Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-10T19:07:29.284Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Adaptations of carabid beetles to dry habitats in East Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Johan Andersen
Affiliation:
Institute of Biology and Geology, University ofTromsø, PO Box 3085, Guleng, 9001 Tromsø, Norway
Karl Erik Zachariassen
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Trondheim, 7055 Dragvoll, Norway Department of Animal Physiology, University of Nairobi, PO box 30197, Nairobi, Kenya
Geoffrey M. O. Maloiy
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, University of Nairobi, PO box 30197, Nairobi, Kenya
John M. Z. Kamau
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, University of Nairobi, PO box 30197, Nairobi, Kenya

Abstract

The rates of water loss and humidity preference of carabids from dry tropical habitats have been studied and compared with corresponding data from temperate carabids and tropical tenebrionids. Within each group of beetles the rate of relative water loss decreases with increasing body size. Carabids from dry tropical areas have rates of water loss which are lower than those of temperate species, but considerably higher than the values for tenebrionids from dry tropical habitats. Small temperate carabids can stay in dry air for only a few hours, whereas large tropical tenebrionids may survive for weeks without becoming critically dehydrated. Given the choice between a dry and a humid atmosphere, well hydrated beetles of all groups will initially choose the dry atmosphere. Most temperate carabids will switch to humid atmosphere after a few hours and tropical carabids after 1–3 days, whereas tropical tenebrionids may remain in dry air for almost 3 weeks. The temperate carabids are very sensitive to dehydration and will shift to a humid atmosphere when dehydrated by only 2–5%. Tropical carabids and tenebrionids will shift first when they are dehydrated by 7–20% of their body weight in a hydrated state, implying that these beetles are considerably less sensitive to water loss than temperate carabids.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Ahearn, G. A. & Hadley, N. F. 1969. The effects of temperature and humidity on water loss in two desert tenebrionid beetles, Eleodes armata and Cryptoglossa verrucosa. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 30:739749.Google Scholar
Andersen, J. 1985. Humidity responses and water balance of riparian species of Bembidiini (Col., Carabidae). Ecological Entomology 10:363375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cloudsley-Thompson, J. L 1964. On the function of the subelytral cavity in desert Tenebrionidae (Col.). Entomologist' Monthly Magazine 100:148151.Google Scholar
Crawford, C. S. 1981. Biology of desert invertebrates. Springer, Berlin. 314 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edney, E. B. 1977. Water balance in land arthropods. Zoophysiology and Ecology 9:1282.Google Scholar
Erwin, T. L 1979. Thoughts on the evolutionary history of ground beetles: hypotheses generated from comparative faunal analysis of lowland forest sites in temperate and tropical regions. Pp. 539587 in Erwin, T. L., Ball, G. E. and Whitehead, D. R. (eds). Carabid beetles: their evolution, natural history, and classification. Proceedings of the First International Symposium of Carabidology. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, 08 1976. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, E. 1980. Polyphagy, oligophagy and food specialization in ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Netherlands Journal of Zoology 30:564584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindroth, C. H. 1945. Die Fennoskandischen Carabidae L Gøteborgs Kungliga Vetenskaps och Vitterhet Sammhälles Handlingar (B) 4:1709.Google Scholar
Lindroth, C. H. 1961. Sandjägare och Jordløpare. Fam. Carabidae. 2nd edition. Svensk Insektfauna 35, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Minnick, D. R., Kerr, S. H. & Wilkinson, R. C. 1973. Humidity behaviour of the dry wood termite Cryptotermes brevis. Environmental Entomology 2:597601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paarman, W. 1979. Ideas about the evolution of the various annual reproduction rythms in carabid beetles of the different climatic zones. Pp. 119132 in Boer, P. J. den, Thiele, H.-U. & Weber, F. (eds). On the evolution of behaviour in carabid beetles. Miscellaneous Papers 18, Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Perttunen, V. 1953. Reactions of diplopods to the relative humidity of the air. Investigations on Orthomorpha gracilis, lulus terrestris, and Schizophyllum sabulosum. Annates Zoologici Societatis Zoologicae Botanicae Fennicae ‘Vanamo’ 16:169.Google Scholar
Schjøtz-Christensen, B. 1965. Biology and population studies of Carabidae of the Corynephoretum. Natura Jutlandica 11:173.Google Scholar
Schmidt, G. 1955/1956. Der Stoffwechsel der Caraben (Ins. Coleopt.) unde seine Beziehung zum Wasserhaushalt. Zoologische Jahrbücher 66:273294.Google Scholar
Thiele, H.-U. 1977. Carabid beetles in their environments. A study on habitat selection by adaptations in physiology and behaviour. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 369 pp.Google Scholar
Zachariassen, K. E. 1977. Ecophysiological studies on beetles from arid regions in East Africa. Norwegian Journal of Entomology 24:167170.Google Scholar