内蒙古阿拉善骆驼生活环境水生双翅目昆虫种类调查

【目的】通过对内蒙古阿拉善骆驼生活环境中水生双翅目昆虫的调查研究,以明确其种类的组成和分布。【方法】于2014年5-9月利用网捕法,调查了阿拉善骆驼生活环境水生双翅目昆虫。对鉴定的吸血种类的COI基因序列进行了测序和分析。【结果】共发现水生双翅目昆虫21科41属47种,其中有16种为内蒙古地区新记录,12种为吸血种类,长角亚目、芒角亚目和短角亚目个体数量分别占水生双翅目昆虫总数的49.3%,43.5%和7.2%。分子数据分析显示,12种吸血水生双翅目昆虫的COI基因序列一致性在75.9%~97.3%之间,不同科之间大部分水生双翅目昆虫差异显著,科内不同属间差异也较明显。【结论】本研究基本上掌握了内蒙古骆驼生活环境水生双翅目昆虫的种类,特别是吸血种类,为后期骆驼福斯盘尾丝虫病传播媒介种属的确定提供了基础数据。     

推动骆驼以后

阿拉善荒漠是放养骆驼为主的地区，近年来一些地方对退化草场实行了禁牧。禁牧后的第一、二年见到了效果，但是三，四年后牧民普遍反映封禁的草场反而变坏了，用他们的话说“牧草不吃就坏了”。     

前言

内蒙古自治区地处我国北部边陲,幅员辽阔,自然资源丰富,是我国重要的畜牧业基地之一。她有著名的呼伦贝尔草原、锡林郭勒草原、乌兰察布草原和鄂尔多斯大草原等。东部的大兴安岭森林是我国的重要木材生产基地之一,西部的阿拉善戈壁荒漠则是享有盛名的骆驼之乡。这样富饶的自然资源是本区建设现代牧业的重要物质基础。     

沙漠之舟——骆驼

骆驼耐饥耐渴、性情温顺、不畏风,善走沙漠,可从事农田耕作、生活使役、军事运输,是人们生活中的益友,素有“沙漠之舟”誉称。骆驼高2米,长3米,重约450公斤,寿命可达30年,是哺乳纲偶蹄目骆驼科的反刍动物。骆驼原为野生,四千多年前被驯化,有单、双峰之分。单峰驼集中于非洲各国、亚洲的印度、巴基斯坦和阿拉伯半岛诸国。双峰驼多分布在蒙古人民共和国,其次是中国和苏联。我国双峰驼最多的是内蒙、青海和甘肃的阿拉善驼,其次是新疆驼,数量最少的是苏明特驼,仅分     

走进阿拉善大戈壁——戈壁深处

戈壁，有人说它是“难生草木之地”，也有人说它是“不适宜人类居住的地方”。然而，在阿拉善的版图上戈壁占据了1／3，并且旱已有人居住，那里有覆盖地表仅1％左右的超旱生植物，有“大漠骄子”之称的骆驼，有相距数十、上百公里的散落人家，每家有十几万或几十万亩的草场……那是一个严酷而奇妙的世界，它为人类储备了应对气候千旱化的宝贵知识财富。     

阿拉善荒漠灌丛群落谱系结构及其影响因子

为探究阿拉善荒漠灌丛群落的构建机制,该研究选取净亲缘关系指数(NRI)作为谱系结构指数,在对阿拉善荒漠灌丛群落野外调查的基础上,以群落物种组成为基础数据,计算各样地群落的NRI,并分析NRI在经纬度梯度上的变化趋势及其与土壤因子和水热因子的关系。结果表明:(1)阿拉善荒漠灌丛群落谱系结构在阿拉善高原东南部以发散状态为主,在阿拉善高原西部和北部地区以聚集状态为主。(2)阿拉善荒漠灌丛群落的NRI随经度的升高而减小,随纬度的升高而增大。(3)阿拉善荒漠土壤质地、土壤容重、土壤pH值和土壤有机碳含量与其群落谱系结构均无显著相关性;在降水因子和温度因子中,与群落谱系结构相关系数最大的分别为年降水量和年温度变化范围(最暖月最高温与最冷月最低温的差值),其中:年降水量与NRI呈显著负相关关系,年温度变化范围与NRI呈显著正相关关系,且最暖月最高温和最冷月最低温与NRI均有显著相关性,推测年温度变化范围对阿拉善灌丛群落谱系结构的影响是通过最暖月最高温和最冷月最低温起作用的。研究发现,阿拉善高原东南部区域的荒漠灌丛群落构成主要受竞争排斥的作用,其西部和北部地区的群落构成主要受环境过滤的影响;阿拉善荒漠灌丛群落的谱系结构主要受年降水量和极端温度的影响。     

感受阿拉善（二）——变对干旱的信息库

阿拉善的大地1／3是戈壁!穿越阿拉善常常是漂泊在茫茫戈壁里。 什么是戈壁？这是几乎所有初到戈壁的人第一个问题。翻阅词典你会得到最直白的解释：“戈壁是一种被粗砂、砾石覆盖在硬土层上的荒漠地形,难生草木的土地。“我们就是带着这样的定义走进阿拉善戈壁的。然而,当结束穿越阿拉善之旅的时候,我们对戈壁的理解已经远远超出了字典上的简单表述。     

沙漠之舟

骆驼,你沙漠的船, 你,有生命的山! 在黑暗中, 你昂头天外, 导引着旅行者走向黎明的地平线 -郭沫若:《骆驼》“沙漠之舟”是人们赞颂骆驼的美称。每当人们一提起它时,脑际往往会立即浮现出一幅别有风光的图景:一个盛夏的中午,骄阳似火,一望无际、犹如浩瀚的大海般的戈壁滩被烤得滚烫;沙漠中特有的植物因失水过多而变得无精打彩;少有的鸣禽早已躲到勉强可以遮阴的盐木树下纳凉去了;形形色色的晰蜴有如热锅上的蚂蚁,来去匆匆,赶忙藏到洞中避暑;一切都好像晒僵了似的,万籁俱寂。突然,从远处传来叮噹的骆铃声,打破了这沙漠中的寂静。勇敢的驼队给荒芜的旷野增添了不少生气。在沙丘中,骆驼犹如巨浪中的小舟时隐时现……当见到在如此艰苦环境中劳顿的人和驼着重物的骆驼,会使你油然产生敬慕之感。有不少叙述到大沙漠探险的书籍,对刻苦耐劳的骆驼有许许多多的传说。骆驼身上也的确隐藏着很多令人难解之谜。     

阿洛夫奧斯特线虫 Ostertagia(Ostertagia)orloffi Sankin,1930的另一宿主

1957年我们进行东北家畜寄生虫的调查时,在双峰骆驼(Camellus bactrianus L.)的第四胃中找到阿洛夫奥斯特线虫(Ostcrtagia(Ostcrtagia)orloffi Sankin,1930)。据国外文献的记载,本虫多寄生于绵羊的第四胃,而没有在骆驼消化道中寄生的记录,国内阿洛夫奥斯特线虫至今街无报导过。因此,这次在骆驼体内找到本线虫不仅是一新宿主,而且在国内亦是一新记录。阿洛夫奥斯特线虫呈丝状,淡黄色;体表无横纹而     

埋藏条件下3种干旱荒漠植物的种子休眠释放和土壤种子库

对种子休眠的自然释放及其作用因素的研究, 是了解种子休眠生态学、种群适应机制的重要途径。以内蒙古阿拉善干旱荒漠区的3种主要植物牛枝子(Lespedeza potaninii)、唐古特白刺(Nitraria tangutorum)和骆驼蒿(Peganum nigellastrum)为材料, 研究了种子在野外埋藏18个月期间和4个埋深条件下的休眠释放特性和土壤种子库。3种植物种子在野外埋藏时(采收后5 ℃冷藏6个月)的休眠率分别为98%、95%和3%。结果显示, 埋藏过程中, 3种植物种子的休眠释放表现出不同的变化特性。对牛枝子而言, 置于地表(0 cm)的种子比埋藏于土中的种子的休眠释放快, 埋藏期末, 埋深0、2、5和10 cm的种子的休眠率分别为64%、87%、86%和82%。唐古特白刺种子埋藏6个月后, 各埋深的休眠已完全释放, 释放速率随埋深增加而加快。骆驼蒿种子具有典型的季节性休眠循环特性, 休眠率各年度最高点出现在10月份, 释放速率随埋深增加呈减慢趋势。埋藏期末不同埋深条件下, 牛枝子、唐古特白刺和骆驼蒿种子的平均田间萌发率分别为11%、12%和8%; 平均室内萌发率分别为3%、74%和42%; 而平均死种子率分别为3%、15%和10%。根据Thompson和Grime (1979)的土壤种子库分类体系, 供试的3种植物都属于持久土壤种子库类型。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor