Journal of Threatened
Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 November 2023 | 15(11): 24241–24254
ISSN 0974-7907
(Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8461.15.11.24241-24254
#8461 | Received 30 March 2023 | Final received 30 May 2023 | Finally
accepted 15 October 2023
Flies in the high for floral
hike? Altitudinal variation in species diversity and composition of Diptera
(Insecta) in the eastern Himalaya, India
Shuvra Kanti Sinha 1,
Santanu Mahato 2, Pravas Hazari 3, Sarmistha Ojha 4,
Nandan Jana 5, Niyatee Pandya 6, Amita Hajra 7,
Ujjal Ghosh 8 & Silanjan Bhattacharyya 9
1,3,5,6 Calyptrate Research Laboratory,
Zoology Department, Sreegopal Banerjee College, Mogra, Hooghly, West Bengal
712503, India.
2 Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology
and Natural History, Anaikatti, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641108, India.
2 Biopsychology Laboratory, Institution
of Excellence, University of Mysore, Manasagangotri, Mysuru, Karnataka 570006,
India.
4 CUBEC, JAIN (Deemed-to-be
University), Bengaluru, Karnataka 560078, India.
7 Department of Zoology, Government
General Degree College, Kharagpur II, West Bengal 721149, India.
8 Additional Principal Chief
Conservator of Forests - North Bengal, West Bengal, India.
9 Department of Zoology, West
Bengal State University, Barasat, North 24 Paraganas, West Bengal 700126,
India.
1 suvrosinha@gmail.com
(corresponding author), 2 santanumahato94@gmail.com, 3 pravashazari2017@gmail.com,
4 sarmisthaojha95@gmail.com, 5 nandanjana2012@gmail.com, 6
niyatee456@gmail.com, 7 amitahajrasinha@gmail.com, 8 ghosh.u@gmail.com,
9 silanjan@wbsu.ac.in
Editor: R.M. Sharma, Zoological Survey of India,
Pune, India. Date of publication: 26 November
2023 (online & print)
Citation: Sinha, S.K., S. Mahato, P. Hazari, S. Ojha, N. Jana, N. Pandya, A.
Hajra, U. Ghosh & S. Bhattacharyya (2023). Flies in the
high for floral hike? Altitudinal variation in species diversity and
composition of Diptera (Insecta) in the eastern Himalaya, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 15(11): 24241–24254. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8461.15.11.24241-24254
Copyright: © Sinha et al. 2023. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License. JoTT allows unrestricted use,
reproduction, and distribution of this article in any medium by providing
adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: Financial assistance was provided for the project by the West Bengal
Biodiversity Board (WBBB), India [Grant number: 863/3K (Bio)-1/2019; dated 22/07/2019].
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Author details: Dr. SK Sinha has 23 years of research experience on the taxonomy and
ecology of calyptrate flies. S Mahato is a PhD scholar at SACON, Coimbatore. He
has been working on the taxonomy and ecology of
Diptera for the last 10 years and has an interest in animal behaviour. P
Hazari, N Jana and N Pandya are working with SKS on the diversity and ecology
of calyptrate flies. S Ojha is pursuing her PhD in ecology and behaviour of primates and has a special interest in insects. Dr. A Hajra
who studies mosquito control, has interests in parasitology and medical
entomology. U Ghosh is the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
Govt. of West Bengal, and his area of interest is biodiversity
conservation. Dr. S Bhattacharyya is Professor of Zoology at the West Bengal
State University, and he works on ecology and conservation.
Author contributions: Study conception and design, field surveys and communication – SKS; Assistant and support in field surveys – PH, UG & SB; Lab
work – SKS, PH, NJ & SM; Data compilation – SM, SO,
NJ, NP & AH; Data analysis & the first draft of manuscript – SM &
SO; Comments on draft of the manuscript – SKS, AH, UG & SB; All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgements:
We acknowledge the
West Bengal Forest Department for the opportunity to study in the Neora Valley
National Park as a part of the Biodiversity Assessment Programme. First author
(SKS) thanks the West Bengal Biodiversity Board for financial assistance.
Thanks, are also due to the principal and head, Department of Zoology,
Sreegopal Banerjee College, Hooghly, for laboratory facilities. We also thank
Dr. Abhijit Mazumdar and his students of Entomology Research Unit, Department
of Zoology, The University of Burdwan for helping in identification of Culicoides
specimens.
Abstract: Species
diversity and composition enable us to understand the conservation and
management of an ecosystem. There is scarcity of knowledge in understanding the
diversity change across the gradients of elevation, especially in the Himalaya.
Here, we focused in the eastern Himalaya to investigate the patterns of
taxonomic and functional diversity of true flies with relation to variation in
altitude. The study was conducted in protected area (Neora Valley National
Park) in the eastern Himalaya, India and the survey was
conducted at five altitudinal zones (from 500 to 3,000 m). A total of 201
species of Diptera, with 105 genera and 33 families were recorded, of which 25
species are new to the state of West Bengal and seven species are new to India.
The species diversity increased with elevation (maximum was near 2,500 m) and
most of the flies preferred to be close to bushes with flowers, with a
substantial percentage of them being pollinator species. Flies adapt to the
various vegetation and climate patterns, which was evident by the abundance of
fly species at high altitudes (1,500–2,500 m). Hence, it is very important to
implement appropriate actions to protect the diversity of true flies in this
Himalayan landscape.
Keywords: Elevation
gradient, insect diversity, pollination, species composition, West Bengal.
INTRODUCTION
Patterns of species composition
and diversity, along with environmental and elevational gradients, provide
insights into our understanding of ecosystem conservation. Research trends have
shifted toward a greater understanding of the elevation gradient and its impact
on species diversity across various geographic regions (Terborgh 1977; Brown
2001; Sanders & Rahbek 2012; Acharya & Vijayan 2015; Marathe et al.
2021). Furthermore, changes in landscape physiology and climatic conditions due
to the different gradients of elevation effects the species diversity
(Sundqvist et al. 2013). Many studies have documented and described the
mechanisms on patterns of diversity with respect to elevational gradient
(Acharya et al. 2011a,b; Kraft et al. 2011; Sundqvist
et al. 2013; Chun & Lee 2018). In harsher environments at higher
elevations, niche differences and relative fitness differences may drive the
presence of fewer species (HilleRisLambers et al. 2012; Kraft et al. 2015).
Understanding such patterns and their underlying mechanisms is important for
understanding the implications of insect conservation, particularly in the
Himalayan regions that are vulnerable to climate change. The Himalaya is unique
for examining such gradients and their impact on a variety of habitats with
steep altitudinal gradient and unstable climate.
Biogeographical studies of
multiple taxa have increased in recent years in various parts of the Himalayas.
Most of the studies are focused on birds, plants, and pollinating insects such
as butterflies. In the eastern Himalaya, bird species richness is greatest at
intermediate elevations (Acharya et al. 2011b), whereas low elevations
(<2,000 m) are important for butterfly conservation (Acharya & Vijayan
2015). When it comes to plants, elevation and high temperature have a
considerable influence on the distribution and growth of trees (Acharya et al.
2011a). The reduction in tree height and richness noticed beyond 2,300 m,
allows herbs to dominate due to climatic constraints (Sharma et al. 2019). In
this context, a comprehensive study of true flies (Diptera) is also useful for
identifying habitats with conservation value in the Himalayan mountain
landscape.
The observed trends showed that
most of the current studies focused on Lepidoptera (Joshi
& Arya 2007; Bhardwaj et al. 2012; Acharya & Vijayan 2015; Dey et al.
2017; Sharma et al. 2020) and Hymenoptera (Bharti et al. 2013; Streinzer et al.
2019; Subedi & Budha 2020; Dewan et al. 2021; Marathe et al. 2021).
Besides, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, and Coleoptera, Diptera is considered one of
the principal orders of pollinating insects. Furthermore, flies of families
such as Asilidae, Bibionidae, Muscidae, Stratiomyidae, Tabanidae, Tipulidae,
Rhagionidae, Limoniidae, Sciaridae also act as bio-indicators of climate change
(Frouz 1999; Bizzo et al. 2010; Mezgebu et al. 2019; Montoya et al. 2021) and
the main potential pollinators (biotic vector) at high altitudes and latitudes,
like in alpine, arctic and subarctic ecosystems where bees are less abundant
(Elberling & Olesen 1999; Tiusanen et al. 2016; Lefebvre et al. 2018).
Studies also indicate that species diversity and richness of Diptera change
with elevation for example, species composition changes along the altitudinal
gradient (700–2,500 m) and partitioning between seasonally dry lowland and
moist montane evergreen forests on the Doi Inthanon mountain in northern
Thailand (Plant et al. 2012; Chatelain et al. 2018), species richness and
distribution of Hemerodromiinae and Clinocerinae are changing with the elevational
gradient on the Pieniny Mountains in central Europe (Słowińska & Jaskuła
2021). Therefore, it is important to investigate their community composition
across different environmental and elevational gradients in the Himalayas. The
objective of this study was to investigate the variation of species composition
and distribution of Diptera fauna in the eastern Himalaya between 500 m and
3,000 m elevation gradient.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study area
The study was conducted in the
Neora Valley National Park which covers an area of 159.78 km2. The
park has diverse ecosystems with a wide range of elevation gradients (183–3,200
m), located near the ecological tri-junction of West Bengal, Sikkim (India) and
Bhutan on the northeast (26.8675–27.1263 0N; 88.750–88.8333 0E).
It is considered as crowning glory of the state of West Bengal (Mallick 2010).
The study area is an east Himalayan moist mixed deciduous forest (Champion
& Seth 1968), with lower areas (up to 1,800 m) recognized as subtropical
mixed broadleaf forest, lower temperate evergreen forest, and upper areas
(1,800–3,200 m) recognized as upper temperate mixed broadleaf forest and
Rhododendron forest (Mallick 2012). The study area was divided into five
categories based on the vegetation composition—Lower Hill Forest (<762 m),
Middle Hill Forest (762–1,676 m), Broad-leaved Forest (1,676–2,133 m), Oak
Forest (2,133–2,500 m) and Rhododendron Forest (>2,500 m) (Figure 1).
Field methods
The survey was conducted at 14
different locations (forest camps) between March 2018 and September 2021 as
part of the Biodiversity Assessment Programme (organized by the Department of
Forest, Government of West Bengal), using pre-set representative trail
transects in representative elevations (Table 1). In each camp sites, four to
five surrounding areas were surveyed from 0800 to 1500 h (7 hours). The flies
in the different habitats were observed and collected by the first author,
which were then classified (Table 2). During the field survey, insect
collecting hand nets and one malaise trap were used to collect true flies.
Average hand net collection time was 3–4 hours and malaise trap was used accordingly to the suitability of the terrains.
Insect hand net specimens were paralyzed by benzene vapour in a killing jar and
stored in an envelope for future use. Specimens were also pinned (No. 2) in the
field and stored in an insect box. Specimens collected by malaise trap were
sorted by sub-family and stored in 70% alcohol.
Identification of species
In the laboratory, collected insects
were placed in a wet chamber overnight before being pinned by inserting an
insect-pin slightly laterally through the pro-thoracic segment. Pinned
specimens were labeled with the location of collection, date, altitude, and
substances on which the flies were found. The flies were taxonomically
identified using chaetotaxy key (Senior-White et al. 1940; Emden 1965;
Shinonaga & Kano 1971; Crosskey 1976; Nandi 2002; Scudder & Cannings
2006; Buck et al. 2009; Joseph & Parui 2012) under a stereoscopic binocular
microscope, and genitalia of male individuals were dissected in some cases for
confirmation of identification. The specimens of Culicoides were
separated and stored in different microcentrifuge tubes (1.5 ml) containing 70%
ethyl alcohol. After mounting the adults on a slide using the phenol-balsam
technique mentioned by Wirth & Marston (1968), the midges were identified
using the identification keys used by Wirth & Hubert (1989) under a
compound microscope. Following the identification keys used by Borror &
Delong (1970), specimens were identified up to the suborder level, Nematoceran
flies were identified up to the family level, and rest of the flies were
identified up to the order level.
Analysis
A map of the study area
indicating all sampling sites was prepared using QGIS software (version
3.16.11). The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) was calculated
using a December 2019 (Landsat 8) satellite image. This month was chosen
for its peak forest vegetation as it is just post-monsoon and to minimize the
effect of atmospheric load on remote sensing data due to lower moisture content
in the air. The remote sensing data (Landsat 8 image) was obtained from
USGS Earth Explorer (https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/). In ENVI software,
the captured image was radiometrically corrected and normalized. The NDVI was
employed to determine vegetation on the ground. It is used to monitor and
detect changes in vegetation and land cover. The image was classified based on
the NDVI value.
The indices like α-diversity
index, Simpson’s index and Shannon-Weiner Index were measured to understand the
species richness and species evenness of flies in the study area (Krebs 1999).
The correlation between the diversity indices like Shannon-Weiner Index and
Simpson’s Index with the elevation of all sites were done. Pearson’s
correlation coefficients were estimated between altitude for all the study
sites and the occurrence of fly species (Bhardwaj et al. 2012). IBM SPSS Statistics
20, PAST Version 4 software and Microsoft Excel were used for analyzing the
data and preparing different diagrams. A QQ-plot was done to understand the
distribution pattern of all species in 14 sites. This has been done using
elevation and Simpson’s Index.
RESULTS
Collection and identification of
201 species belonging to 105 genera and 33 families were enumerated (Table 3).
Members of the Muscidae dominated the area with 66 species followed by
Syrphidae (33), Calliphoridae (17), and Tachinidae (12). A total of 25 species
are reported as new records to West Bengal and seven being new to India (Table
3). Within the newly reported species in West Bengal, 13 belonged to Muscidae.
When the total number of native
species (201 species) was taken into account, the
accumulation curve tended to stabilize after 12 sampling efforts (Figure 2).
Spatial patterns of species distribution over various habitats were observed
(Figure 3). It was found that the most of the flies
preferred flowering plants (32.77%), followed by non-flowering plants (27.14%)
throughout the region, and the least number of flies (1.41%) were found in
areas near streams.
In general, comparison of
distribution of species and families across all 14 sites revealed that
Chaudaferi (S13) and Alubari (S14) were high in diversity with respect to
families, in the higher elevation (Figure 4). On the other hand, Mouchuki has
the highest number of families, having moderate number of species.
A graphical representation is
made with respect to centroid position of both the variables (indices and
elevation) in Figure 5. The centroid is the intersection point of means of both
Simpson’s index and elevation. It is the same in case of Shannon-Weiner index
and elevation. It shows that, the Simpson’s indices of most of the sites are
near the centroid, indicating it is in a normal distribution. Here, maximum
number of flies are found within the range of 1,500–2,500 m. Likewise, the
Shannon-Weiner indices of most of the sites are very near to the centroid and
similarly, the maximum number of flies are found within the range of
1,500–2,500 m. So, Pearson’s correlation test (Figure 6) between Simpson’s
Index and elevation was performed which reveals that, there is a negative
correlation between them (r = -0.108). On the other hand, a correlation
test between Shannon-Weiner Index and elevation reveals that there is a
positive correlation but very less association between them (r = 0.092).
Another correlation was done among the 14 sampling sites to find out what kind
of association prevails on basis of abundance of flies. A QQ-plot showed that
the observed values (estimated quantiles) were normalized (Figure 7). A
rarefaction curve was generated on the basis of all 14 sites, which showed the
abundance and species richness at high altitude sampling sites (Figure 8).
DISCUSSION
This is the first elaborate
survey of dipteran fauna from the Neora Valley National Park along the
elevation gradient. A total of 201 flies from 105 genera and 33 families were
documented. Recently, Sinha et al. (2021) reported 31 species of family
Muscidae from Neora Valley, including two species, Limnophora (Heliographa)
ceylanica and Neomyia pacifica recorded for the first time in
India. A new species, Heligmonevra paruii (family Asilidae) was described
and illustrated from Neora Valley by Naskar et al. (2019), but it was not
recorded in the present investigation.
Diptera are the primary
potential pollinators at high altitudes and latitudes where bees are scarce. In
the eastern Himalaya, the diversity of Syrphidae reflected the supremacy of
these flies over other pollinator insects such as honeybees at the higher
altitudes (Sinha et al. 2022). Studies found a similar pattern in the tropical
region, such as Doi Inthanon mountain in northern Thailand (Plant et al. 2012;
Chatelain et al. 2018). Even as we move farther north, the proportion of
dipteran species in the total pollinator fauna grows with latitude, and they
are the most common families of flower-visiting insects in the arctic
(Elberling & Olesen 1999; Tiusanen et al. 2016; Lefebvre et al. 2018). In
the light of this, we assessed the species richness and distribution pattern of
Diptera at various elevations in the eastern Himalaya, with the highest number
of flies found between 1,500 and 2,500 m. This is most likely because there are
large amount flowering plants. On the contrary, in the lower elevation (1,500
m), there is dense forest with fewer fly species. Less fly species live in
higher elevation areas comprising Maling bamboo forests. Furthermore, it
becomes windy higher up (>2,500 m), and that area is covered with
Rhododendron and wild rose plants, which reduces fly activity.
Muscidae (32.83%) and Syrphidae
(16.41%) were the most abundant families at all of our sample sites. This could
be due to their ability to survive in environments ranging from extremely low
to extremely high elevation. Members of these families can also be found at all
of the sites in a habitat that is relatively bushy and densely populated with
flowering plants. Muscidae is the most common family of flower-visiting insects
in the Arctic region, and they are much more abundant and widespread than the
insects of other dipteran families which like to visit flowers (Elberling &
Olesen 1999).
Pollinator communities are changing
dramatically as a result of climate change (González-Varo et al. 2013; Rafferty
2017). However, there are large gaps in our understanding of the role of
Diptera in pollination networks in the Himalaya in relation to climate change.
Although our findings suggest that more sampling is required to obtain a
complete picture of the study area, plant-Diptera interactions also need
to be examined.
Table 1. Detail of the sampling sites in
Neora Valley National Park, India.
|
Site no. |
Site names |
Latitude |
Longitude |
Elevation (m) |
Forest Types |
|
S1 |
Ashalay |
27.013 |
88.769 |
686 |
Lower Hill Forest |
|
S2 |
Ambeok Basti |
27.025 |
88.713 |
952 |
Middle Hill Forest |
|
S3 |
Mouchuki |
27.027 |
88.786 |
1170 |
Middle Hill Forest |
|
S4 |
Gogune |
27.049 |
88.826 |
1525 |
Middle Hill Forest |
|
S5 |
Tempola |
27.077 |
88.779 |
1757 |
Broad-leaved Forest |
|
S6 |
Kolbung |
27.095 |
88.681 |
1810 |
Broad-leaved Forest |
|
S7 |
Thosum Khola |
27.074 |
88.791 |
1861 |
Broad-leaved Forest |
|
S8 |
Thamkharka |
27.098 |
88.691 |
1952 |
Broad-leaved Forest |
|
S9 |
Thosum Peak |
27.078 |
88.771 |
2043 |
Broad-leaved Forest |
|
S10 |
Dolay |
27.072 |
88.706 |
2050 |
Broad-leaved Forest |
|
S11 |
PHE Camp |
27.097 |
88.725 |
2158 |
Oak Forest |
|
S12 |
Jaributi |
27.104 |
88.721 |
2196 |
Oak Forest |
|
S13 |
Choudaferi |
27.093 |
88.702 |
2356 |
Oak & Rhododendron Forest |
|
S14 |
Alubari |
27.128 |
88.720 |
2540 |
Rhododendron Forest |
Table 2. Types of Habitats found in the study
sites.
|
No. |
Habitat type |
Codes |
|
1 |
Animal, human dung, decaying
fruits |
AD |
|
2 |
Bushes |
B |
|
3 |
Flowering plant |
F |
|
4 |
Human settlement |
HS |
|
5 |
Moist surface |
MS |
|
6 |
Near stream |
NS |
|
7 |
Open spaces/ Rock surface |
OS |
|
8 |
Shade area |
S |
Table 3. Detail of recorded Diptera species
in Neora Valley National Park, India.
|
No. |
Family |
Subfamily |
Species |
Records* |
Sources |
|
1 |
Anthomyiidae |
Anthomyiinae |
Anthomyia sp.1 |
|
|
|
2 |
Anthomyiidae |
Anthomyiinae |
Anthomyia sp.2 |
|
|
|
3 |
Anthomyiidae |
Anthomyiinae |
Delia platura |
|
|
|
4 |
Anthomyiidae |
Anthomyiinae |
Paregle densibarbata |
|
|
|
5 |
Anthomyiidae |
Pegomyinae |
Pegomya sp. |
WB |
Suwa 1981 |
|
6 |
Asilidae |
Laphriinae |
Maira longirostrata |
|
|
|
7 |
Asilidae |
Laphriinae |
Maira sp. |
|
|
|
8 |
Asilidae |
Laphriinae |
Nusa bengalensis |
|
|
|
9 |
Asilidae |
Laphriinae |
Nusa sp. |
|
|
|
10 |
Asilidae |
Stenopogoninae |
Microstylum sp. |
|
|
|
11 |
Bibionidae |
Pleciinae |
Penthetria japonica |
|
|
|
12 |
Bibionidae |
Pleciinae |
Plecia assamensis |
WB |
Mukhopadhyay et al. 2015 |
|
13 |
Blephariceridae |
Blepharicerinae |
Blepharocera sp. |
|
|
|
14 |
Bombyliidae |
Anthracinae |
Anthrax sp. |
|
|
|
15 |
Bombyliidae |
Anthracinae |
Villa sp. |
|
|
|
16 |
Calliphoridae |
Ameniinae |
Silbomyia asiatica |
|
|
|
17 |
Calliphoridae |
Calliphorinae |
Aldrichina grahami |
|
|
|
18 |
Calliphoridae |
Calliphorinae |
Calliphora sp. |
|
|
|
19 |
Calliphoridae |
Calliphorinae |
Calliphora pattoni |
|
|
|
20 |
Calliphoridae |
Calliphorinae |
Calliphora vicina |
|
|
|
21 |
Calliphoridae |
Calliphorinae |
Calliphora vomitoria |
|
|
|
22 |
Calliphoridae |
Chrysomyiinae |
Chrysomya pinguis |
|
|
|
23 |
Calliphoridae |
Luciliinae |
Lucilia illustris |
|
|
|
24 |
Calliphoridae |
Melanomyinae |
Melinda scutellata |
|
|
|
25 |
Calliphoridae |
Polleniini |
Dexopollenia sp. |
|
|
|
26 |
Calliphoridae |
Polleniini |
Polleniopsis pilosa |
|
|
|
27 |
Calliphoridae |
Rhiniinae |
Idiella mandarina |
|
|
|
28 |
Calliphoridae |
Rhiniinae |
Isomyia sp. |
|
|
|
29 |
Calliphoridae |
Rhiniinae |
Rhinia apicalis |
|
|
|
30 |
Calliphoridae |
Rhiniinae |
Stomorhina sp. |
|
|
|
31 |
Calliphoridae |
Rhiniinae |
Strongyloneura sp.1 |
WB |
Senior White et al. 1940 |
|
32 |
Calliphoridae |
Rhiniinae |
Strongyloneura sp.2 |
|
|
|
33 |
Cecidomyiidae |
Lestremiinae |
Allarete spatuliformis |
|
|
|
34 |
Cecidomyiidae |
Porricondylinae |
Camptomyia sp.1 |
WB |
Ahad Najam et al. 2009; Gagne
& Jaschhof 2021 |
|
35 |
Ceratopogonidae |
Ceratopogoninae |
Culicoides sp. 1 |
|
|
|
36 |
Ceratopogonidae |
Ceratopogoninae |
Culicoides pararegalis |
|
|
|
37 |
Ceratopogonidae |
Ceratopogoninae |
Culicoides pseudoregalis |
|
|
|
38 |
Ceratopogonidae |
Ceratopogoninae |
Culicoides regalis |
|
|
|
39 |
Ceratopogonidae |
Ceratopogoninae |
Culicoides subregalis |
|
|
|
40 |
Ceratopogonidae |
Ceratopogoninae |
Culicoides sp.2 |
|
|
|
41 |
Chironomidae |
Unidentified |
Unknown |
|
|
|
42 |
Culicidae |
Culicinae |
Culex sp.1 |
|
|
|
43 |
Culicidae |
Culicinae |
Culex sp.2 |
|
|
|
44 |
Diopsidae |
Unidentified |
Unknown |
|
|
|
45 |
Dolichopodidae |
Diaphorinae |
Chrysotus sp. |
|
|
|
46 |
Dolichopodidae |
Diaphorinae |
Diaphorus sp. |
|
|
|
47 |
Dolichopodidae |
Dolichopodinae |
Dolichopus sp.1 |
|
|
|
48 |
Dolichopodidae |
Dolichopodinae |
Dolichopus sp.2 |
|
|
|
49 |
Drosophilidae |
Drosophilinae |
Drosophila sp. |
|
|
|
50 |
Drosophilidae |
Unidentified |
Unknown |
|
|
|
51 |
Hybotidae |
Hybotinae |
Hybos culiciformis |
IND |
Shamshev et al. 2015; Zouhair
& Kettani 2022 |
|
52 |
Lauxaniidae |
Homoneurinae |
Homoneura sp.1 |
IND |
Miller 1976; Sasakawa 1992;
Shatalkin 1996; Gao & Yang 2004; Lee & Han 2015 |
|
53 |
Lauxaniidae |
Homoneurinae |
Homoneura sp. 2 |
|
|
|
54 |
Lonchopteridae |
Unidentified |
Unknown |
|
|
|
55 |
Muscidae |
Atherigoninae |
Atherigona orientalis |
|
|
|
56 |
Muscidae |
Atherigoninae |
Atherigona sp. |
|
|
|
57 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Coenosia plumiseta |
WB |
Bharti 2008 |
|
58 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Coenosia sp.1 |
WB |
Rahman et al. 2017 |
|
59 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Coenosia sp.2 |
|
|
|
60 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Coenosia sp.3 |
|
|
|
61 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Limnophora latiseta |
|
|
|
62 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Limnophora brunnescens |
|
|
|
63 |
Muscidae |
Lispinae |
Lispe bengalensis |
|
|
|
64 |
Muscidae |
Lispinae |
Lispe sericipalpis |
|
|
|
65 |
Muscidae |
Lispinae |
Lispe orientalis |
|
|
|
66 |
Muscidae |
Lispinae |
Lispe sp.1 |
|
|
|
67 |
Muscidae |
Lispinae |
Lispe sp.2 |
|
|
|
68 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Dichaetomyia nubiana |
|
|
|
69 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Dichaetomyia sp.1 |
|
|
|
70 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Morellia nigrisquama |
WB |
Emden 1965; Mitra 2011; Sinha
et al. 2021 |
|
71 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Morellia pectinipes |
WB |
Emden 1965; Mitra 2011; Sinha
et al. 2021 |
|
72 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Morellia sp.1 |
|
|
|
73 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Morellia sp.2 |
|
|
|
74 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Musca convexifrons |
WB |
Mitra 2006 |
|
75 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Musca domestica |
|
|
|
76 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Musca hervei |
|
|
|
77 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Musca tempestiva |
WB |
Emden 1965; Shina et al. 2021 |
|
78 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Musca sp.1 |
|
|
|
79 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Musca sp.2 |
|
|
|
80 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Neomyia gavisa |
|
|
|
81 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Neomyia coerulea |
|
|
|
82 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Neomyia claripennis |
|
|
|
83 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Neomyia fletcheri |
|
|
|
84 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Phaonia kambaitiana |
WB |
Emden 1965; Mitra 2011; Sinha
et al. 2021 |
|
85 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Pyrellia cadaverina |
WB |
Emden 1965 |
|
86 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Rypellia flavipes |
WB |
Emden 1965; Sinha et al. 2021 |
|
87 |
Muscidae |
Muscinae |
Rypellia malaisei |
WB |
Shina et al. 2021 |
|
88 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Brontaea ascendens |
|
|
|
89 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Brontaea distincta |
|
|
|
90 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Brontaea lasiopa |
|
|
|
91 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Graphomya maculata |
WB |
Emden 1965; Mitra 2011; Sinha
et al. 2021 |
|
92 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Graphomya rufitibia |
|
|
|
93 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Hebecnema sp. |
|
|
|
94 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Myospila bina bina |
|
|
|
95 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Myospila tenax |
|
|
|
96 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Myospila sp.1 |
|
|
|
97 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Brontaea sp.1 |
|
|
|
98 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Brontaea sp.2 |
|
|
|
99 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Dichaetomyia quadrata |
|
|
|
100 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Dichaetomyia sp.2 |
|
|
|
101 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Helina appendiculata |
|
|
|
102 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Helina iwasai |
IND |
Shinonaga & Singh 1994;
Sinha et al. 2021 |
|
103 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Myospila lenticeps |
|
|
|
104 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Helina sp.1 |
|
|
|
105 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Helina sp.2 |
|
|
|
106 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Hydrotaea unispinosa |
|
|
|
107 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Hydrotaea sp. |
|
|
|
108 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Limnophora tonsa |
|
|
|
109 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Limnophora sp.1 |
|
|
|
110 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Limnophora sp.2 |
|
|
|
111 |
Muscidae |
Coenosiinae |
Limnophora sp.3 |
|
|
|
112 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Mydaea longiscutellata |
|
|
|
113 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Myosplia meditabunda
meditabunda |
WB |
Jana et al. 2023 |
|
114 |
Muscidae |
Mydaeinae |
Mydaea sp. |
|
|
|
115 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Phaonia sp.1 |
|
|
|
116 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Phaonia sp.2 |
|
|
|
117 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Phaonia sp.3 |
|
|
|
118 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Phaonia sp.4 |
|
|
|
119 |
Muscidae |
Phaoniinae |
Spilogona sp. |
WB |
Emden 1965 |
|
120 |
Muscidae |
Stomoxydinae |
Stomoxys calcitrans |
|
|
|
121 |
Mycetophilidae |
Mycetophilinae |
Rhymosia sp. |
WB |
Banerjee et al. 2018 |
|
122 |
Phoridae |
Metopinini |
Megaselia pallicornis |
|
|
|
123 |
Phoridae |
Phorinae |
Dohrniphora aequididtans |
|
|
|
124 |
Pipunculidae |
Unidentified |
Unknown |
|
|
|
125 |
Psychodidae |
Psychodinae |
Clogmia albipunctata |
|
|
|
126 |
Psychodidae |
Psychodinae |
Psychoda sp. |
|
|
|
127 |
Psychodidae |
Psychodinae |
Telmatoscopus lacteitarsis |
|
|
|
128 |
Ptychopteridae |
Ptychopterinae |
Ptychoptera sp. |
|
|
|
129 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Bercaea cruentata |
|
|
|
130 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Boettcherisca nepalensis |
WB |
Sinha 2014 |
|
131 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Ravinia pernix |
|
|
|
132 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Robineauella (Jantiella) kanoi |
|
|
|
133 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Sarcophaga albiceps |
|
|
|
134 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Sarcophaga coei |
|
|
|
135 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Sarcophaga sp.1 |
|
|
|
136 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Sarcophaga sp.2 |
|
|
|
137 |
Sarcophagidae |
Sarcophaginae |
Sinonipponia baruai |
IND |
Pape 1996; Nandi 2002 |
|
138 |
Scathophagidae |
Scathophaginae |
Scathophaga sp. |
|
|
|
139 |
Sepsidae |
Nemopodatinae |
Nemopoda pectinulata |
|
|
|
140 |
Sepsidae |
Sepsinae |
Sepsis sp. |
|
|
|
141 |
Stratiomyidae |
Unidentified |
Unknown |
|
|
|
142 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Cheilosia sp. |
|
|
|
143 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Chrysogaster sp. |
IND |
Dousti & Hayat 2006;
Khaghaninia et al. 2012; Dousti 2023 |
|
144 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Eristalinus taeniops |
|
|
|
145 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Eristalinus sp. |
|
|
|
146 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Eristalis himalayensis |
|
|
|
147 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Eristalis tenax |
|
|
|
148 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Eristalis tristriatus |
|
|
|
149 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Eristalis sp. |
|
|
|
150 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Rhingia binotata |
|
|
|
151 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Rhingia sp. |
|
|
|
152 |
Syrphidae |
Eristalinae |
Sphegina sp. |
|
|
|
153 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Asarkina africana |
IND |
Whittington 1998; Ssymank 2012;
Smit et al. 2017; El-Hawagry & Gilbert 2019 |
|
154 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Asarkina sp.1 |
|
|
|
155 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Asarkina sp.2 |
|
|
|
156 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Baccha maculata |
|
|
|
157 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Betasyrphus sp. |
|
|
|
158 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Chrysotoxum sp. |
|
|
|
159 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Citrogramma citrinum |
|
|
|
160 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Episyrphus balteatus |
|
|
|
161 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Episyrphus sp.1 |
|
|
|
162 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Episyrphus sp.2 |
|
|
|
163 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Episyrphus sp.3 |
|
|
|
164 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Episyrphus sp.4 |
|
|
|
165 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Eupeodes sp. |
|
|
|
166 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Lycastris sp.1 |
|
|
|
167 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Lycastris sp.2 |
|
|
|
168 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Melanostoma sp. |
|
|
|
169 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Paragus haemorrhous |
IND |
Haarto 2014; Turk et al. 2014 |
|
170 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Paragus sp.1 |
|
|
|
171 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Paragus sp.2 |
|
|
|
172 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Spherosphoria scripta |
WB |
Mitra et al. 2015; Sengupta et
al. 2016 |
|
173 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Syrphus dalhousiae |
WB |
Mitra et al. 2015; Sengupta et
al. 2016 |
|
174 |
Syrphidae |
Syrphinae |
Syrphus torvus |
|
|
|
175 |
Tabanidae |
Pangoniinae |
Philoliche longirostris |
|
|
|
176 |
Tachinidae |
Dexiinae |
Prosena sp. |
|
|
|
177 |
Tachinidae |
Dexiinae |
Thelaira solivaga |
WB |
Sathe et al. 2014 |
|
178 |
Tachinidae |
Dexiinae |
Zelia sp. |
|
|
|
179 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Linnaemya sp. |
|
|
|
180 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tothillia asiatica |
WB |
O’Hara et al. 2020 |
|
181 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tachina sp.1 |
WB |
O’Hara et al. 2020 |
|
182 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tachina sp.2 |
|
|
|
183 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tachina sp.3 |
|
|
|
184 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tachina sp.4 |
|
|
|
185 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tachina sp.5 |
|
|
|
186 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tachina sp.6 |
|
|
|
187 |
Tachinidae |
Tachininae |
Tachina sp.7 |
|
|
|
188 |
Tephritidae |
Unidentified |
Unknown |
|
|
|
189 |
Tipulidae |
Chioneinae |
Atarba sp. |
|
|
|
190 |
Tipulidae |
Dolichopezinae |
Dolichopeza sp. |
|
|
|
191 |
Tipulidae |
Limoniinae |
Atypophthalmus sp. |
|
|
|
192 |
Tipulidae |
Limoniinae |
Geranomyia sp.1 |
|
|
|
193 |
Tipulidae |
Limoniinae |
Geranomyia sp.2 |
|
|
|
194 |
Tipulidae |
Limoniinae |
Toxorhina sp. |
|
|
|
195 |
Tipulidae |
Tipulinae |
Holorusia sp. |
|
|
|
196 |
Tipulidae |
Tipulinae |
Indotipula sp.1 |
|
|
|
197 |
Tipulidae |
Tipulinae |
Indotipula sp.2 |
|
|
|
198 |
Trichoceridae |
Trichocerinae |
Trichocera sp. |
WB |
Alexander 1961 |
|
199 |
Ulidiidae |
Otitinae |
Pseudotephritis sp.1 |
|
|
|
200 |
Ulidiidae |
Otitinae |
Pseudotephritis sp.2 |
|
|
|
201 |
Ulidiidae |
Otitinae |
Pseudotephritis sp.3 |
|
|
*First time recorded from the
state of West Bengal (WB), or India (IND)
For figures - - click here for full pdf
References
Acharya,
B.K., B. Chettri & L. Vijayan (2011a). Distribution pattern of trees
along an elevation gradient of Eastern Himalaya, India. Acta Oecologica.
37(4): 329–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actao.2011.03.005
Acharya,
B.K., N.J. Sanders, L. Vijayan & B. Chettri (2011b). Elevational gradients in bird diversity
in the Eastern Himalaya: an evaluation of distribution patterns and their
underlying mechanisms. PloS One 6(12): e29097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029097
Acharya, B.K.
& L. Vijayan (2015). Butterfly diversity along the elevation gradient of Eastern Himalaya,
India. Ecological Research 30(5): 909–919. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-015-1292-0
Ahad N.K.A.,
M.S. Siddique, V.D. Deshpande & R.M. Sharma (2009). A new species of the Genus Camptomyia
Kieffer (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) from Maharashtra. Records of the Zoological
Survey of India 109(3): 85–89.
Alexander,
C.P. (1961). Classification
and synonymy of the Crane-flies described by Enrico Brunetti (Diptera: Families
Ptychopteridae, Trichoceridae and Tipulidae). Records of the Zoological
Survey of India 59(1-2): 19–34. https://doi.org/10.26515/rzsi/v59/i1-2/1961/161570
Banerjee, D.,
A. Naskar, J. Sengupta, S. Hazra & A. Maity (2018). Insecta: Diptera. In: Chandra,
K., D. Gupta, K.C. Gopi, B. Tripathy & V. Kumar (eds.). Faunal Diversity
of Indian Himalaya. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, 727pp.
Bhardwaj, M.,
V.P. Uniyal, A.K. Sanyal & A.P. Singh (2012). Butterfly communities along an
elevational gradient in the Tons valley, Western Himalayas: Implications of
rapid assessment for insect conservation. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology
15(2): 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2011.12.003
Bharti, M.
(2008). Current
status of family Muscidae (Diptera) from India. Journal of Entomological Research
32(2): 171–176.
Bharti, H.,
Y.P. Sharma, M. Bharti & M. Pfeiffer (2013). Ant species richness, endemicity
and functional groups, along an elevational gradient in the Himalayas. Asian
Myrmecology 5(1): 79–101.
Bizzo, L.,
M.S. Gottschalk, D.C.D. Toni & P.R. Hofmann (2010). Seasonal dynamics of a
drosophilid (Diptera) assemblage and its potential as bioindicator in open
environments. Iheringia Série Zoologia 100: 185–191. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0073-47212010000300001
Borror, D.J.
& D.M. DeLong (1970). An Introduction to the Study of Insects. Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
USA.
Brown, J.H.
(2001). Mammals on
mountainsides: elevational patterns of diversity. Global Ecology and
Biogeography 10(1): 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1466-822x.2001.00228.x
Buck, M.,
N.E. Woodley, A. Borkent, D.M. Wood, T. Pape, J.R. Vockeroth, V. Michelsen
& S.A. Marshall (2009). Key to Diptera families - adults, pp. 95–144. In: Brown, B.V, A.
Borkent & J.M. Cumming (eds.). Manual of Central American Diptera,
Vol 1. NRC Research Press, Ottawa.
Champion,
H.G. & S. K. Seth (1968). A Revised Survey of the Forest Types of India. Manager of Publications,
Government of India, Delhi.
Chatelain,
P., A. Plant, A. Soulier-Perkins & C. Daugeron (2018). Diversity increases with
elevation: Empidine dance flies (Diptera, Empididae) challenge a predominant
pattern. Biotropica 50(4): 633–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12548
Chun, J.H.
& C.B. Lee (2018). Partitioning the regional and local drivers of phylogenetic and
functional diversity along temperate elevational gradients on an East Asian
peninsula. Scientific Reports 8(1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21266-4
Crosskey,
R.W. (1976). A Taxonomic
conspectus of the Tachinidae (Diptera) of the Oriental region. Bulletin of
the British Museum (Natural History). Entomology Supplement 26: 357.
Dey, P., V.P.
Uniyal & K. Chandra (2017). A prefatory estimation of diversity and distribution
of moths in Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Western Himalaya, India. National
Academy Science Letters 40(3): 199–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40009-016-0534-1
Dewan, S.,
B.K. Acharya, O.R. Vetaas & S. Ghatani (2021). Do sub-groups of butterflies
display different elevational distribution patterns in the Eastern Himalaya,
India? Frontiers of Biogeography 13(3): e49643. https://doi.org/10.21425/F5FBG49643
Dousti, A.F.
(2023). An updated
checklist of Syrphidae (Diptera, Brachycera) from Iran. Journal of Insect
Biodiversity and Systematics 9(2): 207–264. https://doi.org/10.52547/jibs.9.2.207
Dousti, A.F.
& R. Hayat (2006). A catalogue of the Syrphidae (Insecta: Diptera) of Iran. Journal of
the Entomological Research Society 8(3): 5–38.
Elberling, H.
& J.M. Olesen (1999). The structure of a high latitude plant-flower visitor system: the
dominance of flies. Ecography 22(3): 314–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb00507.x
El-Hawagry,
M.S & F. Gilbert (2019). Catalogue of the Syrphidae of Egypt (Diptera). Zootaxa 4577(2):
201–248. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4577.2.1
Emden, V.
(1965). The Fauna of
India and the Adjacent Countries. Diptera, Muscidae. Baptist Mission Press,
Calcutta, 647 pp.
Frouz, J.
(1999). Use of soil
dwelling Diptera (Insecta, Diptera) as bioindicators: a review of ecological
requirements and response to disturbance. Agriculture, Ecosystems
&Environment 74(1–3): 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(99)00036-5
Gagne, R.J.
& M. Jaschhof (2021). A Catalog of the Cecidomyiidae (Diptera) of the World. Digital,
816 pp.
Gao, C. &
D. Yang (2004). A review of
the Genus Homoneura from Guangxi, China (Diptera: Lauxaniidae). The
Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 52(2): 351–364.
González-Varo,
J.P., J.C. Biesmeijer, R. Bommarco, S.G. Potts, O. Schweiger, H.G. Smith, I.
Steffan-Dewenter, H. Szentgyörgyi, M. Woyciechowski & M. Vilà (2013). Combined effects of global change
pressures on animal-mediated pollination. Trends in Ecology & Evolution
28(9): 524–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.05.008
Haarto, A.
(2014).
Identification of the Finnish species of Paragus Latreille, 1804 subgenus Pandasyopthalmus
Stuckenberg, 1954 (Diptera, Syrphidae). Sahlbergia 20(2): 2–5.
HilleRisLambers,
J., P.B. Adler, W.S. Harpole, J.M. Levine & M.M. Mayfield (2012). Re-thinking community assembly
through the lens of coexistence theory. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution,
and Systematics 43: 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160411
Jana, N., P.
Hazari, S.K. Sinha & L. Wei (2023). An updated Checklist of the Myospila
Rondani (Diptera: Muscidae) of India with description of a new species. Zootaxa
5361(2): 252–262. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5361.2.6
Joseph, A.N.T
& P. Parui (2012). A review of the Asilidae (Diptera) from Oriental region. Oriental
Insects 17(1): 269–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/00305316.1983.10433697
Joshi, P.C.
& M. Arya (2007). Butterfly communities along altitudinal gradients in a protected forest
in the Western Himalayas, India. Tropical Natural History 7(1): 1–9.
Khaghaninia,
S., A. Shakeryari & B. Gharaei (2012). Synopsis of the Genus Chrysogaster
Loew, 1857 (Diptera: Syrphidae) in Iran. Munis Entomology and Zoology 7:
363–367.
Kraft, N.J.,
P.B. Adler, O. Godoy, E.C. James, S. Fuller & J.M. Levine (2015). Community assembly, coexistence
and the environmental filtering metaphor. Functional Ecology 29(5):
592–599. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12345
Kraft, N.J.,
L.S. Comita, J.M. Chase, N.J. Sanders, N.G. Swenson, T.O. Crist, J.C. Stegen,
M. Vellend, B. Boyle, M.J. Anderson
& H.V. Cornell (2011). Disentangling the drivers of β diversity along latitudinal and
elevational gradients. Science 333(6050): 1755–1758. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1208584
Krebs, C.J.
(1999). Ecological
Methodology.
Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, Inc., Menlo Park, California, USA.
Lee, H.S.
& H.Y. Han (2015). Nine species of the family Lauxaniidae (Diptera, Lauxanioidea) New to
Korea. Animal Systematics, Evolution and Diversity 31(4): 266–276. https://doi.org/10.5635/ASED.2015.31.4.266
Lefebvre, V.,
C. Villemant, C. Fontaine & C. Daugeron (2018). Altitudinal, temporal and
trophic partitioning of flower-visitors in Alpine communities. Scientific
Reports 8(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23210-y
Mallick, J.K.
(2010). Status of
Red Panda Ailurus fulgens in Neora Valley National Park, Darjeeling
District, West Bengal, India. Small Carnivore Conservation 43: 30–36.
Mallick, J.K.
(2012). Mammals of
Kalimpong Hills, Darjeeling District, West Bengal, India. Journal of
Threatened Taxa 4(12): 3103–3136. https://doi:10.11609/JoTT.o2418.3103-36
Marathe, A.,
K. Shanker, J. Krishnaswamy & D.R. Priyadarsanan (2021). Species and functional group
composition of ant communities across an elevational gradient in the Eastern
Himalaya. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 24(4): 1244–1250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2021.08.009
Mezgebu, A., A.
Lakew, B. Lemma & G. Beneberu (2019). The potential use of chironomids
(Insecta: Diptera) as bioindicators in streams and rivers around Sebeta,
Ethiopia. African Journal of Aquatic Science 44(4): 369–376. https://doi.org/10.2989/16085914.2019.1650711
Miller, R.M.
(1976). The taxonomy
and biology of the Nearctic species of Homoneura (Diptera: Lauxaniidae). Lowa
State University, 247 pp.
Mitra, B.
(2006). Insecta:
Diptera: Muscidae. In: Alfred, J.R.B. (ed.), Fauna of Arunachal Pradesh, State
Fauna Series, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata, 355 pp.
Mitra, B.
(2011). On a
collection of Insecta: Diptera: Muscidae from Uttarakhand. Records of the
Zoological Survey of India 3(2): 67–74.
Mitra, B., S.
Roy, I. Imam & M. Ghosh (2015). A review of Hoverflies
(Syrphidae: Diptera) from India. International Journal of Fauna and
Biological Studies 2(3): 61–73.
Montoya,
A.L., J.L. Parra & M. Wolff (2021). Structure and diversity of
hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) in northwestern Colombian Paramos: towards the
identification of bioindicator species in the Tropical Andes. Journal of
Insect Conservation 25(5): 809–828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-021-00346-3
Mukhopadhyay,
E., A. Naskar, S. Hazra, A. Maity, J. Sengupta, P. Parui & D. Banerjee
(2015). A checklist
of Indian March flies (Insecta: Diptera: Bibionidae). Zoological Survey of
India, 8 pp.
Nandi, B.C.
(2002). Fauna of
India and the adjacent countries (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). ZSI, Kolkata.
Naskar, A.,
A. Maity & D. Banerjee (2019). A new species of the genus Heligmonevra Bigot,
1858 (Diptera, Asilidae) from Indian Himalaya with a revised key to its
species. Oriental Insects 53(1): 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/00305316.2018.1440257
O’Hara, J.E.,
S.J. Henderson & D.M. Wood (2020). Preliminary checklist of the
Tachinidae (Diptera) of the World. Version 2.1. 1039 pp. Available at:
http://www.nadsdiptera. org/Tach/WorldTachs/Checklist/Worldchecklist.html
Pape, T.
(1996). Catalogue of
the Sarcophagidae of the world (Insecta: Diptera). Memoirs on Entomology,
International, Volume 8.
Plant, A.R.,
C. Surin, R. Saokhod & W. Srisuka (2012). Elevational gradients of
diversity and species composition of Hemerodromiinae (Diptera: Empididae) at
Doi Inthanon, Thailand: Has historical partitioning between seasonally dry
lowland and aseasonal moist mountain forests contributed to the biodiversity? Tropical
Natural History 12(1): 9–20.
Rafferty,
N.E. (2017). Effects of
global change on insect pollinators: multiple drivers lead to novel
communities. Current Opinion in Insect Science 23: 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2017.06.009
Rahman, A., M.
Bathari, P. Borah, R.R. Taye & P. Patgiri (2017). Diversity of insect species along
with their host in Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat. Journal of
Entomology and Zoology Studies 5(6): 2307–2312.
Sanders, N.J.
& C. Rahbek (2012). The patterns
and causes of elevational diversity gradients. Ecography 35: 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2011.07338.x
Sasakawa, M.
(1992). Lauxaniidae
(Diptera) of Malaysia (part 2): A revision of Homoneura Van Der Wulp.
Insecta Matsumurana 46: 133–210.
Sathe, T.V.,
P.M. Bhoje & A.S. Desai (2014). Floral host plants for Tachinid
flies (Diptera: Tachinidae) from Kolhapur and Satara districts, India. Journal
of Entomological Research 38(3): 183–188.
Scudder,
G.G.E. & R.A. Cannings (2006). The Diptera Families of British
Columbia. Columbia
University.
Sengupta, J.,
A. Naskar, A. Maity, S. Hazra, E. Mukhopadhyay, D. Banerjee & S. Ghosh
(2016). An updated
distribution account of Indian Hover flies (Insecta: Diptera: Syrphidae). Journal
of Entomology and Zoology Studies 4(6): 381–396.
Senior-White,
R., D. Aubertin & J. Smart (1940). Family Calliphoridae, vol. VI. Taylor & Smart, London,
United Kingdom.
Shamshev, I.,
P. Grootaert & S. Kustov (2015). New data on the genus Hybos
Meigen (Diptera: Hybotidae) from the Palaearctic region. Zootaxa
3936(4): 451–484. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3936.4.1
Sharma, K.,
B.K. Acharya, G. Sharma, D. Valente, M.R. Pasimeni, I. Petrosillo & T.
Selvan (2020). Land use
effect on butterfly alpha and beta diversity in the Eastern Himalaya, India. Ecological
Indicators 110: 105605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105605
Sharma, N.,
M.D. Behera, A.P. Das & R.M. Panda (2019). Plant richness pattern in an
elevation gradient in the Eastern Himalaya. Biodiversity and Conservation
28(8): 2085–2104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01699-7
Shatalkin,
A.I. (1996). Palearctic
species of Homoneura (Diptera, Lauxaniidae). Entomological Review
75(7): 171–186.
Shinonaga, S.
& R. Kano (1971). Fauna Japonica, Muscidae (Insecta: Diptera). Academic Press of Japan, 233
pp.
Shinonaga, S.
& M.M. Singh (1994). Muscidae of Nepal (Diptera). The Japan Society of Medical Entomology
and Zoology 45: 99–177.
Sinha, S.K.
(2014). New records
of Calyptrate flies (Diptera) from the state of Jharkhand, India. Prommalia
2: 1–22.
Sinha, S.K.,
P. Hazari & S. Mahato (2021). Diversity of Muscidae (Diptera) in Neora Valley
National Park, West Bengal. Indian Journal of Entomology 84(2): 251–261.
https://doi.org/10.55446/IJE.2021.38
Sinha, S.K.,
S. Mahato, P. Hazari, N. Pandya, A. Hajra & N. Jana (2022). Altitudinal partitioning of
syrphid flies (Diptera) increases along elevation gradients in pollinator
communities in the Eastern Himalayas, India. Biodiversity 23(3–4):
102–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/14888386.2022.2138545
Słowińska, I.
& R. Jaskuła (2021). Distributional patterns of aquatic Empididae (Diptera) along an
elevational diversity gradient in a low mountain range: An example from central
Europe. Insects 12(2): 165. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12020165
Smit, J.T.,
A. van Harten & R. Ketelaar (2017). Order Diptera, family Syrphidae.
The hoverflies of the Arabian Peninsula, pp. 572–612. In: van Harten A. (ed.).
Arthropod Fauna of the UAE. Dar Al Ummah, Abu Dhabi.
Ssymank, A.
(2012). A
contribution to the Syrphidae (Diptera) fauna of Cameroon with a preliminary
checklist of the family. African Invertebrates 53(1): 249–266.
https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC121917
Streinzer,
M., J. Chakravorty, J. Neumayer, K. Megu, J. Narah, T. Schmitt, H. Bharti, J.
Spaethe & A. Brockmann (2019). Species composition and
elevational distribution of bumble bees (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Bombus
Latreille) in the east Himalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, India. ZooKeys 851:
71–89. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.851.32956
Subedi, I.P.
& P.B. Budha (2020). Diversity and distribution patterns of ants along elevational
gradients. Nepalese Journal of Zoology 4(1): 44–49. https://doi.org/10.3126/njz.v4i1.30672
Sundqvist,
M.K., N.J. Sanders & D.A. Wardle (2013). Community and ecosystem
responses to elevational gradients: processes, mechanisms, and insights for
global change. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics
44(1): 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110512-135750
Suwa, M.
(1981). Some
Anthomyiidae from India (Diptera). Insecta matsumurana. New series: Journal
of the Faculty of Agriculture Hokkaido University, series entomology 22:
15–28. http://hdl.handle.net/2115/9810
Terborgh, J.
(1977). Bird species
diversity on an Andean elevational gradient. Ecology 58(5): 1007–1019. https://doi.org/10.2307/1936921
Tiusanen, M.,
P.D. Hebert, N.M. Schmidt & T. Roslin (2016). One fly to rule them all - Muscid
flies are the key pollinators in the Arctic. Proceedings of the Royal
Society B: Biological Sciences 283(1839): 20161271. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.1271
Turk, J.K.,
N. Memon, B. Mal, S.A.
Memon, M.A. Shah & D.A. Solangi
(2014). First record
and redescription of Paragus haemorrhous Meigen (Diptera: Syrphidae)
from Balochistan, Pakistan. Indian Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies
2(5): 267–270.
Whittington,
A.E. (1998). Hoverflies
(Diptera: Syrphidae) from Vumba, Eastern highlands of Zimbabwe, with the
description of a new species of Paragus. Annals of the Natal Museum 39:
185–198.
Wirth, W.W.
& A.A. Hubert (1989). The Culicoides of South East Asia (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Memoirs
of the American Entomological Institute 44: 1–508.
Wirth, W.W.
& N. Marston (1968). A method for mounting small insects on microscope slides in Canada
balsam. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 61(3): 783–784. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/61.3.783
Zouhair, L. & K. Kettani (2022). Moroccan
Hybotinae (Diptera: Hybotinae): first record of the subfamily and rare genera
with an emphasis on their distribution. Zootaxa 5196(2): 211-222. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5196.2.3