4.0 Article

A country-scale species richness assessment suggests that the inventory of Colombian Odonata species is far from being complete

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TROPICAL INSECT SCIENCE
Volume 42, Issue 2, Pages 2035-2039

Publisher

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s42690-021-00706-1

Keywords

Dragonflies; Damselflies; Colombia; Richness; Rarefaction

Categories

Funding

  1. PAPIIT [IN 204921]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although odonate insect collections in Colombia have increased in recent years, it is unknown whether the inventory list is complete. Analysis using rarefaction curves indicated varying degrees of completeness for different regions and departments, with some areas having scarce collections. Odonates are mainly found in the Andes and Orinoquia regions, highlighting the importance of sampling in protected areas and under-sampled localities.
Although collections of odonate insects have increased in recent years in Colombia, it is unknown whether the inventory list is complete for this country. Thus, we have investigated whether odonate species richness for Colombian endemic and total species by department and natural region, are complete using sample- and coverage-based rarefaction curves. This analysis indicated rarefaction curve values of completeness of 99% for the whole country, 87% all departments, 73% for region, and 99% for endemic patterns. Collections are scarce for Arauca, Casanare, Guaviare, Vichada, Narino, Guajira, Norte de Santander, San Andres, Sucre and Vaupes departments. Conversely, the departments with more collections were Antioquia, Cundinamarca, Magdalena and Meta. Regionally, odonates have been more collected in the Andes and Orinoquia, followed by the Caribbean and Pacific. We encourage odonate sampling especially in protected areas and poorly sampled localities. This sampling should be accompanied by habitat management and conservation plans.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available