Barnes, R. J.

Haskell, N. H.

Higley, Leon G.

Roe, A.

English

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska

University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln School of Natural Resources: Faculty Publications Natural Resources, School of 2023 Changing blowfly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) populations in Orlando, Florida, United States A. Roe R. J. Barnes Leon G. Higley University of Nebraska - Lincoln, lhigley1@unl.edu N. H. Haskell Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/natrespapers  Part of the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, and the Other Environmental Sciences Commons Roe, A.; Barnes, R. J.; Higley, Leon G.; and Haskell, N. H., "Changing blowfly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) populations in Orlando, Florida, United States" (2023). School of Natural Resources: Faculty Publications. 1716. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/natrespapers/1716 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Natural Resources, School of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Natural Resources: Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Changing Blow Fly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) Populationsin Orlando, Florida, United StatesAuthors: Roe, Amanda, Barnes, Russell J., Higley, Leon G., andHaskell, Neal H.Source: Florida Entomologist, 106(3) : 189-191Published By: Florida Entomological SocietyURL: https://doi.org/10.1653/024.106.0306BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titlesin the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations,museums, institutions, and presses.Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates youracceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use.Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non - commercial use.Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher ascopyright holder.BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofitpublishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access tocritical research.Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Florida-Entomologist on 21 May 2024Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useS c i e n t i f i c  N o t e s1College of Saint Mary, Biology Program, Omaha, NE 68106, USA, E-mail: aroe@csm.edu (A.R.)2Forensic Entomology Investigations, Orlando, FL 32829, USA †Deceased (R.J.B.)3University of Nebraska-Lincoln, School of Natural Resources, Lincoln, NE 68583, USA, E-mail: lhigley@drshigley.com (L.G.H.)4Forensic Entomology Investigations, Rensselaer, IN 47978, USA, E-mail: nhaskell@hughes.net (N.H.H.)*Corresponding author; E-mail: aroe@csm.edu (A.R.)2023 — Florida Entomologist — Volume 106, No. 3 189Changing blow fly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) populations in Orlando, Florida, United StatesAmanda Roe1,*, Russell J. Barnes2,†, Leon G. Higley3, and Neal H. Haskell4Insects fulfill a large array of ecological roles including pollination, pathogen transmission, and decomposition. Necrophagous insects, specifically blow flies (Diptera: Calliphoridae), are an important part of terrestrial decomposition because of their ability to locate and colo-nize carcasses. This dependence on carrion for completion of their life cycles allows carrion trapping to give insight into population composi-tions and changes in those compositions should they occur.Previous studies in Florida (Gruner et al. 2007; Swiger et al. 2014) have shown a consistent group of carrion-attending blow flies that in-cludes Lucilia sericata Meigen, Lucilia coeruleiviridis Macquart, Phor-mia regina Meigen, Cochliomyia macellaria Fabricius, Chrysomya rufi-facies Macquart, and Chrysomya megacephala Fabricius. The 2 Lucilia species, P. regina, and C. macellaria are ubiquitous North American flies. However, C. rufifacies and C. megacephala are tropical, non-na-tive blow flies introduced to the United States in the early 1980’s. The first Chrysomya species introduced into the continental United States was C. rufifacies reported from Texas in 1981 (Gagné et al. 1982). The introduction of C. megacephala to the continental United States oc-curred in both California and Texas in 1989 (Wells 1991). By 1992 both C. rufifacies and C. megacephala were documented as being “...abun-dantly present and well entrenched...” in Florida (Baumgartner 1993, page 338). However, no studies have been conducted in the Orlando, Florida, region to observe whether these 2 non-native species have had an impact on overall blow fly distributions.Thus, this research was conducted with 2 main objectives: to gain an understanding of the blow fly populations in urban Orlando, Florida, and to document any potential shifts in blow fly species prevalence since the previous survey conducted in 2002 to 2004 (Gruner et al. 2007).The study was carried out in Orlando, Orange County, Florida, from Jun to Sep 2009 and Apr to Oct 2010 at 4 different locations around the city (28.48764 °N, 81.26329 °W; 28.57303 °N, 81.41284 °W; 28.63535 °N, 81.42215 °W; 28.57411 °N, 81.40785 °W). Fly specimens were col-lected during the summer months using assorted fresh and frozen (up to 4 wks) animal carrion. The carrion, all roadkill, ranged from small rodents to a large dog. Carcasses were placed in shaded areas with little direct sunlight. Ambient air temperatures were recorded on-site and compared with wireless internet field connections, with all com-parison temperatures being within 1 °C of each other. Successive speci-men gathering from the same animal carcass continued up to 3 d after the initial collection. In 2009, adult fly specimens were collected using an aerial net. The aerial net was swept in figure-eight motions 5 to 60 cm above the carcass. The captured specimens were transferred into a vial of 95% alcohol. In 2010, adult fly specimens were collected using a modified Bishopp cone trap (Hall 1948). The screened conical trap was 23 cm off the ground. It had a 66 cm base and 15 cm top that ended in a 15 cm collecting jar. The specimens were placed at −18 °C for 5 ± 2 mins and funneled into a vial of 95% alcohol. Adult specimens were identified morphologically (Whitworth 2006). Because sampling inter-vals varied across dates, numbers collected are expressed as numbers per sample date.Table 1 and Figure 1 present summaries of species and numbers col-lected in 2009 and 2010. Peak activity varied by species, but overall, the blow flies collected were most abundant Jul to Sep (2009) and Jun to Sep (2010). Only 5 species of calliphorids were recovered: C. rufifacies, C. Table 1. Calliphorid species collected in 2009 (Jun 11 2009 to Sep 12 2009) and 2010 (Apr 4 2010 to Oct 11 2010) in Orlando, Florida, from exposed carrion. Da-ta include totals from all dates, and totals reflecting sampling effort expressed as totals per sampling day.YearChrysomya rufifaciesChrysomya megacephalaLucilia  coeruleiviridisCochliomyia macellariaLucilia sericataTotal Collected per Sampling Day2009 73 98 15 1  32010 773 4,547 81 141  5Percent of Total Collected2009 38% 52% 8% 1%  2%2010 14% 82% 1% 3%  0%Total Collected2009 588 1,110 98 12  12010 7,510 44,711 484 1,016 49Percent of Total Collected per Sampling Day2009 33% 61% 5% 1%  0%2010 14% 83% 1% 2%  0%Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Florida-Entomologist on 21 May 2024Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use190 2023 — Florida Entomologist — Volume 106, No. 3megacephala, C. macellaria, L. coeruleiviridis, and L. sericata. Of these, the Chrysomya species were by far the most abundant, representing 90% of all blow flies collected in 2009 and 96% of all blow flies in 2010. Specifically, C. megacephala was the most abundant species, represent-ing 63% of collections (per sampling day) in 2009 and 83% in 2010.From 2002 to 2004, 7 species of blow flies were collected from pig carrion near Gainesville, FL: L. coeruleiviridis, C. macellaria, C. rufifa-cies, P. regina, C. megacephala, Calliphora livida Hall, and Calliphora vicina Robineau-Desvoidy (Gruner et al. 2007). Lucilia coeruleiviridis was the most abundant species collected, comprising as much as 90% of flies collected in the summer. Lucilia coeruleiviridis was also the most abundant species in Orlando, Florida case collections in the early 2000’s (Haskell, unpublished data).Our survey sites were approximately 180 km south of those sam-pled by Gruner et al. (2007) in 2002 to 2004. In addition to the dif-ferent location and environmental conditions, 2 other important dif-ferences between the studies are that we used carrion from various small animal species while Gruner et al. (2007) used dead pigs. Also, we sampled Jun to Sep (2009) and Apr to Oct (2010), while Gruner et al. (2007) sampled year-round. Despite these differences, our a priori expectation was that we would collect a greater diversity in species as we were trapping using a variety of bait species during the warmest months of the year. In contrast to our expectations and the findings of Gruner et al. (2007), we collected 5 species compared with their 7. Missing from our samples were P. regina, C. livida, and C. vicina, but we collected L. sericata, which was not collected by Gruner et al. (2007).The absence of C. livida and C. vicina is expected as both are most active at cool temperatures, while all the species we collected either favor or better tolerate higher temperatures like those seen during our collection period (24.4–35.6 °C) (Haskell & Williams 2008). As one of the most common species occurring on carrion across North America, the absence of P. regina was initially unexpected. However, competi-tion studies (McInnis & Higley 2020) show that P. regina was unable to compete successfully with C. rufifacies given limited food resources in laboratory experiments. Consequently, the absence of P. regina in our samples agrees with the expectation that as environmental condi-tions (specifically temperature) change to favor tropical species like C. rufifacies and C. megacephala, P. regina and other blow fly species are subject to competitive displacement.This same phenomenon of competitive displacement might also be playing out between C. rufifacies and C. megacephala. With the intro-duction of C. rufifacies to North America and increasing average tem-peratures, many scientists predicted that C. rufifacies would expand its range and would potentially become the most abundant summer blow fly. This prediction has been valid regarding range expansion (Sha-hid et al. 2000; Rosati & VanLaerhoven 2007; Bugaski & Bailey 2020) and C. rufifacies has become the predominant species in many habi-tats, especially during the late summer months. However, we found that C. megacephala was the most abundant species collected, with an especially high percentage of all blow flies collected (over 80%) in 2010. We think the most likely explanation for the abundance of C. megacephala is temperature-mediated competitive exclusion. Gruner et al. (2017) showed that C. megacephala development rates are much faster at higher temperatures than those reported for P. regina or C. rufifacies. This is supported by Shiao and Yeh (2008) who reported C. megacephala not only had a shorter larval duration but was also able to survive with a lower body weight. So, while C. rufifacies expands its range geographically, in central Florida, C. megacephala continues to be the dominant species due to its faster development rates under higher temperatures and its ability to produce smaller, viable adults.From a practical standpoint, information regarding the relative di-versity of blow flies is of forensic value, particularly on a regional basis. For example, differences in species distribution on a body can be an indicator of seasonality and of instances where a body may have been moved post-mortem (Haskell & Williams 2008). Biologically, these dis-tribution data help document results of competitive differences be-tween introduced and native blow flies, and how climate change could potentially influence those competitive relationships.Although changes in species relationships and population dynam-ics are complex and even unknowable in some cases, these results, as well as previous research, are continuing to document population shifts and the impact these shifts can have on native and non-native blow fly species.SummaryBlow flies (Diptera: Calliphoridae) were collected from various car-rion baits in Orlando, Florida over 2 periods: Jun 2009 to Sep 2009 and Apr 2010 to Oct 2010. In a previous study conducted from 2002 to 2004 the dominant blow fly in Orlando, Florida, was Lucilia coerulei-viridis Macquart (Gruner et al. 2007). This collection documents a shift to Chrysomya megacephala Fabricius, as the most dominant blow fly Fig. 1. Summary of species and numbers of blow fly collected in 2009 (by aerial netting) and 2010 (by Bishopp cone trap). Only 5 species of calliphorids were recovered: Chrysomya rufifacies, Chrysomya megacephala, Cochliomyia macel-laria, Lucilia coeruleiviridis, and Lucilia sericata.Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Florida-Entomologist on 21 May 2024Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useScientific Notes 191species found in Orlando, Florida in 2009 to 2010. These field results have potential forensic implications, particularly in the analysis of cold cases.Key Words: diversity; competition; competitive displacement; in-troduced speciesSumarioSe recolectaron moscas calliforidas (Diptera: Calliphoridae) de va-rios cebos de carroña en Orlando, Florida durante 2 períodos: de junio del 2009 a septiembre del 2009 y de abril del 2010 a octubre del 2010. En un estudio anterior realizado entre el 2002 y 2004, la mosca domi-nante en Orlando, Florida, era Lucilia coeruleiviridis Macquart (Gruner et al. 2007). Esta colección documenta un cambio a Chrysomya mega-cephala Fabricius, como la especie de mosca calliforida más dominante encontrada en Orlando, Florida entre 2009 y 2010. Estos resultados de campo tienen implicaciones forenses potenciales, particularmente en el análisis de casos sin resolver.Palabras Clave: diversidad; competencia; desplazamiento competi-tivo; especies introducidasReferences CitedBaumgartner DL. 1993. Review of Chrysomya rufifacies (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Journal of Medical Entomology 30: 338–352.Bugaski K, Bailey R. 2020. First record of the hairy maggot blow fly, Chrysomya rufifacies (Diptera: Calliphoridae) in Indiana. The Great Lakes Entomologist 53: 64–67.Gagné RJ, Gerrish RR, Richard RD. 1982. Correspondence. Entomological Soci-ety of America Newsletter 5: 9.Gruner SV, Slone DH, Capinera JL. 2007. Forensically important Calliphoridae (Diptera) associated with pig carrion in rural North-Central Florida. Journal of Medical Entomology 44: 509–515.Gruner SV, Slone DH, Capinera JL, Turco MP. 2017. Development of the oriental latrine fly, Chrysomya megacephala (Diptera: Calliphoridae), at five constant temperatures. Journal of Medical Entomology 54: 290–298.Hall DG. 1948. The Blowflies of North America. Monumental Printing Company, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.Haskell NH, Williams RE [eds.] 2008. Entomology and Death: A Procedural Guide. Second edition. East Park Printing, Clemson, South Carolina, USA.McInnis A, Higley LG. 2020. Competition among three forensically important blow fly species (Diptera: Calliphoridae): Phormia regina, Lucilia sericata, and Chrysomya rufifacies. Environmental Entomology 49: 1473–1479.Rosati JY, VanLaerhoven SL. 2007. New record of Chrysomya rufifacies (Diptera: Calliphoridae) in Canada: predicted range expansion and potential effects on native species. The Canadian Entomologist 139: 670–677.Shahid SA, Hall RD, Haskell NH, Merritt RW. 2000. Chrysomya rufifacies (Mac-quart) (Diptera: Calliphoridae) established in the vicinity of Knoxville, Ten-nessee, USA. Journal of Forensic Science 45: 896–897.Shiao SF, Yeh T. 2008. Larval competition of Chrysomya megacephala and Chrys-omya rufifacies (Diptera: Calliphoridae): behavior and ecological studies of two blow fly species of forensic significance. Journal of Medical Entomology 45: 785–799.Swiger SL, Hogsette JA, Butler JF. 2014. Larval distribution and behavior of Chrysomya rufifacies (Macquart) (Diptera: Calliphoridae) relative to other species on Florida black bear (Carnivora: Ursidae) decomposing carcasses. Neotropical Entomology 43: 21–26.Wells JD. 1991. Chrysomya megacephala (Diptera: Calliphoridae) has reached the continental United States: review of its biology, pest status, and spread around the world. Journal of Medical Entomology 28: 471–473.Whitworth TL. 2006. Keys to the genera and species of blow flies (Diptera: Cal-liphoridae) of America north of Mexico. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 108: 689–725.Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Florida-Entomologist on 21 May 2024Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use

Changing blowfly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) populations in Orlando, Florida, United States

https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2699&context=natrespapers

Changing blowfly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) populations in Orlando, Florida, United States

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska