Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T04:37:49.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ARTHROPODS INHABITING THE SPOROPHORES OF FOMES FOMENTARIUS (POLYPORACEAE) IN GATINEAU PARK, QUEBEC

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

W. G. Matthewman  and
D. P. Pielou
W. G. Matthewman
Affiliation:
Entomology Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa
D. P. Pielou
Affiliation:
Entomology Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The fauna of the sporophores of the perennial bracket fungus Fomes fomentarius (L. ex Fr.) Kickx were examined in a 3-year study. One species of molluscs and more than 152 species of arthropods excluding mites, representing 13 orders, 70 families, and 5400 individuals, emerged from or were found on or in, 1448 sporophores detached from dead birch trees; the sporophores were collected each year in Gatineau Park, Que., kept individually in screen-topped glass jars in a laboratory, and examined for several months. Mites, which were recorded quantitatively only in the final year, added 4 orders, 19 families, and 30 species to the preceding totals. Mites were the most frequently occurring and probably the most numerous arthropods, followed by Coleoptera, Psocoptera, Collembola, Hymenoptera, and Diptera.The key organisms of the fauna were five species of beetles that were primarily responsible for tunnelling and destruction of the sporophores and would therefore exert great influence on the composition of the community. Their tunnels provided shelter and food for many smaller arthropods or facilitated their feeding. Some beetle species tunnelled the sporophores for one season and others, for several, but many living sporophores and most dead ones tunnelled by beetles were tunnelled in the same season by more than one species of beetles.There was considerable latitude in types of sporophores inhabited by various arthropods but some species were particularly attracted to living or dead, to younger or older, and to smaller or larger, sporophores. Some species were also attracted to certain regions of the sporophore more than were other species.Possible economic implications of observations made in the study are discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 103 , Issue 6 , June 1971 , pp. 775 - 847
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1971

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

REFERENCES

Arnett, R. H. 1968. The beetles of the United States. American Entomological Institute, Ann Arbor, Mich.Google Scholar
Austin, M. D. 1933. The insect and allied fauna of cultivated mushrooms. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 69: 16–17.Google Scholar
Bessey, E. A. 1950. Morphology and taxonomy of fungi. Blackiston, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blatchley, W. S. and Leng, C. W.. 1916. Rhynchophora or weevils of north eastern America. Nature, Indianapolis.Google Scholar
Buller, A. H. R. 1922. Researches on fungi, II. Longmans, London.Google Scholar
Buxton, P. A. 1960. British Diptera associated with fungi. III: Flies of all families reared from about 150 species of fungi. Entomologist's mon. Mag. XCVI: 61–94.Google Scholar
Donisthorpe, H. 1928. Dorcatoma dresdensis Hbst. and D. serra Pz., two new British insects with notes on the other British species of the genus. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 64: 196–199.Google Scholar
Donisthorpe, H. 1935. The British fungicolous Coleoptera. Entomologist's mon. Mag. LXXI: 21–31.Google Scholar
Faull, J. H. 1922. Forest pathology. A preliminary account of the true tinder fungus. Ont. Min. Lands, Forests Rep., 1921, pp. 262–265.Google Scholar
Ferrière, C. 1955. Note sur les Hyménoptères des champignons. Mitt. schweiz. ent. Ges. 28(1): 106–108.Google Scholar
Graves, R. C. 1960. Ecological observations on the insects and other inhabitants of woody shelf fungi (Basidiomycetes: Polyporaceae) in the Chicago area. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 53: 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graves, R. C. and Graves, Anne C. F.. 1966. The insects and other inhabitants of shelf fungi in the southern Blue Ridge region of western North Carolina. I: Introduction, description of the habitat, and the host fungi. Annls ent. Soc. Am. 59: 381–390;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
II: The parasitic Hymenoptera. Annls ent. Soc. Am. 59: 391–392.Google Scholar
Hilborn, M. T. 1942. The biology of Fomes fomentarius. Maine agric. Exp. Stn Bull. 409, pp. 162–214.Google Scholar
Hubert, E. E. 1931. An outline of forest pathology. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Ingles, L. G. 1933. The succession of insects in tree trunks as shown by the collections from the various stages of decay. J. Ent. Zool. 25: 57–59.Google Scholar
*Ito, Yasuhiro. 1964. Descriptions of eight tarsonemid mites from Japan. Jap. J. appl. Ent. Zool. 8: 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacot, A. P. 1930. Moss-mites as spore-bearers. Mycologia 22: 94–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacot, A. P. 1934. Acarina as possible vectors of the dutch elm disease. J. econ. Ent. 27: 858–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, J. F. and Powell, J. A.. 1969. Host relationships in North American fungus-feeding moths (Oecophoridae, Oinophilidae, Tineidae). Bull. Mus. comp. Zool. 138: 29–51.Google Scholar
Lindquist, E. E. 1963. A taxonomic review of the genus Hoploseius Berlese (Acarina: Blattisocidae). Can. Ent. 95: 1175–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, E. E. 1970. Relationships between mites and insects in forest habitats. Can. Ent. 102: 978–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, J. L. 1957. Polyporaceae of North America. The genus Fomes. St. Univ. Coll. For. Tech. Publ. 80. Syracuse Univ., New York.Google Scholar
Mason, W. R. M. 1968. New Canadian Braconidae (Hymenoptera). Can. Ent. 100: 715–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minch, Edith L. 1952. Insect inhabitants of Polyporus betulinus. Jl N.Y. ent. Soc. 60: 31–35.Google Scholar
Moennich, H. 1939. List of Coleoptera found living in and on various fungi. Bull. Brooklyn ent. Soc. 34: 155–157.Google Scholar
Moennich, H. 1944. 1940 supplement to the Coleoptera found living in and on various fungi. Bull. Brooklyn ent. Soc. 39: 164–170.Google Scholar
Overholts, L. E. 1953. The Polyporaceae of the United States, Alaska and Canada. Univ. Mich. Stud. Scient. Ser. XIX. Univ. Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Park, O. and Strohecker, H. F.. 1936. Studies in nocturnal ecology, V: An experiment in conducting field classes at night. Ohio J. Sci. 36: 45–54.Google Scholar
Park, O., Auerback, S., and Corley, Glenna. 1950. The tree-hole habitat with emphasis on the pselaphid beetle fauna. Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci. 9: 19–57.Google Scholar
Paviour-Smith, Kitty. 1960 a. The fruiting bodies of macrofungi as habitats for beetles of the family Ciidae (Coleoptera). Oikos 11(1): 43–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paviour-Smith, Kitty. 1960 b. Insect succession in the “birch-bracket fungus”, Polyporus betulinus. Proc. int. Cong. Ent. Vienna, pp. 792–796.Google Scholar
Paviour-Smith, Kitty. 1965. Some factors affecting numbers of the fungus beetle Tetratoma fungorum F. J. Animal Ecol. 34: 700–724.Google Scholar
Paviour-Smith, Kitty. 1966. Artificial light and Tetratoma fungorum F. (Col., Tetratomidae). Entomologist's mon. Mag. 102: 56–57.Google Scholar
Pearman, J. V. 1928. Biological observations on British Psocoptera. Entomologist's mon. Mag. 64: 209–218, 239–243, 263–268.Google Scholar
Pielou, D. P. 1966. The fauna of Polyporus betulinus (Bulliard) Fries (Basidiomycetes: Polyporaceae) in Gatineau Park, Quebec. Can. Ent. 98: 1233–1237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pielou, D. P. and Matthewman, W. G.. 1966. The fauna of Fomes fomentarius (Linnaeus ex Fries) Kickx growing on dead birch in Gatineau Park, Quebec. Can. Ent. 98: 1308–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pielou, D. P. and Verma, A. N.. 1968. The arthropod fauna associated with the birch bracket fungus, Polyporus betulinus, in eastern Canada. Can. Ent. 100: 1179–1199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehfous, M. 1955 a. Contribution à l'étude des insectes des champignons. Mitt. schweiz. ent. Ges. 28(1): 1–106.Google Scholar
Rehfous, M. 1955 b. Note sur les Lépidoptères des champignons. Mitt. schweiz. ent. Ges. 28(1): 109–110.Google Scholar
Scarborough, C. S. The systematic and the ecological association of the Blattisocidae Garman (= Aceosejidae Wharton and Baker) to the Polyporaceae. Ph.D. Thesis, unpub., Mich. State Univ., 1969.Google Scholar
*Schaarschmidt, L. 1959. Systematik und Ökologie der Tarsonemiden. Beitr. Syst. Ökol. mitteleur. Acarina 1, Abschn. 5: 713–823.Google Scholar
Simonet, J. 1955. Note relative aux Hémiptères capturés sur les champignons. Mitt. schweiz. ent. Ges. 28(1): 111–114.Google Scholar
Studhalter, R. A. and Ruggles, A. G.. 1915. Insects as carriers of the chestnut blight fungus. Penna Dep. Forestry Bull. 12: 7–33.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. A. 1939. The animals associated with edible fungi. Jl N.Y. ent. Soc. 47: 11–37.Google Scholar
Von Schrenk, H. and Spaulding, H.. 1909. Diseases of deciduous forest trees. U.S. Dep. Agric. Bur. Pl. Ind. Bull. 149.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1920 a. Notes on the fungus-beetle, Cis Vitula Mann. Psyche, (Camb.) 27: 133–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1920 b. Coleoptera associated with Polyporus Versicolor L. in New Jersey. Psyche, (Camb.) 27: 137–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1920 c. The insect enemies of polyporoid fungi. Am. Nat. LIV: 443–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1922 a. A summary of the food habits of North American Coleoptera. Am. Nat. LVI: 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1922 b. The fungous insect fauna of a mesophytic woods in New Jersey. Proc. biol. Soc. Wash. 35: 125–128.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1924. More notes on fungus insects and their hosts. Psyche, (Camb.) 31: 236–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, H. B. and West, E.. 1920 a. Fungous insects and their hosts. Proc. biol. Soc. Wash. 33: 1–19.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1920 b. The eggs of Boletotherus bifurcatus Fab. (Col.). Ent. News 31: 280.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1921. Additional notes on fungous insects. Proc. biol. Soc. Wash. 34: 167–171.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. B. 1923. Notes on fungous insects. Can. Ent. LIV: 198–199.Google Scholar
Winston, P. W. 1956. The acorn microsere, with special reference to arthropods. Ecology 37: 120–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar