Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Jaiswal, Deepa
- On a Collection of Aquatic Beetles (Coleoptera: Gyrinidae, Haliplidae, Noteridae, Dytiscidae, Hydrophilidae and Hydrochidae) of Madhya Pradesh, India
Abstract Views :232 |
PDF Views:114
Authors
Affiliations
1 Zoological Survey of India, Freshwater Biological Station, Hyderabad-500 048, IN
2 Zoological Survey of India, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053, IN
1 Zoological Survey of India, Freshwater Biological Station, Hyderabad-500 048, IN
2 Zoological Survey of India, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053, IN
Source
Records of the Zoological Survey of India - A Journal of Indian Zoology, Vol 114, No 1 (2014), Pagination: 89-103Abstract
The most successful order of the insect, Coleoptera includes 3, 87,100 described species from the whole world representing about 38% of insect species (1,020,007 species) of all the orders (Zhang, 2011). Of these, 40,000 species belong to aquatic beetles pertaining to at least eighteen families. Despite of having multitudes of freshwater aquatic habitats in India, knowledge on these beetles is quite insufficient.Full Text
- Aquatic Beetles (Coleoptera) of Chhattisgarh, India
Abstract Views :213 |
PDF Views:101
Authors
Affiliations
1 Zoological Survey of India, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053, IN
2 Zoological Survey of India, Freshwater Biological Station, Hyderabad-500 048, IN
1 Zoological Survey of India, New Alipore, Kolkata-700053, IN
2 Zoological Survey of India, Freshwater Biological Station, Hyderabad-500 048, IN
Source
Records of the Zoological Survey of India - A Journal of Indian Zoology, Vol 114, No 1 (2014), Pagination: 105-110Abstract
With more than 3.8 lakh described species of beetles (Coleoptera) throughout the world (Zhang, 2011), 12,604 species belong to aquatic beetles (Jach and Balke, 2008). Despite the vast fresh water bodies in India, the information on aquatic beetles of several states is still lacking.Full Text
- Point Source-Driven Seasonal Hypoxia Signals Habitat Fragmentation and Ecosystem Change in River Ganga
Abstract Views :365 |
PDF Views:89
Authors
Affiliations
1 Ganga River Ecology Research Laboratory, Environmental Science Division, Centre of Advanced Study in Botany, Institute of Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, IN
2 Department of Botany, Mahatma Gandhi Kashividyapith University, Varanasi 221 002, IN
1 Ganga River Ecology Research Laboratory, Environmental Science Division, Centre of Advanced Study in Botany, Institute of Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, IN
2 Department of Botany, Mahatma Gandhi Kashividyapith University, Varanasi 221 002, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 117, No 12 (2019), Pagination: 1947-1949Abstract
The development of dissolved oxygen deficit (DOD; hypoxia) has been reported to expand over 2.45 × 105 km2 area of the ocean from over 400 different areas worldwide1. Although cultural eutrophication has greatly accelerated DOD in estuaries and semi-enclosed seas2,3, it is not a common phenomenon in large rivers4. Hydrological continuum reinforces oxygenation, and therefore, development of hypoxia (dissolved oxygen (DO) < 2.0 mg l–1) is less critical in large rivers. River ecosystems usually respond to gradual changes in a smooth manner. However, smooth and continuous changes can be interrupted by sudden abrupt switches to a mosaic of alternative states leading to loss of resilience5. Such shifts are most often driven externally, for instance, point source flushing, but they can trigger internal feedbacks leading the system to behave chaostically even in the absence of external forcing6.Full Text
References
- Diaz, R. J. and Rosenberg, R., Science, 2008, 321, 926–929.
- Chan, F. et al., Science, 2008, 319, 920.
- Conley, D. J., Carstensen, J., VaquerSunyer, R. and Duarte, C. M., Hydrobiologia, 2009, 629, 21–29.
- Diaz, R. J., J. Environ. Qual., 2001, 30, 275–281.
- Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S., Foley, J. A., Folke, C. and Walker, B., Nature, 2001, 413, 591–596.
- May, R. M., Nature, 1977, 269, 471–477.
- Pandey, J., Pandey, U. and Singh, A. V., Biogeochemistry, 2014, 119, 179–198.
- Tare, V., Yadav, A. V. S. and Bose, P., Water Res., 2003, 37, 67–77.
- APHA, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, American Public Health Association, Washington DC, USA, 1998.
- Sànchez, E. et al., Ecol. Indic., 2007, 7, 315–328.
- Hu, W. F., Lo, W., Chua, H., Sin, S. N. and Yu, P. H. F., Environ. Int., 2001, 26, 369–375.
- Tabatabai, M. A. and Bremner, J. M., Soil Biol. Biochem., 1969, 1, 301–307.
- Ling, T. Y., Ng, C. S., Lee, N. and Buda, D., World Appl. Sci. J., 2009, 7, 440– 447.
- Wang, W., Water Res., 1980, 14, 603– 612.
- Rong, N. and Shan, B., Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 2016, 23, 13438–13447.
- Merseburger, G. C., Marti, E. and Sabater, F., Sci. Total Environ., 2005, 347, 217–229.
- Conley, D. J., Humborg, C., Rahm, L., Savchuk, O. P. and Wulff, F., Environ. Sci. Technol., 2002, 36, 5315–5320.
- Vahtera, E. et al., Ambio, 2007, 36, 186– 194.
- Grantham, B. A. et al., Nature, 2004, 429, 749–754.
- Hindustan, Varanasi Issue, 14 May 2018, p. 4.
- Jaiswal, D. and Pandey, J., Environ. Res., 2019, 178, 108712.
- ZSI, Faunal Resources of Ganga, Part I, Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, 1991.
- Karthick, B., Mahesh, M. K. and Ramachandra, T. V., Curr. Sci., 2011, 100, 552–558.
- Pandey, U., Pandey, J., Singh, A. V. and Mishra, A., Curr. Sci., 2017, 113, 959– 964.
- Molecular investigation of Cavernicoles from Kotumsar Cave in Northern Eastern Ghats, India
Abstract Views :337 |
Authors
Boni Amin Laskar
1,
Shantanu Kundu
2,
Rehanuma Sulthana
1,
Harikumar Adimalla
3,
Deepa Jaiswal
1,
Kaomud Tyagi
2,
Vikas Kumar
2,
Kailash Chandra
1
Affiliations
1 Freshwater Biology Regional Centre, Zoological Survey of India, Hyderabad − 500048, Telangana, IN
2 Centre for DNA Taxonomy, Molecular Systematics Division, Zoological Survey of India, M Block, New Alipore, Kolkata − 700053, West Bengal, IN
3 House No. 2-60, Village Turkapalle, Nalgonda − 508266, Telangana, IN
1 Freshwater Biology Regional Centre, Zoological Survey of India, Hyderabad − 500048, Telangana, IN
2 Centre for DNA Taxonomy, Molecular Systematics Division, Zoological Survey of India, M Block, New Alipore, Kolkata − 700053, West Bengal, IN
3 House No. 2-60, Village Turkapalle, Nalgonda − 508266, Telangana, IN
Source
Records of the Zoological Survey of India - A Journal of Indian Zoology, Vol 121, No 3 (2021), Pagination: 337–345Abstract
The Kotumsar cave is situated in the Eastern Ghats and has been reported by the existence of 14 different organisms morphologically. To reassess the living taxa and hitherto unreported organisms, intervention of molecular tool is required to corroborate the exact faunal diversity. In the present study, we dealt with the environmental samples and opportunistically encountered living specimens from both deep and transition zones of the Kotumsar cave. The morphological and integrated approach confirmed the existence of Rhinolophus rouxii (Medellin et al., 2017) (bat), Kempiola shankari Sinha and Agarwal, 1977 (cricket), Heteropoda leprosa Simon, 1884 (spider). Further, the collected environmental DNA (eDNA) samples were successfully identified as Fejervarya pierrei (Dubois, 1975) (frog), Indoreonectes evezardi (Day, 1872) (fish), Metrocoris sp. (true bug), Barytelphusa cunicularis (Westwood, 1836) (crab), Trigoniulidae sp. (millipede), and Megascolecidae sp. (worm). Hence, the present investigation through combined approaches by both morphological and molecular data helps to add six more organisms to the faunal checklist of Kotumsar cave. The study also contributed the genetic information of cavernicoles in the global database from India. This genetic information would further help to pursuing other biological studies and adopt better conservation strategies of cave-dwelling organisms and restoration of the colligated ecosystem.Keywords
Cave Fauna, Conservation, DNA Barcoding, Environmental DNA (eDNA), New RecordFull Text
References
- Banafar, A.S. and Biswas, J. 2016. Hathipol: Biodiversity of a Tunnel ‘Cave’ of Chhattisgarh, India. Amb. Sci., 03: 52-54. https://doi. org/10.21276/ambi.2016.03.1.nn02.
- Barr, T.C. 1968. Cave ecology and the evolution of troglobites. Evol. Biol., 2: 35-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8094-8_2.
- Barrett, R.D. and Hebert, P.D. 2005. Identifying spiders through DNA barcodes. Can. J. Zool., 83: 481-491. https://doi.org/10.1139/ z05-024.
- Beron, P. 2015. Comparative study of the invertebrate cave faunas of Southeast Asia and New Guinea. Hist. Nat. Bulg., 21: 169-210.
- Bhargava, H.N., Jain, A.K. and Singh, D. 1984. On background related chromatic response in the cave fish Nemacheilus evezardi (Day). J. Anim. Morphol. Physiol., 31: 203-209.
- Biswas, J. 1992a. Influence of epigean environmental stress on a subterranean cave ecosystem: Kotumsar. Biome, 5: 39-43.
- Biswas, J. 1992b. Kotumsar Cave ecosystem: An interaction between geophysical, chemical and biological characteristics. NSS Bull., 54: 7-10.
- Biswas, J. 1993. Constructive evolution: Phylogenetic age related visual sensibility in the hypogean fish on Kotumsar Cave. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. India, 63: 181-187.
- Biswas, J. 2009. The biodiversity of Krem Mawkhyrdop of Meghalaya, India, on the verge of extinction. Curr. Sci., 96: 10.
- Biswas, J. 2010. Kotumsar Cave biodiversity: A review of cavernicoles and their troglobiotic traits. Biodivers. Conserv., 19: 275-289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9710-7.
- Biswas, J. and Shrotriya, S. 2011. Dandak: A mammalian dominated cave ecosystem of India. Subterranean. Biol., 8: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.8.1224.
- Buhlmann, K.A. 2001. A biological inventory of eight caves in northwestern Georgia with conservation implications. J. Caves. Karst. Stud., 63: 91-98.
- Chakravorty, R. 2008. Mammalia. In: Vertebrate Fauna of Kangerghati, Guru Ghasidas and Sanjay National Park, Conservation Area Series 36. Director, Zoological Survey, India, Kolkata; p. 264.
- Chatterjee, S., Caleb, J.T.D., Tyagi, K., Kundu, S. and Kumar, V. 2017. First report of Menemerus nigli Wesolowska & Freudenschuss (Araneae: Salticidae) from India. Halteres, 8: 109-111.
- Chirstman, M.C. and Culver, D.C. 2001. The relationship between cave biodiversity and available habitat. J. Biogeogr., 28: 367-380. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2699.2001.00549.x.
- Culver, D.C. and Pipan, T. 2009. The Biology of Caves and other Subterranean Habitats. Oxford University Press; p. 254.
- Deiner, K., Fronhofer, E.A., Machler, E., Walser, J.C. and Altermatt, F. 2016. Environmental DNA reveals that rivers are conveyer belts of biodiversity information. Nat. Commun., 7: 12544. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12544. PMid:27572523 PMCid:PMC5013555.
- Disney, R.H.L. 2009. Scuttle flies (Diptera: Phoridae) from caves in Meghalaya, India. J. Caves. Karst. Stud., 71: 81-85.
- Folmer, O., Hoeh, W.R., Black, M.B. and Vrijenhoek, R.C. 1994. Conserved primers for PCR amplification of mitochondrial DNA from different invertebrate phyla. Mol. Mar. Biol. Biotechnol., 3: 294-299.
- Gravely, F.H. 1931. Some Indian spiders of the families Ctenidae, Sparassidae, Selenopidae and Clubionidae. Rec. Ind. Mus. Cal., 33: 211-282.
- Harries, D.B., Ware, F.J., Fischer, C.W., Biswas, J. and Kharprandaly, B.D. 2008. A review of the biospeleology of Meghalaya, India. J. Caves. Karst. Stud., 70: 163-176.
- Hildreth-Werker, V. and Werker, J.C. 2006. Cave conservation and restoration. Alabama: National Speleological Society, Inc., Carlsbad, New Mexico U.S.A.; p. 1-644. https://digital.lib.usf.edu/SFS0051033/00001.
- Kotaki, M., Kurabayashi, A., Matsui, M., Kuramoto, M., Djong, T.H. and Sumida, M. 2010. Molecular phylogeny of the diversified frogs of genus Fejervarya (Anura: Dicroglossidae). Zoolog. Sci., 27: 386-395. https://doi.org/10.2108/zsj.27.386. PMid:20443685.
- Kottelat, M., Harries, D.R. and Proudlove, G.S. 2007. Schistura papulifera, a new species of cave loach from Meghalaya, India (Teleostei: Balitoridae). Zootaxa, 1393: 35-44. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1393.1.4.
- Kumar, V., Chandra, K., Kundu, S., Tyagi, K., Laskar, B.A., Singha, D., Chakraborty, R. and Pakrashi, A. 2019. Utility of mitochondrial DNA in wildlife forensic science: reliable identification of confiscated materials from Eastern India. Mitochondrial DNA B, 4: 583- 588. https://doi.org/10.1080/23802359.2018.1561216.
- Kundu, S., Kumar, V., Tyagi, K. and Chandra, K. 2018. Environmental DNA (eDNA) testing for detection of freshwater turtles in a temple pond. Herpetol. Notes, 11: 369-371.
- Kundu, S., Rath, S., Tyagi, K., Chakraborty, R., Pakrashi, A., Kumar, V. and Chandra, K. 2018. DNA barcoding of Cloridopsis immaculata: Genetic distance and phylogeny of stomatopods. Mitochondrial DNA B, 3: 955-958. https://doi.org/10.1080/23802359.2018. 1507632. PMid:33474378 PMCid:PMC7800632.
- Medellin, R.A., Wiederholt, R. and LoÂpez-Hoffman, L. 2017. Conservation relevance of bat caves for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Biol. Cons., 211: 45-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.01.012.
- Messouli, M., Holsinger, J.R. and Reddy, Y.R. 2007. Kotumsaridae, a new family of subterranean amphipod crustaceans from India, with description of Kotumsaria bastarensis, new genus, new species. Zootaxa, 1589: 33-46. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1589.1.3.
- Padhye, A.D., Jadhav, A., Modak, N., Nameer, P.O. and Dahanukar N. 2015. Hydrophylax bahuvistara, a new species of fungoid frog (Amphibia: Ranidae) from peninsular India. J. Threat. Taxa., 7: 7744-7760. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o4252.7744-60.
- Prasad, K.N. 1996. Pleistocene Cave Fauna from Peninsular India. J. Caves. Karst. Stud., 58: 30-34.
- Pricop, E. and Negrea, B.M. 2009. On the adaptations to cave life of some different animal groups (first note). ELBA Bioflux, 1. http://www.elba.bioflux.com.ro.
- Reddy, Y.R. 2006. First Asian report of the genus Chilibathynella Noodt, 1963 (Bathynellacea, Syncarida), with the description and biogeographic significance of a new species from Kotumsar Cave, India. Zootaxa, 1370: 23-37. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1370.1.2.
- Reddy, Y.R. and Defaye, D. 2009. Two new Parastenocarididae (Copepoda, Harpacticoida) from India: Parastenocaris muvattupuzha n. sp. from a river and P. kotumsarensis n. sp. from a cave. Zootaxa, 2077: 31-55. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2077.1.2.
- Sato, H., Sogo, Y., Doi, H. and Yamanaka, H. 2017. Usefulness and limitations of sample pooling for environmental DNA metabarcoding of freshwater fish communities. Sci. Rep., 7: 14860. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-14978-6. PMid:29093520 PMCid: PMC5665893.
- Sinha, K.M. and Agarwal, S.M. 1977. A new cavernicolous Orthoptera, Kempiola shankari n. sp. (Orthoptera Phalangopsidae) from Madhya Pradesh. Indian For., 103: 150-152.
- Skalski, W. 1990. Some observations on the fauna of the Kotomsar Cave in India (Bastar District, Madhya Pradesh State). Mem. Biospeol., 17: 175-180.
- Skalski, W. 1992. A new cave-dwelling moth, Kangerosithyris kotomsarensis Gen. Et Sp. Nov. From India (Lepidoptera, Tineidae). Mem. Biospeol., 19: 205-208.
- Sket, B. 2008. Can we agree on an ecological classification of subterranean animals? J. Nat. Hist., 42: 1549-1563. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930801995762.
- Sponsel, L. 2015. Sacred Caves of the World: Illuminating the Darkness. In: Brunn SD, editor. The Changing World Religion Map: Sacred Places, Identities, Practices and Politics. Netherlands: Springer; p. 503-522. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9376-6_25.
- Sutherland, W.J., Bardsley, S., Clout, M., Depledge, M.H., Dicks, L.V., et al. 2013. A horizon scan of global conservation issues for 2013. Trends. Ecol. Evol., 28: 16-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.022. PMid:23219597.
- Suwannapoom, C., Sumontha, M., Tunprasert, J., Ruangsuwan, T., Pawangkhanant, P., Korost, D.V. and Poyarkov, N.A. 2018. A striking new genus and species of cave-dwelling frog (Amphibia: Anura: Microhylidae: Asterophryinae) from Thailand. Peer J., 6: e4422. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4422. PMid:29497587 PMCid:PMC5828679.
- Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A. and Kumar, S. 2013. MEGA6: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol. Biol. Evol., 30: 2725-2729. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst197. PMid:24132122 PMCid:PMC3840312.
- Thompson, J.D., Gibson, T.J., Plewniak, F., Jeanmougin, F. and Higgins, D.G. 1997. The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: Flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res., 25: 4876-4882. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/25.24.4876. PMid:9396791 PMCid:PMC147148.
- Valentini, A., Taberlet, P., Miaud, C., Civade, R. and Herder, J., et al. 2016. Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol., 25: 929-942. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13428. PMid:26479867.
- Verma, S.K. and Singh, L. 2003. Novel universal primers establish identity of an enormous number of animal species for forensic application. Mol. Ecol. Notes., 3: 28-31. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00340.x.