Dragonflies - Science topic

The purpose of life is often viewed as finding meaning and fulfillment through personal growth, relationships, and contributions to the world. It involves seeking happiness, knowledge, and purpose, while also navigating challenges. For some, it includes spiritual or philosophical exploration, while others focus on making a positive impact. Ultimately, the purpose of life is subjective and can vary from person to person.

There are a few field guides and collection guides available online for Odonates of peninsular and central India:

1. Andrew, Raymond & Subramanian, K.A. & Tiple, Ashish. (2008). A Handbook on Common Odonates of Central India.

2. Emiliyamma, K.G., Radhakrishnan, C. and Jaffer Palot, Muhamed (2005). APictorial Handbook on-Common Dragonflies and Damselflies of Kerala: 1-67. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata.

3. DuBois, Robert. (2021). Sampling Design Considerations for Surveys of Dragonflies and Damselflies (Odonata) in Wisconsin. 200.

4. Fraser, F.C (1933). The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Odonata.Vols I. Taylor and Francis Ltd., London.

5. Fraser, F.C (1934). The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Odonata.Vols II. Taylor and Francis Ltd., London.

6. Fraser, F.C (1936). The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. Odonata.Vols III. Taylor and Francis Ltd., London.

7. Mitra, T. R. (2006). Handbook on Common Indian Dragonflies (Insecta : Odonata): For Nature Lovers and Conservationists. India: Zoological Survey of India.

8. Needham, James G. 1899. Directions for Collecting and Rearing Dragon Flies, Stone Flies, and May Flies. Washington, D.C. Govt. Printing Office. (Bulletin of the United States National Museum, no. 39)

9. Needham, J. G. (1932). A Key to the Dragonflies of India. Records of the Zoological Survey of India, 34(2), 195–228. https://doi.org/10.26515/rzsi/v34/i2/1932/162568

10. Subramanian, K.A. (2005). Damselflies and dragonflies of peninsular India-A field Guide. E-book of the Project Lifescape.

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Meehir

A thousand thanks. Roberto.

A bit late, but Aastha Aastha did you change the filter for the file extension (see attached image)? For me it defaults to a specific file type, and so I have to change it to "All Files (*.*)" to get it to show everything?

Ricardo Martin,

You may want to take a look at the article below, especially statistical analysis. It might be useful.

Hello Author,

Field guide of Odonata was available in North India and Peninsular India. Usually, during the field survey some authors were documented only photographs of used expensive camera. And some others were used to collected the specimens by sweep net and Drag net. But the collection methodology was described based on own experience. Some authors describe for ex: it's a pond or wetland area, their take 0.5 km to 1 km surrounding of foot pathway. In additionally, it's linear stream or river, they are take same distance but side foot paths of the stream or river.

I have some experience this kind but they are not published.

I have attach one online available hard copy link below:

Use the above link and find the hard of Dragonflies and Damselflies of Peninsular India, Field guide book.

Best of luck!

By

Vijayan

To avoid repeated counting of individuals during an Odonate Transect Survey you can follow these strategies:Establish Clear Survey Routes: Define specific routes or areas for your survey. Clearly mark the boundaries and ensure surveyors know where to start and finish, reducing the chances of double-counting.Use Marking Techniques: If possible, mark the individuals you have counted without harming them. For example, you can use non-toxic, temporary markers like colored dots on wings. This way, you can identify previously counted individuals and avoid counting them again.Time Gaps Between Surveys: If conducting multiple surveys in the same area, introduce time gaps between surveys. Odonates are highly mobile, so waiting for a while can allow them to disperse, reducing the likelihood of recounting the same individuals.Record Environmental Conditions: Note down environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, and wind speed. These conditions can affect odonate behavior. If conditions change significantly between surveys, it's less likely that the same individuals will be present.Train Surveyors: Properly train surveyors to recognize odonate species and avoid counting the same individuals multiple times. Training can enhance the accuracy of the survey results.Use Standardized Survey Methods: Adhere to standardized survey protocols and guidelines. Following established methods ensures consistency and helps in minimizing errors related to repeated counting.Employ Technology: Consider using technology like photography or video recording to capture the odonates during the survey. Later, you can review the recordings to confirm identifications and avoid double-counting.

Greeting everyone!

I have also a problem with identification of female Gomphus from Georgia(Caucasus). At first glance, it looks like Gomphus schneiderii, but closer examination revealed certain differences in vulval scale stucture - accordfng "Field Guide to the Dragonflies of Britain and Europe: 2nd edition" by Dijkstra and Asmus Schröter, 2020 the tips of vulval scale are pointy while the tips of my specimen are rounded. (picture attached).

Could it be intraspecific variation?

Thanks you in advance!

Most likely, the .vol file is just a binary array. For correctly interpreting it, you would need some meta-information, e.g. dimensions in x, y, z, the voxel-size, the data-type (e.g. 16bit-unsigned-int, 32bit-float, ...), and the "endianess", i.e. "little endian" or "big endian".

The CT reconstruction-software should provide a separate file containing that information, or even a wrapper for direct import.

In many applications you can import the .vol-file as "raw" image, where you have to specify the necessary meta-information.

For conversion from raw to TIFF you could, for instance, use Fiji/ImageJ.

Ian Garofalo

These tutorials might be helpful:

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYp9kffbkhQ

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y17529_e3oE

The idea about competing resources between adults and larvae is absurd, because nobody can compete with himself. The single serious publication about complete metamorphosis is my paper: Kluge N.J. 2005. Larval/pupal leg transformation and a new diagnosis for the taxon Metabola Burmeister, 1832 = Oligoneoptera Martynov, 1923. // Russian Entomological Journal (2004) 13(4): 189–229.

and my new book in Russian: http://www.insecta.bio.spbu.ru/sys-ins.htm

kindly see

Seasonal Migrations of Pantala flavescens (Odonata: Libellulidae) in Middle Asia and Understanding of the Migration Model in the Afro-Asian Region Using Stable Isotopes of Hydrogen Sergey N. Borisov 1,*, Ivan K. Iakovlev 1 , Alexey S. Borisov 1 , Mikhail Yu. Ganin 2 and Alexei V. Tiunov 3 1 Institute of Systematics and

Most species more or less are sensitive to water quality, But pollutions and types of pollutions are very different.

For example, contamination of water with wastewater, detergents, petroleum pollutants, oils, heavy metals, natural toxins such as arsenic and sulfur, polymeric materials such as Nano plastics or dangerous toxins such as dioxins, etc., each have different effects or different tolerant response between species- species Have different

Sometimes combining several factors has quite complex and different results. Most importantly, a species may be relatively adaptable to an area with contaminated conditions and same species may not exhibit this resistance in other habitats due to genetic differences or coexisted fauna and flora, biotic and abiotic factors of ecosystems.

The type of pollution and the study area are very important with local species.

As your study area is Bangladesh, so for adult identification of the odonates you better follow the identification keys given by Fraser, F.C. (1936) in Fauna of British India (Odonata). For the immature odonates you could see 'Freshwater Biology " by Ward, H.B. and Whipple, G.C. (1959) and also 'A guide to the study of Freshwater Biology' by Needham, J.G. and Needham, R.P. (1962).

I don't know if ResearchGate is the best place find an answer to this question. Have you reached out to anybody DSA or other large odonate study organizations? Here are some (hopefully) useful links:

http://iodonata.updog.co (specifically the "Organizations/Societies" and "Discussion Groups" links)

Just google: Gossamerwings

Thanks alot for your valuable suggestion.

Correction: on Fauna Europaea you will not find the subspecies.

Addition: Here you will find almost all species, including subspecies, in the Appendix 1. V.J. Kalkman, J.-P. Boudot, R. Bernard, K.-J. Conze, G. De Knijf, E. Dyatlova, S. Ferreira, M. Jović, J. Ott, E. Riservato and G. Sahlén. 2010. European Red List of Dragonflies. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Thanks Dear Aarti Rama

It could be Trithemis aurora.

Although I already knew the report, many thanks!

Best wishes,

André

Hi, Kwitonda,

In Statistica 8 you have standartization method for your data. Or you can normalize the data and compare. Or can use robast statistics. First should see the type of distribution. To use uniform approach distribution of all var should be the same type (better normal). If no, use robast statistics. Some ideas you can find in Elliott (1977) or in my several articles (my site). For abundance distribution is log-normal; in your case should see direct results...

Andrey

I would focus on physical attributes, which can be easily measured, such as surrounding land use (e.g. within a strip of 100m). Water analysis (especially searching for pollutants) can be misleading as they often arrive episodically (run-off events, spray drift, ecc.). For the analysis I would use the community compositions of the Odonata, applying nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) and fit the environmental variables with the function envfit (R, Vegan package).

Hi dear Bisan,

Thank you for your suggesting paper. sounds interesting.I will review your paper .

Just for my information, Did your paper improve speed of  convergence or not?

Dear,

Although dragonfly larvae are capable of predating larvae of Aedes aegypti, this is not enough for them to perform an efficient biocontrol. For the success of biological control, several factors need to be taken into account. In this case, the greatest difficulty is the difference of the breeding sites used by these species. Hardly a dragonfly will reproduce in the great diversity of small and domestic nurseries used by Aedes aegypti. The major difficulty is not to eliminate the larvae, but rather to use a measure of control that is able to reach them.

Hi dear Jashua,

 I think there is not just one parameter to effect exploration and exploitation at one moment, and adapting parameters maybe a good idea. By the way thanks for your explanation, that's quiet helpful.

The question about what exactly is a sub-species and when do populations qualify to be separate species is a very old one. 

Current state of taxonomy of odonates is such that we still lack detailed morphological data on majority of species, which creates a huge problem. Hence, a priori I must admit many problematic groups exist where the relationships between species/sub-species remain ambiguous.

"Between Onychogomphus forcipatus And Onychogomphus lefebvrii differentiation are less than from O. lefebvrii and O. flexuosus."

 I think what you are asking here is if we cannot define a 'unit of difference' between two species then how do we know if they are not just sub-species? 

It's a complex question which cannot be answered quickly. As Kiran mentioned above sub-species are geographically isolated populations which if allowed CAN interbreed. Now this definition is not practiced for every species is it'll be impossible to test viability of off-springs between different species.

Instead taxonomists working on specific groups create their own un-written guidelines which are to be followed.

As a case study, I am here's one of my own papers which deals with a sub-species of a damselfly Aciagrion approximans krishna. This population was previously described under the species Aciagrion hisopa but in our paper we show that it actually belongs to A. approximans. If you go through the paper we compare both the sub-species of A. approximans in detail (one sub-species occurs in North-eastern India and Indo-china while the other in the Peninsular India, so these two sub-species are geographically separated perhaps with some region of 'overlap' in Eastern India).

The differences between these two 'sub-species' are much smaller than differences between other species of the same genera. 

Several prominent scientists do not consider sub-species as scientifically useful, as with molecular studies and phylogenetics the concept of subspecies is being challenged. So we still do not have full-proof answers for your questions in the literature :)

"From our experience in the literature we are convinced that the subspecies concept is the most critical and disorderly area of modern systematic theory-more so than taxonomists have realized or theo-rists have admitted."

"Differentiation in higher taxa accepted names such as Genera in various references is another problem. in one reference taxon name is Rhodischnura nursei and in another is ischnura nursei. or Anax ephippiger - Heminax ephippiger?"

This has actually nothing at all to do with species or sub-species but instead comes under the phenomenon of Taxonomic revisions. 

Both species which you mention had been previously described under a different genus but later analysis, either morphological or phylogentic revelade they belonged to some other genus hence they were transferred and two names exist for these species.

This is the reason why species which have been 'revised' are always written as,

e.g., Ischnura nursei (Morton,1907): note the author name and year in parenthesis.

Whereas a species never been revised will be written as e.g., Ischnura rubilio Selys,1876

In case of Rhodischnura/Ischnura nursei, a phylogenetic analysis done by Dijsktra et al. 2013 (see: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/syen.12035/abstract) revealed that this species belongs to the Ischnura 'clade' and hence is con-generic with other Ischnura species. This led the authors to transfer the species to the genus Ischnura and is now widely used; (e.g., see: http://www.indianodonata.org/#!/sp/379/Ischnura-nursei)

Hope this answers your question at least partly, Cheers :)

Thisis a legend that subspecies cannot overlapp and cannot exchange gene. Subspecies appear generally through isolation driven by climate oscillations or tectonic drift, or migration and settlement of an isolated population (founder effect). When climate oscillation lead to the appearance of a subspecies having only a small genertic difference, reverse of climate trend can promote new contact between the disjunct subspecies with possibility of hybridation as reproducive isolation is weak. This should be the case of Orthetrum corerulescens coerulescens (European) and Orthetrum coerulescens anceps, (from Pakistan  to Morocco) which presently overlapp and produce an outnumberable amount of intermediates structures in part of the Mediterranean and the near-whole Balkans.

The basic question for subspecies instead of species is that they cannot be defined objectively but are created according to the personnal preference of their descriptor. Some show a small genetic chnage when compared to the original population (nominotypical subspecies), other not according to known studies. There is no theoretical range span for subspecies, Some may have a minute range, other a wide range, this depends of the past geographic and genetic history of the group, linked to climate, geology and behaviour.

Have a nice 2017 year full of nice discoveries

JPB

Many thanks Andrew.  I shall have a look at the paper. 

As the previous comments have noticed, interspecies mating attempts are extremly common in Odonata. If you check the literature on Sympetrum depressiusculum e.g., there mating system is based on males starting in the early morning and grasp for mating attempt nearly every dragonfly they came across, from males of their own species to any other species resting in the same roots and not fast enough warming up to escape their attempts. I rember the picture of a male Sympetrum depressiusculum (a Libellulidae) holding a male Onychogompgus uncatus ( a Gomphidae).

Greetings Arne

Hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Rediscovery?????

This word is really ridiculous for scientific work

about 2 year ago and also yesteryear i found both male and female of this species from 3 separate area from Iran.

my unpublished paper nipped in the bud and with my idea this manner is not scientific moral.

in my opinion C. persicum clearly separated species and Lohman, 1993 described a valid taxon.  

Dear Anila,

I think the first photo is of a red male of an Aethriamanta species (family: Libellulidae: subfamily Urothemistinae), not Crocothemis. The second photo appears to be a yellowish female of an Orthetrum species (family Libellulidae: subfamily Libellulinae), but the clarity of the photo makes it difficult to discern required detail. There is probably only one Aethriamanta species present at this locality, but there is likely to be a number of Orthetrum species occurring together at this site, making species I.D. more difficult, particularly because females of the different Orthetrum species resemble each other quite closely. I hope this is of help.

Cheers Magnus Peterson

Yes; pdf attached. See also papers by Borisov 2009 2014 2015 at https://yadi.sk/d/7urxmt5anuzgD

Hi Nhat:

To preserve insects in museum collections in tropical countries you must keep the specimens in a dry place. Fungi are the main threat to the collections in tropical countries. The room must have a dehumidifier to keep humidity low (50-70%) to prevent the development of fungi that can damage the collection.Keep pinned insects in dust-proof boxes having a soft bottom that will permit easy pinning. Several types of insect boxes may be purchased from supply houses.

The most commonly used type is made of wood, about  230 by 330 by 60 mm in size, with a tight-fitting lid  and an inner bottom of composition board, or foam plastic. Put mothballs (Naphthalene flakes) into a small card­board pillbox that is firmly attached to the bottom of  the insect box (usually in one corner) and has a few pin  holes in it.  It prevent pests and fungi in the boxes. Process insects that are to be stored in paper  envelopes (such as Odonata and Lepidoptera) while they are still soft enough to fold the wings above the body.The most important point to remember is that all such manipulations of the specimen are best  done while the insect is still fresh and flexible.  You can spread the wings of  butterflies and dragonflies using a spreading board made of balsa wood or styrofoam, cardboard, or any soft material that allows a pin to be  inserted deeply enough for the lower surface of the specimen to rest on a flat surface. Spread­ing boards can be obtained from a supply house or made at home. There are standard positions for the wings of a spread insect. In the case of butterflies, moths and dragonflies, the rear margins of the front wings should be far enough for­ward so there is no large gap at the side between the front and hind wings.  If you need more detailed information refer to standard textbooks of Entomology like Borror & DeLong 2007 for housing, arranging and caring for the collection.

Regards,

Luis Miguel

Dear colleague, colour is not relevant for subspecies demarcation and only the structure of the inferior appendages work (see paper 1990 attached). Your first picture seems to match O. forcipatus forcipatus (but see below), the second one is a bit atypical (a bit too long) for O. forcipatus albotibialis but is certainely this taxon. A study at the population level is always needed for the area of these specimens, as the individual variation around a "standard" median morph is important.

I am a bit surprised for the occurrence of an "O. f. forcipatus - like structure" in NW Iran as all Iran populations have been ascribed to ssp. albotibialis after Dumont et al. (1992) found it in SW Turkmenistan (W. Kopet Dag) and Schneider & Dumont (2015) in Fars province in Iran. Populations from Georgia are definitely ssp. albotibialis (Schröter et al. 2015 (in press)) after a long-lasting situation of confusion. Populations of Armenia have been also ascribed to ssp. albotibialis by Tailly et al. (2004) and Ananian & Tailly (2013), as well as those from NE and SE Azerbaijan (Dumont 2004; Skvortsov & Snegovaya 2014). All Anatolian populations are also ssp. albitibialis. So it is practically impossible to have a true population of the nominal subspecies in NW Iran and I wonder if the structure of this specimen is really representative of a population wich would have such constant feature. SSP. albotibialis may be either very yellow or rather melanic, so the extent of the black surfaces cannot be used for identification.

To go further with the status of these taxa (subspecies or true species), genetic investigations are needed. If you analyse the origin and features of the various subspecies included in the 2014 paper attached here, you will see that using the usual markers for the 3 subspecies forcipatus, unguiculatus and albotibialis don't result in any demarcation of either (all are mixed). So progress remain to do for better insights in this collective species.

All the best

JPB

In my opinion for an identification it could be also useful to know where (geographic area) this specimen was collected,

Rinaldo Nicoli

Hello!

There are some taxonomic/ systematic articles that could be of your interest:

Nel et al. 2009. Revision of Permo-Carboniferous griffenflies (Insecta: Odonatoptera: Meganisoptera) based upon new species and redescription of selected poorly known taxa from Eurasia.;

Kukalová-Peck 2009. Carboniferous protodonatoid dragonfly nymphs and the synapomorphies of Odonatoptera and Ephemeroptera (Insecta: Palaeoptera).;

Bechly et al. 2001. New results concerning the morphology of the most ancient dragonfies (Insecta: Odonatoptera) from the Namurian of Hagen-Vorhalle (Germany).

thanks alot guys

Hi,

the rearing conditions depends a lot on the species and the size of the larvae:

small dragonfly larvae: simply filtered pond water (without potential predators), 1-2 piece of grass (for Protozoon development/ as food and to sit on; important: not too much grass; pellicles on the surface needs to get delete) and not too much water (3-4cm high, so that atmospheric oxygen can diffuse into the water). Food: every second day very good washed freshly hatched Artemia salina nauplia. Important: not too much food; delete old, not fed food. For larvae, which prefer to stay in the sediment some layer of washed sediment is necessary. Temperature: something around 18-25 °C is perfect for the most species. The higher the temperature the higher the growing rate and the higher the mortality.

bigger dragonfly larvae: give the bigger larvae more space, more sediment, more bigger sticks to climb on. Food: you can stop the artemia feeding and take chironomids and a mixture of macroinvertebrates from the next pond instead. The last larval stadia are mostly critical; there is often a rather high mortality!

Good luck!

Feel free to contact me for more details.

Dear Ravi Kant Upadhyay,

thanks for your answer!

Could you provide some references on publication about these structures?

Cheers,

Natalia.

Thank you, Bert! 

Thanks for the information

Venkatesh - excellent paper - thanks for that. They are surprisingly effective predators. 

Red cotton bug and dusky cotton bug (Hemiptera)  always stain the cotton fiber. They have importance from the view point of dye. Cochineal scale is well known for insect dye for food and drinks.

Why must this ink long for a year? Most damselflies and dragonflies only live for some weeks. Only some species are on the wing for several months.

Dear Jonathan, thanatosis is indeed a response to threat that has been not only shown to occur but also has a survival value in damselfly larvae (Ischnura elegans (Coenagrionidae) Freya, Gyssels and Stoks, 2005 Ethology 111: 411-423). This response is shown when damselfly larvae were confronted with either dragonfly or fish predators. Whether thanatosis is shown by dragonflies is not known but I wouldn't be surprised if this is the case.

MONTEIRO-JÚNIOR, C.S. ; Juen, L. ; HAMADA, N. . Effects of urbanization on stream habitats and associated adult dragonfly and damselfly communities in central Brazilian Amazonia. Landscape and Urban Planning, v. 127, p. 28-40, 2014.