Euborellia brunneri
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Arthropoda
Class: Insecta
Order: Dermaptera
Family: Anisolabididae
Genus: Euborellia
Species:
E. brunneri
Binomial name
Euborellia brunneri
(Dohrn, 1864)
Synonyms
  • Forcinella brunneri Dohrn, 1864
  • Gonolabis verhoeffi Burr, 1905
  • Anisolabis verhoeffi (Burr, 1905)

Euborellia brunneri is a species of earwig in the family Anisolabididae.[1]

Taxonomy

This species was originally described by Heinrich Wolfgang Ludwig Dohrn, as Forcinella brunneri, in 1864 from a female specimen collected by Brunner in Adelaide, Australia. In 1905 a male specimen, also from South Australia, was mistakenly thought to be a new species and was named by Malcolm Burr as the synonym Gonolabis verhoeffi (and soon after known as Anisolabis verhoeffi). The species is now placed in the genus Euborellia, and is thus named Euborellia brunneri.[2]

Description

Euborellia brunneri is apterous and sexually dimorphic in terms of size. It is native to coastal regions of eastern Australia; specifically, it occurs in the states of Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia, New South Wales, and Queensland.[2] E. brunneri tends to keep hidden beneath plant detritus and other debris where it is dark and damp. Individuals are mostly nocturnal and solitary, but may occur in abundance when habitat conditions are suitable.[3][4][5][6][7]

The behavioural ecology of E. brunneri was the subject of research that resulted in several scientific publications, primarily authored by Emile van Lieshout and Mark Adrian Elgar.[3][4][5][6][7]

See also

An additional two species of the genus Euborellia are known from Australia:

References

  1. ↑ "Euborellia brunneri". Zipcode Zoo. Retrieved 28 December 2016.
  2. 1 2 "Species Euborellia brunneri (Dohrn, 1864)". Australian Faunal Directory. Australian Government Department of Environment and Energy. Retrieved 4 January 2017.
  3. 1 2 van Lieshout, E.; van Wilgenburg, E.; Elgar, M. A. (2009). "No male agonistic experience effect on pre-copulatory mate choice in female earwigs". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 63 (12): 1727–1733. doi:10.1007/s00265-009-0788-4.
  4. 1 2 van Lieshout, E.; Elgar, M. A. (2009). "Armament under direct sexual selection does not exhibit positive allometry in an earwig". Behavioral Ecology. 20 (2): 258–264. doi:10.1093/beheco/arp013.
  5. 1 2 van Lieshout, E. (2011). "Male genital length and mating status differentially affect mating behaviour in an earwig". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 65 (2): 149–156. doi:10.1007/s00265-010-1021-1.
  6. 1 2 van Lieshout, E.; Elgar, M. A. (2011). "Longer exaggerated male genitalia confer defensive sperm-competitive benefits in an earwig". Evolutionary Ecology. 25 (2): 351–362. doi:10.1007/s10682-010-9422-1.
  7. 1 2 van Lieshout, E.; Elgar, M. A. (2011). "Owner positional disadvantage in contests over mating prevents monopolization of females". Animal Behaviour. 82 (4): 753–758. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.07.005.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.