Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-23T17:44:55.869Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Habitat specificity and food preferences of an assemblage of tropical Australian dung beetles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Christopher J. Hill
Affiliation:
Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management, Department of Zoology, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia 4811

Abstract

Two dung beetle assemblages from rainforest and open forest in the wet tropics of north-eastern Australia are described. The fauna was sampled using flight intercept traps, baited pitfall traps and light traps, with flight intercept traps being the most effective sampling technique. Dung beetle species were found to be highly habitat specific with a switch from rainforest to open forest assemblages occurring over tens of metres. The majority of the fauna was active at night. The most abundant species were attracted to a variety of food types but several species appeared to specialize on either dung or mushrooms.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

Doube, B. M. 1990. A functional classification for analysis of the structure of dung beetle assemblages. Ecological Entomology 15:371383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doube, B. M., MacQueen, A., Ridsdill-Smith, T. J. & Weir, T. A. 1991. Native and introduced dung beetles in Australia. Pp. 230241 in Hanski, I. & Cambefort, Y. (eds). Dung beetle ecology. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. 481 pp.Google Scholar
Halffter, G. & Favila, M. E. 1993. The Scarabaeinae (Insecta: Coleoptera): an animal group for analysing, inventorying and monitoring biodiversity in tropical rain forest and modified landscapes. Biology International 27:1521.Google Scholar
Hanski, I. & Cambefort, Y. (eds). 1991a. Dung beetle ecology. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. 481 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanski, I. & Cambefort, Y. 1991b. Resource partitioning. Pp. 330349 in Hanski, I. & Cambefort, Y. (eds). Dung beetle ecology. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. 481 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanski, I. & Krikken, J. 1991. Dung beetles in tropical forests in South-East Asia. Pp. 179197 in Hanski, I. & Cambefort, Y. (eds). Dung beetle ecology. Princeton University Press, New Jersey. 481 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, C. J. 1993. The species composition and seasonality of an assemblage of tropical Australian dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). Australian Entomologist 20:121126.Google Scholar
Howden, H. F., Howden, A. T. & Storey, R. I. 1991. Nocturnal perching of scarabaeine dung beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae) in an Australian tropical rain forest. Biotropica 23:5157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howden, H. F. & Nealis, V. G. 1975. Effects of clearing in a tropical rain forest on the composition of coprophagous scarab beetle fauna. Biotropica 7:7783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, B. C. 1989. Effects of forest fragmentation on dung and carrion beetle communities on Central Amazonia. Ecology 70:17151725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kremen, C., Colwell, R. K., Erwin, T. L., Murphy, D. D., Noss, R. F. & Sanjayan, M. A. 1993. Terrestrial arthropod assemblages: their use in conservation planning. Conservation Biology 7:796808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, E. G. 1972. A revision of the scarabaeine dung beetles of Australia I. Tribe Onthophagini. Australian Journal of Zoology, Supplementary Series No. 9:3330.Google Scholar
Matthews, E. G. 1974. A revision of the scarabaeine dung beetles of Australia II. Tribe Scarabaeini. Australian Journal of Zoology, Supplementary Series No. 38:1211.Google Scholar
Matthews, E. G. 1976. A revision of the scarabaeine dung beetles of Australia III. Tribe Coprini. Australian Journal of Zoology, Supplementary Series No. 38:152.Google Scholar
Nummelin, M. & Hanski, I. 1989. Dung beetles of the Kibale Forest, Uganda; comparison between virgin and managed forests. Journal of Tropical Ecology 5:349352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peck, S. B. & Davies, A. E. 1980. Collecting small beetles with large area ‘window’ traps. The Coleopterist's Bulletin 34:237239.Google Scholar
Storey, R. I. 1977. Six new species of Onthophagous Latreille (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) from Australia. Journal of the Australian Entomological Society 16:313320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storey, R. I. & Weir, T. A. 1990. New species of Onthophagus Latreille (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) from Australia. Invertebrate Taxonomy 3:783815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strahan, R. (ed.). (1983). Complete book of Australian mammals. Angus & Robertson, Sydney. 530 pp.Google Scholar
Topping, C. J. & Sunderland, K. D. 1992. Limitations to the use of pitfall traps in ecological studies exemplified by a study of spiders in a field of winter wheat. Journal of Applied Ecology 9:485491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tracey, J. G. 1982. The vegetation of the humid tropical region of North Queensland. CSIRO, Melbourne. 124 pp.Google Scholar
Turton, S. M. & Duff, G. A. 1992. Light environments and floristic composition across an open forest-rain forest boundary in northeastern Queensland. Australian Journal of Ecology 17:415423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zar, J. H. 1984. Biostatistical analysis (2nd edition). Prentice-Hall International, New Jersey. 718 pp.Google Scholar