Gryllidae                            X
Thysanoptera
Phloeothripidae
Trichoptera
Glossosomatidae
Hydropsychidae
Hydroptilidae            X
Leptoceridae                         X
Odontoceridae                                    X
Philopotamidae
Polycentropodidae
Taxa number              3          10           2

* Categories of functional groups of aquatic insect (Pred =
Predators, Scra = Scrapers; Fil = Filterers; Coll = Collectors;
Coll-fil = Collect ors-filterers; Pier-her = Piercers-herbivores;
Shre-her = Shredders-herbivores; Shre-det = Shredders-detritivores).
COPYRIGHT 2012 Universidade Estadual de Maringa
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2012 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:da Silva, Fabio Henrique; Favero, Silvio; Sabino, Jose
Publication:Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences (UEM)
Date:Jan 1, 2012
Words:4542
Previous Article:The study of fractals among ecologists/O estudo dos fractais entre os ecologos.
Next Article:First record of the choicy ruff, Seriolella porosa Guichenot, 1848 (Perciformes: Centrolophidae) in Brazilian waters/Primeiro registro do savorin,...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters