Drosophilidae (Diptera) of Australia's Northern Territory: Ecology and biogeography

The drosophilid fauna is well documented in eastern Australia but is poorly known in other parts of the continent. This paper summarises what is known of this fauna in the Northern Territory (NT), and includes results from banana trapping in the humid and arid zones. The 42 recorded species include species that breed in fruit, fungi and/or flowers, and a larval predator of scale insects. Drosophilids occur in all three major climate zones (humid, semiarid and arid) but predominate in the humid zone. Banana-attracted species in the humid zone (wet-dry tropics) were common in all sampled habitats: urban, rainforest and open woodland. They included predominantly urban and/or rainforest species. Of the species collected in open woodland, some are likely to be breeding there, whereas others may have been intercepted during movement across the area. The semiarid fauna is a depauperate version of that found in the humid region. Only three species have been recorded in the arid region: an endemic arid specialist, and two cosmopolitan species (D. simulans and D. melanogaster ) in urban Alice Springs. Overall, the NT drosophilid fauna represents a depauperate version of that found in eastern Australia, probably because of climatic factors and natural barriers to range expansion. There is little evidence of regional endemism, with probably only one (and at most three) species endemic to the NT, and no evidence of independent, natural dispersion from nearby Indonesia.

Species richness in agamid lizards: chance, body size, sexual selection or ecology?

Why does species richness vary so greatly across lineages? Traditionally, variation in species richness has been attributed to deterministic processes, although it is equally plausible that it may result from purely stochastic processes. We show that, based on the best available phylogenetic hypothesis, the pattern of cladogenesis among agamid lizards is not consistent with a random model, with some lineages having more species, and others fewer species, than expected by chance. We then use phylogenetic comparative methods to test six types of deterministic explanation for variation in species richness: body size, life history, sexual selection, ecological generalism, range size and latitude. Of eight variables we tested, only sexual size dimorphism and sexual dichromatism predicted species richness. Increases in species richness are associated with increases in sexual dichromatism but reductions in sexual size dimorphism. Consistent with recent comparative studies, we find no evidence that species richness is associated with small body size or high fecundity. Equally, we find no evidence that species richness covaries with ecological generalism, latitude or range size.

The Galilean turn in population ecology

The standard mathematical models in population ecology assume that a population's growth rate is a function of its environment. In this paper we investigate an alternative proposal according to which the rate of change of the growth rate is a function of the environment and of environmental change. We focus on the philosophical issues involved in such a fundamental shift in theoretical assumptions, as well as on the explanations the two theories offer for some of the key data such as cyclic populations. We also discuss the relationship between this move in population ecology and a similar move from first-order to second-order differential equations championed by Galileo and Newton in celestial mechanics.

Visual Biology of Hawaiian Coral Reef Fishes. III. Environmental Light and an Integrated Approach to the Ecology of Reef Fish Vision

In the previous two papers in this three-part series, we have examined visual pigments, ocular media transmission, and colors of the coral reef fish of Hawaii. This paper first details aspects of the light field and background colors at the microhabitat level on Hawaiian reefs and does so from the perspective and scale of fish living on the reef. Second, information from all three papers is combined in an attempt to examine trends in the visual ecology of reef inhabitants. Our goal is to begin to see fish the way they appear to other fish. Observations resulting from the combination of results in all three papers include the following. Yellow and blue colors on their own are strikingly well matched to backgrounds on the reef such as coral and bodies of horizontally viewed water. These colors, therefore, depending on context, may be important in camouflage as well as conspicuousness. The spectral characteristics of fish colors are correlated to the known spectral sensitivities in reef fish single cones and are tuned for maximum signal reliability when viewed against known backgrounds. The optimal positions of spectral sensitivity in a modeled dichromatic visual system are generally close to the sensitivities known for reef fish. Models also predict that both UV-sensitive and red-sensitive cone types are advantageous for a variety of tasks. UV-sensitive cones are known in some reef fish, red-sensitive cones have yet to be found. Labroid colors, which appear green or blue to us, may he matched to the far-red component of chlorophyll reflectance for camouflage. Red cave/hole dwelling reef fish are relatively poorly matched to the background they are often viewed against but this may be visually irrelevant. The model predicts that the task of distinguishing green algae from coral is optimized with a relatively long wavelength visual pigment pair. Herbivorous grazers whose visual pigments are known possess the longest sensitivities so far found. Labroid complex colors are highly contrasting complementary colors close up but combine, because of the spatial addition, which results from low visual resolution, at distance, to match background water colors remarkably well. Therefore, they are effective for simultaneous communication and camouflage.

Laws of nature and laws of ecology

We address the question of whether there are laws in ecology. Although there has been a great deal of recent interest in this topic, much of the relevant debate has been conducted under some common misconceptions about what laws of nature are. Once these misconceptions are cleared up, the case for ecology having laws is much stronger. Indeed, we suggest that the case for laws in ecology is no better or worse than the case for laws in physics.