Pine savanna overstorey influences on ground‐cover biodiversity

Question: Does the overstorey of pine savannas influence plant species biodiversity in the ground cover? Location: Camp Whispering Pines (30°41\u27 N; 90°29\u27 W), eastern Louisiana (USA). Methods: We used ecologically sensitive restoration logging to remove patches of Pinus palustris (longleaf pine) in a second-growth loess plain Pinus palustris savanna managed using frequent lightning season fires. Five years later, we measured numbers of vascular plant species and transmitted light in replicated 100-m2 plots. Treatments involved three different overstorey conditions: no overstorey for 5 years, no overstorey for several decades, and overstorey pines present for decades. Results: Both recent and long-term openings contained, on average, about 100 vascular plant species per 100 m2, 20% more than in similar-sized areas beneath overstorey trees. Responses varied with life form; more herbaceous species occurred in recent and older overstorey openings than beneath overstorey trees. Total numbers of all species and of less abundant forb species were positively and linearly related to light transmitted to ground level. Those species responding to openings in the overstorey and positively associated with increased transmitted light levels were monocarpic and short-lived perennial forb and grass species with a seed bank in the soil. In addition, community structure, as reflected in species composition and abundances, appeared to vary with canopy condition. Conclusions: Restoration involving ecologically sensitive removal of patches of overstorey pines in frequently burned pine savannas should benefit the ground cover and increase plant species biodiversity as a result of increased abundance of seed bank species. © IAVS; Opulus Press

The morphological evolution of the Adephaga (Coleoptera)

The evolution of the coleopteran suborder Adephaga is discussed based on a robust phylogenetic background. Analyses of morphological characters yield results nearly identical to recent molecular phylogenies, with the highly specialized Gyrinidae placed as sister to the remaining families, which form two large, reciprocally monophyletic subunits, the aquatic Haliplidae + Dytiscoidea (Meruidae, Noteridae, Aspidytidae, Amphizoidae, Hygrobiidae, Dytiscidae) on one hand, and the terrestrial Geadephaga (Trachypachidae + Carabidae) on the other. The ancestral habitat of Adephaga, either terrestrial or aquatic, remains ambiguous. The former option would imply two or three independent invasions of aquatic habitats, with very different structural adaptations in larvae of Gyrinidae, Haliplidae and Dytiscoidea.Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. Grant Number: BE 1789/11‐