Dataset Information

Hoverflies of the Timon-David collection (Diptera, Syrphidae).

ABSTRACT:

Background

Hoverflies are among the most important insect pollinators and there is documented evidence of a recent decline in their populations. To trace the past distributions of hoverfly species, verified records of historical collections are essential.

New information

Here, we provide data on 1071 specimens of hoverflies collected or received by Jean Timon-David and hosted at the Marseille Natural History Museum, France. Most of the specimens were collected by Timon-David himself and come from south-eastern France, mainly from the Departments of Bouches-du-Rhône, Var and Hautes-Alpes. Most of these specimens were checked for the accuracy of their identification according to the latest identification keys. This resulted in 85 additions to the known fauna of the French Departments, mostly for Var and Bouches-du-Rhône. The taxonomy of all specimens was checked against the latest available checklists and updated names added whenever necessary. Specimens received from entomologists working in other continents may also be valuable, as these are historic testimonies of the fauna of their own respective regions of origin and may, therefore, also be used as reference material. One paratype specimen from Australia is present in the collection. The holotype of Cheilosia vangaveri Timon-David, 1937 is absent from the collection and should be considered as lost. All but two of the specimens with locality labels had their geographical coordinates of origin added in the dataset.

SUBMITTER: Neve G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10946086 | biostudies-literature | 2024

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hoverflies of the Timon-David collection (Diptera, Syrphidae).

Nève Gabriel G Lair Xavier X Lebard Thomas T Meunier Jean-Yves JY Teste Louis-Jean LJ Séguinel Louise L

Biodiversity data journal 20240219

<h4>Background</h4>Hoverflies are among the most important insect pollinators and there is documented evidence of a recent decline in their populations. To trace the past distributions of hoverfly species, verified records of historical collections are essential.<h4>New information</h4>Here, we provide data on 1071 specimens of hoverflies collected or received by Jean Timon-David and hosted at the Marseille Natural History Museum, France. Most of the specimens were collected by Timon-David himse ...[more]

PMID: 38501073

Similar Datasets

Project description:Hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) are among the most important pollinators, although they attract less attention than bees. They are usually thought to be rather opportunistic flower visitors, although previous studied demonstrated that they show colour preferences and their nectar feeding is affected by morphological constraints related to flower morphology. Despite the growing appreciation of hoverflies and other non-bee insects as pollinators, there is a lack of community-wide studies of flower visitation by syrphids. The aim of this paper is to provide a detailed analysis of flower visitation patterns in a species rich community of syrphids in a Central European grassland and to evaluate how species traits shape the structure of the plant-hoverfly flower visitation network. We found that different species varied in the level of specialisation, and while some species visited a similar spectre of flowers, others partitioned resources more strongly. There was a consistent difference in both specialisation and flower preferences between three syrphid subfamilies. Eristalinae and Pipizinae were more specialised than Syrphinae. Trait-based analyses showed that relative flower visitation (i) increased with plant height, but most strongly in Eristalinae; (ii) increased with inflorescence size in small species from all three subfamilies, but was independent of inflorescence size in large species of Eristalinae and Syrphinae; and (iii) depended on flower colour, but in a subfamily-specific way. Eristalinae showed the strongest flower colour preferences for white flowers, Pipizinae visited mostly white and yellow flowers, while Syrphinae were less affected by flower colour. Exploration of the structure of the plant-hoverfly flower visitation network showed that the network was both modular and nested. We also found that there were almost no differences in specialisation and relative visitation frequency between males and females. Overall, we showed that flower visitation in syrphids was affected by phylogenetic relatedness, body size of syrphids and several plant traits.

Dataset Information

Hoverflies of the Timon-David collection (Diptera, Syrphidae).

Background

New information

Publications

Hoverflies of the Timon-David collection (Diptera, Syrphidae).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets