Page 100 [100]
OCR
98 | IV. Categories of animal associations a peregrinant, given that there is not a single oilseed rape plant in the wheat field, except that we observe it feeding on the flowers of Lithospermum arvense, and, therefore, it is a sustinent of the presocium. We see a Nicrophorus (Necrophorus) vespillo walking on the soil surface among the wheat stems: an intercalary element of the supersocium, probably attracted here by the few vole nests whose entrance holes are visible among the cracks of the soil surface. We find a single Trichogramma evanescens in the bottom of the sweep net; we do not know where it came from and where it will go to. As it has several potential hosts, we classify it as an obstant of the presocium; here, it is at least a hospitant and not a peregrinant, because there may have been a few Agrotis eggs on the weeds, and it could have been en route to these when captured. We observe a robber fly that captures a stem fly - a sole representative of the obstant coetus of the presocium; a single semaphoront, that is a temporary element of the Chloropiditena pumilionis catena. It quickly flies away, and its next victim will be from a totally different catena. The above is an example of how one can distinguish the various kinds of associations, and how the semaphoronts that belong to various associative categories may mix. The above list - and this must be considered an advantage “lives”, and is dissimilar from species lists and their respective columns of numbers that tell nothing about the simple coenological questions: how does the animal in question associate with others, and what is its role in the coexistence. This is, however, not the endpoint but the start of the analysis of animal associations, and only the initial step was demonstrated above. The methods of coenological analysis will be dealt with in a separate chapter; first we have to discuss the dynamics of the zoocoenosis. These dynamics are so important in the coenological censuses that they need a separate chapter. One question, though needs to be asked at the end of this chapter. The links in the above example also exist if we do not complicate the terminology with new terms; therefore, what sense is there in setting up these new frames? The reply is that these links are manifested within these associative frames and their clear-sighted recognition and observance leads us towards understanding relationships that profoundly influence pest densities, but these may remain hidden without clarifying the internal relationships of the associative categories. To do this, we need to know in which associative category the individual semaphoronts live, where we can find them, and what factors are they subject to? This is why need agrozoocoenology!
