Summary
The whole dung-inhabiting (adult) beetle community living in southern Finland was studied with reference to the seasonal (6 summer months), macrohabitat (open field, half-open pine forest and closed spruce forest) and successional (30 days) gradients. The material comprised 50 coprophagous and 129 carnivorous species, represented by 26,650 and 35,850 individuals, respectively. The most important characteristics of each species are given in an Appendix.
In the coprophages the species-abundance relations fitted the lognormal distribution well, but in the carnivores the distribution was strikingly less even. A great number of other differences (see below) apparent between the two trophic groups were explained as the result of a difference in the degree of specialization, apart from the difference in their trophic position: coprophages are microhabitat (dung) and food specialists, while carnivores are microhabitat generalists (and therefore their “critical” niche space was not completely covered in this study).
In the coprophages, two important species guilds were observed: the first occurred at the very geginning of the succession (mean position 2.5 days), and consisted mainly of true dung specialists; the second guild contained species with wider utilization along the successional dimension (mean position 6.5 days), and species of more generalist nature (saprophages). The utilization of carnivores along the successional gradient was more continuous, probably because of their more diversified food resources. The total niche width among the coprophages increased from early successional species to species occurring mainly later on, but was more constant in carnivores. The environmental dimensions proved to be totally independent of each other among the carnivores, while the coprophages showed a clear supplementary relationship along them. Among the carnivores, a spherical niche shape dominated, but among the coprophages elongated and disk-liked shapes were also well represented, especially in specialist species. In both groups, a significant positive correlation existed between niche width and dominance, but not between niche width and abundance. It is suggested that the patchy distribution and transient occurrence of suitable microhabitats contributes to the coexistence of many ecologically similar species.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andrewartha, H.G., Birch, L.C.: The distribution and abundance of animals. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press 1954
Cody, M.L.: Competition and the structure of bird communities. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press 1974
Colwell, R.K., Futuyma, D.J.: On the measurement of niche breadth and overlap. Ecology52, 567–576 (1971)
Elton, C.S.: The pattern of animal communities. London: Methuen 1966
Hanski, I.: Some comments on the measurement of niche metrics. Manuscript (1977)
Hanski, I., Koskela, H.: A re-examination of a debate on the methods of ecological classification in Finland at nineteen fourties. Ann. Ent. Fenn.43 (in press)
Horn, H.S., MacArthur, R.H.: Competition among fugitive species in a harlequin environment. Ecology53, 749–752 (1972)
Hutchinson, G.E.: Copepodology for the ornithologist. Ecology32, 571–577 (1951)
Hutchinson, G.E.: Homage to Santa Rosalia,or Why are there so many kinds of animals? Amer. Nat.93, 145–159 (1959)
Koskela, H.: Habitat selection of dung-inhabiting Staphylinids (Coleoptera) in relation to age of the dung. Ann. Zool. Fenn.9, 156–171 (1972)
Koskela, H., Hanski, I.: Structure and succession in a cow dung-inhabiting beetle community. Ann. Zool. Fenn.14 (in press)
Landin, B.: Ecological studies on dung-beetles (Col. Scarabaeidae). Opuscula Entomol., Suppl.19, 1–227 (1961)
Legner, E.F., Poorbaugh, J.H.: Biological control of vector and noxious synanthropic flies: a review. Calif. Vector Views19, 81–100 (1972)
Levins, R.: Evolution in changing environment. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press 1968
Levins, R., Culver, D.: Regional coexistence of species and competition between rare species. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. (Wash.)68, 1246–1248 (1971)
MacArthur, R.H.: Geographical ecology, New York: Harper and Row 1972
MacArthur, R.H., Levins, R.: The limiting similarity, convergence and divergence of coexisting species. Amer. Nat.101, 377–385 (1967)
MacArthur, R.H., Pianka, E.R.: On optimal use of a patchy environment. Amer. Nat.100, 603–609 (1966)
May, R.M.: Some notes on estimating the competition matrix, α. Ecology56, 737–741 (1975a)
May, R.M.: Patterns of species abundance and diversity. In: Ecology and evolution of communities (M.L. Cody, J.M. Diamond, eds.). Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press 1975b
McClure, M.S., Price, P.M.: Competition among sympatric Erythroneura leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) on American sycamore. Ecology56, 1388–1397 (1975)
McNaughton, S.J., Wolf, L.L.: Dominance and the niche in ecological systems. Science167, 131–139 (1970)
Pakarinen, P.: Agglomerative clustering and factor analysis of South Finnish mire types. Ann. Bot. Fenn.13, 35–41 (1976)
Pianka, E.R.: Niche overlap and diffuse competition. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. (Wash.)71, 2141–2145 (1974)
Pielou, E.C.: Ecological diversity. New York: Wiley 1975
Preston, F.W.: The commonness and rarity of species. Ecology29, 254–283 (1948)
Pritchard, N.M., Anderson, A.J.B.: Observations on the use of cluster analysis in botany with an ecological example. J. Ecol.59, 727–747 (1971)
Rathcke, B.J.: Competition and coexistence within a guild of herbivorous insects. Ecology57, 76–87 (1976)
Roff, D.A.: Spatial heterogeneity and the persistence of populations. Oecologia (Berl.)15, 245–258 (1974)
Root, R.B.: The niche exploitation pattern of the Blue-gray gnatcatcher. Ecol. Monographs37, 317–350 (1967)
Roughgarden, J.: Species packing and the competition function with illustrations from coral reef fish. Theo. Pop. Biol.5, 163–186 (1974)
Sale, P.F.: Overlap in resource use, and interspecific competition. Oecologia (Berl.)17, 245–256 (1974)
Schoener, T.W.: Resource partitioning in ecological communities. Science185, 27–39 (1974)
Skellam, J.G.: Random dispersal in theoretical populations. Biometrika38, 196–218 (1951)
Sneath, P.H.A., Sokal, R.R.: Numerical taxonomy. San Francisco: Freeman 1973
Valiela, I.: The arthropod fauna of bovine dung in central New York and sources on its natural history. J. New York entomol. Soc.77, 210–220 (1969)
Whittaker, R.H., Levin, S.A., Root, R.B.: Niche, habitat and ecotope. Amer. Nat.107, 321–338 (1973)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hanski, I., Koskela, H. Niche relations among dung-inhabiting beetles. Oecologia 28, 203–231 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00751601
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00751601