@article {1705,
	title = {Reduced Splash Dispersal of Bovine Parasitic Nematodes from Cow Pats by the Dung Beetle Diastellopalpus-Quinquedens},
	journal = {Journal of Parasitology},
	volume = {78},
	number = {5},
	year = {1992},
	note = {have copy},
	month = {Oct},
	pages = {845-848},
	abstract = {From a thoroughly mixed portion of cattle feces with Cooperia sp. eggs, 1-kg artificial pats were placed in 6 buckets containing 6 kg of soil each. Ten dung beetles, Diastellopalpus quinquedens, were added to each of 3 buckets. The remaining 3 buckets served as controls without beetles. When infective parasite larvae (L3) had developed in the cow pats indoors, the following procedure was followed. During occasions of rainfall each bucket was placed outdoors in the center of a wider and higher container. When the rain stopped all buckets were brought indoors, and infective larvae spread by splash droplets during the rain were collected in the containers and counted. After 33 days, the remaining dung on the soil surface in buckets with dung beetles constituted only 38\% of that in the controls. Moreover, the number of L3 in feces left on the soil surface in the buckets with beetles was reduced by 88\%, presumably due to beetle activity. This may explain the 70-90\% reduction in splash dispersal of L3 of Cooperia sp. from cow pats attacked by beetles. The dung-burying activity of the beetles did not result in increased numbers of L3 in the soil under the cow pats, suggesting that many of the parasites in buried feces were destroyed.},
	keywords = {cooperia, dung beetle, ecological function, ecosystem service, larvae, trichostrongylidae},
	url = {<Go to ISI>://A1992JR77300017},
	author = {Gronvold, J. and Sommer, C. and Holter, P. and Nansen, P.}
}
@article {1771,
	title = {An experiment on dung removal by Aphodius larvae (Scarabaeidae) and earthworms},
	journal = {Oikos},
	volume = {28},
	year = {1977},
	pages = {130-136},
	author = {Holter, P.}
}
@article {1772,
	title = {Effect of dung-beetles (Aphodius spp.) and earthworms on the disappearance of cattle dung},
	journal = {Oikos},
	volume = {32},
	number = {3},
	year = {1979},
	pages = {393-402},
	author = {Holter, P.}
}
@article {1967,
	title = {Treating cattle with ivermectin: effects on the fauna and decomposition of dung pats},
	journal = {Journal of Applied Ecology},
	volume = {27},
	year = {1990},
	pages = {1-15},
	keywords = {cattle, dung beetle, IVERMECTIN},
	author = {Madsen, M. and Overgaard Nielsen, B. and Holter, P. and Pedersen, O. C. and Brochner Jespersen, J. and Vagn Jensen, K.-M. and Nansen, P. and Gronvold, J.}
}
@article {1774,
	title = {Particle feeding in Aphodius dung beetles (Scarabaeidae): old hypothesis and new experimental evidence},
	journal = {Functional Ecology},
	volume = {14},
	year = {2000},
	note = {digital},
	pages = {631-637},
	keywords = {Aphodiinae, dung beetle, feeding ecology, morphology, Mouthparts},
	author = {Holter, P.}
}
@article {1775,
	title = {Dung feeding in hydrophilid, geotrupid and scarabaeid beetles: Examples of parallel evolution},
	journal = {European Journal Of Entomology},
	volume = {101},
	number = {3},
	year = {2004},
	note = { digital disease ecology, parasite transmission, scarbaeinae, ecological function},
	pages = {365-372},
	abstract = {The maximum size of ingested ball-shaped particles was determined in three species of adult dung feeding beetle: Anoplotrupes (Geotrupes) stercorosus and Geotrupes spiniger (Geotrupidae, Geotrupinae) and Sphaeridium lunatum (Hydrophilidae, Sphaeridiinae). Maximum diameters were 40-65 mum, 60-75 mum and 16-19 mum in A. stercorosus, G. spiniger and S. lunatum, respectively, and it was concluded that these beetles feed in the same way as found in previous studies on coprophagous scarabaeids (Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae). Coarse particles, mainly indigestible plant fragments, are rejected by an unknown filtering mechanism, and only very small particles are actually ingested. The two geotrupids, however, tolerate somewhat larger particles than do scarabaeines of similar size. This may reflect a lower degree of specialisation towards dung feeding in the geotrupids than in the scarabaeines. In several ways, the mouthparts of the coprophagous Scarabaeidae, Geotrupidae and Hydrophilidae show essentially the same morphological modifications that must be adaptations for dung feeding. For the hydrophilid (Sphaeridium), such modifications are described for the first time. They include asymmetric mandibular molars (right convex, left concave), fitting exactly into each other, with highly specialised surfaces that may concentrate the food prior to ingestion by squeezing fluid out of it. Other examples are the conjunctives (scarabaeids and geotrupids) or similar structures (the hydrophilid) and the large, hairy, pad-like distal lobes of the maxillar galeae. Provided that current views on the evolutionary history of these beetles are correct, dung feeding has arisen independently in the Scarabaeidae, Geotrupidae and Hydrophilidae. If so, the feeding on very small particles and the concomitant modifications of mouthparts in these three groups must be results of parallel evolution.},
	keywords = {COLEOPTERA dung beetle, Dung beetles, evolution, feeding habits, Geotrupidae, HELMINTH EGGS, hydrophilidae, Mouthparts, particle feeding, Scarabaeidae},
	isbn = {1210-5759},
	url = {<Go to ISI>://000224407300003},
	author = {Holter, P.}
}
@article {1776,
	title = {Are ball-rolling (Scarabaeini, Gymnopleurini, Sisyphini) and tunnelling scarabaeine dung beetles equally choosy about the size of ingested dung particles?},
	journal = {Ecological Entomology},
	volume = {30},
	year = {2005},
	pages = {700-705},
	abstract = {1. The maximum size of ingested particles was determined in 11 species of ball-rolling, adult dung beetle (Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae) by mixing small latex or glass balls of known diameter into their food. The tribes Scarabaeini, Gymnopleurini, and Sisyphini (four, four, and three species respec- tively) were represented, with mean body sizes ranging from 0.33 to 4.0 g fresh weight. 2. Only particles with maximum diameters of 4{\textendash}85 mm were ingested. Hence rollers, like other known beetles feeding on fresh dung, filter out larger, indiges- tible plant fragments and confine ingestion to small particles of higher nutritional value. 3. The maximum diameter of ingested particles increased significantly with body weight, whereas taxon (tribe) had no additional effect. Because big rollers accept larger particles than do tunnellers (which make dung stores for feeding and breeding in the soil immediately below the pat) of similar weight, the slope of the diameter-against-weight regression for rollers was significantly higher than that found earlier for tunnellers. 4. An explanation could be that a typical food ball made by a roller is con- siderably smaller than the amount of dung available to a feeding tunneller of the same size. If the roller were as choosy about particle size as the tunneller, it might not get enough food. This applies to large rollers in particular because their food balls contain a higher proportion of coarse fibres than those made by small species. },
	keywords = {Ball-rollers, Dung beetles, food exploitation, particle feeding, rollers, Scarabaeidae, Scarabaeinae, telecoprids},
	author = {Holter, P. and Scholtz, Clarke H.}
}
