Published

2022-03-07

Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia

Sistemas silvopastoriles como alternativa para conservación de los escarabajos coprófagos (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) en un paisaje ganadero en Caucasia Colombia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15446/caldasia.v44n1.83102

Keywords:

Agroforestry system, bioindicator, extensive livestock, Scarabaeinae, true diversity (en)
Bioindicador, diversidad verdadera, ganadería extensiva, sistema agroforestal, Scarabaeinae (es)

Downloads

Authors

Silvopastoral systems (SPS) represent an alternative to the environmental impact and biodiversity decline caused by extensive livestock practices. We evaluate the transformation of a conventional pasture parcel into a SPS, and how it alters the diversity of dung beetles, fundamental organisms in these ecosystems. Transects with pitfall traps, baited with excrement were established in SPS, pasture, and forest ecosystems. Differences in the structure of communities were compared through Whittaker curves, the incidence of functional groups, and non-parametric multidimensional scaling. The completeness of the sampling was estimated and the magnitude of change in qD diversity of the SPS concerning pasture and forest ecosystem was calculated for each season. A total of 7446 beetles belonging to twelve genera, fifteen species, and seven morphospecies were collected. The SPS was the environment with the greatest diversity of qD and functional groups after the forest ecosystem. It was more diverse than pasture, 30 % to 50 % richer in species and 10 % to 50 % more diverse in 1D and 2D. It is concluded that the conversion of the conventional pastures to SPS led to changes in the composition and structure of the beetle community, making the SPS a more diverse environment than the pasture in all seasons including the dry one, when conditions are the most adverse. These results suggest that the implementation of SPS is an important measure to preserve and increase the diversity of forest dung beetles in the livestock areas of the country.

Los sistemas silvopastoriles (SSP) representan una alternativa para disminuir el impacto sobre la biodiversidad y la transformación de los ecosistemas causado por la ganadería extensiva. Evaluamos cómo la transformación de un pastizal en un SSP altera la diversidad de escarabajos coprófagos, organismos fundamentales en estos ecosistemas. En ecosistemas de pastizal, SSP y bosque, se instalaron transectos con trampas de caída cebadas con excremento. Las diferencias en la estructura de las comunidades se compararon mediante curvas Whittaker, incidencia de grupos funcionales y escalamiento multidimensional. Se estimó la completitud del muestreo y se calculó la magnitud del cambio en diversidad qD del SSP respecto al pastizal y al bosque para cada temporada. Se recolectaron 7446 escarabajos pertenecientes a doce géneros, quince especies y siete morfoespecies. El SSP fue el ambiente con mayor diversidad qD y grupos funcionales después del bosque. Más diverso que el pastizal, entre 30 % y 50 % más rico en especies y entre 10 % y 50 % con mayor diversidad 1D y 2D respectivamente. Se concluye que la conversión de los pastizales tradicionales a sistemas SSP conduce a cambios en la composición y estructura de la comunidad de escarabajos, haciendo del SSP un ambiente más diverso que el pastizal en todas las temporadas incluso en la época de sequía cuando las condiciones son adversas. Estos resultados sugieren que la implementación de los SSP es una medida importante para la conservación e incremento de la diversidad de los escarabajos coprófagos del bosque en las zonas ganaderas del país.

References

Alcaldía Municipal de Caucasia. c2020. Plan de desarrollo territorial 2020-2023. [Last accessed: 29 Dec 2020]. http://www.caucasia-antioquia.gov.co/tema/plan-de--desarrollo-municipal.

Amat-García G, Amat-García E, Ariza-Marín E. 2009. Insectos invasores en los tiempos del cambio climático. Innovacion y Ciencia. 33(4):45–53.

Andresen E. 2005. Effects of Season and Vegetation Type on Community Organization of Dung Beetles in a Tropical Dry Forest1. Biotropica. 37(2):291–300. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2005.00039.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2005.00039.x

Arellano Gámez L, León-Cortés JL, Halffter Salas G, Montero Muñoz JL2013. Acacia woodlots, cattle and dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a Mexican silvopastoral landscape. Rev. Mex. Biodivers. 84(2). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7550/rmb.32911 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7550/rmb.32911

Arellano L, León‐Cortés JL, Halffter G. 2008. Response of dung beetle assemblages to landscape structure in remnant natural and modified habitats in southern Mexico. Insect Conserv. Diver. 1(4):253–262. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4598.2008.00033.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4598.2008.00033.x

Armenteras D, Gonzalez T, Ramírez-D JP, Meza-E MC. 2018. Causas de Degradación Forestal en Colombia: una primera aproximación. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Bogotá, Instituto de Hidrología, Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales de Colombia-IDEAM, Programa ONU-REDD.

Calle Z, Murgueitio E, Chará J, Molina CH, Zuluaga AF, Calle A. 2013. A Strategy for Scaling-Up Intensive Silvopastoral Systems in Colombia. J. Sustain Forest. 32(7):677–693. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2013.817338 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2013.817338

Chao A, Jost L. 2012. Coverage-based rarefaction and extrapolation: standardizing samples by completeness rather than size. Ecology. 93(12):2533–2547. doi: https://doi.org/10.1890/11-1952.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/11-1952.1

Chao A, Ma KH, Hsieh TC, Chiu CH. c2015. Online Program SpadeR (Species-richness Prediction and Diversity Estimation in R. Program and User’s Guide. [Last accessed: 29 Dec 2020]. http://chao.stat.nthu.edu.tw/wordpress/software_download/

Chará J, Reyes E, Peri P, Otte J, Arce E, Schneider F. c2019. Silvopastoral Systems and their Contribution to Improved Resource Use and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): Evidence from Latin America. Cali, Colombia: FAO, CIPAV and Agri Benchmark. [Last accessed: 29 Dec 2020]. http://www.fao.org/publications/card/es/c/CA2792EN/

Cultid-Medina CA, Escobar F. 2016. Assessing the Ecological Response of Dung Beetles in an Agricultural Landscape Using Number of Individuals and Biomass in Diversity Measures. Environ. Entomol. 45(2):310–319. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvv219 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvv219

Cultid–Medina CA, Medina CA. 2015. Los escarabajos coprófagos y su monitoreo en la restauración de ecosistemas. In: Aguilar-G M, Ramírez W, editors. Monitoreo a procesos de restauración ecológica, aplicado a ecosistemas terrestres. Bogotá, Colombia: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt. p. 129–133.

Escobar F. 1997. Estudios de la comunidad de coleópteros coprófagos (Scarabaeidae) en un remaente de bosque seco al norte del Tolima, Colombia. Caldasia. 19(3):419–430.

Escobar F, Halffter G, Solís Á, Halffter V, Navarrete D. 2008. Temporal shifts in dung beetle community structure within a protected area of tropical wet forest: a 35-year study and its implications for long-term conservation. J. Appl. Ecol. 45(6):1584–1592. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01551.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01551.x

Estrada A, Coates-Estrada R, Dadda AA, Cammarano P. 1998. Dung and carrion beetles in tropical rain forest fragments and agricultural habitats at Los Tuxtlas, Mexico. J. Trop. Ecol. 14(5):577–593. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467498000418 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467498000418

Etter A, Andrade A, Saavedra K, Cortes-R J. 2018. Actualización de la Lista Roja de los Ecosistemas Terrestres de Colombia: Herramienta para la gestión de los ecosistemas. Bogotá, Colombia: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt.

Etter A, Zuluaga AF. c2018. Áreas aptas para la actividad ganadera en Colombia | Biodiversidad 2017. Bogotá, Colombia: Moreno LA, Rueda C, Andrade GI, editors. Estado y tendencias de la biodiversidad continental de Colombia. [Last accessed: 30 Dec 2020]. http://reporte.humboldt.org.co/biodiversidad/2017/cap4/403/

Etter A, McAlpine C, Possingham H. 2008. Historical Patterns and Drivers of Landscape Change in Colombia Since 1500: A Regionalized Spatial Approach. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 98(1):2–23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00045600701733911 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00045600701733911

[FAO] Organización de la Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura. c2020. Evaluación de los recursos forestales mundiales. Informe Colombia 2020. Roma. [Last accessed 30 Dec 2020]. http://www.fao.org/3/cb0099es/cb0099es.pdf

Gardner TA, Hernández MIM, Barlow J, Peres CA. 2008. Understanding the biodiversity consequences of habitat change: The value of secondary and plantation forests for neotropical dung beetles. J. Appl. Ecol. 45(3):883–893. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01454.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01454.x

Genier F, Kohlmann B. 2003. Revision of the Neotropical dung beetle genera Scatimus Erichson and Scatrichus gen. nov. (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). Fabreries. 28:57–111.

Giraldo C, Escobar F, Chará JD, Calle Z. 2011. The adoption of silvopastoral systems promotes the recovery of ecological processes regulated by dung beetles in the Colombian Andes. Insect Conserv. Diver. 4(2):115–122. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4598.2010.00112.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-4598.2010.00112.x

Gómez-Cifuentes A, Giménez Gómez VC, Moreno CE, Zurita GA. 2019. Tree retention in cattle ranching systems partially preserves dung beetle diversity and functional groups in the semideciduous Atlantic forest: The role of microclimate and soil conditions. Basic Appl. Ecol. 34: 64–74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2018.10.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2018.10.002

González Arenas JJ, Cubillos Buitrago Á, Chadid Hernández MA, Cubillos Gonzáles A, Arias Patiño M, Zúñiga Avirama E, Joubert F. Pérez Vizcaino IR, Berrío Meneses V. 2018. Caracterización de las Principales Causas y Agentes de la Deforestación a Nivel Nacional Período 2005-2015. Bogotá: IDEAM, MADS, ONU-REDD.

Halffter G. 1991. Historical and ecological factors determining the geographical distribution of beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). Biogeographia. 15(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.21426/B615110376

Halffter G, Arellano L. 2002. Response of Dung Beetle Diversity to Human–induced Changes in a Tropical Landscape. Biotropica. 34(1):144–154. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2002.tb00250.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2002.tb00250.x

Halffter G, Halffter V. 1989. Behavioral evolution of the non-rolling roller beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). Acta Zool. Mex. (32):1–53. doi: https://doi.org/10.21829/azm.1989.31321937 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21829/azm.1989.31321937

Hammer O, Harper D, Ryan P. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica. 4:1–9.

Hanski I, Cambefort Y. c1991. Dung Beetle Ecology. 2nd ed. Princeton University Press. [Last accessed: 30 Dec 2020]. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691634593/dung-beetle-ecology DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400862092

Hoyos I, Cañón-Barriga J, Arenas-Suárez T, Dominguez F, Rodríguez BA. 2019. Variability of regional atmospheric moisture over Northern South America: patterns and underlying phenomena. Clim. Dyn. 52(1):893–911. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4172-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4172-9

Hoyos I, Dominguez F, Cañón-Barriga J, Martínez JA, Nieto R, Gimeno L, Dirmeyer PA. 2018. Moisture origin and transport processes in Colombia, northern South America. Clim Dyn. 50(3):971–990. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3653-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3653-6

Janzen DH. 1983. Seasonal Change in Abundance of Large Nocturnal Dung Beetles (Scarabaeidae) in a Costa Rican Deciduous Forest and Adjacent Horse Pasture. Oikos. 41(2):274–283. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3544274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3544274

Jost L. 2006. Entropy and diversity. Oikos. 113(2):363–375. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14714.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2006.0030-1299.14714.x

Keenan RJ, Reams GA, Achard F, de Freitas JV, Grainger A, Lindquist E. 2015. Dynamics of global forest area: Results from the FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Forest Ecol. Manag. 352:9–20. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.06.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2015.06.014

Marsh CJ, Louzada J, Beiroz W, Ewers RM. 2013. Optimising Bait for Pitfall Trapping of Amazonian Dung Beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae). PLoS ONE 8(8): e73147. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073147 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073147

Medina CA, Lopera-Toro A. 2000. Clave ilustrada para la identificación de géneros de escarabajos coprófagos (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) de Colombia. Caldasia. 22(2):209–315.

Medina CA, Lopera-Toro A, Vítolo A, Gill B. 2001. Escarabajos coprófagos (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae) de Colombia. Biota. 2(2).

Montoya-Molina S, Giraldo-Echeverri C, Montoya-Lerma J, Chará J, Escobar F, Calle Z. 2015. Land sharing vs. land sparing in the dry Caribbean lowlands: A dung beetles’ perspective. Appl. Soil Ecol. 98:204–212. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.10.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2015.10.017

Murgueitio E, Calle Z, Uribe F, Calle A, Solorio B. 2011. Native trees and shrubs for the productive rehabilitation of tropical cattle ranching lands. Forest Ecol. Manag. 261(10):1654–1663. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.09.027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.09.027

Murillo-Ramos L, Ayazo R, Medina CA. c2016. Diversidad de escarabajos coprófagos (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) en un remanente ribereño y un fragmento de bosque húmedo tropical en Córdoba, Colombia. reponame: Repositorio Institucional de Documentación Científica Humboldt. [Last accessed: 29 Dec 2020]. http://repository.humboldt.org.co/handle/20.500.11761/9682. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.16.26.1.0.200

Nichols E, Larsen T, Spector S, Davis AL, Escobar F, Favila M, Vulinec K. 2007. Global dung beetle response to tropical forest modification and fragmentation: A quantitative literature review and meta-analysis. Biol. Conserv. 137(1):1–19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.01.023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.01.023

Nichols E, Spector S, Louzada J, Larsen T, Amezquita S, Favila ME. 2008. Ecological functions and ecosystem services provided by Scarabaeinae dung beetles. Biol. Conserv. 141(6):1461–1474. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.04.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.04.011

Noriega JA, Solís C, García H, Murillo-Ramos L, Renjifo JM, Olarte JE. 2013. Sinopsis de los escarabajos coprófagos (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) del Caribe Colombiano. Caldasia 35(2):465–477.

Peraza LN, Deloya C. 2006. Una nueva especie Mexicana de Dichotomius Hope (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) y clave para la identificación de las especies del grupo carolinus. Neotrop. Entomol. 35(5):629–631. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2006000500009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2006000500009

Rangel-Acosta JL, Martínez-Hernández NJ. 2017. Comparación de los ensamblajes de escarabajos copronecrófagos (Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae) entre fragmentos de bosque seco tropical y la matriz adyacente en el departamento del Atlántico-Colombia. Rev Mex Biodivers. 88(2). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rmb.2017.03.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmb.2017.03.012

Sarmiento-Garcés R, Amat García G. 2014. Escarabajos del género Dichotomius hope 1838 (Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae) en la Amazonía Colombiana. Rev. Acad. Colomb. Cienc. 33(127):285–296.

Solis A, Kohlmann B. 2013. El género Uroxys (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) en Costa Rica. G. it. Entomol. 13(58):289–340.

Sowig P. 1996. Brood care in the dung beetle Onthophagus vacca (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae): the effect of soil moisture on time budget, nest structure, and reproductive success. Ecography. 19(3): 254–258. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1996.tb01252.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1996.tb00234.x

Vaz-De-Mello FZ, Edmonds WD, Ocampo FC, Schoolmeesters P. 2011. A multilingual key to the genera and subgenera of the Scarabaeinae of the New World (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Zootaxa. 2854(1):1–73. doi: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2854.1.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2854.1.1

How to Cite

APA

Duque-Vélez, P., Olivera-Angel, M. and Wolff, M. (2022). Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia. Caldasia, 44(1), 184–193. https://doi.org/10.15446/caldasia.v44n1.83102

ACM

[1]
Duque-Vélez, P., Olivera-Angel, M. and Wolff, M. 2022. Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia. Caldasia. 44, 1 (Jan. 2022), 184–193. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15446/caldasia.v44n1.83102.

ACS

(1)
Duque-Vélez, P.; Olivera-Angel, M.; Wolff, M. Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia. Caldasia 2022, 44, 184-193.

ABNT

DUQUE-VÉLEZ, P.; OLIVERA-ANGEL, M.; WOLFF, M. Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia. Caldasia, [S. l.], v. 44, n. 1, p. 184–193, 2022. DOI: 10.15446/caldasia.v44n1.83102. Disponível em: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/cal/article/view/83102. Acesso em: 19 jul. 2024.

Chicago

Duque-Vélez, Patricia, Martha Olivera-Angel, and Marta Wolff. 2022. “Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia”. Caldasia 44 (1):184-93. https://doi.org/10.15446/caldasia.v44n1.83102.

Harvard

Duque-Vélez, P., Olivera-Angel, M. and Wolff, M. (2022) “Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia”, Caldasia, 44(1), pp. 184–193. doi: 10.15446/caldasia.v44n1.83102.

IEEE

[1]
P. Duque-Vélez, M. Olivera-Angel, and M. Wolff, “Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia”, Caldasia, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 184–193, Jan. 2022.

MLA

Duque-Vélez, P., M. Olivera-Angel, and M. Wolff. “Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia”. Caldasia, vol. 44, no. 1, Jan. 2022, pp. 184-93, doi:10.15446/caldasia.v44n1.83102.

Turabian

Duque-Vélez, Patricia, Martha Olivera-Angel, and Marta Wolff. “Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia”. Caldasia 44, no. 1 (January 3, 2022): 184–193. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/cal/article/view/83102.

Vancouver

1.
Duque-Vélez P, Olivera-Angel M, Wolff M. Silvopastoral systems as an alternative for conservation of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) in a cattle landscape in Caucasia Colombia. Caldasia [Internet]. 2022 Jan. 3 [cited 2024 Jul. 19];44(1):184-93. Available from: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/cal/article/view/83102

Download Citation

CrossRef Cited-by

CrossRef citations0

Dimensions

PlumX

Article abstract page views

659

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Caldasia

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).