ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM HEALTH A CASE STUDY FROM SOUTH WESTERN KARNATAKA, INDIA

Transcription

1 FRASERIA (N.S.) 7, ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM HEALTH A CASE STUDY FROM SOUTH WESTERN KARNATAKA, INDIA Abstract - Key words K.A.SUBRAMANIAN1., SAMIR ALl2 & T.V.RAMACHANDRA2 1ZoologicalSurvey of India, Western Regional Station, PUNE, Maharashtra , INDIA. ZWetlandand Energy Research Group, Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science. BANGALORE , INDIA. - * -subbuka.zsi@gmail.com The influence of riparian land use on the diversity an~ distribution were investigated by sampling 113 localities covering 4 districts in south-western Karnataka. A total of 55 species in 12 families were recorded. Streams, rivers and lakes had higher diversity than marshes and sea coast. However, lakes had low endemism than streams and rivers. Streams flowing through evergreen forests had higher diversity and endemism. Human impacted riparian zones such as paddy fields had relatively lower species richness. However, streams flowing through forestry plantations had higher diversity than other natural riparian zones such as dry deciduous, moist deciduous and semi evergreen forests. Myristica swamps-a relict evergreen forest marsh had low diversity and high endemism. Odonate communities of lentic ecosystems, and human impacted streams and rivers were characterized by widespread generalist species. Endemics and habitat specialists were. restricted to streams and rivers with undisturbed riparian zone. The study documents possible odonate community change due to human impact: The influence of riparian 'Ianduse change on odonate community is also discussed. - Odonata, Riparian land use, Western Ghats, Introduction Studies from different parts of Information on diversity and the world have show!1that insects like distribution of various taxa at habitat, odonates are good indicators of local and regional scale is the key to ecosystem health. The species biodiversity conservation, especially of assemblages of odonates are little known taxa such as Odonata influenced by aquatic and terrestrial (dragonflies and damselflies), vegetation3. Since larvae and adult Odonates are aquatic insects and are odonates respond to change in habitat highly specializedfor a specific wetland quality, they are widely recognized habitat. At global level, the streams and indicators for monitoring wetland rivers of the Western Ghats are one of health4, Methodologies for monitoring the hyper diverse areas for odonates wetland health using odonates has with 176 species and 68 endemics1, been developed and currently being Manyof theseendemicsare recorded -used in differentparts of the world 5- from the central Western Ghats, 7',Unfortunately, no such attempt has spanning Kodagu, Utlarakannada and been made for Indian wetlands, This is Dakshinkannada districts of largely due to unavailability of Karnataka2, information on distribution and habitat Cl'roceedingsof tlie 18tli International Symposium of OdonatofoDY

2 ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM 84 use of aquatic invertebratespecies, Sampling Methodincl.udingodonates. This in turn, has In each locality different senouslyr~tardedthe de~elop~en~of ~wetland habitats were surveyed countrywide wetlan~blomo~ltorl~g " between9-13"hrs.specieswhichcould programmes using" aquatic' not be identified in the field were invertebrates.,in~oh(ingconservation collected and sto~e~ in 70% ethyl mana~er~,sclentl~ts,nongover~mental alcohol for identification.all species organizationsandgeneralpublic. wereidentifiedfollowingfraser1cj.12. The The odonate fauna of the Western sampling sites were georeferenced Ghats is well «nown taxonomically. using hand held Gloabal Positioning Taxonomyof adultsis wellworkedout System(GarminGPS).Duringthefield anddescriptionsareavailableforallthe' visits the riparian landuse types and reportedspecies8-11. Recentstudies threatsto wetlandhabitatsin each on theodonatefaunaof the regionare localitywere also recorded. species checklists based on field Riparian landscape and wetland surveysz, Though partial, these types published studies give valuable. informationon geographicarid habitat.based on pred '!1In~nt distributionof odonatesof1he region... vegetationand I~ndu.sethe riparian zoneswereclassifiedinto9 typesand The understa~d!ng~n ecology,habitat, wetlands,were classifiedinto 5 types use an.~.dlv~rslty of odonate (Table-1).All the 113 localities were ~mm~n~tlesof dlffe~entlanduse.types. further grouped into 9 landuse or 5 IS very Important In developing a wetlandtypesfor analysis. wetlandbiomonitoringtechnique.this. 4nderstandingis crucial to know how Analysis odonate communities respond to Familyand speciespresence! change in landuse pattern. Present absencerecordsacross landuseand study investigates the influence of wetlandtypeswere used to estimate riparianlanduseon the diversity,and diversitymeasurements. Allthespecies distributionof odonatecommunitiesof records were georeferenced and south western Karnataka.The study spatialdistributionof speciesdiversity alsoexplorespotentialuseofodonates wasestimatedand plottedusingdiva as indicators of riparian ecosystem:' GIS. health. Results Methodology Diversity Study localities A total of 55 species in 12 Dragonflies and damselflies' familieswererecordedinthestudy.six were sampled from 113 localities in of th~ species recorded in the study Shimoga Uttarakannada,Udupi and were endemicto the Western Ghats. Mangalore (formerly Study localities such as Mala" Dakshinakannada) (Map-1&2,) Ramsamudra, Koyur and Kukkedistricts duringaugust to November, Subramenyahad high speciesand family diversity(maps 3&4). Species l/!rocee4mgsof tlie 18tli l"temational' Symposium of Otftmatofogy

3 K.A.SUBRAMANIAN1', SAMIR AU2 & T.Y.RAMACHANDRA2 ~ 85 Map 1 : UttaraKannaola ana uakanmkannaola \ ~, SoutIo~lem Ktmtaka D.. KBrl11llaka_region kiomole<. Legend: UK : Uttarakannada, SH:Shimoga. DK:Dakshinkannada (Udupi & Dakshinkannada districts combined) 300 cfi.t s. pl.". t.o"""""$ W_rSocl.;... P'I s._am$ J',,/ So"... We"'..", K CJ K ",..s_.. CJ "lu.. KARNAIAKA ~ ~ kilometers Map 2 : Uttarakannada and Dakshinkannada (Magnified)! showing sampling locations. lproceetfinasof the 18tli lntemationa{ Symposium of Oaonatou,9Y J

4 ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM 86 SouthWe:stemKama.... D family_richness 0 Nodata III kiomet.., 100 in Map 3 : Distribution of Family Richness in South Western Karnatka Souih WoOl"'" Korneralta D species Jicllnes.s.\-HI I11III"-19 EJ III ~B 0 NoD- tn kilometers Map 4 : Distribution of Species Richnes~ 10' ~uu'" ng~tern Karnatka (}1roceemnosof tlie 18tli International Symposium of Otfonatofo9J

5 KASUBRAMANIAN1', SAMIRAU2 & T.V.RAMACHANDRA2 87 such as Orthetrumsabina (Drury,1770), Pantala flavescens (Fabricius, 1798) Diplocodes trivialis (Rambur, 1842) (Libellulidae), Rhynocypha bisignata (Selys, 1853) (Chlorocyphidae) and Euphaea fraseri (Laidlaw, 1920) (Euphaeidae) were very wide,spread across localities. On the other hand, Dysphaea' eihela, Fraser, 1924e (Euphaeidae), 'Epithemis mariae (Laidlaw, 1915b) (Libellulidae), Phyl[oneurawestermanni(Selys, 1860) and Esme longistyla Fraser, 1931a (Protoneuridae) were recorded from only one or two localities. Frequency distribution of 15 most common odonates is given in Fig-1. Distributionacross wetland types- Species richness across wetland habitats shows that ponds, streams and lakes have high species diversity. Sea coasts were very poor in species (Fig.2). Species such as Anax guttatus (Burmeister, 1839), Crocothemis servilla (Drury,1770), Diplacodes trivialis (Rambur, 1842),. Ictinogomphus rapax (Rambur, 1842), Orthetrum sabina (Drury,1770)and Pantala flavescens (Fabricius, 1798) were widespread across wetlands, (Fig.3).On the othe( hand speciess{jch as Disparoneura quadrimaculata (Ram bur, '1842), Phylloneura westermanni (Selys, 1860), Esme longistyla' Fraser, 1931 a (Protoneuridae), Euphaea fraseri (Laidlaw, 1920) (Euphaeidae), Vestalis ' gracilis (Rambur, 1842), and v. apicalis Selys, 1873(Calopterygidae) were restricted to one or two habitats,all the six endemic species were restricted to streams, myristica swamps and rivers. No endemic species were recorded from other habitats such as ponds, lakes, pa<;ldyfields and beaches (Fig.4). Distribution across riparian landuse types Species diversity varies aeross riparian landuse types. High species diversityand endemism were observed in streams flowing through evergreen forests, followed by plantations. Myristrica swamps, dry deciduous forests and beaches had low diversity (fig.5). Species such as Diplacodes trivialis(rambur, 1842),Ictinogomphus rapax (Rambur, 1842), Orthetrum sabina (Drury,1770), Agriocnemis pygmaea (Rambur, 1842), Copera vittata Selys, 1863; and Pantala flavescens(fabricius, 1798)were wide spreatf across riparian 'Ianduse types. On the other hand, species such as Protosticta hearseyi Fra,ser, 1922a, Macromia indica Fraser, 1924c, Hylaeothemis frushtorferi Fraser, 1924e and Dysphaea ethala Fraser, '924e were restricted to one or two riparian landuse types. High endemism were observed in streams flowing through evergreen forests and Myristica swamps. Wetlands with dry deciduous forests and beaches were devoid of any endemic species (Fig.6). Landuse Change and Odonata " Diversity Field observations reveal that agricultural expansion, riparian deforestation and organic pollution are most wide spread threats to odonate habitats in the region. These drivers of landuse and habitat changes influence the diversity of odonates. The change in Odonata community in different riparian and wetland ecosystems is summarized in Table-1. Families like Protoneur:idae and Platystictidae are (f'roceem"lls of tlie 18tli I ntenuztiotuz{ Symposium of Otfonatofooy

6 ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM 88 very sensitive to habitat modifications and disappear completely when riparian forests are removed in evergreen and semi evergreen forests. On the other hand, Euphaeidaetolerate riparian modifications in evergreen forest zone and disappear completely in modified semievergreen forest zones. Maximum loss of Odonata community occurs due to riparian modifications of moist deciduous forests, where families Calopterygidae, Euphaeidaeand Corduliidaedisappear. Dragonflies and Damselfli~s recorded in the study - SUBORDER:ZYGOPTERA 1 Family: Calopterygidae 1. Neurobasis chinensis (Linnaeus, 1758) 2 Vestalis apicalis Selys, Vestalis gracilis (Rambur, 1842) 2 Family: Chlorocyphidae 4 Libellagolineata(Burmeister,. 1839) 5 Rhinocypha (Selys,1853) bisignata 3 Family: Coenagrionidae 6 Agriocnemis pygmaea (Rambur, 1842) 7 Ceriagrion cerinorubellum (Brauer, 1865) 4 Family: Euphaeidae 13 Dysphaea ethela Fraser, 1924e 14 Euphaea (Laidlaw,1920) fraseri 5 Family: Lestidae 15 Lestes elatus Hagen in Selys, Family :Platycnemididae 16 Copera marginipes (Rambur, 1842) 17 Copera vittata Selys, Family:Platystictidae 18 Protosticta hearseyi Fraser, 1922a 8 Family: Protoneuridae 19. Disparoneura quadrimaculata (Rambur,1842) 20 Esme Fraser,1931a longistyla 21 Phylloneura westermanni (Selys,1860) II 'SUBORDER:ANISOPTERA. 22 Family: Aeshnidae 23 Anaciaeschna jaspidea (BurmElister, 1839) 24 Anax guffatus (Burmeister, 1839). 25 Anax immaculifrons Rambur, Ceriagrioncoromandelianum 26 G.yn.acantha dravida (Fabricius, 1798) Llefbnck, Ceriagrion olivaceum 10 Family:Gomphidae Laidlaw, Ictinogomphus rapax 10' IschnuraauroraBrauer, 1865 (Rambur, 1842). 11 Ischnura senegalensis 11 Family:Libeliulidae (Rambur, 1842) 28 Acisoma panorpoides 12 Pseudagrion microcephalum Rambur,'1842 (Rambur, 1842) 29 Aethriamanta brevipennis, {Rambur,1842) a>roceemngsof tlie 18tli International Symposium of Oaonatowgy

7 KASUBRAMANIAN, SAMIR All AND T.V.RAMACHANDRA Brachydiplax (Rambur, 1842) sabrina 31 Brachythemis contaminata (Fabricius,1793) 32 Bradinopyga geminata (Rambur, 1842) 33 Cratilla lineata Foerster, Crocothemis servi/ia (Drury, 1770) 35 Oiplacodes (Rambur,1842) trivia lis 36 Epithemis (Laidlaw,1915b) mariae 37 Hylaeothemis fruhstorferi Fraser,1924e 38 Lathrecista (Fabricius, 1798) asiatica 39 Neurothemis Fulvia (Drury, 1773) 40 Neurothemis tullia (Drury, 1773) 41 Orthetrum glaucum (Brauer, 1865) 42 Orthetrum (Brauer, 1868) luzonicum 43 Orthetrum pruinosum (Rambur, 1842) 44 Orthetrum sabina (Drury, 1770). 45 Pantala f/avescens (Fabrici~s, '1798) 46 Polamarcl)a congener (Rambur, 1842) 47 Rhyothemis variegata (Linnaeus, 1763) 48 Tetrathemisplatyptera Selys, Tholymis tillarga (Fabricius, 1798) 50 Tramea limbata Rambur, Trithemisaurora (Burmeister,. 1839). 52 Trithemis festiva (Rambur,, 1842) 53 Trithemispallidinervis (Kirby, 1889) 54 Zyxomma Rambur, 1842 petiolatum 12 Family:Macromiidae 55 Macromia Fraser,1924c indica (*Species marked in bold are endemic to the Western Ghats) Discussion The odonate fauna of coastal districts of Karnataka was extensively explored by Frasers,9. During the. pre;:;ent study, 55. species with6 Western Ghats endemics were recorded. Frequency distribution of species shows that globally wide spread species such as Panta/a f/avescens (Fabricius, 1798), Dip/ocodes trivialis (Rambur, 1842), Orthetrum sabina (Drury,1770) (Libellulidae) are most common in all the study localities. In addition to this species such as Rhynocypha bisignata (Selys, 1853) (Chlorocyphidae) and. Euphaea Fraseri (Laidlaw, 1920) (Euphaeidae), which are restricted to the peninsular India, are locally very common. On the other hand, species such as Dysphaea ethe/a Fraser, 1924e (Euphaeidae), Epithemis mariae (Laidlaw, 1~15b) (Libellulidae) and Phylloneura westermanni (Selys, 1860) (Protoneuridae) were recorded from only one locality. Highly restricted distribution of these species co~ld be due to their specific habitat requirement. Species such as Epithemis mariae (Laidlaw, 1915b) (Libellulidae) and Phylloneura westermanni (Selys, 1860) are found fproceemngs of tlie 18tli Internationa{ Symposium of OaonatoUJgy

8 ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIANECOSYSTEM 90 Croeothe1'1'Jis Agrioenernis servilia pygrnea Orthetrum Ictinogomphus Orthetrum pruinosum rapax g/aueum Br~ehythe1'1'JiS eonto1'1'jil1ata Cope,:o vit.tata Libel/ago Iil1eata 34 Vesta lis gracilis 39 Isc:hl1ura aurora 39 Euphaea fraseri 49 Pa,Ha/a f/avesc:el1s 54 Dip/aeodes trivia lis 61 Rhinoc..ypha Orthetrun1 bisignata sabina ; 40', ' Fig.1. Frequency distribution of 15 most common species ' Streams' lakes Rivers Marshes Coast Fig. 2. Species richness across wetland types tpmceetfi1lljsof tlie 18tli Intemationat Symposium of OtfonatofDay

9 ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIANECOSYSTEM 91 Ceriagrion caromandelianum Bradinopyga geminate Anax immaculifrons Tramea /imbata Cepero marginipes Ceriagrion cerinorubellum Brachythemis Agriocnemis Rhyothemis cantaminata pygmea variegate Pantala flavescens Orthetrum sabina /ctinogomphus,apex Dip/aeodes trivia.fis Crocathemis servilia Anax guttatus Fig. 3. Frequency distribution of 15 most common species across wetland habitats STREAM RIVER COAST LAKE MARSH Fig. 4. Endemic species richenss across wetland types lproceetfingsof tlie 18tli Intemationaf Symposium of Otfonatofogy

10 KASUBRAMANIAN, SAMIR All AND r.v.ramachandra EVG PLAN PADDY 5EVG MOEC l.tabi MY5 OOE( BEACH Fig. 5. Species richness across riparian landuse types ' EVG MY5 HABI MOEC PADDY PLAN SEVG BEACH ODEC Fig.G. Endemic Species Richenss Across Riparian landuse Types ( EVG:Evergreen forests; PlAN:Plantations; SEVG:Semievergreen forests; MDEC:Moist Deciduous Forests; HABI:Habitations; MYS:Myristica Swamps; DDEC:Dry Deciduous Forests). only in Myristica swamps and is very prevalent thro~ghout the Dysphaea ethela Fraser, 1924e Western Ghats and the biological (Euphaeidae) in unpollutedfast flowing reasons remain elusive1,2.. stream and rivers. The family Libellulidae which High species diverstty was was. most species. rich family (27 observed in streams and lakes. High species) inthe turrent study uses lentic diversity of lakes was due to the habitats. High species richness and presence of wide spread species from wide geographic spread of this family Libellulidae. On the other hand, the is probably related to its lentic habitat, streams were characterized by the which is widelyavailable. This may be presence of endemics and all the six generalizedto inferthat lentic habitats, endemicsreportedin thecurrentstudy thoughmayincreasespeciesrichness were recordedhere. This patternof of an area, can potentiallyencourage highdiversityandendemisminstreams colonizationof widespreadgeneralists lproceemnosof tlie 18tli International Symposium of Otfonatofo8J

11 ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM 93 Table 1: Odonata community change in relation to riparian land use and wetland modifications. Natural Natural Natural Human Human Odonata Loss Gain Riparian Wetland Odonata Modified Modified Community (No. (No. Ecosy- Ecosy- Commu- Riparian Wetland Families) Families) stem stem nity Ecosystem Ecosystem Evergreen Streams Protone Horticulture Check Euphaeidae, 2 0 Forests and,. -uridae, and Spice Dams Caloptel')'gidae, Rivers Plat- Plantations Gomphidae, ystictidae, Corduliidae Euphaeidae Calopterygidae, Gomphidae, Corduliidae Semi Streams Euphaei- Forestry Check Calopterygidae, 1 1 Evergreen and dae, Plantations, Dams Coenagrionidae Forests Rivers Caloptery- Agriculture Gomphidae, gidae, Libellulidae. Gomphidae, Corduliidae Moist Streams Euphaei- Forestry Check Aeshnidae 3 1 Deciduous and dae,calop- Plal'ltations, Dams. Coenagrionidae Forests Rivers terygidae, Agriculture,. Gomphidae, Aeshnidae, Pastures Libellulidae. Gomphidae, Corduliidae, Libellulidae. Coastal Marshes Aeshnidae Agriculture Ponds Aeshnidae 0 0 Swamps Coenagrion and Coenagrionidae idae paddy Gomphidae, Gomphidae, fields Libellulidae. Libellulidae. Methodologies for monitoring wetland health using odonates has been developed and currently being used in different parts of the world (Oertli, 2008; Chovanec and Waringer, 2001, Paul, 2005). species such as libellulids. High diversity and endemism were observed in streams flowing through evp,rgreen forests. Though Myristita swamps had low diversity, it had high endemism with species such as Epithemis mariae, Hylaeothemis frushtorferi Fraser, 1924e(Libellulidae) and Phylloneura westermanni (Selys, 1860) (Protoneuridae) restricted to it. This study shows that how Odonata community responds to change in riparian landuse. Recent lproceemngsof the 18th I ntemationa{ Symposium of Ot!onatofogy

12 KASUBRAMANIAN, SAMIR All AND T.V.RAMACHANDRA 94 studies have shown that inland Forest Departmentand KarnatakaState wetlands of the region are facing Biodiversityboardfor supportingthestudy. serious threats 28.Regional scale KAS '~incere~y acknowl~dge Dr. destruction of riveri11e habitats by Rama~nshna,Director,Zoological~~rvey h d I t. d,'.. of Indlsand Dr.A.S.Mahabal,Additional t t y ro-e ec rlc an I~rlga Ion projec.s Directorand Officer in Charge,Western threatens t~e survival of ende~lc odonates,which depend on fast flowing Regional Station, Zoological Survey of India, Pune for providing necessary torrentialstreams. Manyof the endemic facilitiesfor data analysisand writingthis odonates such as O;sparoneura manuscript. ap;calis Fraser,1924e(Protoneuridae), References Id;onyx sps. (C?rdulidae) and 1. SUBRAMANIAN, K.A. Biology of Calocypha laldlawli Fraser, 1924e Odonata(Ed.Tyagi,B. K.). Scientific (Chlorocyphidae) (not reported in the Publishers,Jodhpur,India(2007). current study but re.po~edin lit~r~ture) 2. SUBRAMANIAN, K.A. & are very narrowly distributed Wlt~1nthe SIVARAMAKRISHNAN, K.G.Vistasof Weste~n ~hats and destruction of alteration of a small catchment Entomological Research for the NewMillenium.(Eds.Sanjayan,K.P., essentially means extinction of these Mahalingam, V. Snd Muralirangan,. species. Local scale impactson riverine. M.C.). G.S. Gill Research Institute, habitats such as check dams, draining Chennai(2002). of.swamps, canalization, du"mpingof 3. REMSBURG, A.J.& TURNER,M.G.J. wastes and pesticide pollutionaltersthe NorthAmericanBentho/ogicalSociety quality of habitats and promotes the 28 (2009)44. colonization of generalist species such 4. SAMWAYS,M. J. Odonatologica,21 as libellulids. These small local scale (1992)165. habitatalterationsareverywidespread 5. OERTLI,B. In: Dragonflies and throughout the study area and are very Damselflies-Model organisms for difficultto assessits longterm impact ecological and evolutionary on the endemic odonates. research(ed.alexcordoba-aguilar). I mma th nse t. 7: pp OxfordUniversityPress, n su ry, e co rva Ion 0 ~ rd (2008) of endemicodonatesis directlylinked x 0.. to the conservation of riverine 6. CHOVANEC,A. & WARINGER, J. ecosyste~ of the region. Current :;;~arch& Management. 17 (2001) conservation management measures.. of the region need to consider the 7. CATLI~G,P.M. Canadian Fleld~ importance of riverine ecosystems, Naturalist, 119(2005)233. especially the natural riparian zone. A 8. FRASER,F.C.Recordsof the India" conservationmanagement programme Museum,32 (1932)443. focusing on threatened odonate 9. FRASER,F.C.RecordsOfrhe Indian habitatssuch as Myristicaswamps and Museum (A Journal Of Indian forest streams are very essential for Zoology).26 (1924)423. long term conservation. Acknow Ied gements Authors are grateful to Karnataka 10. FRASER, EC. The Fauna Of British India, Including Ceylon And Burma, Odonata, Vol.1Taylor& FrancIs. Ltd., London,( ). lproceetfinosof tlie 18tli International Symposium of Oaonatofooy

13 ODONATAAS INDICATORS OF RIPARIAN ECOSYSTEM FRASER, EC. The Fauna Of British India, Including Ceylon And Burma, Odonata, VoL2, Taylor & Francis Ltd., London, (1934). 12. FRASER, EC. The Fauna Of British India, Including Ceylon And Burma, Odonata, VoL3, Taylor & Francis Ltd., London, ( ). 13. FONSEKA, TERENCE DE. The Dragonflies< of Sri Lanka. WHT Pub,lications (Private) Limited, Colombo; Sri Lan~a, 303 (2000). 14. DAVIS, D.A.L. & TOBIN, P. The Dragonflies of The World: A Systematic List of Extant Species Of Odonata. Vol I. Societas Internationalis Odontologica Rapid Communications (Supplements). 3 (1984). 15. DAVIS, D.A. L. & TOBIN, P. The Dragonflies of The World: A Systematic List of Extant Species Of Odonata. Vol II. Societas Internationalis Odontologica Rapid Communications (Supplements). 3 (1985) PRASAD, M. & VARSHNEY, R.K. Oriental Insects, 29 (1995) PETERS, G. Dtsch. Ento.z., N.F28 Heft I-III, seite (1981) RAO, R. & LAHIRI, A.R. JBNHS 79 (1982) PRASAD, M. Faunal Diversity In India: Odonata. ZoologicalSurvey Of India, Calcutta. 171 (1999). 20. MATHAVAN, S. & MILLER, P.L. Soc. Int. Odonatol. Rapid. Coom. (SuppL), (1989). 21. RADHAKRISHNAN, C. Zoos Print, 11 (1997) EMILlYAMMA, K.G. & RADHA- KRISHNAN, C. Rec. Zool. SUN.India. 98 (2000) EMILlYAMMA, K.G. & RADHA- KRISHNAN, C. Zoo's print Jourral. 17 (2002) JAFER PALOT, M., CHERUVAT, D., EMILlYAMMA, K.G. & RADHA- KRISHNAN, C. Fishing Chimes, 22 (2002)56: 25. RADHAKRISHNAN, C. & EMILlY- AMMA, K.G. Odonata (Insecta) of Kerala: A Systematic database. In: Advancements,~n Insect Biodiversity. (Ed. Gupta, R. K.) Agrobios, Jodhpur (2003). 26. EMILlYAMMA, K.G., RADHA- KRISHNAN, C. & JAFER PALOT,M. Pictorial Handbook on Common Dragonflies and Damselflies of Kerala. Zoological Survey of India 67 (2005). 27. SUBRAMANIAN, KA Damselflies and dragonflies of peninsular India- A field Guide.LLS. Bangalore, India. 118 (2005). sci- edtlifescapetodonates. html 28 VIJAYAN, V.S., PRASAD, S.N., VIJAYAN, L. & MURALlDHARAN, S. Inland Wetlands of India- Conservation Priorities. Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore. Pp XXiV+532 (2005). cp,oceetfings of tlie 18tli Internationa{ Symposium of Od"onatofo9Y