More than just nestlings: incidence of subcutaneous Philornis (Diptera: Muscidae) nest flies in adult birds.

Philornis flies Meinert (Diptera: Muscidae) have been documented parasitizing over 250 bird species, some of which are endemic species threatened with extinction. Philornis parasitism is hypothesized to affect nestlings disproportionately more than adult birds because limited mobility and exposed skin of nestlings increase their vulnerability to parasitism. We used a comprehensive literature review and our recent fieldwork in the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, and Grenada to challenge the idea that parasitism by subcutaneous Philornis species is a phenomenon primarily found in nestlings, a fact that has not been quantified to date. Of the 265 reviewed publications, 125 (49%) reported incidences of parasitism by subcutaneous Philornis, but only 12 included the sampling of adult breeding birds. Nine of these publications (75%) reported Philornis parasitism in adults of ten bird species. During fieldwork in the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, and Grenada, we documented 14 instances of parasitism of adult birds of seven avian species. From literature review and fieldwork, adults of at least fifteen bird species across 12 families and four orders of birds were parasitized by at least five Philornis species. In both the published literature and fieldwork, incidences of parasitism of adult birds occurred predominantly in females and was frequently associated with incubation. Although our findings indicate that Philornis parasitism of adult birds is more common than widely presumed, parasite prevalence is still greater in nestlings. In the future, we recommend surveys of adult birds to better understand host-Philornis relationships across life stages. This information may be essential for the development of effective control measures of Philornis to ensure the long-term protection of bird species of conservation concern.

What constitutes a community? A co-occurrence exploration of the Costa Rican avifauna.

The concept of a "community" as a form of organization for natural biological systems is both widespread and widely accepted within the ecological and biological sciences. Communities have been defined as groups of organisms that interact in ways that denote interdependence between individuals and taxa (e.g. as defined by "food webs") but they have also been defined as groups of co-occurring organisms that are assumed to interact by virtue of their shared spatiotemporal existence. The latter definition has been debated and challenged in the literature, with mounting evidence for co-occurrence being more indicative of coincident ecological niches in space and time rather than being evidence of ecological interaction or dependency. Using a dataset of 460 Costa Rican bird species divided into breeding and non-breeding season datasets, we empirically demonstrate the ways in which co-occurrence can create illusory communities based on similar occupied ecological niches and similar patterns of co-occurrence at different times of year. We discuss the importance of discerning coincidental co-occurrence from true ecological interactions that would manifest a true community, and further address the importance of differentiating communities of co-occurrence from communities of demonstrable ecological interaction. While co-occurrence is a necessary aspect of interspecific interactions, we discuss and demonstrate here that such co-occurrence does not make a community, nor should explicit patterns of co-occurrence be seen as evidence for evolutionarily important ecological interactions.