Journal of Threatened
Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 November 2024 | 16(11): 26124–26130
ISSN 0974-7907
(Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8963.16.11.26124-26130
#8963 | Received 13 February 2024| Final received 18 September 2024 |
Finally accepted 14 November 2024
Diving into diversity: aquatic
beetles of Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary, Chandigarh,
India
Karmannye Om Chaudhary
School of Biological & Behavioural Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, Mile
End Road, London E1 4NS, England.
Editor: Hasko F. Nesemann, Hofheim am Taunus,
State of Hesse, Germany. Date
of publication: 26 November 2024 (online & print)
Citation:
Chaudhary, K.O. (2024). Diving into diversity: aquatic beetles of Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary, Chandigarh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 16(11):
26124–26130. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8963.16.11.26124-26130
Copyright: © Chaudhary 2024. 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: None.
Competing interests: The author declares no competing interests.
Author details: Karmannye Om Chaudhary is a student from Chandigarh, India currently a biology undergraduate at Queen Mary University of London. He is a youth advisor for the British Trust of Ornithology and has been an avid birder for the past nine years, documenting and surveying avifauna all over India and the UK with a particular research interest in waterfowl and their population dynamics. He is the head of research at the NGO, Avian Habitat & Wetland Society based in Punjab where he carries out and various waterfowl and entomological surveys to study the biodiversity of the region. He also carries out taxonomic research in oriental aquatic beetles and ichneumons working in collaboration with the Wildlife
Institute of India, and the Zoological Survey India.
Acknowledgements: The author is grateful for his
encouragement and assistance, director of Zoological Survey India, and the
Chandigarh Forest Department for providing access to Sukhna
Wildlife Sanctuary. The author is also grateful to Mr. Narbir
Khalon, Mr. Pragye Om
Chaudhary, Mr. Navjit Singh, Mrs. Rima Dhillon, R.F.O
Devender Chauhan, and Forester Sanjay Yadav for their assistance in the field
work and collection of specimens.
Abstract: The Sukhna
Wildlife Sanctuary, located in the Shivalik Hills of
Chandigarh, India, encompasses several freshwater ecosystems, including ponds,
streams, and marshes. The objective of this study is to fill the current
information void regarding the populations of aquatic beetles in the sanctuary.
During the period from June to September 2023, a comprehensive study was
conducted in the Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary, resulting
in the identification and documentation of 164 specimens of aquatic Coleoptera. These specimens belonged to six species, five
genera, and two families in which the Dytiscidae
family was found to be the most prevalent. The study findings offer significant
insights into the population magnitude and geographical dispersion of aquatic
beetles within the investigated settings and show the need for comprehensive
surveys to understand the intricate interplay of factors governing beetle
distribution.
Keywords: Biodiversity, Coleoptera, Dytiscidae,
ecological indicators, freshwater ecosystems, Hydrophilidae,
Hydroglyphus, Laccophilus,
Shivalik hills, species richness.
Introduction
Aquatic beetles belonging to the Coleoptera order and its Adephaga
and Polyphaga suborders are a remarkably diverse and
ecologically significant group of insects that exert a substantial impact on
freshwater ecosystems worldwide. With over 13,000 species worldwide, these
insects inhabit a variety of aquatic habitats, including rivers, lakes, ponds,
and marshes (Short 2017). In India, a nation renowned for its abundance of
species, aquatic beetles are no exception to the abundance of species. India is
a hotspot of aquatic beetle diversity, with approximately 776 species
distributed across 137 genera and 17 families (Chandra et al. 2017). Aquatic
beetles play crucial roles in freshwater ecosystems by engaging in nutrient
cycling and serving as integral components of aquatic food webs. Furthermore,
their sensitivity to environmental changes provides valuable insights into
ecosystem health (Ribera et al. 2003).
The Sukhna
wildlife sanctuary in the Shivalik Hills of
Chandigarh, India (Figure 1) contains a variety of freshwater habitats, such as
ponds, streams, and wetlands, and is of great ecological significance. Its
strategic location, which acts as a link between the Himalaya and the northern
plains, increases its ecological significance. Despite the environmental
significance of the sanctuary and the crucial role aquatic beetles play in
shaping freshwater ecosystems, there has been a dearth of research on the
composition and distribution of aquatic beetle communities within the
sanctuary. Understanding the intricate structure of these communities is
crucial for conserving the sanctuary’s aquatic ecosystems. Several
environmental factors, including microhabitat characteristics, habitat size,
vegetation structure, and ecological habitat types, are known to influence
these communities (Lundkvist et al. 2003; Akunal & Aslan 2017). Prior research on Indian aquatic
beetles has focused primarily on taxonomic aspects, providing limited insight
into their habitats and ecology (Sheth et al. 2018).
Given the unique biodiversity of the Shivalik region,
the significance of this knowledge gap increases.
This study represents the first
investigation into the aquatic beetle population within the Sukhna
Wildlife Sanctuary, aiming to bridge the existing knowledge gap in this particular
field. The survey findings indicate that a total of 164 specimens were
observed, encompassing seven distinct species belonging to two separate
families and five genera. This investigation aims to contribute to the
expanding body of knowledge on aquatic beetles in India and compile a
comprehensive baseline dataset on aquatic Coleoptera
for the union territory of Chandigarh. This research on the aquatic beetle
fauna of Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary hopes to shed
light on their ecological significance, contribute to the sanctuary’s
conservation efforts, and increase our knowledge of the region’s freshwater
ecosystems.
Methods
& Materials
Study Area
The Sukhna
Wildlife Sanctuary is located within the geographical coordinates of 300171’–300110’
N and 760162’–760291’ E. It is situated in the Shivalik Hills of Chandigarh, India, and is renowned for
its untouched ecological environment. On 16 March 1998, the region was
officially established as a wildlife refuge, covering a vast land area of
around 25.98 km2 (equal to 6,420.99 ac), with the primary purpose of
protecting a wide range of plant and animal species. Located in close proximity
to the renowned Sukhna Lake, this sanctuary serves as
a crucial contributor to the region’s endeavours in
conserving biodiversity. The Sukhna Wildlife
Sanctuary encompasses forests, shrub fields, and sections of the Nepli Forest, resulting in a distinctive and vital
ecological environment for various wildlife species. The ecological value of
the area is enhanced by its position inside the outermost Shivalik
Range, which is distinguished by geological formations and an altitude range
spanning from 346 m to 620 m .
Sampling
The survey was conducted in the Nepli Range of Sukhna Wildlife
Sanctuary from June to September 2023. The data collection efforts were
primarily directed towards four prominent water bodies which act as siltation
dams in the sanctuary, as shown in Figure 1. A 20-cm-diameter, pond net with
mesh size of 500 μm and an extendible telescopic
handle was used for the aquatic beetle collection (Dudgeon 1999; Merrit & Cummins 1978). At each body of water, samples
were collected by meticulously sweeping the net six times in opposite
directions across a 1-m distance (Subramanian & Sivaramakrishnan
2007). This strategy guaranteed the capture of aquatic beetles from a variety
of microhabitats along the water bodies coastlines. After collecting the
contents of the sweep net, they were gently poured into a spill tray. The
aquatic beetles were then counted visually, and one representative specimen of
each species was collected and preserved in an ethanol solution containing 90%
ethanol. To minimise disturbance, the remaining
contents of the spill tray were returned to their natural habitat.
Taxonomic Identification
Each specimen was photographed
using a Wadeo Digital Microscope. Subsequently, the
samples were forwarded to the Zoological Survey of India (ZSI) in order to
undergo taxonomic identification. The process of identification was
accomplished by means of dissecting the collected specimens and conducting a
comparison of male genitalia along with the use of reliable identification keys
and original descriptions (Vazirani 1968, 1984; Ghosh
& Nilsson 2012).
Results
In the present investigation, a
total of 164 aquatic Coleoptera specimens belonging
to six species, five genera, and two families were identified and documented at
Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary (Image 1, Table 2). All
species were recorded for the first time from the union territory of
Chandigarh.
The most numerous family was discovered to be Dytiscidae,
followed by Hydrophilidae. As seen in the figure
below, the species Laccophilus parvulus demonstrated the greatest overall
abundance, with a significant presence specifically at point 4, where a total
of 45 individuals were recorded. The species Hydroglyphus
pendjabensis exhibited a higher concentration at
point 3, where a total of 13 individuals were seen. In contrast, the species Hyphoporus sp. demonstrated a more
uniform distribution, with four individuals observed at point 1 and six
individuals observed at point 3. The species Laccophilus
sharpi had a notable presence at point 2, with a
total of 22 individuals being seen. Enochrus (Methydrus)
esuriens had a predominant distribution at
point 1, where a total of four individuals were seen. The species Sternolophus inconspicuus,
which was quite uncommon, was observed as a single specimen at point 1 and as
two specimens at point 2. Hydroglyphus flammulatus exhibited a very homogeneous spatial
distribution over the entirety of the four designated sample locations, with a
range of abundances spanning 2–12 individuals.
As seen in Figure 2, sampling
point 1 had the lowest number of aquatic beetle individuals and similar species
richness to point 3. Sampling point 2 had a higher species richness than point
2 and point 3 had a lower number of individuals as compared to point 3. Point 4
had the highest number as well highest species richness of aquatic beetles.
Discussion
The results obtained from this
research provide valuable information regarding the population size and spatial
distribution of aquatic Coleoptera species in the Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary. The majority of species that
were recorded are widely distributed and often found throughout various regions
of India. According to the data presented in Table 2, it has been observed that
four out of the seven aquatic beetle species found in Chandigarh have not yet
been reported in the neighbouring states of Punjab
and Haryana (Ghosh & Nilsson 2012).
The results show that the Dytiscidae family is dominant in aquatic habitats, which is
consistent with global trends in aquatic ecosystems. Predatory diving beetles,
scientifically known as Dytiscidae, are amazing
adapters to a wide range of aquatic settings and frequently hold the top
predatory positions within them (Miller & Bergsten 2016). The abundance of
these species in the Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary emphasises their biological relevance in the aquatic food
chain, as they act as important predators and nutrient recyclers. The
comparatively uniform distribution of Laccophilus parvulus and Hydroglyphus
flammulatus throughout the sampling sites is a
noteworthy observation, which implies that these species have less specialized
habitat preferences and are capable of adjusting to a diverse array of
environmental conditions because specific environmental conditions, including
vegetation type, water profundity, and temperature, are preferred by particular
species (Lundkvist et al. 2003). Different species of
aquatic beetles were found in different numbers and areas at each of the four
sampling sites, which shows that the aquatic habitats in the sanctuary are not
all the same. The observed discrepancies may be ascribed to distinct
microhabitat attributes, habitat dimensions, vegetation configuration, and
additional ecological variables that are recognized to impact communities of
aquatic beetles (Ribera et al. 2003; Akunal &
Aslan 2017; Sharma et al. 2019).
Figure 2 shows a steady increase in the
population size of aquatic beetles from point 1 to point 4 of the Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary, which corresponded to a
significant elevation gradient, where point 1 was positioned at the lowest
altitude and point 4 was at the highest. This corresponds to the fact that
altitude may have a significant impact on the composition of aquatic insects by
influencing the distribution of species (Taher & Heydarnejad
2020). The results also exhibit that points 2 & 4 had greater species
richness than points 1 & 3. The differences seen may be due to the
different biological features of the places where samples were taken. With
higher vegetation, detritus, and shallower water, points 2 & 4 were suitable
water bodies to harbour a variety of beetle species
(Molnar et al. 2009), while points 1 & 3 exhibited low vegetation cover,
high turbidity, and stagnant water, which may have led to a lack of species
diversity (Gomezlutz et al. 2017). A detailed and
extensive examination of the temporal variations and habitat preferences of
aquatic beetles might aid in statistically validating the findings. This is
required since the current study has a small sample size and was completed over
a short period of time. Completing such an investigation would present
substantial challenges since it would require removing a large population of
aquatic beetles from their environment, which might alter the balance of the
aquatic ecosystems. Furthermore, precisely identifying beetle species requires
microscopic inspection of their genitalia, which would require their
euthanasia. The fact that only seven species from two families were observed
during this time period calls for further surveying and building upon the data
that this paper offers. Aquatic beetles from the families Gyrinidae,
Noteridae, and Elmidae
remain absent from this habitat.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this study lays
down the baseline data for the aquatic Coleoptera
found in Chandigarh and provides insights into the functioning of aquatic
beetle communities in Sukhna Wildlife
Sanctuary. A considerable abundance of the family Dytiscidae
was revealed by the systematic identification and categorization of 164
specimens representing seven species, revealing insight into its critical role
as the principal predator and contributor to nitrogen cycling within aquatic
environments. A pattern in the diversity and number of beetles at different
altitudes influenced by different factors, such as habitat quality, was also observed;
it is critical to undertake more extensive surveys and long-term surveillance
of aquatic Coleoptera populations in order to acquire
an understanding of their responses to environmental changes and the complex
interrelationships between biotic and abiotic factors. The findings not only
add to our understanding of the richness present in the Sukhna
Wildlife Sanctuary but also highlight the need for coordinated conservation
efforts to maintain these essential freshwater habitats because, as indicators
of habitat features and ecological variety, water beetles are vital members of
the biotic community in all wetland environments (Eyre & Foster 1989;
Fairchild et al. 2000).
Table 1.
Sampling locations of aquatic beetles within Sukhna
Wildlife Sanctuary.
|
Sampling point |
Name of water body |
Description of water body |
Latitude (N) |
Longitude (E) |
Elevation (in m) |
Area (in m2) |
|
Point 1 |
Majla Wala Dam No.3 |
Check the dam with little
vegetation on the shoreline and high depth. |
30.752 |
76.853 |
366 |
7648 |
|
Point 2 |
Julahe Wala Dam No.4 |
Check the dam with decent
vegetation and rocky substrate. |
30.755 |
76.857 |
390 |
9174 |
|
Point 3 |
Kandalewla Dam No.2 |
Check dam with low vegetation,
high turbidity and deep water. |
30.765 |
76.875 |
426 |
5848 |
|
Point 4 |
Kandalewla Dam No.1 |
Check dam with high vegetation,
low turbidity and shallow water. |
30.764 |
76.876 |
450 |
4217 |
Table 2. A
systematic inventory of water beetles found in Sukhna
Wildlife Sanctuary, Chandigarh, India and their distribution through India and
the world (Ghosh & Nilsson 2012; Chandra et al. 2017; Gupta et al. 2022; Sonali et al. 2022).
|
Family |
Scientific name |
Distribution through India |
Distribution through the world |
|
Dytiscidae |
Hydroglyphus flammulatus |
Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar,
Delhi, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Kerala, Maharashtra, Manipur,
Meghalaya, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu,
Tripura, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal. |
Bangladesh, China, Indonesia,
Iran, Japan, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, Thailand,
Taiwan, Vietnam. |
|
Hydroglyphus pendjabensis (Guignot, 1954) |
Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi,
Goa, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan,
Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal. |
Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal,
Pakistan |
|
|
Hyphoporus sp. |
- |
Palearctic and Oriental, from
Iran to India and southeastern Asia; |
|
|
Laccophilus sharpi |
Andaman & Nicobar Islands,
Assam, Bihar, Delhi, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Jharkhand, Kerala,
Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Manipur, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Puducherry,
Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, West
Bengal. |
Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Nepal,
Pakistan. |
|
|
Laccophilus parvulus (Aubé, 1838) |
Andaman & Nicobar Islands,
Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Goa, Gujarat, Himachal
Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Manipur, Odisha,
Puducherry, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttarakhand, Uttar
Pradesh, West Bengal. |
Bangladesh, Bhutan, China,
Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Malaysia, Nepal, Philippines, Pakistan,
Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam. |
|
|
Hydrophilidae |
Enochrus (Methydrus) esuriens (Walker,
1858) |
Andaman & Nicobar Islands,
Andhra Pradesh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand,
Maharashtra, Manipur, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Sikkim, Telangana,
Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal. |
Australia, Bangladesh, China,
Fiji, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Philippines, Papua
New Guinea, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam |
|
Sternolophus inconspicuus (Nietner, 1856) |
Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra,
Meghalaya, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh. |
Cambodia, China, Hong Kong,
Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Myanmar, Nepal, Philippines, South Korea, Sri Lanka,
Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam. |
For figures & images - - click here for full PDF
References
Akunal, F. & B. Aslan (2017). Habitat characteristics
influencing larval abundance and diversity of three Dytiscidae
(Coleoptera) species in temporary Mediterranean
ponds. Journal of Natural History 51(35–36): 2263–2280.
Chandra, K.,
D. Jaiswal & D. Gupta (2017). Insecta; Coleoptera,
pp 379–400. In: Chandra, K., K.C. Gopi, D.V. Rao, K. Valarmathi
& J.R.B. Alfred (eds.). Current Status of Freshwater Faunal Diversity in
India. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, 624 pp.
Dudgeon, D.
(1999). Tropical
Asian Streams – zoobenthos, ecology and conservation.
Aquatic Insects 23(2): 167.
Eyre, M.D.
& G.N. Foster (1989). A comparison of aquatic Hemiptera and Coleoptera
communities as a basis for environmental and conservation assessments in static
water sides. Journal of Applied Entomology 108: 355–362.
Fairchild,
G.W., A.M. Faulds & J.F. Matta (2000). Beetle assemblages in ponds:
effects of habitat and site age. Freshwater Biology 44: 523–534.
Gomezlutz, M.C. & A.I. Kehr (2017). A preliminary study of aquatic Coleoptera
in temporary ponds and the ecological variables influencing their richness and
diversity. Journal of the Entomological Society of Argentina 76(3– 4):
7–15.
Ghosh, S.K.
& A.N. Nilsson (2012). Catalogue of the diving beetles of India and adjacent countries (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae). Skorvnopparn, Umel,
Supplement 3: 1–77.
Gupta, D., K.
Chandra, J. Ghosh, P. Das, S. Dutta & J. Saini (2022). Insecta: Coleoptera,
pp. 233–277. In: Chandra, K., D. Banerjee, C. Raghunathan, D. Gupta, P. Raj
& G. Sharma (eds.). Faunal Diversity of Biogeographic Zones of India:
Gangetic Plains. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata.
Lundkvist, A., T. Kairesalo
& E. Ranta (2003). Habitat preference and niche
segregation of four diving beetle species (Coleoptera:
Dytiscidae) in relation to water chemistry and
predation pressure. Ecography 26(3): 355–364.
Merritt, R.H.
& K.W. Cummins (1978). An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North
America.
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Miller, K.B.
& J. Bergsten (2016). Diving Beetles of the World: Systematics and Biology of the Dytiscidae. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 320 pp.
Molnar, A.,
Z. Csabai & B. Tothmeresz
(2009). Influence of
flooding and vegetation patterns on aquatic beetle diversity in a constructed
wetland complex. Wetlands 29(4): 1214–1223.
Ribera, I.,
E. Terol & J.L. Moreno (2003). Water beetle diversity in
relation to habitat quality in Mediterranean temporary ponds. Aquatic
Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13(5): 301–310.
Sharma, S.,
G. Sharma, F.A. Pir & F. Ahmad (2019). Diversity and habitat selection
of aquatic beetles (Coleoptera). Acta Zoologica Lituanica 14(1):
31–37.
Sheth, S.D., H.V. Ghate
& J. Hájek (2018). Copelatus Erichson,
1832 from Maharashtra, India, with description of three new species and notes
on other taxa of the genus (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae: Copelatinae). Zootaxa 4459(2): 235–260. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4459.2.2
Short, A.E.
(2017). Systematics
of aquatic beetles (Coleoptera): current state and
future directions. Systematic Entomology 43(1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/syen.12270
Sonali, S., S.G. Kumar, P. Basu & D. Gupta (2022). Water beetles (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae, Noteridae and Hydrophilidae) of
Hazaribagh Wildlife Sanctuary, Jharkhand, India. Records of the Zoological
Survey of India 122(3): 337–343.
Subramanian,
K.A. & K.G. Sivaramakrishnan (2007). Aquatic Insects for Biomonitoring
Freshwater Ecosystems — A Methodology Manual. Asoka Trust for Research in
Ecology and Environment (ATREE), Bangalore.
Taher, M.
& M.S. Heydarnejad (2020). Ecological factors affecting
aquatic beetle species (Insecta: Coleoptera).
Iranian Journal of Animal Biosystematics 15(2): 137–146. https://doi.org/10.22067/ijab.v15i2.81541
Vazirani, T.G. (1968). Contribution to the study of
aquatic beetles (Coleoptera) 2. A review of the
subfamilies Noterinae, Laccophilinae,
Dytiscinae and Hydroporinae
(in part) from India. Oriental Insects 2(3– 4): 211– 341.
Vazirani, T.G. (1984). The Fauna of India: Coleoptera. Family Gyrinidae and
Family Haliplidae. Zoological Survey of India,
Calcutta, India, 140 pp + 57 Figs + 3 pl.