New Host-plant Records For Neotropical Agromyzids (diptera: Agromyzidae) From Asteraceae Flower Heads

Agromyzidae is a large and cosmopolitan fly family with approximately 2,500 known species. Here we present 22 new records of agromyzid-host plant associations. Plants were sampled from 2002 to 2005 in São Paulo state, Brazil. A total of eight agromyzid species were reared from 18 Asteraceae host species. The genus Melanagromyza Hendel was the commonest. This is the first detailed study reporting associations between non-leafmining Agromyzidae and their host plants in Brazil.3719799Almeida, A.M., C.R. Fonsceca, P.I. Prado, M. Almeida Neto, S. Diniz, U. Kubota, M.R. Braun, R.L.G. Raimundo, L.A. Anjos, T.G. Mendonça, S.M. Futada & T.M. Lewinsohn. 2005. Diversidade e ocorrência de Asteraceae em cerrados de São Paulo. Biota Neotrop. 5: http://www.biotaneotropica. org.br/v5n2/pt/abstract?article+BN00105022005 . ISSN 1676-0603Andersen, A., Sjursen, H., Rafoss, T., Biodiversity of Agromizydae (Diptera) and biologically and conventionally grown spring barley and grass field (2004) Biol. Agric. Hortic, 22, pp. 143-155Benavent-Corai, J., Martinez, M., Jimenez Peydró, R., Catalogue of the host-plants of the world Agromyzidae (Diptera) (2005) Boll. Zool. Agrar. Bachic. Serie II, 37, pp. 1-97Bremer, K., (1994) Asteraceae: Cladistics and classification, , Timber Press, Portland, 752pChen, X., Lang, F., Xu, Z., He, J., Ma, Y., The occurrence of leafminers and their parasitoids on vegetables and weeds in Hangzhou area, Southeast China (2003) BioControl, 48, pp. 515-527Eiten, G., Cerrado vegetation of Brazil (1972) Bot. Rev, 38, pp. 201-341Fonseca, C.R., Prado, P.I., Almeida Neto, M., Kubota, U., Lewinsohn, T.M., Flower heads, herbivores, and their parasitoids: Food web structure along a fertility gradient (2005) Ecol. Entomol, 30, pp. 36-46Gagné, R.J., (1994) The gall midges of the Neotropical region, , Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, 352pLewinsohn, T.M. 1991. Insects in flower heads of Asteraceae in southeast Brazil: a case study on tropical species richness, p.525-560. In P.W. Price, T.M. Lewinsohn, G.W. Fernandes & W.W. Benson (eds.). Plant-animal interactions: Evolutionary ecology in tropical and temperate regions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 639pLewinsohn, T.M., Novotny, V., Basset, Y., Insects on plants: Diversity of herbivore assemblages revisited (2005) Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst, 36, pp. 597-620Schuster, D.J., Gilreath, J.P., Wharton, R.A., Seymour, P.R., Agromyzidae (Diptera) leafminers and their parasitoids in weeds associated with potato in Florida (1991) Environ. Entomol, 20, pp. 720-723Spencer, K.A., Notes on the Neotropical Agromyzidae (Diptera) (1966) Pap. Avulsos Zool, 19, pp. 142-150Spencer, K.A., The Agromyzidae of Canada and Alaska (1969) Mem. Entomol. Soc. Can, 64, pp. 1-311Spencer, K.A. 1973a. Agromyzidae (Diptera) of economic importance. Dr. W. Junk B. V. The Hague, Serie Entomologica, 418pSpencer, K.A., The Agromyzidae (Diptera) of Venezuela. Rev. Fac. Agrom (1973), pp. 5-107. , Mar. VIIISpencer, K.A., (1990) Host specialization in the world Agromyzidae, , Diptera, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 444pSpencer, K.A. 1996. Australasian/Oceanian Diptera Catalog - Web Version. URL: http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/aocat/agromyzidae.html. Accessed in 12/09/2006Spencer, K.A. & C.E. Stegmaier. 1973. Arthropods of Florida (EUA) and neighboring land areas, v. 7. Agromyzidae of Florida (USA) with a Supplement on Species from the Caribbean. Fla. Dep. Agri. Cons. Serv., Gainesville, 205pSpencer, K.A. & G.C. Steyskal. 1986. Manual of the Agromyzidae (Diptera) of the United States. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook. n. 638. Washington, U.S.ASpencer, K.A., Martinez, M., Etienne, J., Les Agromyzidae (Diptera) de Guadeloupe. (1992) Ann. Soc. Entomol. Fr, 28, pp. 251-302Zwölfer, H. 1988. Species richness, species packing, and evolution in insect-plant systems, p.301-319. In E.D. Schulze & H. Zwölfer (eds.), Potentials and limitations of ecosystem analysis. Springer-Verlag. Berlin, 435

On the perils of ignoring evolution in networks

Here, we reply to the stimulating comments from Sagoff [1] and Rossberg [2] on Segar et al. [3]

The role of evolution in shaping ecological networks

The structure of ecological networks reflects the evolutionary history of their biotic components, and their dynamics are strongly driven by ecoevolutionary processes. Here, we present an appraisal of recent relevant research, in which the pervasive role of evolution within ecological networks is manifest. Although evolutionary processes are most evident at macroevolutionary scales, they are also important drivers of local network structure and dynamics. We propose components of a blueprint for further research, emphasising process-based models, experimental evolution, and phenotypic variation, across a range of distinct spatial and temporal scales. Evolutionary dimensions are required to advance our understanding of foundational properties of community assembly and to enhance our capability of predicting how networks will respond to impending changes

Integrating Economic Costs And Biological Traits Into Global Conservation Priorities For Carnivores

Background: Prioritization schemes usually highlight species-rich areas, where many species are at imminent risk of extinction. To be ecologically relevant these schemes should also include species biological traits into area-setting methods. Furthermore, in a world of limited funds for conservation, conservation action is constrained by land acquisition costs. Hence, including economic costs into conservation priorities can substantially improve their conservation cost-effectiveness. Methodology/Principal Findings: We examined four global conservation scenarios for carnivores based on the joint mapping of economic costs and species biological traits. These scenarios identify the most cost-effective priority sets of ecoregions, indicating best investment opportunities for safeguarding every carnivore species, and also establish priority sets that can maximize species representation in areas harboring highly vulnerable species. We compared these results with a scenario that minimizes the total number of ecoregions required for conserving all species, irrespective of other factors. We found that cost-effective conservation investments should focus on 41 ecoregions highlighted in the scenario that consider simultaneously both ecoregion vulnerability and economic costs of land acquisition. Ecoregions included in priority sets under these criteria should yield best returns of investments since they harbor species with high extinction risk and have lower mean land cost. Conclusions/Significance: Our study highlights ecoregions of particular importance for the conservation of the world's carnivores defining global conservation priorities in analyses that encompass socioeconomic and life-history factors. We consider the identification of a comprehensive priority-set of areas as a first step towards an in-situ biodiversity maintenance strategy. © 2009 Loyola et al.48Margules, C.R., Pressey, R.L., Systematic conservation planning (2000) Nature, 405, pp. 243-253Margules, C.R., Sarkar, S., (2007) Systematic conservation planning, , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 278 pCowling, R.M., Pressey, R.L., Rouget, M., Lombard, A.T., A conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot - the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa (2003) Biol Conserv, 112, pp. 191-216Smith, R.J., Goodman, P.S., Matthews, W.S., Systematic conservation planning: A review of perceived limitations and an illustration of the benefits, using a case study from Maputaland, South Africa (2006) Oryx, 40, pp. 400-410Loyola, R.D., Kubota, U., Lewinsohn, T.M., Endemic vertebrates are the most effective surrogates for identifying conservation priorities among Brazilian ecoregions (2007) Divers Distrib, 13, pp. 389-396Dinerstein, E., (1995) A conservation assessment of the terrestrial ecoregions of Latin America and the Caribbean, , Washington DC: WWF and the World Bank. 129 pBurgess, D.N., (2004) Terrestrial ecoregions of Africa and Madagascar: A conservation assessment, , Washington: Island Press. 483 pLoyola, R.D., Becker, C.G., Kubota, U., Haddad, C.F.B., Fonseca, C.R., Hung out to dry: Choice of priority ecoregions for conserving threatened Neotropical anurans depends on life-history traits (2008) PLoS ONE, 3 (5), pp. e2120. , doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002120Loyola, R.D., Oliveira, G., Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., Lewinsohn, T.M., Conservation of Neotropical carnivores under different prioritization scenarios: Mapping species traits to minimize conservation conflicts (2008) Divers Distrib, 14, pp. 949-960Loyola, R.D., Kubota, U., Fonseca, G.A.B., Lewinsohn, T.M., Key Neotropical ecoregions for conservation of terrestrial vertebrates (2009) Biodivers Conserv, 18, pp. 2017-2031Mittermeier, R.A., Robles-Gil, P., Hoffman, M., Pilgrim, J., Brooks, T., (2004) Hotspots revisited: Earth's biologically richest and most endangered terrestrial ecoregions, , Mexico City: CEMEX. 392 pOlson, D.M., Dinerstein, E., The Global 200: Priority ecoregions for global conservation (2002) Ann Miss Bot Gard, 89, pp. 199-224Bode, M., Wilson, K.A., Brooks, T.M., Turner, W.R., Mittermeier, R.A., Cost-effective global conservation spending is robust to taxonomic group (2008) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 105, pp. 6498-6501Brooks, T.M., Mittermeier, R.A., da Fonseca, G.A.B., Gerlach, J., Hoffmann, M., Global biodiversity conservation priorities (2006) Science, 313, pp. 58-61Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., Brooks, T.M., Pilgrim, J.D., Konstant, W.R., Wilderness and biodiversity conservation (2003) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 100, pp. 10309-10313Stattersfield, A.J., Crosby, M.J., Long, A.J., Wege, D.C., (1998) Endemic bird areas of the world: Priorities for biodiversity conservation, , Cambridge: BirdLife International. 846 pCardillo, M., Mace, G.M., Gittleman, J.L., Purvis, A., Latent extinction risk and the future battlegrounds of mammal conservation (2006) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 103, pp. 4157-4161Becker, C.G., Loyola, R.D., Extinction risk assessments at the population and species level: Implications for amphibian conservation (2008) Biodiv Conserv, 17, pp. 2297-2304Cardillo, M., Mace, G.M., Jones, K.E., Bielby, J., Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., Multiple causes of high extinction risk in large mammal species (2005) Science, 309, pp. 1239-1241Cardillo, M., Purvis, A., Sechrest, W., Gittleman, J.L., Bielby, J., Human population density and extinction risk in the world's carnivores (2004) PLoS Biology, 2, pp. 909-914Valenzuela-Galván, D., Vázquez, L.B., Prioritizing areas for conservation of Mexican carnivores considering natural protected areas and human population density (2008) Anim Conserv, 11, pp. 215-223Valenzuela-Galván, D., Arita, H.T., Macdonald, D.W., Conservation priorities for carnivores considering protected natural areas and human population density (2008) Biodivers Conserv, 17, pp. 539-558Gittleman, J.L., Funk, S.M., MacDonald, D.W., Wayne, R.K., (2001) Carnivore conservation, , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 690 pDirzo, R., Miranda, A., Altered patterns of herbivory anddiversity in the forest understory: A case study of the possible consequences of contemporary defaunation (1991) Plant-animal interactions: Evolutionary ecology in tropical and temperate regions, pp. 273-287. , Price P, Lewinsohn TM, Fernandes GW, Benson WW, eds, New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc. ppLaurance, W.F., Peres, C.A., (2006) Emerging threats to tropical forests, , Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 520 pRondinini, C., Boitani, L., Systematic Conservation Planning and the Cost of Tackling Conservation Conflicts with Large Carnivores in Italy (2007) Conserv Biol, 21, pp. 1455-1462Underwood, E.C., Shaw, M.R., Wilson, K.A., Kareiva, P., Klausmeyer, K.R., (2008) Protecting Biodiversity when Money Matters: Maximizing Return on Investment, ONE 3, pp. e1515. , PLoS, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001515Naidoo, R., Balmford, A., Ferraro, P.J., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T.H., Integrating economic costs into conservation planning (2006) Trends Ecol Evol, 21, pp. 681-686Davis, F.W., Costello, C., Stoms, D., (2006) Efficient conservation in a utility-maximization framework, p. 11. , http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss11/art33, Ecol Soc, Available(2006) WildFinder: Online database of species distributions, version Jan-06, , http://www.worldwildlife.org/WildFinder, AvailableRondinini, C., Stuart, S., Boitani, L., Habitat suitability models and the shortfall in conservation planning for African vertebrates (2005) Conserv Biol, 19, pp. 1488-1497Das, A., Krishnaswamya, J., Bawaa, K.S., Kirana, M.C., Srinivasc, V., Prioritisation of conservation areas in the Western Ghats, India (2006) Biol Conserv, 133, pp. 16-31Laurance, W.F., Lovejoy, T.E., Vasconcelos, H.L., Bruna, E.M., Didham, R.H., Ecosystem decay of Amazonian forest fragments: A 22-year investigation (2002) Conserv Biol, 16, pp. 605-618Boyd, C., Brooks, T.M., Butchart, S.H.M., Edgar, G.J., da Fonseca, G.A.B., Spatial scale and the conservation of threatened species (2008) Conserv Lett, 1, pp. 37-43Gittleman, J.L., Carnivore life histories: A reanalysis in the light of new models (1993) Mammals as predators, pp. 65-86. , Dunstone N, Gorman ML, eds, Oxford: Oxford University Press. ppCarbone, C., Gittleman, J.L., A common rule for the scaling of carnivore density (2002) Science, 295, pp. 2273-2276Urbina-Cardona JN, Loyola RD (2008) Applying niche-based models to predict endangered-hylid potential distributions: are Neotropical protected areas effective enough? Tropical Conservation Science 1: 417-445Lamoreux, J.F., Morrison, J.C., Ricketts, T.H., Olson, D.M., Dinerstein, E., Global tests of biodiversity concordance and the importance of endemism (2006) Nature, 440, pp. 212-214Pressey, R.L., Possingham, H.P., Day, J.R., Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves (1997) Biol Conserv, 80, pp. 207-219Soutullo, A., De Castro, M., Urios, V., Linking political and scientifically derived targets for global biodiversity conservation: Implications for the expansion of the global network of protected areas (2008) Divers Distrib, 14, pp. 604-613Olson, D.M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E.D., Burgess, N.D., Powell, G.V.N., Terrestrial ecoregions of the worlds: A new map of life on Earth (2001) Bioscience, 51, pp. 933-938Wilson, D.E., Reeder, D.M., (2005) Mammal species of the World: A taxonomic and geographic reference, , Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 2000 pPurvis, A., Gittleman, J.L., Cowlishaw, G., Mace, G.M., Predicting extinction risk in declining species (2000) Proc Royal Soc London B, 267, pp. 1947-1952Balmford, A., Gaston, K.J., Blyth, S., James, A., Kapos, V., Global variation in terrestrial conservation costs, conservation benefits, and unmet conservation needs (2003) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 100, pp. 1046-1050(2004) International Financial Statistics, , International Monetary Fund , Washington DC, International Monetary FundCIESIN, I., (2005) Gridded Population of the World (GPW), , http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/plue/gpw, WRI , New York: Palisades. AvailableAndelman S, Ball I, Davis F, Stoms D (1999) SITES v. 1.0: An analytical toolbox for designing ecoregional conservation portfolios. Washington: The Nature ConservancyPossingham, H., Ball, I., Andelman, S., Mathematical methods for identifying representative reserve networks (2000) Quantitative Methods for Conservation Biology, pp. 291-306. , Ferson S, Burgman M, eds, NewYork: Springer-Verlag. p