Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 May 2020 | 12(8): 15828–15834

ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)

doi: https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4724.12.8.15828-15834

#4724 | Received 24 November 2018 | Final received 14 May 2020 | Finally accepted 16 May 2020

Collecting parasitic Aculeata (Hymenoptera) from rice ecosystems of Tamil Nadu, India

J. Alfred Daniel¹ & K. Ramaraju ²

^1,2Department of Agricultural Entomology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, P.N. Pudur, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641003, India.

¹danieljalfred@gmail.com (corresponding author), ²kramaraju60@gmail.com

Abstract: Surveys were conducted to explore the parasitic aculeate fauna in rice ecosystems of Tamil Nadu in 2015–2016 in three different rice growing zones, viz., the western zone, the Cauvery delta zone and the high rainfall zone. The study recorded a total of 32 aculeates that represent 12 species under seven families belonging to three super families, viz., Apoidea (Apidae), Chrysidoidea (Bethylidae, Chrysididae, & Dryinidae), and Vespoidea (Mutillidae, Scoliidae, & Thiphiidae). Alpha and beta diversity were computed for the three zones and the diversity indices (Simpson’s index, Shannon-Wiener index, Pielou’s index) revealed the high rainfall zone as the most diverse zone, with the Cauvery delta zone being the least diverse. On comparing the species similarities using the Jaccard’s index in between the three zones taken in pairs, it was found that 42 per cent similarity existed between the western and Cauvery delta zone and 11 per cent similarity between high rainfall and Cauvery delta zones and 16 per cent similarity between the high rainfall and western zones.

Keywords: Apidae, Bethylidae, Chrysididae, diversity, Dryinidae, indices, Mutillidae, Scoliidae, Tiphiidae.

Editor: Anonymity requested. Date of publication: 26 May 2020 (online & print)

Citation: Daniel, J.A. & K. Ramaraju (2020). Collecting parasitic Aculeata (Hymenoptera) from rice ecosystems of Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 12(8): 15828–15834. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4724.12.8.15828-15834

Copyright: © Daniel & Ramaraju 2020. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.

Funding: Maulana Azad National Fellowship from Ministry of Minority Affairs through University Grants Commission.

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Author details: J. Alfred Daniel did his PhD on the diversity of parasitic hymenopterans and currently working as a senior research fellow in the Insect Museum of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore. K. Ramaraju is a mite taxonomist and now working as a professor of Entomology in Department of Agricultural Entomology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.

Author contribution: JAD involved in the collection of insects, segregation of collected insects up to family level, performed statistical analysis, and wrote the manuscript. KR involved in correction of the manuscript and he is the advisor of the whole study.

Acknowledgements: Thanks are due to Ministry of Minority Affairs, Government of India for the financial grants through Maulana Azad National Fellowship.

INTRODUCTION

Rice fields have unique characteristics that make them ideal grounds for diverse biological organisms. In addition, the different growth stages of the rice plant from seedling to harvest create micro-climatic conditions, offering a variety of habitats and niches conducive to a variety of life forms (Edirisinghe & Bambaradeniya 2010). Thus, it is an ecosystem which sustains not only the people whose staple diet is rice but also a diverse assemblage of plants and animals that have made rice fields their niche. But indiscriminate use of insecticides in rice fields has resulted in the loss of biodiversity of beneficial organisms like hymenopteran insects (Dudley et al. 2005).

Reducing the mortality of hymenopterans caused by insecticides is essential for greater sustainability in rice pest management (Heong & Hardy 2009; Gurr et al. 2011). They show greater stability to the ecosystem than any group of natural enemies of insect pests because they are capable of living and interacting at a lower host population level. A typical phytophagous insect is host to about five species of Hymenoptera (Hawkins 1993). Destroying one parasitoid species, therefore, may have unpredictable and immeasurable effects on the abundance of a number of phytophagous insects (LaSalle 2003). These studies suggest how important hymenopterans are in their natural habitats.

Although the species composition of terrestrial insects in rice fields throughout the world is relatively well documented, only a few studies have examined the biodiversity of hymenopterans in rice fields (Heckman 1974, 1979). The studies regarding the ability of aculeate Hymenoptera to utilize wetlands is far from satisfying (Stapenkova et al. 2017). Aculeata is one of the largest groups of insects and a few of them are parasitoids attacking a wide range of insects in their various stages of development, thereby playing a pivotal role in ecological balance. The diversity of parasitic aculeates associated with rice ecosystem is poorly studied in Tamil Nadu, hence the present study was undertaken.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sites of collection

The survey was carried out in the rice fields in 2015–2016 in three different agroclimatic zones of Tamil Nadu State, viz.: western zone (District representation: Coimbatore at Paddy Breeding Station, Coimbatore, 427m, 11.007N, 76.937E), Cauvery delta zone (District representation: Thiruvarur at Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Needamangalam, 26m, 10.774N, 79.412E), and high rainfall zone (District representation: Kanyakumari at Agricultural Research Station, Thirupathisaram, 17m, 8.207N, 77.445E). Collections were made for 20 consecutive days in each zone to give equal weightage and to minimize chances of variations in the collection. The time of sampling in each zone was decided based on the rice growing season of the zone and the stage of the crop, i.e., 20 days from August–September 2015 in the western zone, October– November 2015 in the high rainfall zone, and December 2015–January 2016, in the Cauvery delta zone.

Methods of collection

A total of three different gadgets, viz., sweep net, yellow pan trap kept at ground level, and yellow pan trap erected at canopy levels were employed. All the three gadgets were employed continuously for 20 days.

Preservation and identification of the specimens

The parasitoids, thus, collected were preserved in 70% ethyl alcohol. The dried specimens were mounted on pointed triangular cards and studied under a Stemi (Zeiss) 2000-C and photographed under Leica M205A stereozoom microscopes and identified through conventional taxonomic techniques by following standard keys. For future references all the identified specimens were submitted at Insect Biosystematics Laboratory, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore. Species identity was made by following standard keys and also by confirming them with concerned experts from various institutes like, Lynn S. Kimsey, professor of entomology, UC Davis Department of Entomology and Nematology for Chrysididae and Tiphiidae, Arkady S. Lelej, entomology professor, Russian Entomological Society for Mutillidae, and Manickavasagam of Annamalai University for Dryinidae.

Measurement of diversity

Relative density (calculated by the formula, Relative Density (%) = (Number of individuals of one species / Number of individuals of all species) X 100, alpha diversity, viz., Simpson’s index (Simpson 1949), (SDI is calculated using the formula D = Σn (n-1)/ N(N-1) where n=total number of organisms of a particular species and N=total number of organisms of all species. Subtracting the value of Simpson’s index from 1, gives Simpson’s Index of Diversity (SID). The value of the index ranges from 0 to 1, the greater the value the greater the sample diversity). Shannon-index (Shannon, 1948), Margalef richness index (Margalef 1958), Pielou’s evenness index (Pielou 1966; Magurran 1988), and beta diversity using Jaccard index (Jaccard 1912) were calculated using the online software Biodiversity Calculator (https://www.alyoung.com/labs/biodiversity_calculator.html).

Statistical analysis

The statistical test ANOVA was also used to check whether there was any significant difference in the collections from three zones. The data on population number were transformed into X+0.5 square root before statistical analysis. The mean individuals caught from three different zones were analyzed by adopting randomized block design (RBD) to find least significant difference (LSD). Critical difference (CD) values were calculated at five per cent probability level. All these statistical analyses were done using Microsoft Excel 2016 version and Agres software version 3.01.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Parasitic Aculeata

In the present study, a total of 32 aculeates were collected from rice ecosystems that represent 12 species under seven families (Images 1–12), viz., Apidae, Bethylidae, Chrysididae, Dryinidae, Mutillidae, Scoliidae, and Tiphiidae.

Parasitic aculeate faunal surveys of rice ecosystems in western Cauvery delta and high rainfall zones of Tamil Nadu revealed that the species richness was maximum (7) in both western and high rainfall zones. Abundance wise, the high rainfall zone stood first with a total collection of 14 individuals. The western zone ranks second with a total collection of nine individuals and Cauvery delta region represented the least abundant with a total collection of seven individuals.

The Simpson’s index of diversity is highest for high rainfall zone (0.91) and lowest for western zone (0.87) (Table 2), revealing more diversity in high rainfall zone than the western zone. A similar trend was observed for the Shannon index also. From the values of Margalef richness index for the three zones, it was found that the high rainfall zone was very rich in species with a richness value of 3.03 followed by western zone (2.08), while for Cauvery delta zone the value is 2.05. The Pielou’s evenness value for the sites clearly indicated that the evenness patterns of all the three zones were almost the same with evenness index value 0.41 for Cauvery delta zone, followed by western zone (0.40) and high rainfall zone (0.40) (Table 2). The species composition among elevational zones can indicate how community structure changes with biotic and abiotic environmental pressures (Shmida & Wilson 1985; Condit et al. 2002). Studies on the effect of elevation on species diversity of taxa such as spiders (Sebastian et al. 2005), moths (Axmacher & Fiedler 2008), paper wasps (Kumar et al. 2008), and ants (Smith et al. 2014) reported that species diversity decreased with an increase in altitude, however, according to Janzen (1976), diversity of parasitic Hymenoptera is not as proportionately reduced by elevation as in other insect groups, a fact that is in support of our results.

A similar study conducted by Shweta & Rajmohana (2016) to assess the diversity of members belonging to the subfamily Scelioninae also declared that the elevation did not have any major effect on the overall diversity patterns. Daniel et al. (2017) obtained similar results by conducting experiments to assess the diversity of pteromalids of rice ecosystems in Tamil Nadu. The elevation dealt with in that work ranged from 17–427 m which was not very high. So taking into account the scale and extent of elevational gradients, it can be said that species diversity and richness have not showed any correlation, i.e., species diversity and richness were not proportional with that of elevation.

On comparing the species similarities using the Jaccard’s index in between the three sites taken in pairs, it is found that 42 percent similarity between western zone and Cauvery delta zone and 11 per cent similarity between high rainfall zone and Cauvery delta zone. The similarity between western zone and high rainfall zone is 16 per cent. All the parasitic aculeates that were collected along with their host details were presented in Table 3.

Apidae

Under the family Apidae, only one species, Thyreus ceylonicus (Friese) was collected only from the western zone. Since, only one species was caught, diversity indices cannot be calculated.

The bee genus Thyreus Panzer is cleptoparasitic on species of Amegilla Friese possibly on Anthophora Latreille and Eucera Scopoli (Stoeckhert 1954). Matsumura et al. (2004) have collected a few kleptoparasitic cuckoo bees from the rice fields of Japan.

Bethylidae

Two species of bethylids, viz., Goniozus indicus (Ashmead) and Holepyris hawaiiensis were collected in the present study. Though G. indicus was found to be common to all the three zones, H. hawaiiensis was found only in the western zone. Among the three zones, high rainfall zone (7) was found to have more number of bethylids followed by western zone (4) and Cauvery delta zone (2) (Table 1). A total of 13 numbers of bethylid individuals were collected from all the three zones.

A mean of 0.20 ± 0.12 bethylids were collected per day from western zone. Cauvery delta zone and high rainfall zone yielded 0.10 ± 0.07 and 0.35 ± 0.15 bethylids per day, respectively.

Chrysididae

Under the family Chrysididae, only one species, Stilbum cyanarum (Forster) was collected in the present study. Stilbum cyanarum was collected from high rainfall zone alone. Since only one species was caught, diversity indices could not be calculated.

Dryinidae

In the present study, a total of eight dryinid individuals comprising three different species, viz., Dryinus sp., Gonatopus sp. and Haplogonatopus sp. were collected. Dryinus sp. and Gonatopus sp. were common to both western zone and Cauvery delta zone, but Haplogonatopus sp. was obtained only from the high rainfall zone. It was found that the Cauvery delta zone was the most dryinid abundant zone with a total collection of five numbers followed by western zone (2) and high rainfall zone represented by only one individual

Mutillidae

Two species, Storozhenkotilla sp. and Zavatilla sp., were collected under the family Mutillidae. Both the species were collected from the high rainfall zone alone. A total of three mutillid individuals were collected in the present study (Table 1).

High rainfall zone recorded a mean of 0.15 ± 0.11 individuals per day. Since, mutillids were collected only from high rainfall zone no comparison between zones were made. Heong et al. (1991), Bambaradeniya et al. (2004), and Samin et al. (2011) have recorded mutillids from the rice fields of Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Iran, respectively.

Scoliidae

Two species, Campsomeriella collaris Betrem and Scolia affinis Guerin, were collected in the current study. Though C. collaris was obtained both from the western and high rainfall zones, S. affinis was obtained only from high rainfall zone. No scoliids was caught from Cauvery delta zone.

A mean of 0.05 ± 0.05 and 0.10 ± 0.10 scoliids were collected per day from western zone and high rainfall zone, respectively. Since only one species was recorded from western zone and no species were recorded from Cauvery delta zone, diversity indices could not be calculated for these two zones

Tiphiidae

Under the family Tiphiidae, three individuals of Mesa sp. were collected from western zone. The other two zones have not accounted for Tiphiidae. These are parasitoids of subterranean beetle larvae, especially of Scarabaeoidea and Tenebrionidae occurring in soil or rotten wood; some are found to parasitize mole crickets (Allen 1996). Heong et al. (1991), Bambaradeniya et al. (2004), and Fritz et al. (2011) have collected Tiphiidae from rice ecosystem of Philippines and Sri Lanka.

Conclusion

This study reveals the diversity of parasitic Aculeata of three different rice ecosystems of Tamil Nadu, where the high rainfall zone is the most diverse and the Cauvery delta zone being the least. The reasons for the significant changes in diversity of aculeates and their host insects are to be further studied.

Table 1. Comparison of parasitic Aculeata collected from three rice growing zones of Tamil Nadu.

Species	Zones						Total
	Western		Cauvery Delta		High Rainfall		Total
	No.	%	No.	%	No.	%	No.	%	F	P
Apidae Thyreus ceylonicus	1	100	0	0.0	0	0.00	1	100	1.00	0.37
Bethylidae Goniozus indicus	3	75	2	100	7	100	12	92.3	1.33	0.27
Holepyris hawaiiensis	1	25	0	0	0	0	01	7.7	1.00	0.37
Chrysididae Stilbum cyanarum	0	0.0	0	0.0	1	100	1	100	1.00	0.37
Dryinidae Dryinus sp.	1	50	2	40.0	0	0	3	37.5	1.03	0.36
Gonatopus sp.	1	50	3	60.0	0	0	4	50.0	1.20	0.30
Haplogonatopus sp.	0	0	0	0	1	100	1	12.5	1.00	0.37
Mutillidae Storozhenkotilla sp.	0	0.0	0	0.0	1	33.3	1	33.3	1.00	0.37
Zavatilla sp.	0	0	0	0	2	66.7	2	66.7	1.00	0.37
Scoliidae Campsomeriella collaris	1	100	0	0	1	50	2	66.7	0.5	0.60
Scolia affinis	0	0	0	0	1	50	1	33.3	1.00	0.37
Tiphiidae Mesa sp.	3	100	0	0.0	0	100	3	100	1.00	0.37
Total collected	11	-	07	-	14	-	32	-	-
Number of species	07	-	03	-	07	-	12	-	-

%- Relative Density, No.- Total number of individuals collected, F-Value, P-Value

Table 2. Diversity indices of parasitic Aculeata from three rice growing zones of Tamil Nadu.

Zones	Mean number of all aculeates collected/day	SE	SID	H’	a	E1	b %
Western	0.55 (0.94)	± 0.22	0.87	0.72	2.08	0.40	W and C – 42
Cauvery Delta	0.35 (0.87)	± 0.15	0.90	0.67	2.05	0.41	C and H - 11
High Rainfall	0.70 (1.02)	± 0.23	0.91	0.88	3.03	0.40	H and W - 16
S.ED	0.10	-	-	-	-	-
CD (p=0.05)	0.20	-	-	-	-	-

Table 3. Parasitic aculeates collected in the study along with their host.

Parasitoid	Host	Reference
Thyreus ceylonicus	Amegilla sp. & Anthophora sp.	Lieftinck, 1962
Goniozus indicus	Cnaphalocrocis medinalis Scirpophaga sp.	Gifford, 1965
Holepyris hawaiiensis	Corcyra cephalonica, & Plodia interpunctella	Amante et al. 2018
Stilbum cyanarum	Eumenidae, Sphecidae, & Megachilidae	Tormos et al. 2006
Dryinus sp.	Plant hoppers	Guglielmino et al. 2013
Gonatopus sp.	Plant hoppers	Guglielmino et al. 2013
Haplogonatopus sp.	Plant hoppers	Guglielmino et al. 2013
Storozhenkotilla sp.	Coleoptera, Diptera, & Hymenoptera	Lelej et al. 2007
Zavatilla sp.	Coleoptera, Diptera, & Hymenoptera	Lelej et al. 2007
Campsomeriella collaris	Scarabaeoidea	Vidyasagar & Bhat 1991
Scolia affinis	Scarabaeoidea	Vidyasagar & Bhat 1991
Mesa sp.	Scarabaeoidea	Vidyasagar & Bhat 1991

For images - - click here

REFERENCES

Allen, H.W. (1966). A revision of the Tiphiinae (Hymenoptera: Tiphiidae) of eastern North America. Transaction of American Entomological Society 92: 231–356.

Amante, M., P. Suma, M. Schöller & A. Russo (2018). The Bethylidae (Hymenoptera): a tool for biological control programmes in food industries. IOBC-WPRS Bulletin 130: 135–138.

Axmacher, J.C. & K. Fiedler (2008). Habitat type modifies geometry of elevational diversity gradients in Geometrid moths (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) on Mt. Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Tropical Zoology 21: 243–251.

Bambaradeniya, C.N.B., J.P. Edirisinghe, D.N. De Silva, C.V.S. Gunatilleke, K.B. Ranawana & S. Wijekoon (2004). Biodiversity associated with an irrigated rice agro-ecosystem in Sri Lanka. Biodiversity Conservation 13(9): 1715–1753. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000029331.92656.de

Condit, R., N. Pitman, E.G. Leigh Jr, J. Chave, J. Terborgh, R.B. Foster, P. Nunez, S. Aquilar, R. Valencia, G. Villa, H.C. Muller-landau, E. Losos & S.P. Hubbell (2002). Beta diversity in tropical forest trees. Science 295: 666–669. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1066854

Daniel, J.A., K. Ramaraju, V.K.R. Farsana& P.M. Sureshan (2017). Diversity of Pteromalids (Pteromalidae: Hymenoptera) among three rice growing zones of Tamil Nadu, India. Annals of Plant Protection Sciences 25(2): 298–303. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-0163.2017.00013.1

Edirisinghe, J.P. & C.N. Bambaradeniya (2010). Rice fields: an ecosystem rich in biodiversity. Journal of the National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka 34(2): 57-59.

Fritz, L.L., E.A. Heinrichs, V. Machado, T.F. Andreis, M. Pandolfo, S.M. Salles, J.V. Oliveira & L.M Fiuza (2011). Diversity and abundance of arthropods in subtropical rice growing areas in the Brazilian south. Biodiversity Conservation 20(10): 2211–2224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0083-3

Gifford, J.R. (1965). Goniozus indicus as a parasite of the sugarcane borer. Journal of Economic Entomology 58(4): 799–800. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/58.4.799

Guglielmino, A., M. Olmi & C. Bückle (2013). An updated host-parasite catalogue of world Dryinidae (Hymenoptera: Chrysidoidea). Zootaxa 3740(1): 1–113.

Gurr, G.M., J. Liu & D.M.Y. Read (2011). Parasitoids of Asian rice planthopper (Hemiptera: Delphacidae) pests and prospects for enhancing biological control. Annals of Applied Biology 158: 149–176. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/58.4.799

Hawkins, B.A. (1993) Refuges, host population dynamics and the genesis of parasitoid diversity, pp. 235–256. In: LaSalle, J. & I.D. Gauld (eds.). Hymenoptera and Biodiversity. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, 348pp.

Heckman, C.W. (1974). Seasonal succession of species in a rice paddy in Vientiane, Laos. Internationale Revue Der Gesamten Hydrobiologie 59: 489–507. https://doi.org/10.1002/iroh.19740590403

Heckman, C.W. (1979). Rice field ecology in North East Thailand. Monographs Biology 34: 228.

Heong, K.L. & B. Hardy (2009). Planthoppers: New Threats to the Sustainability of Intensive Rice Production Systems in Asia. International Rice Research Institute, Philippines, 460pp.

Heong, K.L., G.B. Aquino & A.T. Barrion (1991). Arthropod community structures of rice ecosystems in the Philippines. Bulletin of Entomological Research 81(4): 407–416. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300031977

Jaccard, P. (1912). The distribution of the flora in the alpine zone. New Phytologist 11: 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1912.tb05611.x

Janzen, D.H. (1976). Changes in the arthropod community along an elevational transect in the Venezuelan Andes. Biotropica 8: 193–203.

Kumar, A., J.T. Longino, R.K. Colwell & S. O’Donnell (2008). Elevational patterns of diversity and abundance of Eusocial paper wasps (Vespidae) in Costa Rica. Biotropica 41: 338–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2008.00483.x

LaSalle, J. (2003) Parasitic Hymenoptera, biological control and biodiversity, pp. 197–215. In: LaSalle J. & I. Gauld (eds.). Hymenoptera and Biodiversity. CAB International Wallingford, UK. 348pp.

Lelej, A.S., M. Ullah & K. Mahmood (2007). Additions to the knowledge of the Mutillidae (Hymenoptera) of Pakistan. Zootaxa 1444(1): 53–60.

Lieftinck, M.A., (1962). Revision of the Indo- Australian species of the genus Thyreus Panzer (= Crocisa Jurine) (Hymenoptera, Apoidea, Anthophoridae) Part 3. Oriental and Australian species. Zoologische Verhandelingen 53: 1–312

Magurran, E.A. (1988). Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. Croom Helm, Australia, 215pp.

Margalef, R. (1958). Temporal succession and spatial heterogeneity in phytoplankton, pp. 323–347. In: Adriano, A. & Buzzati-Traverso (eds.). Perspectives in Marine Biology. University of California Press, Berkeley. 621p.

Matsumura, C., J. Yokoyama & I. Washitani (2004). Invasion status and potential ecological impacts of an invasive alien bumblebee, Bombus terrestris L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae) naturalized in Southern Hokkaido, Japan. Global Environmental Research 8(1): 51–66.

Pielou, E.C. (1966). The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. Journal of Theoretical Biology 13: 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(66)90013-0

Samin, H., H. Zhou & S. Ezzatpanah (2011). A study of Omaliine rove beetles (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) from Iranian rice and cotton fields and surrounding grasslands. Calodema 129: 1–6.

Sebastian, P.A., M.J. Mathew, S.P. Beevi, J. Joesph & C.R. Biju (2005). The spider fauna of the irrigated rice ecosystem, in central Kerala, India. The Journal of Arachnology 33: 247–255. https://doi.org/10.1636/05-08.1

Shannon, C.E. (1948). A Mathematical Theory of Communication. The Bell System Technical Journal 27: 379-423 and 623-656. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

Shmida, A. & M.V. Wilson (1985). Biological determinants of species diversity. Journal of biogeography 12: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.2307/2845026

Shweta, M. & K. Rajmohana (2016). Egg parasitoids from the subfamily Scelioninae (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) in irrigated rice ecosystems across varied elevational ranges in southern India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 8(6): 8898–8904. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2061.8.6.8898-8904

Simpson, E.H. (1949). Measurement of species diversity. Nature 163: 688. https://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0

Smith, M.A., W. Hallwachs & D.H. Janzen (2014). Diversity and phylogenetic community structure of ants along a Costa Rican elevational gradient. Ecography 37: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2013.00631.x

Stapenková, A., P. Heneberg, P. Bogusch (2017). Larvae and nests of aculeate Hymenoptera (Hymenoptera: Aculeata) nesting in reed galls induced by Lipara spp. (Diptera: Chloropidae) with a review of species recorded. Part II. PLoS ONE 12(1): 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0169592

Stoeckhert, F.K. (1954). Fauna Apoideorum Germaniae. Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Klasse 65: 1–87.

Tormos, J., C. Polidori, J.D. Asís & M. Federici (2006). Description of the Post defecating Larva of Stilbum cyanura (Förster) and Observations on Adult Behavior. Journal of Entomological Science 41(1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.18474/0749-8004-41.1.1

Vidyasagar, P.S.P.V. & S.K. Bhat (1991). Pest management in coconut gardens. Journal of Plantation Crops 19(2): 163–182.