Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:29:53.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structure, behavior, and the life cycle of an aquatic firefly, Luciola substriata, in China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Fu Xinhua ,
Ohba Nobuyoshi ,
Fredric V. Vencl  and
Lei Chaoliang
Fu Xinhua*
Affiliation:
Institute of Insect Resources, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
Ohba Nobuyoshi
Affiliation:
Yokosuka City Museum, Yokosuka 238, Japan
Fredric V. Vencl
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York 11794-5245, United States of America, and Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Ancón, Balboa, Panama
Lei Chaoliang*
Affiliation:
Institute of Insect Resources, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
*
1E-mail: [email protected].
2Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aquatic firefly Luciola substriata Gorham, 1880 (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) was first discovered in mainland China in 2000. The larvae of L. substriata inhabit ponds and lakes rich in aquatic vegetation. We recorded L. substriata feeding on two species of aquatic snails, Lymnaea stagnalis (L., 1758) (Basommatophora: Lymnaeidae) and Gyraulus convexiusculus (Hutton, 1849) (Basommatophora: Planorbidae). Three predators of fireflies were also recorded for the first time: the red swamp crayfish, Procambarus clarkii (Girard, 1852) (Decapoda: Cambaridae), the crab Eriocheir sinensis H. Milne-Edwards, 1853 (Decapoda: Varunidae), and the grass carp, Ctenopharyngodon idellus (Valenciennes in Cuvier et Valenciennes, 1844) (Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae). Egg incubation averaged 11 days at an ambient temperature of 20–25 °C. The prepupal stage of L. substriata lasted 6.2 days, and the pupal stage lasted 4.4 days. The imaginal period lasted from May to September. Courtship light-flashing activity peaked 1 h after sunset. The light spectrum of responsiveness of L. substriata was 425–603 nm, with a peak responsive emission at 504 nm. In addition, we have described and illustrated the morphology of L. substriata.

Résumé

La luciole aquatique Luciola substriata Gorham, 1880 (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) a été trouvée pour la première fois en Chine continentale en 2000. Les larves de L. substriata colonisent les étangs et les lacs riches en végétation. Nous avons observé L. substriata se nourrir de deux espèces de gastéropodes aquatiques, Lymnaea stagnalis (L., 1758) (Basommatophora: Lymnaeidae) et Gyraulus convexiusculus (Hutton, 1849) (Basommatophora: Planorbidae). Trois prédateurs des lucioles sont signalés pour la première fois, l'écrevisse rouge de Louisiane, Procamburus clarkii (Girard, 1852) (Decapoda: Cambaridae), le crabe Eriocheir sinensis H. Milne-Edwards, 1853 (Decapoda: Varunidae) et la carpe herbivore, Ctenopharyngodon idellus (Valenciennes in Cuvier et Valenciennes, 1844) (Cypriniformes: Cyprinidae). L'incubation des oeufs dure en moyenne 11 jours à une température ambiante de 20–25 °C. Le stade prénymphal de L. substriata dure 6,2 jours et le stade nymphal 4,4 jours. La période adulte s'étend de mai à septembre. Le clignotement lumineux de cour atteint son maximum 1 h après le coucher du soleil. La réactivité au spectre lumineux de L. substriata va de 425 à 603 nm, avec une émission réactive maximale à 504 nm. Nous avons aussi décrit et illustré la morphologie de L. substriata.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 137 , Issue 1 , February 2005 , pp. 83 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blair, K.G. 1927. An aquatic lampyrid larva from S. Celebes. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (Part I): 43–45.Google Scholar
Branham, M.A. 1996. Flashing males win mate success. Nature (London), 381: 745–746.Google Scholar
Buschman, L.L. 1984. Biology of the firefly Pyractomena lucifera (Coleoptera: Lampyridae). Florida Entomologist, 67: 529–542.Google Scholar
Chen, S.F., and Chen, R.Z. 1997. The rearing of the aquatic firefly Luciola ficta. The Magazine of Yilan Science University, 14: 25–32. [In Chinese.]Google Scholar
De Cock, R., and Matthysen, E. 2003. Glow-worm larvae bioluminescence (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) operates as an aposematic signal upon toads (Bufo bufo). Behavioral Ecology, 14: 103–108.Google Scholar
Ho, J.Z., Ju, J.S., and Ju, J.C. 1998. Discovery of the aquatic larvae of Luciola substriata. Nature Conservation Quarterly, 18: 26–31. [In Chinese.]Google Scholar
Jeng, M.L., Lai, J., and Yang, P.S. 2003. Lampyridae: a synopsis of aquatic fireflies with description of a new species (Coleoptera). In Water Beetles of China. Vol. 3. Edited by Jäch, M.A. and Ji, L.. Zoologisch-Botanische Gesellschaft in Ãsterreich and wiener Coleopterologenverein, Vienna, Austria. pp. 539–562.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, T. 1965. Ecological and biological studies on the West African firefly Luciola discicollis (Coleoptera: Lampyridae). Annals of the Entomo-logical Society of America, 58: 414–426.Google Scholar
Lloyd, J.E. 1966. Studies on the Flash Communication System in Photinus fireflies. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Miscellaneous Publication, 130: 1–93.Google Scholar
Lloyd, J.E. 1971. Bioluminescent communication in insects. Annual Review of Entomology, 16: 97–122.Google Scholar
Lloyd, J.E. 1984 a. On deception, a way of all flesh, firefly signaling and systematics. Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology, 1: 49–84.Google Scholar
Lloyd, J.E. 1984 b. Evolution of a firefly flash code. Florida Entomologist, 67: 228–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, J.E. 1984 c. Occurrence of aggressive mimicry in fireflies. Florida Entomologist, 67: 368–376.Google Scholar
Ohba, N. 1983. Studies on the communication system of Japanese fireflies. Science Report of Yokosuka City Museum, 3: 1–62.Google Scholar
Ohba, N. 1988. Aquatic glowworms. Insect and Nature, 23: 8–13. [In Japanese.]Google Scholar
Ohba, N. 1996. Ecological study of the firefly Luciola owadai and conservation of its habitat. Insect and Nature, 31: 17–21.Google Scholar
Okada, Y.K. 1928. Two Japanese aquatic glow-worms. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London (Part 1): 101–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, L.H., Donn, T.J., and John, L.B. 2000. Swimming behavior of an aquatic weevil, Lissorhoptrus oryzophilus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Florida Entomologist, 83: 316–324.Google Scholar
Vencl, F.V., and Carlson, A.D. 1998. Proximate mechanisms of sexual selection in the firefly Photinus pyralis (Coleoptera: Lampyridae). Journal of Insect Behaviour, 11: 191–207.Google Scholar
Vencl, F.V., Blasko, B.J., and Carlson, A.D. 1994. Flash behavior of female Photuris versicolor fireflies in simulated courtship and predatory dialogues. Journal of Insect Behaviour, 7: 843–858.Google Scholar