Figure 1.
Examples of plant damage representing a broad spectrum of insect herbivory from the Messel and Eckfeld maar lake localities.
A. Well preserved gall with delineation of concentric growth striae [DT163] (SMF Me 3591). B. Paired mandible chew marks on Araciphyllites tertiarius [DT219] (SMF Me 1396). C. Elongate and round scales of scale insects preserved in situ on an leaf blade (arrows) [DT191] (PB 2005-140, LS, NHMM) [40]. D. A broad zone of gall necroses on surrounding plant tissue [DT163] (SMF Me 3198). E. Mine with a distinctively quadrangular terminal chamber [DT171] (SMF Me 3582). F. Gall attachment scars on a lauraceous leaf fragment [DT206] (SMF Me 21180). G. Circular holes characterized by a broad flange of reaction tissue (arrow) [DT206] (SMF Me 21184). H. A strongly undulatory, serpentine mine consisting of modest width increases and containing particulate frass, on a walnut leaf (Juglandaceae) [DT92] (SMF Me 13228). I. An unidentified dicot exhibiting typical margin excisions, most likely produced by megachilid bee [DT82] (PB 1990-527, LS, NHMM) [101]. Scale bar = 1 cm.
Figure 2.
Rarefaction curves comparing the number of angiosperm leaf morphotypes at Messel and Eckfeld.
The shaded area represents the standard error of the rarefaction calculated after [102]. The horizontal scale is reduced to 3000 for greater detail.
Table 1.
Site summaries and diversity parameters analyzed for plant-species assemblages from the two study localities (Messel, Eckfeld).
Figure 3.
Mean diversity of damage types (DTs) on the bulk floras rarified to 800 leaves.
A. Mean diversity of damage types (DTs) on the bulk floras. B. Specialized DTs. C. Mining DTs. D. Galling DTs. The horizontal line is the median, the top and bottom horizontal margins of the box are respectively the upper and lower quartiles, and the vertical lines are the full range of values from the data.
Table 2.
Occurrence of damage types (DTs) recorded from Messel and Eckfeld and DTs that are already known from other European floras.
Figure 4.
A comparison of damage frequencies between the Messel and Eckfeld floras.
Regression lines are from a linear model, and R2 values are shown on the plots. Error bars were omitted to reduce clutter.
Table 3.
Dicot species or morphotypes with at least 50 specimens in the Messel Maar floral community, their assignments to “evergreen” (E), “deciduous ” (D), or unassigned (U) categories for analysis, and their bases of assignment (L), leaf texture and/or other foliar features; (R), phenology of all or most living relatives.
Figure 5.
Two-way cluster analysis of insect damage on species–locality pairs, based on relative abundances of the seven functional feeding groups.
Each plant from Messel and Eckfeld with at least 50 specimens was included in the analysis. Black circles are scaled according to the relative abundance of each functional feeding group on each plant host. The two-way cluster analysis was performed using the protocol of [11]. The significance of the clusters in Roman numerals is explained in the text. Abbreviations are: MF, margin feeding; HF, hole feeding; G, galling; M, leaf mining; S, skeletonization; SF, surface feeding; and PS, piercing and sucking.
Table 4.
Dicot species or morphotypes with at least 50 specimens in the Eckfeld Maar floral community, their assignments to “evergreen” (E), “deciduous” (D), or unassigned (U) categories for analysis, and their bases of assignment (L), leaf texture and/or other foliar features; (R), phenology of all or most living relatives.
Table 5.
Generalized versus specialized herbivory for Messel and Eckfeld evergreen and deciduous plant taxa.