Find research datasets worth reusing

FIGURE 9 in The Spine Raptor-a new genus of predatory katydid (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Meconematinae: Phlugidini) from the Brazilian Amazon Rainforest

FIGURE 9. Spinaraptor taja sp. nov., paratype female. A: habitus, lateral view; B: head, frontal view; C: head and pronotum, dorsal view; D: foreleg, dorsal view; E: midleg, lateral view; F–H: Terminalia in dorsal, ventral and lateral view respectively. Abbreviations: Cer: cerci; Pl: subgenital plate; Ovp: ovipositor.

FIGURE 15 in The Spine Raptor-a new genus of predatory katydid (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Meconematinae: Phlugidini) from the Brazilian Amazon Rainforest

FIGURE 15. Spinaraptor ecuador (Gorochov, 2012) nov. comb. A–C: Terminalia in dorsal, ventral and lateral view respectively (adapted from Gorochov, 2012). Abbreviations: Cer: cerci; Sty: styli; Pl: subgenital plate.

FIGURE 16 in The Spine Raptor-a new genus of predatory katydid (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Meconematinae: Phlugidini) from the Brazilian Amazon Rainforest

FIGURE 16. Spinaraptor gerana (Gorochov, 2015) nov. comb. A–C: Terminalia in dorsal, ventral and lateral view respectively (adapted from Gorochov, 2015). Abbreviations: Cer: cerci; Sty: styli; Pl: subgenital plate

FIGURE 14 in The Spine Raptor-a new genus of predatory katydid (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Meconematinae: Phlugidini) from the Brazilian Amazon Rainforest

FIGURE 14. Spinaraptor celerinicta (Nickle, 2003) nov. comb., holotype male. A: habitus, lateral view; B: head, frontal view; C: head and pronotum, dorsal view; D: head and pronotum, lateral view; E: stridulatory region, in dorsal view; F–H: Terminalia in lateral, dorsal and ventral view respectively. Abbreviations: Cer: cerci; Sty: styli; Pl: subgenital plate.

FIGURE 10 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 10. Male genitalia of Schizohelea described by Remm (modified drawings from Remm 1967, 1980, 1993): a—S. armata (Remm, 1993) from Kunashir Islands; b—S. lampropeza (Remm, 1967) from Georgia; c—S. pekae (Remm, 1980) from Kyrgyzstan; d—S. spathulata (Remm, 1993) from Armenia.

FIGURE 11 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 11. Schizohelea described by Remm (modified drawings from Remm 1967, 1980, 1993): S. lampropeza (Remm, 1967) (b, e, f, h), S. pekae (Remm, 1980) (a, c, g), S. armata (Remm, 1993) (d); a—male flagellum; b, c—female maxillary palp; d—legs of male; e—female hind claw; f—spermathecae; g—female genitalia; h—female sternite 9.

FIGURE 9 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 9. Schizohelea withersi Szadziewski, Dominiak, Rumišek et Rupp, sp. nov., male genitalia: a—ventral view; b, c—gonostylus; d—gonocoxal expansions; e—parameres; f—aedeagus.

FIGURE 5 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 5. Schizohelea incerta (Clastrier, 1963), male genitalia: a—ventral view; b—lateral view; c—gonocoxal expansions; d, e—parameres; f–h—aedeagus.

FIGURE 6 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 6. Schizohelea algeriana Szadziewski, Dominiak, Rumišek et Rupp, sp. nov., male genitalia: a—ventral view; b— gonostylus; c—gonocoxal expansions; d—parameres; e—aedeagus.

FIGURE 7 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 7. Schizohelea clastrieri Szadziewski, Dominiak, Rumišek et Rupp, sp. nov. (a–c) and S. withersi Szadziewski, Dominiak, Rumišek et Rupp, sp. nov. (d–f), males: a—flagellomeres 11–13 of teratological antenna; b, d—maxillary palp; c, e—wing; f—thorax and legs.

FIGURE 8 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 8. Schizohelea clastrieri Szadziewski, Dominiak, Rumišek et Rupp, sp. nov., male genitalia: a—ventral view; b— gonostylus; c—gonocoxal expansions; d—parameres; e—aedeagus.

FIGURE 4 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 4. Schizohelea incerta (Clastrier, 1963) (a–d) and S. algeriana Szadziewski, Dominiak, Rumišek et Rupp, sp. nov. (e–h): a—male maxillary palp; b—male wing; c—female wing; d—male thorax and legs; e—male wing; f—female wing; g—female genitalia; h—spermathecae.

FIGURE 2 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 2. Schizohelea leucopeza (Meigen, 1804), male (a) and female (b–h): a—legs; b—foreleg; c—midleg; d—hind leg; e, f—hind tarsomeres 4, 5 and claws; g—genitalia; h—spermathecae.

FIGURE 3 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 3. Schizohelea leucopeza (Meigen, 1804), male (a–c) and female genitalia (d–f): a—male genitalia, ventral view; b— parameres; c—aedeagus; d—spermathecae; e—abdominal sternite 9; f—adominal sternite 8 with internal sclerites underneath.

FIGURE 1 in Predatory midges of the genus Schizohelea Kieffer, 1917 in Europe and North Africa (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

FIGURE 1. Schizohelea leucopeza (Meigen, 1804), male (a, d, f, g) and female (b, c, e, h): a, b—flagellum; c—eyes separation; d, e—maxillary palp; f—anepisternum and anepisternal cleft; g, h—wing.

opencc-zeroNov 2019View details →

Odors of non-predatory species help prey moderate their risk assessment

<ol> <li>Prey use contemporary information to update their risk estimation, and accordingly, optimize their anti-predator reactions. Conceptualization of this process is largely focused on information that reflects predator activity. We aimed to complement this unilateral view by testing whether prey also use cues of non-predatory species to update their risk perception. </li> <li>We focused our investigation on the desert isopod Hemilepistus reaumuri that reacts defensively to excavated soil mounds, even in the absence of direct predator cues. We located in the field 18 isopod burrows and surrounded each with six soil mounds. One mound remained odorless, and the other five were supplemented with odors of a major isopod predator, the golden scorpion, and four sympatric species that do not prey on isopods, but excavate soil. </li> <li>Isopods augmented their defensive responses toward mounds supplemented by scorpion odors and lessened their anti-predator reactions toward mounds with odors of herbivore rodents. Isopods' responses to the odors of the two insectivorous species that do not eat isopods were similar to the reaction towards the odorless control mounds. </li> <li>Our results suggest that prey use non-predatory species cues to moderate their risk estimation. Therefore, we need to consider this potentially important source of information in studies of predator-prey interactions. Our findings also indicate cues of non-predatory species may not be adequate as control treatments to predator cues.</li> </ol>

opencc-zeroDec 2013View details →

Data from: Predatory fish sounds can alter crab foraging behavior and influence bivalve abundance

The risk of predation can have large effects on ecological communities via changes in prey behaviour, morphology and reproduction. Although prey can use a variety of sensory signals to detect predation risk, relatively little is known regarding the effects of predator acoustic cues on prey foraging behaviour. Here we show that an ecologically important marine crab species can detect sound across a range of frequencies, probably in response to particle acceleration. Further, crabs suppress their resource consumption in the presence of experimental acoustic stimuli from multiple predatory fish species, and the sign and strength of this response is similar to that elicited by water-borne chemical cues. When acoustic and chemical cues were combined, consumption differed from expectations based on independent cue effects, suggesting redundancies among cue types. These results highlight that predator acoustic cues may influence prey behaviour across a range of vertebrate and invertebrate taxa, with the potential for cascading effects on resource abundance.

opencc-zeroDec 2014View details →

Data from: Metabarcoding dietary analysis of coral dwelling predatory fish demonstrates the minor contribution of coral mutualists to their highly partitioned, generalist diet

Understanding the role of predators in food webs can be challenging in highly diverse predator/prey systems composed of small cryptic species. DNA based dietary analysis can supplement predator removal experiments and provide high resolution for prey identification. Here we use a metabarcoding approach to provide initial insights into the diet and functional role of coral-dwelling predatory fish feeding on small invertebrates. Fish were collected in Moorea (French Polynesia) where the BIOCODE project has generated DNA barcodes for numerous coral associated invertebrate species. Pyrosequencing data revealed a total of 292 Operational Taxonomic Units (OTU) in the gut contents of the arc-eye hawkfish (Paracirrhites arcatus), the flame hawkfish (Neocirrhites armatus) and the coral croucher (Caracanthus maculatus). One hundred forty-nine (51%) of them had species-level matches in reference libraries (>98% similarity) while 76 additional OTUs (26%) could be identified to higher taxonomic levels. Decapods that have a mutualistic relationship with Pocillopora and are typically dominant among coral branches, represent a minor contribution of the predators' diets. Instead, predators mainly consumed transient species including pelagic taxa such as copepods, chaetognaths and siphonophores suggesting non random feeding behavior. We also identified prey species known to have direct negative interactions with stony corals, such as Hapalocarcinus sp, a gall crab considered a coral parasite, as well as species of vermetid snails known for their deleterious effects on coral growth. Pocillopora DNA accounted for 20.8% and 20.1% of total number of sequences in the guts of the flame hawkfish and coral croucher but it was not detected in the guts of the arc-eye hawkfish. Comparison of diets among the three fishes demonstrates remarkable partitioning with nearly 80% of prey items consumed by only one predator. Overall, the taxonomic resolution provided by the metabarcoding approach highlights a highly complex interaction web and demonstrates that levels of trophic partitioning among coral reef fishes have likely been underestimated. Therefore, we strongly encourage further empirical approaches to dietary studies prior to making assumptions of trophic equivalency in food web reconstruction.

opencc-zeroAug 2021View details →

Data from: Spatial covariance of herbivorous and predatory guilds of forest canopy arthropods along a latitudinal gradient

In arthropod community ecology, species richness studies tend to be prioritized over those investigating patterns of abundance. Consequently, the biotic and abiotic drivers of arboreal arthropod abundance are still relatively poorly known. In this cross-continental study, we employ a theoretical framework in order to examine patterns of covariance among herbivorous and predatory arthropod guilds. Leaf-chewing and leaf-mining herbivores, and predatory ants and spiders, were censused on > 1,000 trees in nine 0.1 ha forest plots. After controlling for tree size and season, we found no negative pairwise correlations between guild abundances per plot, suggestive of weak signals of both inter-guild competition and top-down regulation of herbivores by predators. Inter-guild interaction strengths did not vary with mean annual temperature, thus opposing the hypothesis that biotic interactions intensify towards the equator. We find evidence for the bottom-up limitation of arthropod abundances via resources and abiotic factors, rather than for competition and predation.