Next Article in Journal
Impact of Abiotic and Biotic Environmental Conditions on the Development and Infectivity of Entomopathogenic Nematodes in Agricultural Soils
Previous Article in Journal
Allele Frequencies of Genetic Variants Associated with Varroa Drone Brood Resistance (DBR) in Apis mellifera Subspecies across the European Continent
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 15
Issue 6
10.3390/insects15060420
insects-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Post-Fire Coleoptera Fauna in Central Russian Forests after the 2021 Fires (Study Using Beer Traps)

by
Leonid V. Egorov
1,2,
Alexander B. Ruchin
1 and
Alexander I. Fayzulin
3,*
1
Joint Directorate of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve and National Park ”Smolny”, Saransk 430005, Russia
2
Prisursky State Nature Reserve, Cheboksary 428034, Russia
3
Institute of Ecology of Volga River basin of RAS, Samara Federal Research Center of RAS, Togliatti 445003, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2024, 15(6), 420; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15060420
Submission received: 20 April 2024 / Revised: 31 May 2024 / Accepted: 3 June 2024 / Published: 5 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Insect Ecology, Diversity and Conservation)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

This study presents an analysis of the Coleoptera fauna in the forests of the Euro-pean Russia in 2022 and 2023, after a fire. Insects were sampled from burned plots (9) in 2010 and 2021, as well as unburned (control) plots (2), and alpha diversity was compared. After processing the material, we examined a total of 12,218 Coleoptera specimens from 38 families and identified 194 species. The families Nitidulidae, Cerambycidae, Elateridae, and Scarabaeidae were the most abundant across all plots. Cerambycidae, Elateridae, Nitidulidae, Staphylinidae, Coccinellidae, and Scarabaeidae exhibited the greatest species diversity. In total, 17 species were found on all plots. Only five species exhibited preferences for some certain plots. Maximum abundance and species diversity were observed on unburned (control) plots. The plots where fires occurred in 2010 and 2021 had the lowest total abundance values for Coleoptera. These fires destroyed almost all potential sites for beetle settlement, feeding, breeding, and shelter.

Abstract

Fires can significantly impact forest ecosystems. However, studies on the effects of fires on insect communities in post-fire plots in natural forests are rare. This study presents an analysis of the Coleoptera fauna in the forests of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve (European Russia) in 2022 and 2023 after a fire. Insects were sampled from burned plots (9) in 2010 and 2021, as well as unburned (control) plots (2), and alpha diversity was compared. After processing the material, we examined a total of 12,218 Coleoptera specimens from 38 families and identified 194 species. The families Nitidulidae, Cerambycidae, Elateridae, and Scarabaeidae were the most abundant across all plots. Cerambycidae, Elateridae, Nitidulidae, Staphylinidae, Coccinellidae, and Scarabaeidae exhibited the greatest species diversity. In total, 17 species were found on all plots, including Cetonia aurata, Protaetia cuprea volhyniensis, Trogoderma glabrum, Carpophilus hemipterus, Epuraea biguttata, Glischrochilus grandis, Glischrochilus hortensis, Glischrochilus quadripunctatus, Soronia grisea, Pediacus depressus, Chrysanthia geniculata, Anastrangalia reyi, Leptura quadrifasciata, Leptura thoracica, Lepturalia nigripes, Rhagium mordax, and Anisandrus dispar. Only five species exhibited preferences for certain plots. Maximum abundance and species diversity were observed on unburned (control) plots. The plots where fires occurred in 2010 and 2021 had the lowest total abundance values for Coleoptera. These fires destroyed almost all potential sites for beetle settlement, feeding, breeding, and shelter. Traps recorded a higher abundance of Coleoptera in the first year after fires compared to the second year. The Coleoptera fauna showed the greatest similarity on the control plots.

1. Introduction

In forest ecosystems, Coleoptera are a significant community component that plays a crucial role in substance cycling and redistribution, organic matter decomposition, pollination, and biological control [1,2,3,4,5]. Most publications that discuss the effects of wildfires on Coleoptera fauna focus on soil-dwelling and terrestrial Coleoptera, which are convenient as monitoring objects [6,7,8,9,10,11,12]. Large fires can have both direct and indirect effects on Coleoptera. Many species of Coleoptera have been observed attempting to escape the flames or burrowing into moist soil to avoid fire [13,14,15,16,17]. The effects of fire are directly influenced by its size, speed of development, and catastrophic nature, as well as the ecological conditions of the habitat. In addition to the direct effects, there are also indirect effects that may not be immediately apparent but can occur gradually over time [18,19,20].
Concerning the response to fires varies among Coleoptera species, some species thrive immediately after a fire, even if they were not previously recorded in the habitats where the fires occurred. Other species gradually repopulate burned ecosystems as they adapt to the effects of fires. A third group return to burned areas after previously inhabiting them. Coleoptera species are more susceptible to fire during their egg and larval stages due to their limited mobility and specific habitat requirements [9,21,22,23,24,25].
The analysis of climatic indicators in European Russia from 1966 to 2018 indicates that the air temperature increased at a rate of 0.32–0.53 °C per decade. The number of days per year with average daily air temperature above 10 °C also increased. These data indicate a significant warming of the climate, which creates conditions for an increase in the danger of wildfires in various regions of Russia [26,27]. According to historical records and palynological analysis, fires occurred in the Mordovia State Nature Reserve in 1842, 1899, 1932, 1972, 2010, 2018, 2019, and 2021. They differed significantly from each other in intensity, area, character of development, duration, and damage to the ecosystem [10,19,28,29]. The most significant wildfires were recorded during the summers of 2010 and 2021. In 2010, the fires took place in natural forests that were considered climax ecosystems at the time. Following the fires, changes occurred in the ecosystem of the burned areas, resulting in the emergence of young deciduous trees, primarily birch (Betula) and aspen (Populus tremula), and the restoration of the herbaceous layer. Khapugin et al. [30] reported that dead and weakened trees gradually decomposed at the site of the upstream fires after 2010. This resulted in a rise in dry wood, primarily from coniferous species that had not had time to decompose. Since 2017, there has been a gradual decrease in precipitation, soil moisture, and changes in the hydrological regime of surface water. The catastrophic fires of 2021 that occurred in the same areas burned in 2010 were caused by a variety of factors. In many places, the fires burned deadwood and dry trees [31]. The situation that occurred in the forest ecosystem of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve is unique to this location. Therefore, we conducted research in this area in 2022 and 2023. The aim of this work was to study the Coleoptera fauna collected by beer traps in the forests of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve affected by wildfires in 2021. The objectives of the study were as follows: (1) to analyze the biodiversity and abundance of Coleoptera on both burned and unburned plots; (2) to compare the number of saproxylic and anthophilic species on the studied plots; and (3) to compare the similarity of Coleoptera faunas in burned and unburned plots and to find out the possibilities of species occupation of the burned plots.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

This study was conducted from 2022 to 2023 in the Mordovia State Nature Reserve in center of European Russia. The reserve is situated on the southern boundary of the taiga zone and adjacent to forest-steppe ecosystems. The Mordovia State Nature Reserve has been under state protection since 1936. The protected area comprises mainly forest ecosystems and covers a total area of 321.62 km2. Historically, the primary tree species in this area was a pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), which formed pure or mixed forest communities. However, due to the 2010 fires, many pine forests were replaced by birch (Betula pendula Roth), resulting in deformations. The Mordovia State Nature Reserve contains pure forest communities of linden (Tilia cordata Mill.) in the northern region. Oak forests (Quercus robur L.) are found in smaller areas, mainly in the floodplain of the Moksha River in the western part of the reserve. The soils in this area are predominantly sandy, with varying degrees of podzolization. The average annual precipitation ranges from 406.6 to 681.3 mm, while the average annual air temperature is 4.7 °C. Maximum values are recorded in July (+39–40 °C) and minimum values in February (−42–45 °C) [30].

2.2. Sampling Procedures

Material was collected between April and October using beer traps baited with beer and sugar. Each trap was made from a 5 L plastic container that previously contained water. A 10 × 10 cm square hole was cut out on one side of the container. It is necessary for the arrival of beetles. Bait made of beer and sugar was poured into the bottom of the container [32]. One trap was set per plot, with the trap set at a height of 1.5 m, hanging below a small wooden tripod [33]. Traps were checked depending on weather conditions after 7–14 days. At the same time, after each check, all the bait was poured out and a completely new bait was added. Material was sampled 13 times in 2022 and 15 times in 2023 and then summarized. A total of 11 plots were selected for the study (Figure 1). These plots varied in terms of fire intensity, distance from the fire edge, and degree of vegetation recovery following the 2010 fires. Previously, Ruchin [31] published detailed descriptions and photos of all plots. We sampled plots that burned in 2010 and 2021 (plots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9), plots that burned only in 2010 (plots 1, 2, and 8), and control plots (plots 10 and 11) that never burned. A brief comparative description of plots is provided in Table 1.

2.3. Identification

The nomenclature of Coleoptera was determined using the latest catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera [34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42] and other relevant publications. Species within each family were listed based on modern data [43,44]. The years of description for some beetle species were determined according to Bousquet [45]. Species identification was performed by the L.V. Egorov.

2.4. Data Analyzes

The Jaccard index was used for comparison based on all beetle species identified on different plots. Additionally, we calculated the Margalef, Shannon, and Simpson indexes [46,47,48] to understand species diversity and community equitability. In our calculations, we excluded Coleoptera that were not identified at the species level. Jaccard index similarity is presented as a dendrogram built using Ward’s method and Ecuclidian distance. We determined saproxylic species based on guidelines from publications [49,50,51,52] and our own data [53]. Anthophilous species were defined as those that repeatedly visited flowers. Our own long-term observations, as well as information from publications [33,54], were used in this case. For saproxylic and anthophilic species, calculations were made for the ratio of the number of these species to the total number of species in a particular plot and expressed as a percentage.
Statistical analysis was performed with PAST 4.07 [55]. The ordination techniques, using principal component analysis (PCA), defined the main gradients in the distribution of the studied species selected for analysis (we analyzed the species that were common to all plots). To provide an ecological interpretation of the ordination axes, studied sites based on the registered species abundance were plotted on the PCA ordination diagram as additional environmental data.

3. Results

In total, 12,218 Coleoptera specimens were identified. We identified 194 species from 38 families (Appendix A). Some specimens (332, 2.7%) could not be identified to the species level. The families Nitidulidae (3781 specimens, 30.9%), Cerambycidae (3223, 26.4%), Elateridae (2572, 21.1%), and Scarabaeidae (1027, 8.4%) had the highest total abundance across all plots in both years of the study. Cerambycidae (33 species, 16.8%), Elateridae (21, 10.7%), Nitidulidae (19, 9.6%), Staphylinidae (15, 7.6%), Coccinellidae (12, 6.1%), and Scarabaeidae (8, 4.1%) accounted for 86.8% of all captured specimens.
The number of Coleoptera collected in traps varied among plots. The highest abundance of Coleoptera was observed on plot 11, plot 10, plot 8, and plot 1 (Figure 2). The plots with the lowest abundance values were plot 5, plot 3, and plot 4. Variations in Coleoptera abundance were observed across different years. In 2022, plots near the 2021 fire boundary (7, 8, 9, 10) and control plots (1, 11) had the highest beetle abundance. However, on plots 4, 5, and 6, which were far away from unburned forests and experienced intensive fires, beetle abundance was higher in 2023, the second year after the 2021 fire (Figure 2).
Plots 3, 4, and 5 had fewer beetle species than the rest of the plots, the latter of which ranged from 20 to 24 species each (Table 2). The diversity of Coleoptera species was highest on plots that either did not burn or burned only in 2010 in both years of the study. The lowest species diversity was observed on plots that burned in both 2010 and 2021 and were located deep within these fires.
The Shannon index yielded the highest value for plot 8. Overall, the burned plots from 2021 exhibited relatively high values for the Shannon index and low values for the Simpson index. The number of beetle species on these plots (4, 5, and 6) was significantly lower than on unburned plots (10 and 11), as evidenced by the low values of the Margalef index. The number of species was highest on plots 10 and 11. In contrast, plots bordering burned wood (7, 8, 9, 10, and 11) or unburned plots (10 and 11) had high Margalef index values. Meanwhile, unburned plots (10 and 11) had low Shannon index values and high Simpson index values, indicating the dominance of one or more Coleoptera species on these plots (Table 2).
The percentage of saproxylic species varied among the plots studied, ranging from 75.8% (plot 6) to 87.0% (plot 9). Plot 6 had the lowest relative number of saproxylic species, while plots 9 and 3 (located on the boundary of burned plots) had the highest values (Table 2). There was no difference observed in the dynamics of the number of saproxylic species on individual plots during the study years. The fluctuations of this parameter on all plots varied by 10%. However, the parameter underwent the least amount of change on the unburned plots (1, 8, 10, 11), while the highest limit of variation was obtained on the plots burned in 2021 (Figure 3).
The percentage of anthophilic species varied among the studied plots, ranging from 45.5% (plot 6) to 59.7% (plot 1). Plot 6 had the lowest number of anthophiles, while plot 1 had the highest (Table 2). No changes in the number of anthophilic species by years of study were recorded on different plots. Somewhat larger changes of the parameter were obtained on boundary plots (Figure 3).
Out of the 194 species, 17 (8.6%) were present in all plots studied. The following are the taxa from the following seven families: (1) Scarabaeidae, Cetonia aurata (Linnaeus, 1758), Protaetia cuprea volhyniensis (Gory and Percheron, 1833); (2) Dermestidae, Trogoderma glabrum (Herbst, 1783); (3) Nitidulidae, Carpophilus hemipterus (Linnaeus, 1758), Epuraea biguttata (Thunberg, 1784), Glischrochilus grandis (Tournier, 1872), Glischrochilus hortensis (Geoffroy, 1785), Glischrochilus quadripunctatus (Linnaeus, 1758), Soronia grisea (Linnaeus, 1758); (4) Cucujidae, Pediacus depressus (Herbst, 1797); (5) Oedemeridae, Chrysanthia geniculata W.L.E. Schmidt, 1846); (6) Cerambycidae, Anastrangalia reyi (Heyden, 1889), Leptura quadrifasciata Linnaeus, 1758, Leptura thoracica Creutzer, 1799, Lepturalia nigripes (De Geer, 1775), Rhagium mordax (De Geer, 1775); (7) Curculionidae, Anisandrus dispar (Fabricius, 1792).
Figure 4 shows that the abundance of most of the 17 species did not depend on the plots. However, five species (E. biguttata, G. grandis, G. hortensis, G. quadripunctatus, and Rh. mordax) were exceptions. The abundance of four species, namely, E. biguttata, G. grandis, G. hortensis, and G. quadripunctatus, showed substantially higher numbers on plot 10 and particularly on plot 11. This information pertains to the results of the Shannon and Simpson index calculations on plots 10 and 11 (Table 2). The calculations demonstrated the dominance of one or more Coleoptera species. For instance, Rh. mordax and these species represented the majority of individuals (67.7%) on plot 11. Meanwhile, Rh. mordax was the most abundant species on plot 10 (Figure 4).
The Jaccard index calculation revealed significant differences between the plots (Figure 5). The biodiversity of Coleoptera on plots 10 and 11, which were not affected by fires, was similar and significantly different from all other plots. Plots 3, 4, and 5, which burned in 2021, were grouped separately, while plot 6 occupied a distinct position. The fire margins were closely related with minimal differences in species composition.

4. Discussion

Our study investigated the effectiveness of using beer traps at low altitudes to study Coleoptera biodiversity in burned areas. The methodology has been extensively studied in open biotopes and forest edges [33,56,57] and can be applied to analyze biodiversity, faunal similarity, and other indicators. Our results indicate that beer traps located at low altitudes in open biotopes effectively attract Coleoptera and can profitably be used in other similar studies. The 2021 fires in the Mordovia State Nature Reserve destroyed dry trees, deadwood, and herbaceous vegetation in many areas, making the use of beer traps on tripods appropriate and effective.
The 2021 fires are considered catastrophic events due to their rapid spread over large areas during windy weather. These events can have devastating impacts on ecosystems, including the entomofauna. Such evaluations are objective and based on observable consequences. For instance, Duelli et al. [58] observed significant increases in insect species diversity and abundance in forests following windstorms. Similarly, Moretti et al. [59] and Bogusch et al. [60] found a similar effect among certain insect groups following significant fires in various European countries. However, severe fire impacts can significantly delay the recovery of insect fauna over large areas. In these cases, the entire ecosystem is disturbed, resulting in the death of plants across all forest layers, leading to a decrease in both biodiversity and abundance insects [61,62].
Small fires in disturbed forests allow more sunlight to reach the soil, promoting the growth of grasses, shrubs, and young trees. These conditions are more attractive to phytophagous, anthophilous, and other ecological groups of insects, which, in turn, become prey for predatory insects. Sunlight also promotes the reproduction and larval development of these insects on grasses, shrubs, and forest edges [14,57,63]. Low-intensity fires typically result in increases in species diversity and abundance. Small fires weaken deadwood, dry trees, and stumps, leading to the development of large numbers of saproxylic Coleoptera species [64,65,66].
In 2022, the traps recorded a 37% higher abundance of Coleoptera in the year following the fires compared to the second year (2023) after the fires. It is unclear whether this result is related to the duration of the experiment, as the traps were operated for 160 days in 2022 and 181 days in 2023. The reasons for this result are likely due to both unknown meteorological factors and the observed increase in abundance of many insect species after fires. These are the typical characteristics of mixed forests in the temperate zone. Forest plots 1 and 8 experienced fires in 2010 but not in 2021. The regeneration of birch and pine is slow, and there is a significant amount of dead wood, including dry dead trees resulting from the fires.
Plots 3, 4, and 5 had the lowest total abundance of Coleoptera. In addition to the fire of 2021, these suffered previous fires in 2010, which destroyed almost all deadwood, dry trees, herbaceous and shrub layers, and a young birch forest down to the roots in 2021. In the second year following the 2021 fires on plots 4, 5, and 6, there was a small increase in the number of Coleoptera species.
According to the Jacquard index the Coleoptera fauna showed the greatest similarity on plots 10 and 11, which formed a distinct clade that differed significantly from all others. Plots 1 and 2, plots 4 and 5, and plots 7 and 8 were also characterized by similar values. All of them were located close to each other or had similar conditions for beetles to live in. Plots 3, 4, and 5 also formed a distinct clade, while plot 6 was somewhat separated on the dendrogram. These results suggest that the faunas of the burned plots are similar to each other, and the beetle faunas of the control plots are more similar to one another than to the other plots.
Only 17 species of Coleoptera were found on all plots. However, the principal component analysis did not reveal any changes in the abundance of 12 out of these 17 species. That is, 12 species are quite widespread in biotopes and can inhabit both open ecosystems (burned plots) and forest ecosystems. Only five species showed certain trends in preference. For instance, E. biguttata can survive on rotting mushrooms, berries, fruits, and decaying liquids [67]. Adults of G. grandis and G. hortensis are commonly found on decaying tree sap from various trees, while their larvae develop on different decaying substrates [68,69]. G. quadripunctatus and Rh. mordax are commonly found in subcortical habitats of both coniferous and deciduous trees, where they feed on decaying tree sap from various tree species [70,71].
The study showed that the diversity and abundance of Coleoptera species were greater on unburned plots than on burned ones. Moreover, plots with one or more species dominance led to a decrease in the Shannon index and an increase in the Simpson index. These indicators changed inversely on plots without herbaceous vegetation, shrubs, deadwood, and dead trees. It is a well-established fact that fires on small plots promote subsequent infestation in neighboring unburned plots [61,62]. However, plots with highland fires may be adjacent to plots with lowland fires. In such cases, the fauna of completely burned plots takes longer to recover [29]. However, if all possible feeding objects for Coleoptera adults and larvae are completely destroyed by fire, recovery may take even longer. The relative number of saproxylic and anthophilic species varied on different plots, confirming this fact. The burned plots would be mainly colonized by saproxylic species that inhabit deadwood or remnants of dead trees. Following primary fires, these organics attract numerous saproxylic invertebrates [72,73]. However, a secondary fire in 2010 destroyed the maximum possible habitats with decaying organics. As a result, there was no significant increase in saproxylic abundance.

5. Conclusions

We surveyed 11 plots and collected 12,218 specimens of 194 Coleoptera species from 38 families over the course of two years. The families Nitidulidae, Cerambycidae, Elateridae, and Scarabaeidae were the most abundant across all plots. Cerambycidae, Elateridae, Nitidulidae, Staphylinidae, Coccinellidae, and Scarabaeidae were the families with the greatest species diversity. All plots had 17 species in common, while only 5 species showed a preference for specific plots. The unburned (control) plots yielded the highest abundance and species diversity. Meanwhile, plots that experienced fires in 2010 and 2021 had the lowest total Coleoptera abundance values. The fire in 2021 on these plots destroyed nearly all objects that could be used for the settlement, feeding, breeding, and sheltering of beetles. In the first year after the fire of 2021, the traps recorded a higher abundance of Coleoptera than in the subsequent year. The coleopteran fauna were most similar on the control and on nearby plots.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.B.R. and L.V.E.; methodology, A.B.R. and A.I.F.; software, A.B.R.; validation, A.B.R. and L.V.E.; formal analysis, A.B.R. and L.V.E.; investigation, A.B.R.; resources, A.B.R.; data curation, L.V.E.; writing—original draft preparation, A.B.R. and A.I.F.; writing—review and editing, L.V.E.; visualization, L.V.E.; supervision, A.B.R.; project administration, A.B.R.; funding acquisition, A.B.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Russian Science Foundation, grant number 22-14-00026.

Data Availability Statement

All data are available from the authors upon request.

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to M.N. Esin (Mordovia State Nature Reserve) for assisting in the research, to A.S. Prosvirov (Moscow, Lomonosov Moscow State University) for clarifying the definition of Ampedus sp., and to O.I. Semionenkov (Smolensk, National Park «Smolenskoye Poozerye») for assisting in the definition of some Staphylinidae.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Species diversity of Coleoptera on plots during two years of study (S—saproxylic; A—anthophilous).
Table A1. Species diversity of Coleoptera on plots during two years of study (S—saproxylic; A—anthophilous).
Species Plots
SA1234567891011
Carabidae
Harpalus signaticornis (Duftschmid, 1812) 1
Lebia marginata (Geoffroy, 1785) 1
Tachyta nana (Gyllenhal, 1810)+ 1 1
Histeridae
Gnathoncus buyssoni (Auzat, 1917)+ 13
Margarinotus striola (C.R. Sahlberg, 1819)+ 27
Platysoma angustatum (J.J. Hoffmann, 1803)+ 1
Platysoma elongatum (Thunberg, 1787) + 2
Leiodidae
Anisotoma axillaris (Gyllenhal, 1810)+ 1
Staphylinidae
Bolitochara pulchra (Gravenhorst, 1806)+ 1
Carphacis striatus (G.-A. Olivier, 1795)+ 1 1 1 123551
Deliphrum tectum (Paykull, 1789)+ 11
Necrodes littoralis (Linnaeus, 1758) 111 1
Nicrophorus investigator (Zetterstedt, 1824) 2
Nicrophorus vespilloides (Herbst, 1783) 2
Oiceoptoma thoracicum (Linnaeus, 1758) 111 6
Omalium rivulare (Paykull, 1789)+ 1 1
Phloeostiba plana (Paykull, 1792)+ 11 1 1 39
Phyllodrepa floralis (Paykull, 1789)+ 1
Phyllodrepa melanocephala (Fabricius, 1787) 1 1
Philonthus sp. 218
Quedius cruentus (G.-A. Olivier, 1795)+ 1 12
Quedius dilatatus (Fabricius, 1787)+ 32
Quedius scitus (Gravenhorst, 1806)+ 1
Staphylinidae sp. 43 201732554
Thamiaraea cinnamomea (Gravenhorst, 1802)+ 1 1
Lucanidae
Platycerus caraboides (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1 1
Scarabaeidae
Cetonia aurata (Linnaeus, 1758) ++331203955652184745108
Gnorimus variabilis (Linnaeus, 1758)++5 1 612122
Oxythyrea funesta (Poda von Neuhaus, 1761) +610521 513
Protaetia cuprea volhyniensis (Gory and Percheron, 1833)++505329302226632481813
Protaetia fieberi (Kraatz, 1880)++212 1 211
Protaetia marmorata (Fabricus, 1792)++72 112102232715
Serica brunnea (Linnaeus, 1758) 2 2
Trichius fasciatus (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 3 2 1 5
Scirtidae
Contacyphon ochraceus (Stephens, 1830) + 1 2 1
Contacyphon padi (Linnaeus, 1758) +1
Contacyphon pubescens (Fabricius, 1792) 1 2 11 1
Contacyphon punctipennis (Sharp, 1872) 21
Contacyphon variabilis (Thunberg, 1787) +1 511 1
Buprestidae
Anthaxia quadripunctata (Linnaeus, 1758)++341 1
Chalcophora mariana (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1
Chrysobothris chrysostigma (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1
Throscidae
Trixagus sp.+ 1 122
Elateridae
Agrypnus murinus (Linnaeus, 1758) +341619132091857122
Ampedus balteatus (Linnaeus, 1758)++13751410 32021
Ampedus cinnabarinus (Eschscholtz, 1829)+ 13564971103819615413716746
Ampedus elongatulus (Fabricius, 1787) + 91 1 122
Ampedus nigrinus (Herbst, 1784)+ 1
Ampedus nigroflavus (Goeze, 1777)+ 41 15261
Ampedus pomonae (Stephens, 1830)+ 2121 18192 1
Ampedus pomorum (Herbst, 1784)+ 26131140208038
Ampedus praeustus (Fabricius, 1792) + 20591671239479
Ampedus sanguineus (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 78 1
Ampedus sanguinolentus (Schrank, 1776)++22 1 10426
Ampedus tristis (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1 1
Anostirus castaneus (Linnaeus, 1758) + 1 2
Cardiophorus ruficollis (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 2 1575 1
Dalopius marginatus (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 51 2
Dicronychus equiseti (Herbst, 1784) + 2
Drapetes mordelloides (Host, 1789)+ 1
Lacon lepidopterus (Panzer, 1800)+ 117
Melanotus villosus (Geoffroy, 1785)+ 21382412 3323
Prosternon tesselatum (Linnaeus, 1758) +273413 18994130
Selatosomus aeneus (Linnaeus, 1758)++2 2 1
Lycidae
Lygistopterus sanguineus (Linnaeus, 1758) ++ 2 212
Cantharidae
Cantharis livida (Linnaeus, 1758) + 1
Cantharis nigricans (O.F. Müller, 1776) + 1 21
Cantharis obscura (Linnaeus, 1758) + 1
Cantharis pellucida (Fabricius, 1792) + 1 2
Cantharis rustica (Fallén, 1807) + 2 1
Dermestidae
Anthrenus museorum (Linnaeus, 1761) + 1 3
Attagenus schaefferi (Herbst, 1792)++3 22211 223
Ctesias serra (Fabricius, 1792)++ 12420298
Dermestus murinus Linnaeus, 1758 1
Megatoma undata (Linnaeus, 1758) ++11 21
Orphilus niger (P. Rossi, 1790)++ 2 2421
Trogoderma glabrum (Herbst, 1783)++265533163447594518
Ptinidae
Dorcatoma robusta A. Strand, 1938+ 1
Hadrobregmus pertinax (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 11
Cleridae
Thanasimus femoralis (Zetterstedt, 1828)+ 1
Thanasimus formicarius (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1 2
Trichodes apiarius (Linnaeus, 1758) +33 21 817
Melyridae
Aplocnemus nigricornis (Fabricius, 1792) ++ 1
Dasytes niger (Linnaeus, 1761)++3111 14226
Malachius aeneus (Linnaeus, 1758)++1
Malachius bipustulatus (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1
Monotomidae
Rhizophagus fenestralis (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1 1117
Rhizophagus picipes (G.-A. Olivier, 1790)+ 1
Nitidulidae
Carpophilus hemipterus (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 61085112052771
Carpophilus marginellus (Motschulsky, 1858)+ 1 211112
Carpophilus truncatus (Murray, 1864) 1
Cryptarcha strigata (Fabricius, 1787) + 1141 1131223134563
Cryptarcha undata (G.-A. Olivier, 1790)+ 2 11 1 4
Cychramus luteus (Fabricius, 1787)++ 163
Epuraea biguttata (Thunberg, 1784)+ 7130241924834241762160
Epuraea guttata (G.-A. Olivier, 1811)+ 1 111
Epuraea sp. 1654241458104876
Glischrochilus grandis (Tournier, 1872)++45202210123918223995324
Glischrochilus hortensis (Geoffroy, 1785)+ 6142262117137234530275523
Glischrochilus quadripunctatus (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 163129372354263448120196
Glischrochilus quadrisignatus (Say, 1835)+ 3 723124
Ipidia binotata (Reitter, 1875)+ 1
Nitidula carnaria (Schaller, 1783) 1 1
Omosita depressa (Linnaeus, 1758) 1
Omosita japonica (Reitter, 1874) 1
Soronia grisea (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 41432627533918381282
Soronia punctatissima (Illiger, 1794)+ 1 1 1
Cryptophagidae
Cryptophagus sp. 1
Silvanidae
Ahasverus advena (Waltl, 1834) 1 1
Cucujidae
Cucujus haematodes (Erichson, 1845)+ 1
Pediacus depressus (Herbst, 1797)+ 164191013525729
Laemophloeidae
Placonotus testaceus (Fabricius, 1787)+ 1
Bothrideridae
Bothrideres bipunctatus (Gmelin, 1790)+ 1
Endomychidae
Mycetina cruciata (Schaller, 1783)+ 1
Coccinellidae
Calvia decemguttata (Linnaeus, 1767) +1
Calvia quatuordecimguttata (Linnaeus, 1758) + 1
Coccinella magnifica (L. Redtenbacher, 1843) + 11
Coccinella septempunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) +25 11 2
Exochomus quadripustulatus (Linnaeus, 1758) 1
Harmonia axyridis (Pallas, 1773) 1
Hippodamia variegata (Goeze, 1777) + 1 1
Mysia oblongoguttata (Linnaeus, 1758) 1
Oenopia conglobata (Linnaeus, 1758) 1
Platynaspis luteorubra (Goeze, 1777) + 1
Propylea quatuordecimpunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) + 11
Psyllobora vigintiduopunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) + 1 11
Mycetophagidae
Litargus connexus (Geoffroy, 1785) + 1 12
Mycetophagus piceus (Fabricius, 1777)+ 1 1
Typhaea stercorea (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1 1
Ciidae
Cis comptus (Gyllenhal, 1827)+ 1
Melandryidae
Xylita laevigata (Hellenius, 1786)+ 111
Mordellidae
Mordella sp. ++ 1
Mordellochroa abdominalis (Fabricius, 1775)++ 1
Tenebrionidae
Bolitophagus reticulatus (Linnaeus, 1767)+ 1 1
Hymenorus doublieri Mulsant, 1852+ 1
Isomira murina (Linnaeus, 1758) +3
Lagria hirta (Linnaeus, 1758) +1 189 21
Pseudocistela ceramboides (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1 1
Oedemeridae
Chrysanthia geniculata (W.L.E. Schmidt, 1846)++253172622171547
Chrysanthia viridissima (Linnaeus, 1758)++17216313 231215
Oedemera femorata (Scopoli, 1763) + 1
Pyrochroidae
Schizotus pectinicornis (Linnaeus, 1758)++1 1
Anthicidae
Notoxus monoceros (Linnaeus, 1761) +155 141
Scraptiidae
Anaspis frontalis (Linnaeus, 1758)++3 127131
Cerambycidae
Anastrangalia reyi (Heyden, 1889) ++10153311319222112
Anastrangalia sanguinolenta (Linnaeus, 1761)++ 2 22211 1
Arhopalus rusticus (Linnaeus, 1758) + 1 2
Aromia moschata (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1 32
Dinoptera collaris (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1
Judolia sexmaculata (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1 132 13
Leptura aurulenta (Fabricius, 1793)++ 1
Leptura quadrifasciata (Linnaeus, 1758)++4354415514195735574268
Leptura thoracica Creutzer, 1799++3161116281143323041
Lepturalia nigripes (De Geer, 1775)++49641323657322673
Lepturobosca virens (Linnaeus, 1758)++58 3 1111431
Molorchus minor (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 11 11
Necydalis major Linnaeus, 1758++3 1 22 4122
Pachyta lamed (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1
Pachyta quadrimaculata (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1 142
Phymatodes testaceus (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 1 1
Phytoecia pustulata (Schrank, 1776) 1
Plagionotus detritus (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1
Purpuricenus globulicollis Dejean, 1839++21 2
Purpuricenus kaehleri (Linnaeus, 1758)++ 132245121
Rhagium inquisitor (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1231 1814353311
Rhagium mordax (De Geer, 1775)++102104612434117241260283424147
Rhagium sycophanta (Schrank, 1781)+ 23 114
Rutpela maculata (Poda von Neuhaus, 1761)++ 1 1
Stenocorus meridianus (Linnaeus, 1758)++34 2 1221
Stenurella bifasciata (O.F. Müller, 1776)++ 1 1
Stenurella melanura (Linnaeus, 1758)++11 1 74511
Stictoleptura maculicornis (De Geer, 1775)++ 11 1 3
Stictoleptura rubra (Linnaeus, 1758)++3 21 21
Strangalia attenuata (Linnaeus, 1758) ++ 111
Xylotrechus antilope (Schoenherr, 1817)+ 1
Xylotrechus capricornus (Gebler, 1830)+ 1
Xylotrechus rusticus (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 112 14 262
Chrysomelidae
Altica sp. 1 3
Lilioceris merdigera (Linnaeus, 1758) 1
Phyllotreta atra (Fabricius, 1775) 11
Plagiodera versicolora (Laicharting, 1781) 1
Spermophagus sericeus (Geoffroy, 1785) +6
Anthribidae
Dissoleucas niveirostris (Fabricius, 1798)+ 1
Platyrhinus resinosus (Scopoli, 1763)+ 1
Tropideres albirostris (Schaller, 1783) + 12 23 2
Curculionidae
Anisandrus dispar (Fabricius, 1792)+ 231694517916326245
Brachyderes incanus (Linnaeus, 1758) + 1
Cryptorhynchus lapathi (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1
Hylastes opacus (Erichson, 1836)+ 2 1
Hylurgus ligniperda (Fabricius, 1787)+ 3
Larinus obtusus Gyllenhal, 1835 1
Lixus filiformis (Fabricius, 1781) 1
Magdalis ruficornis (Linnaeus, 1758)+ 1
Notaris scirpi (Fabricius, 1792) 1
Orchestes rusci (Herbst, 1795) 1
Phyllobius pyri (Linnaeus, 1758) 11 1
Rhinusa neta (Germar, 1821) 1
Sibinia viscariae (Linnaeus, 1761) 1
Sitona inops Schoenherr, 1832 1
Sitona lineatus (Linnaeus, 1758) 1
Strophosoma capitatum (De Geer, 1775) 382 5421

References

  1. Skelton, J.; Jusino, M.A.; Carlson, P.S.; Smith, K.; Banik, M.T.; Lindner, D.L.; Palmer, J.M.; Hulcr, J. Relationships among wood-boring beetles, fungi, and the decomposition of forest biomass. Mol. Ecol. 2019, 28, 4971–4986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Wagner, D.L.; Fox, R.; Salcido, D.M.; Dyer, L.A. A window to the world of global insect declines: Moth biodiversity trends are complex and heterogeneous. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2002549117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Anselmo, L.; Rizzioli, B. Side threats: Further possible effects of warming on the high alpine narrow endemic Carabus cychroides (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Nat. Conserv. Res. 2022, 7, 88–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Dedyukhin, S.V. Fauna and biotopic distribution of Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera) in the Zhiguli State Nature Reserve, Russia. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2023, 8, 61–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dedyukhin, S.V. Fauna and biotopic distribution of weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea) of the Zhiguli State Nature Reserve, Russia. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2022, 7, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pohl, G.R.; Langor, D.W.; Spence, J.R. Rove beetles and ground beetles (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae, Carabidae) as indicators of harvest and regeneration practices in western Canadian foothills forests. Biol. Conserv. 2007, 137, 294–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Egorov, L.V.; Podshivalina, V.N.; Kurulenko, D.Y. Postpyrogenic Changes in the Fauna of Arthropods-Herpetobionts on the Territory of the Prisursky State Nature Reserve. Long-Term Processes in Natural Complexes of Reserves in Russia. 2012, Velikie Luki: 245–249. Available online: https://www.prisursky.ru/site/trudy/Egorov_Kurulenko_Podshivalina_2012.pdf (accessed on 1 April 2024).
  8. Gongalsky, K.B.; Persson, T. Recovery of soil macrofauna after wildfires in boreal forests. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2013, 57, 182–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Koltz, A.M.; Burkle, L.A.; Pressler, Y.; Dell, J.E.; Vidal, M.C.; Richards, L.A.; Murphy, S.M. Global change and the importance of fire for the ecology and evolution of insects. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2018, 29, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Ruchin, A.B.; Alekseev, S.K.; Khapugin, A.A. Post-fire fauna of carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in forests of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve (Russia). Nat. Conserv. Res. 2019, 4 (Suppl. S1), 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Reid, C.; Runagall-McNaull, A.; Cassis, G.; Laffan, S. The impact of the 2019–2020 wildfires on beetles (Coleoptera) in the forests of north-eastern New South Wales. Aust. Zool. 2022, 42, 462–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mason, S.C., Jr.; Shirey, V.; Waite, E.S.; Gallagher, M.R.; Skowronski, N.S. Exploring Prescribed Fire Severity Effects on Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Taxonomic and Functional Community Composition. Fire 2023, 6, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wikars, L.-O. Immediate effects offire-severity on soil invertebrates in cut and uncut pine forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 2001, 141, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Campbell, J.W.; Grodsky, S.M.; Keller, O.; Vigueira, C.C.; Vigueira, P.A.; Waite, E.S.; Greenberg, C.H. Response of beetles (Coleoptera) to repeated applications of prescribed fire and other fuel reduction techniques in the southern Appalachian Mountains. For. Ecol. Manag. 2018, 429, 294–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lazarina, M.; Sgardelis, S.P.; Tscheulin, T.; Devalez, J.; Mizerakis, V.; Kallimanis, A.S.; Papakonstantinou, S.; Kyriazis, T.; Petanidou, T. The effect of fire history in shaping diversity patterns of flower-visiting insects in post-fire Mediterranean pine forests. Biodivers. Conserv. 2017, 26, 115–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Atutova, Z.V. Post-fire restoration of pine forests in the Badary area, Tunkinskiy National Park, Russia. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2023, 8, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Khayati, M.E.; Chergui, B.; Taheri, A.; Fahd, S.; Santos, X. Differential response to fire in ground vs. vegetation arthropod communities. J. Insect Conserv. 2023, 27, 601–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gandhi, K.J.K.; Spence, J.R.; Langor, D.W.; Morgantini, L.E. Fire residuals as habitat reserves for epigaeic beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae and Staphylinidae). Oikos 2011, 120, 26–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kharitonova, A.O.; Kharitonova, T.I. The effect of landscape pattern on the 2010 wildfire spread in the Mordovia State Nature Reserve, Russia. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2021, 6, 29–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Murphy, S.M.; Richards, L.A.; Wimp, G.M. Editorial: Arthropod interactions and responses to disturbance in a changing world. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2020, 8, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Elkin, C.M.; Reid, M.L. Attack and reproductive success of mountain pine beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) in fire-damaged lodgepole pines. Environ. Entomol. 2004, 33, 1070–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kacprzyk, M.; Błońska, E.; Lasota, J. Effect of spot burning of logging residues on the properties of mountain forest soils and the occurrence of ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). J. Mt. Sci. 2020, 17, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kastridis, A.; Stathis, D.; Sapountzis, M.; Theodosiou, G. Insect outbreak and long-term post-fire effects on soil erosion in Mediterranean Suburban Forest. Land 2022, 11, 911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Henry, S.C.; Kirkpatrick, J.B.; McQuillan, P.B. The half century impact of fire on invertebrates in fire-sensitive vegetation. Austral Ecol. 2022, 47, 590–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Batista, E.K.L.; Figueira, J.E.C.; Solar, R.R.C.; de Azevedo, C.S.; Beirão, M.V.; Berlinck, C.N.; Brandão, R.A.; de Castro, F.S.; Costa, H.C.; Costa, L.M.; et al. In Case of Fire, Escape or Die: A Trait-Based Approach for Identifying Animal Species Threatened by Fire. Fire 2023, 6, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Perevedentsev, Y.; Sherstyukov, B.; Gusarov, A.; Aukhadeev, T.; Mirsaeva, N. Climate-Induced Fire Hazard in Forests in the Volga Federal District of European Russia during 1992–2020. Climate 2022, 10, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Veselkin, D.; Kuyantseva, N.; Pustovalova, L.; Mumber, A. Trends in Forest Fire Occurrence in the Ilmensky Nature Reserve, Southern Urals, Russia, between 1948 and 2014. Forests 2022, 13, 528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sieber, A.; Kuemmerle, T.; Prishchepov, A.V.; Wendland, K.J.; Baumann, M.; Radeloff, V.C.; Baskin, L.M.; Hostert, P. Landsat-based mapping of post-Soviet land-use change to assess the effectiveness of the Oksky and Mordovsky protected areas in European Russia. Remote Sens. Environ. 2013, 133, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; MacGowan, I.; Makarkin, V.N.; Antropov, A.V.; Gornostaev, N.G.; Khapugin, A.A.; Dvořák, L.; Esin, M.N. Post-fire insect fauna explored by crown fermental traps in forests of the European Russia. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 21334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Khapugin, A.A.; Vargot, E.V.; Chugunov, G.G. Vegetation recovery in fire-damaged forests: A case study at the southern boundary of the taiga zone. For. Stud. 2016, 64, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ruchin, A.B. The selected insect families and their seasonal dynamics in the Mordovia State nature reserve in the burned areas of 2021. J. Wildl. Biodivers. 2024, 8, 17–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Khapugin, A.A.; Vikhrev, N.E.; Esin, M.N. The use of simple crown traps for the insects collection. Nat. Conserv. Res. 2020, 5, 87–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Khapugin, A.A. Usage of fermental traps for the study of the species diversity of Coleoptera in open biotopes. Insects 2023, 14, 404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 7: Curculionoidea I; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2011; p. 373. [Google Scholar]
  35. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 8: Curculionoidea II; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2013; p. 707. [Google Scholar]
  36. Löbl, I.; Löbl, D. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 2/1. Revised and Updated Version. Hydrophiloidea–Staphylinoidea; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2015; p. 1702. [Google Scholar]
  37. Löbl, I.; Löbl, D. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 3. Revised and Updated Version. Scarabaeoidea–Scirtoidea–Dascilloidea–Buprestoidea–Byrrhoidea; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2016; p. 983. [Google Scholar]
  38. Löbl, I.; Löbl, D. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 1. Revised and Updated Version. Archostemata–Adephaga–Myxophaga; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2017; p. 1443. [Google Scholar]
  39. Iwan, D.; Löbl, I. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 5. Revised and Updated Second Edition. Tenebrionoidea; Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2020; p. 945. [Google Scholar]
  40. Danilevsky, M. (Ed.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 6/1. Updated and Revised Second Edition. Chrysomeloidea I (Vesperidae, Disteniidae, Cerambycidae); Brill: Leiden, The Netherlands; Boston, MA, USA, 2020; p. 712. [Google Scholar]
  41. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 4. Elateroidea–Derodontoidea–Bostrichoidea–Lymexyloidea–Cleroidea–Cucujoidea; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2007; p. 935. [Google Scholar]
  42. Löbl, I.; Smetana, A. (Eds.) Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera; Volume 6: Chrysomeloidae; Apollo Books: Stenstrup, Denmark, 2010; p. 924. [Google Scholar]
  43. Cai, C.; Tihelka, E.; Giacomelli, M.; Lawrence, J.F.; Ślipiński, A.; Kundrata, R.; Yamamoto, S.; Thayer, M.K.; Newton, A.F.; Leschen, R.A.B.; et al. Integrated phylogenomics and fossil data illuminate the evolution of beetles. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2022, 9, 211771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. McKenna, D.D.; Shin, S.; Ahrens, D.; Balke, M.; Beza-Beza, C.; Clarke, D.J.; Donath, A.; Escalona, H.E.; Friedrichh, F.; Letsch, H.; et al. The evolution and genomic basis of beetle diversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 116, 24729–24737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Bousquet, Y. Litteratura Coleopterologica (1758–1900): A guide to selected books related to the taxonomy of Coleoptera with publication dates and notes. ZooKeys 2016, 583, 1–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Shannon, C.E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1948, 27, 379–423, 623–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Margalef, R. Information theory in ecology. Gen. Syst. 1958, 3, 36–71. [Google Scholar]
  48. Magurran, A.E. Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement; Chapman & Hall: London, UK, 1996; 179p. [Google Scholar]
  49. Nikitsky, N.B. The Beetles (Insecta, Coleoptera) of the Moscow Oblast; Part 1; Direct-Media: Moscow, Russia, 2016; 712p. [Google Scholar]
  50. Nikitsky, N.B. The Beetles (Insecta, Coleoptera) of the Moscow Oblast; Part 2; Direct-Media: Moscow, Russia, 2019; 808p. [Google Scholar]
  51. Feldhaar, H.; Schauer, B. Dispersal of Saproxylic Insects. In Saproxylic Insects. Zoological Monographs; Ulyshen, M., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Olenici, N.; Fodor, E. The diversity of saproxylic beetles’ from the Natural Reserve Voievodeasa forest, North-Eastern Romania. Ann. For. Res. 2021, 64, 31–60. [Google Scholar]
  53. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Khapugin, A.A. Vertical distribution of beetles (Coleoptera) in Pine Forests in Central European Russia. Diversity 2022, 14, 622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Cavaletto, G.; Faccoli, M.; Marini, L.; Spaethe, J.; Giannone, F.; Moino, S.; Rassati, D. Exploiting trap color to improve surveys of longhorn beetles. J. Pest. Sci. 2021, 94, 871–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hammer, Ø.; Harper, D.A.T.; Ryan, P.D. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electron. 2001, 4, 9. [Google Scholar]
  56. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V. Vertical stratification and seasonal dynamics of Coleoptera in open biotopes of forest ecosystems (Centre of European Russia). Forests 2022, 13, 1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V.; Khapugin, A.A. Edge effects in the distribution of Coleoptera in the forests of the Center of the European part of Russia. Insects 2023, 14, 371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Duelli, P.; Obrist, M.K.; Wermelinger, B. Windthrow induces changes of faunistic biodiversity in alpine spruce forests. For. Snow Landsc. Res. 2002, 77, 117–131. [Google Scholar]
  59. Moretti, M.; Duelli, P.; Obrist, M.K. Biodiversity and resilience of arthropod communities after fire disturbance in temperate forests. Oecologia 2006, 149, 312–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Bogusch, P.; Blažej, L.; Trýzna, M.; Heneberg, P. Forgotten role of fires in Central European forests: Critical importance of early post-fire successional stages for bees and wasps (Hymenoptera: Aculeata). Eur. J. For. Res. 2015, 134, 153–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Swengel, A.B. A literature review of insect responses to fire, compared to other conservation managements of open habitat. Biodivers. Conserv. 2001, 10, 1141–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gongalsky, K.B. Perfugia as a mechanism for the recovery of soil fauna after ecosystem disturbances. Russ. J. Ecosyst. Ecol. 2017, 2. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Chen, Z.Z.; Liu, L.Y.; Liu, S.Y.; Cheng, L.Y.; Wang, X.H.; Xu, Y.Y. Response of Chrysoperla nipponensis (Okamoto) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) Under Long and Short Photoperiods. J. Insect Sci. 2017, 17, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hammond, H.J.; Langor, D.W.; Spence, J.R. Changes in saproxylic beetle (Insecta: Coleoptera) assemblages following wildfire and harvest in boreal Populus forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 2017, 401, 319–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Parisi, F.; Frate, L.; Lombardi, F.; Tognetti, R.; Campanaro, A.; Biscaccianti, A.B.; Marchetti, M. Diversity patterns of Coleoptera and saproxylic communities in unmanaged forests of Mediterranean mountains. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 110, 105873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Liu, Y.; Gao, B.; Bian, L.; Ren, L.; Luo, Y. Invasion of Red Turpentine Beetles led to the increase of native trunk-boring beetles in Chinese pine stands. For. Ecol. Manag. 2024, 557, 121758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Hodge, S.; Williams, A. Beetles collected using rotting vegetable baits in a Kent Garden. Entomol. Mon. Mag. 2010, 146, 179. [Google Scholar]
  68. Oude, J.E. Naamlijst van de glanskevers van Nederland en het omliggende gebied (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae and Brachypteridae). Ned. Faun. Meded. 1999, 8, 11–32. [Google Scholar]
  69. Nikitsky, N.B.; Osipov, I.N.; Chemeris, M.V.; Semenov, V.B.; Gusakov, A.A. The beetles of the Prioksko-Terrasny Biosphere Reserve—Xylobiontes, mycetobiontes and Scarabaeidae. Arch. Zool. Mus. Mosc. Univ. 1996, 36, 1–197. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  70. Clayhills, T.; Audisio, P.; Cline, A.R.; Mancini, E.; Trizzino, M.; Sabatelli, S. Unraveling cryptic species diversity in an aposematic sap beetle genus (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae: Cryptarchinae) from northern Europe. Insect Syst. Evol. 2016, 47, 131–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ruchin, A.B.; Egorov, L.V. Vertical stratification of beetles in deciduous forest communities in the Centre of European Russia. Diversity 2021, 13, 508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Moretti, M.; Barbalat, S. The effects of wildfires on wood-eating beetles in deciduous forests on the southern slope of the Swiss Alps. For. Ecol. Manag. 2004, 187, 85–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Gutowski, J.M.; Sućko, K.; Borowski, J.; Kubisz, D.; Mazur, M.A.; Melke, A.; Mokrzycki, T.; Plewa, R.; Żmihorski, M. Post-fire beetle succession in a biodiversity hotspot: Białowieża Primeval Forest. For. Ecol. Manag. 2020, 461, 117893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Insects 15 00420 g001
Figure 1. Geographical position of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve in Europe. Study plots are named according to designations in the text. The red line shows the boundary of the fires of 2021 (fires were north of this line). Darker green areas are lower elevations and lighter green higher elevations. A brief description of the plots1–11 is given in Table 1.
Figure 1. Geographical position of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve in Europe. Study plots are named according to designations in the text. The red line shows the boundary of the fires of 2021 (fires were north of this line). Darker green areas are lower elevations and lighter green higher elevations. A brief description of the plots1–11 is given in Table 1.
Insects 15 00420 g001
Insects 15 00420 g002
Figure 2. Coleoptera numbers on plots during by years of study.
Figure 2. Coleoptera numbers on plots during by years of study.
Insects 15 00420 g002
Insects 15 00420 g003
Figure 3. Percentages of saproxylic and anthophilic Coleoptera species on plots by year of study.
Figure 3. Percentages of saproxylic and anthophilic Coleoptera species on plots by year of study.
Insects 15 00420 g003
Insects 15 00420 g004
Figure 4. The diagram of the principal component analysis ordination of the selected Coleoptera species in the Republic of Mordovia (European Russia) based on the number of specimens collected on various plots. C.aur.—Cetonia aurata; P.c.v.—Protaetia cuprea volhyniensis; T.glab.—Trogoderma glabrum; C.hem.—Carpophilus hemipterus; E.big.—Epuraea biguttata; G.gran.—Glischrochilus grandis; G.hor.—Glischrochilus hortensis; G.quad.—Glischrochilus quadripunctatus; S.gr.—Soronia grisea; P.dep.—Pediacus depressus; Ch.gen.—Chrysanthia geniculata; A.reyi—Anastrangalia reyi; L.quad.—Leptura quadrifasciata; L.thor.—Leptura thoracica; L.nig.—Lepturalia nigripes; Rh.mord.—Rhagium mordax; A.disp.—Anisandrus dispar. A brief description of the plots1–11 is given in Table 1.
Figure 4. The diagram of the principal component analysis ordination of the selected Coleoptera species in the Republic of Mordovia (European Russia) based on the number of specimens collected on various plots. C.aur.—Cetonia aurata; P.c.v.—Protaetia cuprea volhyniensis; T.glab.—Trogoderma glabrum; C.hem.—Carpophilus hemipterus; E.big.—Epuraea biguttata; G.gran.—Glischrochilus grandis; G.hor.—Glischrochilus hortensis; G.quad.—Glischrochilus quadripunctatus; S.gr.—Soronia grisea; P.dep.—Pediacus depressus; Ch.gen.—Chrysanthia geniculata; A.reyi—Anastrangalia reyi; L.quad.—Leptura quadrifasciata; L.thor.—Leptura thoracica; L.nig.—Lepturalia nigripes; Rh.mord.—Rhagium mordax; A.disp.—Anisandrus dispar. A brief description of the plots1–11 is given in Table 1.
Insects 15 00420 g004
Insects 15 00420 g005
Figure 5. The similarity of Coleoptera species on 11 plots based on the Jaccard index.
Figure 5. The similarity of Coleoptera species on 11 plots based on the Jaccard index.
Insects 15 00420 g005
Table 1. A brief description of the plots in the places of installation of traps.
Table 1. A brief description of the plots in the places of installation of traps.
PlotsBurnedDescription
12010In 2021, not exposed to fire. Some amount of dead wood, trees (Pinus and Betula). Dense undergrowth of birch. Shrubs are mainly represented by raspberries (Rubus). Grassy tier sparse. Some birch litter.
22010In 2021, not exposed to fire. Located 10 m from edge of 2021 fire. Similar in all respects to plot 1.
32010 and 2021In 2021, the territory was completely burned out. The deadwood and grassy tier are completely burnt out. There were rare dry bushes. It is located 10 m from the edge of the fire deep into the burnt territory (20 m from plot 2).
42010 and 2021In 2021, the territory was completely burned out. It is located 1000 m from the edge of the fire deep into the burned area. The deadwood, shrubs, and grassy tier were completely burned out.
52010 and 2021It is located 2000 m from the edge of the fire deep into the burned territory. Similar in all respects to plot 4.
62010 and 2021It is located 1500 m from the edge of the fire deep into the burned territory. Lowland with water (wet biotope). In 2021, there was a low-intensity fire. Fallen trees and rare birch undergrowth, left over from the fires of 2010, have been preserved. The grassy tier almost completely burned out in 2021.
72010 and 2021It is located 10 m from the edge of the fire deep into the burnt territory (20 m from plot 8). The deadwood, birch, shrubs, and grassy tier were partially burned out. At least half of the dead wood and a lot of dense dry birch undergrowth remained.
82010It is located 10 m from the edge of the fire in 2021. A significant amount of large deadwood trees (pine and birch). Very dense undergrowth of birch and aspen. The grassy tier is sparse. The litter from the fall of hardwoods is small.
92010 and 2021It is located 10 m from the edge of the fire deep into the burnt territory (20 m from plot 10). The deadwood, birch, shrubs, and grassy tier were partially burned out. At least half of the dead wood and dense dry birch undergrowth remain.
10Not burned (control)A plot of forest that has not been exposed to fire. It is located 10 m from the edge of the fires of 2010 and 2021. Old mixed forest of Pinus sylvestris, Betula with an admixture of Tilia cordata, Sorbus aucuparia (in the second tier). The litter is well-defined and powerful, and the grassy layer is sparse.
11Not burned (control)It is located 500 m from the edge of the fires. The old mixed forest is similar in configuration to plot 10. The litter is well-defined and powerful, and the grassy layer is sparse.
Table 2. The main parameters of Coleoptera individuals collected using beer traps on various plots (2022 and 2023).
Table 2. The main parameters of Coleoptera individuals collected using beer traps on various plots (2022 and 2023).
IndicatorsPlots
1234567891011
Number of families2120151812212420222423
Number of species (excluding unidentified ones)7265495353668178778280
Number of specimens1293910555646457100311651360119816351996
Percentage of species that were saproxylic beetles (% of the total number of species on plots)77.880.085.779.279.275.876.582.187.081.782.3
Percentage of species that were anthrophilic beetles (% of the total number of species on plots) 59.755.446.952.847.245.554.357.751.951.254.4
Margalef index9.919.397.68.048.499.4111.3310.6710.7210.9510.27
Shannon index3.133.23.083.023.092.993.113.233.082.832.57
Simpson index0.080.060.070.080.070.090.080.070.090.120.14
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Egorov, L.V.; Ruchin, A.B.; Fayzulin, A.I. Post-Fire Coleoptera Fauna in Central Russian Forests after the 2021 Fires (Study Using Beer Traps). Insects 2024, 15, 420. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15060420

AMA Style

Egorov LV, Ruchin AB, Fayzulin AI. Post-Fire Coleoptera Fauna in Central Russian Forests after the 2021 Fires (Study Using Beer Traps). Insects. 2024; 15(6):420. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15060420

Chicago/Turabian Style

Egorov, Leonid V., Alexander B. Ruchin, and Alexander I. Fayzulin. 2024. "Post-Fire Coleoptera Fauna in Central Russian Forests after the 2021 Fires (Study Using Beer Traps)" Insects 15, no. 6: 420. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15060420

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop