02044nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008300041210006900124300001200193490000700205520159500212653001701807100001801824700002201842856003401864       1991                        eng d00aHabitat Associations and Niche Partitioning in an Island Dung Beetle Community0 aHabitat Associations and Niche Partitioning in an Island Dung Be  a451-4590 v123 aThe composition and habitat associatons of the dung beetle community on Flinders Island (in Bass Strait between Tasmania and the Australian mainland) were assessed to provide baseline data prior to the deliberate introduction of exotic dung beetles for control of dung and dung-breeding flies. The distribution of beetles in relation to vegetative cover and dung type was examined in an experiment, in which pitfall traps were baited with a range of dung types in a variety of contrasting habitats, and by qualitative survey. The beetle community consisted of nine indigenous species (six Onthophagus and one Aphodius species (Scarabaeidae), two Saprinus species (Histeridae)) and two introduced species (Cercyon (Hydrophilidae) and Aphodius). Seven species were diurnal and four were noctural/crepuscular. Five species were strongly associated with woodland and the remainder occurred primarily in open pasture. All species were substantially more abundant in traps baited with human dung than in those baited with herbivore dung. Some species were caught at human dung almost exclusively. There were no obvious effects of herbivore dung type (cow, horse, marsupial, sheep) on the numbers caught in traps. Beetles were more numerous in cattle paddocks than in sheep paddocks. Four indigenous species which are common in cattle dung in open pasture (Onthophagus australis Guerin, Onthophagus granulatus Boheman, Onthophagus posticus Erichson and Aphodius tasmaniae Hope) have niche characteristics that make them potential competitors with exotic species to be introduced from the mainland.10aDung beetles1 aDoube, B., M.1 aWardhaugh, K., G.  u<Go to ISI>://A1991GL0100000100750nas a2200181   4500008004100000245018800041210007200229300001200301490000700313653001600320653000900336653001900345653001400364100001500378700001700393700002000410856013800430       1997                        eng d00aConséquences de l’interaction entre préférences pour l’habitat et quantite´ de ressources trophiques sur les communaute´s d’insectes coprophages (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea)0 aConséquences de l interaction entre préférences pour l habitat e  a107-1190 v1810adung beetle10afood10amammal mammals10aresources1 aKadiri, N.1 aLobo, J., M.1 aLumaret, J., P.  uhttps://scarabnet.myspecies.info/cons-quences-de-l-interaction-entre-pr-f-rences-pour-l-habitat-et-quantite-de-ressources-trophiques-01541nas a2200133   4500008004100000245010500041210006900146300001000215490000700225520110700232653001701339100001701356856003401373       1993                        eng d00aThe Relationship between Distribution and Abundance in a Dung- Beetle Community (Col, Scarabaeoidea)0 aRelationship between Distribution and Abundance in a Dung Beetle  a43-550 v143 aThe relationship between species' local abundance and distribution over a range of spatial scales was analysed in the case of a community of Iberian dung beetles. On a local scale, abundance and distribution are correlated, as statistics would lead one to expect (the larger the population of a species, the more frequently they occur in dung pats and samples). Nevertheless, this correlation is not observed in the data derived from annual sampling, due to presence of species characterized by high population growth rates and narrow seasonal occurrences. The supposition (BROWN, 1984) that broad- niche species should also be locally abundant is not corroborated; species were found that were well-distributed locally, but without large local populations. On a regional scale, the results are in agreement with the model proposed by BROWN & MAURER (1987); locally abundant species tend to be well-distributed, although there is considerable variation in this correlation. On a geographical scale the results are as would be expected, although there are exceptions, possibly due to historical factors.10aDung beetles1 aLobo, J., M.  u<Go to ISI>://A1993LQ9130000502294nas a2200265   4500008004100000245011100041210006900152260001200221300001200233490000700245520153200252653002601784653001901810653001101829653001401840653001701854653001201871653001401883653002401897653001701921653001701938100001701955700002101972856003501993       1999                        eng d00aBetween-group differences in the Iberian dung beetle species-area relationship (Coleoptera : Scarabaeidae)0 aBetweengroup differences in the Iberian dung beetle speciesarea   cNov-Dec  a587-5970 v203 aBetween-group alpha- and beta-diversity differences were derived from species-area relationships fitted to field data. The accuracy of spatial richness variation predictions based on area size was also checked. The log-log model (log S = c + z log A) was found to be the best-fit linear model, with slopes (z) ranging from 0.089 to 0.142. Between-group comparisons of z (slope) and q (intercept) parameters, using the S = q + cA(Z) curvilinear regression model, corroborated early results, indicating a lower beta-diversity (slope) for Scarabaeinae than for Geotrupinae and Aphodiinae. The latter group, probably more sensitive to environmental heterogeneity, should contribute more to species richness in large areas. alpha-Diversity is greater for Aphodiinae, more relevant to local diversity (1 km(2)), than for Scarabaeinae and considerably greater for these two groups than for Geotrupinae. As earlier results show that the richness of a single dung pat is rather more a function of the Scarabaeinae species pool, richness on dung pat scales is probably due more to the between-dropping mobile Scarabaeinae, while Aphodiinae contribute mainly to local and regional pool richness. Nearly 88 % of the total richness variance is explained by area size. This percentage decreases to 37 % when the spatial structure of area size and species number are extracted. The corresponding figures for Scarabaeinae, Aphodiinae and Geotrupinae are 44, 22 and 31 %, respectively. (C) 1999 Editions scientifiques et medicales Elsevier SAS.10aAPHODIUS SCARABAEIDAE10abeta-diversity10aCURVES10adiversity10aDung beetles10aIberian10aPeninsula10arichness comparison10aScarabaeidae10aspecies-area1 aLobo, J., M.1 aMartin-Piera, F.  u<Go to ISI>://000084618100002 