The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A functional classification for analysis of the structure of dung beetle assemblages
Abstract
Abstract. 1. Regional scarabaeid dung beetle assemblages in southern Africa may contain over 100 species, ranging in live weight from 10 mg to 10 g. These show a wide variety of dung‐use and reproductive strategies. 2. To facilitate analysis of these diverse assemblages, a system of classification analogous to guilds is proposed. Scarabaeid dung beetle species are allocated to one of seven functional groups (FGs) according to the way they use and disrupt dung. Each group therefore contains a set of species which are functional analogues of each other. This classification provides a conceptual framework within which to analyse the structure of dung beetle assemblages and the interactions between dung beetles and other dung‐breeding species such as coprophagous flies. 3. There is a clear hierarchy of functional groups in their ability to compete for dung. Competitively dominant groups such as the large ball rollers (FG I) and fast‐burying tunnellers (FG III) are mostly large, aggressive beetles which rapidly remove dung from the pad. The smaller ball rollers (FG II) are also effective competitors for dung. Subordinate groups are those which bury dung slowly over many days (FG IV and V) and those which breed inside the pad (FG VII, endocoprids). Kleptocoprids (FG VI) breed in dung buried by other beetles and so are not part of the hierarchy. 4. The use of this classification is illustrated by reference to three contrasting assemblages of dung beetles in a summer rainfall region of southern Africa. The potential of these beetles for biological control of dung‐breeding flies is discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Gagic, V., Bartomeus, I., Jonsson, T., Taylor, A., Winqvist, C., Fischer, C., Slade, E. M., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Emmerson, M., Potts, S. G., et al. (2015) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.2620 · Cited by 719
Extinction order and altered community structure rapidly disrupt ecosystem functioning
Larsen, T. H., Williams, N. M., & Kremen, C. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00749.x · Cited by 695
SLADE, E. M., MANN, D. J., VILLANUEVA, J. F., & LEWIS, O. T. (2007) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2007.01296.x · Cited by 327
Co-declining mammals and dung beetles: an impending ecological cascade
Nichols, E., Gardner, T. A., Peres, C. A., Spector, S., & The Scarabaeinae Research Network (2009) · Oikos · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.17268.x · Cited by 271
Trait‐based ecology of terrestrial arthropods
Wong, M. K. L., Guénard, B., & Lewis, O. T. (2019) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12488 · Cited by 258
Metadata
- Authors
- DOUBE, B. M.
- Venue
- Ecological Entomology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1990-11
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 371-383
- ISSN
- 0307-6946 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2311
- OpenAlex
- W2008377573
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A functional classification for analysis of the structure of dung beetle assemblages. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2311.1990.tb00820.x
- The paper
- DOUBE, B. M. (1990). A functional classification for analysis of the structure of dung beetle assemblages. Ecological Entomology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.1990.tb00820.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.