Biology and ecology of Mecistomela marginata (Thunberg, 1821) (Hispinae: Alurnini) in Brazil

  • Margarete Valverde De Macedo
  • Ricardo Ferreira Monteiro
  • Thomas Michael Lewinsohn
Part of the Series Entomologica book series (SENT, volume 50)


The Hispinae are a relatively homogeneous subfamily in the Chrysomelidae most of which feed on monocot leaves, mainly Graminae and Palmae. Their larvae are usually leaf miners or free feeders between appressed leaves (Jolivet, 1989). The Neotropical tribe Alurnini ecologically is one of the most homogeneous in the subfamily, all the larvae feeding freely between leaves of Palmae. This tribe includes the largest species in the Chrysomelidae.


  1. Almeida, A. M. & Macêdo, M. V. Advantages of host discrimination in the phoretic parasitoid of Mecistomela marginata (Col.: Chrysomelidae: Hispinae). Submitted.Google Scholar
  2. Barbiere, E. B., 1984. Cabo Frio e Iguaba Grande, dois microclimas distintos a um curto intervalo espacial. pp. 3–15. In Lacerda, L. D., Araujo, D. S. D., Cerqueira, R. and Turcq, B. (eds.). Restingas: origem, estrutura e processos. CEUFF, Niteroi, RJ.Google Scholar
  3. Bondar, G., 1913. A praga do Alurnus ou barata do coqueiro. Chac. Quintaes 8:12–13.Google Scholar
  4. Carroll, C. R., 1978. Beetles, parasitoids and tropical morning glories: a study in host discrimination. Ecol. Ent. 3:79–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Edmunds, M., 1974. Defence in animals. Longman, 357 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Fisher, C. R., 1935. Os coleopteros phytophagos da tribu Alurnini, pragas das palmeiras (Chrysomelidae: Hispinae). Revta. Ent. 5:257–292.Google Scholar
  7. Gall, C. F., 1984. Population structure and recommendations for conservation of the narrowly endemic alpine butterfly Boloria acrocema (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Biol. Conserv. 28:111–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jolivet, P., 1989. Selection trophique chez les Hispinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cryptostoma). Bull. mens. Soc. linn. Lyon 58:297–317.Google Scholar
  9. Lamego, J. A. R., 1940. Restinga de Barra de Maricá. Div. do DNPM, Bol. 96:63 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Lawrence, W. S., 1982. Sexual dimorphism in between and within patch movements of a monphagous insect: Tetraopes (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Oecologia 53:245–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lawrence, W. S., 1987. Effects of sex ratio on milkweed beetle emigration from host plant patches. Ecology 68:539–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lawrence, W. S., 1988. Movement ecology of the red milk-weed beetle in relation to population size and structure. J. Anim. Ecol. 57:21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Macêdo, M. V., De Santis, L. & Monteiro, R. F., 1990. Chrysocharodes rotundiventris De Santis, sp. n. (Eulophidae), urn parasitoide forético, com notas sobre sua ecologia e compor-tamento. Revta. bras. Ent. 34:637–641.Google Scholar
  14. Pasteels, J. M., Rowell-Rahier, M. & Rauup, M. J., 1988. Plant-derived defence in Chrysomelid beetles. In: Barbosa, P. & Letourneau, D. K. (eds.) Novel aspects of insect-plant interactions. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 362 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Rausher, M. D., 1979. Larval habitat suitability and oviposition preference in three related butterflies. Ecology 60:503–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rausher, M. D., 1980. Host abundance, juvenile survival, and oviposition preference in Battus philenor. Evolution 34:342–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rogers, D., 1984. Pattern and process in large-scale animal movement, pp. 160–180. In: Swingland, I. R. & Greenwood, P. J. (eds.). The ecology of animal movement. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 311 pp.Google Scholar
  18. Root, R. B., 1973. Organization of a plant arthropod association in simple and diverse habitats: the fauna of collards (Brassica oleraceae). Ecol. Monogr. 43:95–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Silva, A. G. A., Gonçalves, C. R., Galvão, D. M., Gonçalves, A. J. L., Gomes, J., Silva, M. N. & Simoni, L., 1967. Quarto Catálogo dos insetos que vivem nas plantas do Brasil, seus parasitos e predadores. Rio de Janeiro, 4 Tomos.Google Scholar
  20. Sinclair, A. R. E., 1984. The function of distance movements in vertebrates. In: Swingland, I. R. & Greenwood, P. J. (eds.). The ecology of animal movement. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 311 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Smith, A. D. M. & Maelzer, D. A., 1986. Aggregation of parasitoids and density-independence of parasitism in field populations of the wasp Aphytis melinus and its host, the red scale Aonidiella aurantil. Ecol. Ent. 11:425–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Suguio, K. & Tessler, M. G. 1984. Planicies de cordôes litoráneos quaternários do Brasil: origem e nomenclature, pp. 15–20. In: Lacerda, L. D. L., Araüjo, D. S. D., Cerqueira, R. e Turcq, B. (eds.). Restingas: origem, estrutura e processos. CEUFF, Niterói, RJ.Google Scholar
  23. Tabashnik, B. E., 1980. Population structure of pierid butterflies III—Pest populations of Colias philodice eriphyle. Oecologia 47:175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Uhmann, E., 1957. Chrysomelidae: Hispinae. In: Hincks, W. D. (ed.). Coleopterorum Catalogus. Supplementa. Pars 35, Fasc 1, Junk.Google Scholar
  25. Waage, J. K., 1983. Aggregation in field parasitoid populations: foraging time allocation by a population of Diadeyma (Hy-menoptera: Ichneumonidae). Ecol. Ent. 8:447–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wolda, H., 1978. Seasonal fluctuations in rainfall, food, and abundance of tropical insects. J. Anim. Ecol. 47:369–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margarete Valverde De Macedo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ricardo Ferreira Monteiro
    • 1
  • Thomas Michael Lewinsohn
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratório de Ecologia de Insetos, Departamento de EcologiaUniversidade Federal do Rio de JaneiroRJ-RJBrazil
  2. 2.Laboratorio de Interações Insetos/Plantas, Departamento de ZoologiaUniversidade Estadual de CampinasCampinasBrazil

Personalised recommendations