, Volume 528, Issue 1–3, pp 75–85 | Cite as

A field study of larval development in a dragonfly assemblage in African desert ponds (Odonata)

  • Frank Suhling
  • Kamilla Schenk
  • Tanja Padeffke
  • Andreas Martens


Aquatic animals distributed along a 'habitat-permanence' gradient (HPG), differ in life history (Wellborn et al., 1996. Annual Revue of Ecology and Systematics 27: 337--363). Dragonflies that occur in hot arid regions often occur in temporary waters and consequently perform direct and rapid development. Dragonfly species of the Namibian desert do differ in their selection of habitats along the HPG and therefore may also differ in life cycle. Here, we attempt to monitor colonisation, larval growth and emergence in a temporary pond of known history. We studied the development of dragonfly species that laid eggs in artificial ponds constructed by us in March 2001. The assemblage consisted of species that originate from different habitats along the HPG. To obtain data on larval development we took samples from the ponds at 10-day intervals. Most species showed rapid development. By regressing the maximum sizes attained by larvae on each sampling date against time we estimated growth rates for five species and were thereby able to estimate that total duration of development from oviposition to emergence ranged between 38 and 70 days. Observation of first oviposition and first emergence for three of these species corroborated our estimates based on growth rate. Of few species, which laid eggs in the ponds no larvae or adults were found. For some this may have been the result of predation whereas others may not have grown fast enough to emerge before the ponds dried up. Our results indicate that dragonflies cannot recognise whether a pond will retain water long enough for full larval development and oviposit in waters that will not allow larval development.

Odonata growth rate colonisation sequence emergence Namibia temporary waters migration 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barnard, P.(ed.), 1998. Biological Diversity in Namibia-A Country Study. Namibian Biodiversity Task Force, Wind-hoek, 332 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Benke, A.C., 1970. A method for comparing individual growth rates of aquatic insects with special reference to the Odonata. Ecology 51: 328-331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benke, A.C. & S.S. Benke, 1975. Comparative dynamics and the life histories of coexisting dragonfly populations. Ecology 56: 302-317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brendonck, L., E.Michels, L.De Meester & B.Riddoch, 2002. Temporary pools are not 'enemy free'. Hydrobiologia 456: 147-159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chowdury, S.H. & M. Jashimuddin, 1994. Morphometric studies on the larva of Acisoma panorpoides panorpoides (Rambur). In: Srivastava, V.K. (ed.), Advances in Oriental Odonatology. Cherry Publications, Allahabad: 69-76.Google Scholar
  6. Corbet, P.S., 1957. The life-history of the Emperor Dragon. y Anax imperator Leach (Odonata: Aeshnidae). Journal of Animal Ecology 26: 1-69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corbet, P.S., 1999. Dragonflies. Behaviour and ecology of Odonata. Harley Books, Colchester, 829 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Corbet, P.S., 2002. Stadia and growth ratios of Odonata: a review. International Journal of Odonatology 5: 45-73.Google Scholar
  9. Cowlishaw, G. & J.G. Daviers, 1997. Flora of the Pro-Namib Desert Swakop River catchment, Namibia: community classi cation and implications for desert vege-tation sampling. Journal of Arid Environments 36: 271-290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dudgeon, D., 1989. Gomphid (Odonata: Anisoptera)life cycles and production in a Hong Kong forest stream. Archiv fur Hydrobiologie 114: 531-536.Google Scholar
  11. Dumont, H.J., 1982. Relict distribution patterns of aquatic animals: another tool in evaluating late pleistocene climate changes in the Sahara and Sahel. Palaeoecology of Africa and Surrounding Islands 14: 1-24.Google Scholar
  12. El Rayah, E.A. & F.T. El Din Abu Shama, 1978. Notes on morphology and bionomy of the dragonfly, Trithemis an-nulata scortesii Nielsen (Odonata: Anisoptera), as a predator on mosquito larvae. Zeitschrift fur angewandte Entomologie85: 81-86.Google Scholar
  13. Fincke, O.M., 1992. Behavioural ecology of the giant dam-sel. ies of Barro Colorado Island, Panama (Odonata. Zy-goptera: Pseudostigmatidae). In Quintero, D. & A. Aiello (eds), Insects of Panama and Mesoamerica: Selected Studies. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 449-462.Google Scholar
  14. Fincke, O.M., 1994. Population regulation of a tropical dam-sel. y in the larval stage by food limitation, cannibalism, intraguild predation and habitat drying. Oecologia 100: 118-127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fincke, O.M., 1999. Organization of predator assemblages in Neotropical tree holes: e.ects of biotic factors and priority. Ecological Entomology 24: 12-23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Forge, P., 1981. damselfly. Acta Oecologia Generalis2: 213-226.Google Scholar
  17. Gambles, R.M., 1960. Seasonal distribution and longevity in Nigerian dragonflies. Journal of the West African Scientific Association 6: 18-26.Google Scholar
  18. Gardner, A.E., 1951. The life-history of Sympetrum fonsco-lombii Selys. Odonata-Libellulidae. Entomologist 's Gazette 2: 56-66.Google Scholar
  19. Gardner, A.F., 1956. The biology of dragonflies. Proceedings and Transactions of the South London Entomological and Natural History Society 1554-1955: 109-134 +pls I-VII.Google Scholar
  20. Hassan, A.T., 1975. Studies on the larval development of Palpopleura lucia lucia, Acisoma panorpoides inflatum and Urothemis assignata (Anisopetra: Libellulidae)in a semi-natural environment. Nigererian Journal of Entomology 1: 143-146.Google Scholar
  21. Hassan, A.T., 1976. The effects of food on the larval devel-opment of Palpopleura lucia lucia (Drury)(Anisoptera: Li-bellulidae). Odonatologica 5: 27-33.Google Scholar
  22. Hawking, J.H. & B.A. Ingram, 1994. Rate of larval devel-opment of Pantala. avescens (Fabricius)at its southern limit of range in Australia (Anisoptera: Libellulidae). Odonato-logica 23: 63-68.Google Scholar
  23. Hodgkin, E.P. & J.A.L.Watson, 1958. Breeding of dragonflies in temporary waters. Nature 181: 1015-1016.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jacobson, P.J., K.M. Jacobson & M.K. Seely, 1995. Ephemeral rivers and their catchments. Desert Research Foundation of Namibia, 160 pp.Google Scholar
  25. Jodicke, R., 2001. Saisonale Einnischung von Paragomphus ge-nei in Tunesien (Odonata: Gomphidae). Libellula 20: 13-22.Google Scholar
  26. Johansson, F. & L. Rowe, 1999. Life history and behavioural response to time constraints in a damselfly. Ecology 80: 1242-1252.Google Scholar
  27. Johansson, F. & F. Suhling, 2004. Behaviour and growth of dragonfly larvae along a permanent to temporary water habitat gradient Ecological Entomology 29: 196-202.Google Scholar
  28. Krishnaraj, R. & G. Pritchard, 1995. The influence of larval size, temperature, and components of the functional re-sponse to prey density on growth rates of the dragon. ies Lestes disjunctus and Coenagrion resolutum (Insecta: Odo-nata). Canadian Journal of Zoology 73: 1672-1680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kumar, A., 1976. Biology of Indian dragonflies with special reference to seasonal regulation and larval development. Bulletin of Entomology, New Dehli 3: 37-47.Google Scholar
  30. Kumar, A., 1984. On the life history of Pantala. avescens (Fabricius)(Libellulidae: Odonata). Annals of Entomology 2: 43-50.Google Scholar
  31. Lawton, J.H., B.A. Thompson & D.J. Thompson, 1980. The effects of prey density on survival and growth of damselfly larvae. Ecological Entomology 5: 39-51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martens, A., R. Jodicke & F.Suhling, 2003. An annotated checklist of the Odonata of Namibia. Cimbebasia 18: 139-160.Google Scholar
  33. Maurer, E.F. & A. Sih, 1996. Ephemeral habitats and variation in behavior and life history: comparisons of sibling sala-mander species. Oikos 76: 337-349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McPeek, M.A., M. Grace & J.M.L. Richardson, 2001. Physiological and behavioural responses to predators shape the growth/predation risk trade-oflin damselflies. Ecology 82: 1535-1545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Padeflke, T. & F. Suhling, 2003. Temporal priority and intra-guild predation in temporary waters: an experimental study using Namibian desert dragonflies. damselfly28: 340-347.Google Scholar
  36. Pritchard, G., L.D. Harder, A. Kortello & R. Krishnaraj, 2000. The response of larval growth rate to temperature in three species of Coenagrionid dragon. ies with some comments on 84. Lestes disjunctus (Odonata: Coenagrionidae). International Journal of Odonatology 3: 105-110.Google Scholar
  37. Robert, P.-A., 1958. Les Libellules (Odonata). Delachaux et Niestle, Neuchatel, 364 pp.Google Scholar
  38. Schnapau., I., K. Ullmann & F. Suhling, 2000. Die Libellen-Lebensgemeinschaft griechischer Reisfelder: Auswirkungen von Habitatdauer, Anbaumethode und Vegetationsdichte. Libellula Supplement 3: 63-80.Google Scholar
  39. Skelly, D.K., 1995. A behavioural trade-o. and its conse-quences for the distribution of Pseudacris treefrog tadpoles. Ecology 76: 150-164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stoks, R. & M.A. McPeek, 2003. Predators and life histories shape Lestes damselfly assemblages along a freshwater habitat gradient. Ecology 84: 1576-1587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stortenbeker, C.W., 1967. Observations on the population dynamics of the red locust, Nomadacris septemfasciata (Serville), in its outbreak areas. Agricological Research Re-port, Wageningen 694, 118 pp.Google Scholar
  42. Suhling, F. & S. Lepkojus, 2001. Different growth and behav-iour influences asymmetric predation among early instar dragonfly larvae. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79: 854-860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Suhling, F. & O. Muller, 1996. Die Fluβjungfern Europas (Gomphidae). Die Neue Brehm-Bucherei, Westarp, Magde-burg, 237 pp.Google Scholar
  44. Suhling, F., R. Jodicke & W. Schneider, 2003. Odonata of African arid regions-are there desert species? Cimbebasia 18: 207-224.Google Scholar
  45. Testard, R., 1975. Note sur l 'emergence, le sex ratio et lactivite' des adultes de Mesogomphus genei Selys, dans le sud de l 'Espagne (Anisoptera: Gomphidae). Odonatologica 4: 11-26.Google Scholar
  46. Warren, A., 1915. A study on the food habits of Hawai-ian dragonflies. Bulletin of the Collection of Hawaii 3: 4-45.Google Scholar
  47. Wellborn, G.A., D.K. Skelly & E.E. Werner, 1996. Mecha-nisms creating community structure across a freshwater habitat gradient. Annual Revue of Ecology and Systematics 27: 337-363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wenger, O.-P., 1955. Uber die Entwicklung von Crocothemis erythrea Brulle (Odonata-Libellulidae). Bulletin de la So-cieteentomologique Suisse 28: 280-281.Google Scholar
  49. Williams, D.D., 1987. The Ecology of Temporary Waters. Croom Helm, London & Sydney, 193 pp.Google Scholar
  50. Williams, D.D., 1996. Environmental constraints in temporary fresh waters and their consequences for the insect fauna. Journal of the North American benthological Society 15: 634-650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wissinger, S.A., 1992. Niche overlap and the potential for competition and intraguild predation between size-struc-tured populations. Ecology 73: 1431-1444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wissinger, S.A., H.H. Whiteman, G.B. Sparks, G.L. Rouse & W.S. Brown, 1999. Foraging trade-o. s along a predator-permanence gradient in subalpine wetlands. Ecology 80: 2102-2116.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Suhling
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kamilla Schenk
    • 1
  • Tanja Padeffke
    • 1
  • Andreas Martens
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Zoologisches InstitutTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany
  2. 2.Institut für GeoökologieTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany
  3. 3.Abteilung BiologiePädagogische Hochschule KarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations