Ecological relationships of Haemagogus spegazzinii (Diptera: Culicidae) in a semiarid area of Brazil

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Haemagogus are mosquitoes with diurnal habits that live preferentially in forest areas. In Brazil, they are considered the primary vectors of wild yellow fever. METHODS: The ecological relationships between Haemagogus spegazzinii, the environment, and some of its activities in the semiarid region of Rio Grande do Norte were analyzed by collecting eggs with ovitraps, actively searching in tree holes, capturing adults in Shannon traps, and conducting an investigation for viral infections. RESULTS: A total of 2420 eggs, 271 immature specimens (larvae and pupae), and 206 adults were collected. Egg collection depended on rainfall and relative humidity, with oviposition occurring between January and May. Larvae were found in five plant species, including Tabebuia aurea (craibeira), with 160 larvae collected. We observed shared breeding sites between Hg. spegazzinii and the following species: Aedes albopictus, Aedes terrens, Culex spp., and Toxorhynchites theobaldi. Adults exhibited greater activity between 5 pm and 6 pm, when 191 (92.7%) specimens were captured, while only 1 (0.5%) was collected between 7 pm and 8 pm. The relationship between Hg. spegazzinii and rainfall was significant, with positive correlations with accumulated rainfall 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 days before mosquito collection. We found that the species was infected with the DENV-2 virus. CONCLUSIONS: This work contributes new information on the bioecology of Hg. spegazzinii, with data on the main reproduction periods, oviposition, breeding sites, activity times, and the relationship between the species and meteorological variables in the Caatinga of northeastern Brazil.

Two fundamental ecological relationships that deepen the sense of social, economical and ethical values of mental representations

Over the definition of any possible ecological relationships concerning life-quality competition, survival and transformation standards (concerning animal, human and social life forms) still two basic ecological relationships providing new insights to old problems of Biology, Sociology, Ethics, and Economy can be enhanced. They are ferocity /depredation versus angelically / protection as opposite basic ecological relationships. One main key rests on the correspondence that these relationships keep with the emergence of opposed crucial values like tangible values versus intangible values. These two categories also concern with the ecological, social and cultural further meanings of ethical moods implied by the two ecological relationships above. So, the sense of tangible (material) values over intangible (immaterial) values coheres with the sense of the ferocity /depredation relationship and their adversarial attitudes, while the evolutionary emergence of the angelically / protection relationship and its corresponding harboring attitudes are especially explained in such way that this relationship generates the effective prevalence of intangible / immaterial values over tangible / material ones when both kind of values get into conflict because of opposed life purposes. From these concepts (both on values and ecological relationships) all further social relationship, attitude, mental attribution or representation can be explained as a significant values mix, intercalation or partial balance between the two basic ecological relationships. These appreciations can render new values meanings and ethical categorizations to social and economical relationships. However, they must be interchangeable in terms of attitude mix and unbalance: A same living-agent may act predomi- nantly one ecological-relationship and then change to the other. The eagle acts ecologically harshly by the ferocity / depredation relationship when chasing the rabbit, while immediately shifts ecologically to the angelically / protection relationship when kindly disgorging flesh into its chicks'bills. Any living organism may in any moment adopt one ecological relationship instead the other conveying the implications of the two kinds of values tangible and intangible that they make prevail showing the ethical sense of its meaning. Therefore, these two ecological relationships must not be taken as excluding concept-categories, but as highlighting relationships from an infinite number of ecological relationships. So, according to life changing circumstances one or another ecological relationship takes one corresponding prevalent value. These two ecological relationships are compared apart because each represents a highly different biological meaning and man ethical status implying a great qualitative jump in life evolution and living conditions. What matters is the progressively tendency of angelically /protection and prevalent intangible values to restrain and attenuate the natural original harshness of ferocity / depredation relationship. According to this progression, a hierarchical approach is adopted in connection to higher and lower values as suggested by philosopher Max Scheler. According to him, the fulfillment of the vertical hierarchy implied by values is a sufficient issue to determine the values ethical sense. Whether the values-verticality is or is not transgressed by social life decisions and applications goes related to ferocity / depredation and angelically / protection sequential options; each representing the extreme values in the hierarchical scale: ferocity / depredation more affine to the lowest values (material - tangible values), while angelically / protection more to the prevalence of the highest ones (immaterial - intangible values). Material values are the natural values usually demanded to satisfy biological, physiological, physical and special pleasure needs. On the contrary, immaterial values are intangible spiritual values, such freedom, confidence, friendship, care, love, responsibility, promised-word, word-accomplishment, person-respect, health, Human Rights and the proper people-lives. These are values flying up the highest human, cultural, social panorama over the lower and commonplace appetites of most vulgar individuals. All this treatment is based on firmly keeping the spiritual values such as ethics, culture ,love, care, freedom, respect, education, human life and Human Rights ever at the top of all value hierarchy. Values are not seen as closed systems but as open and unlimitedly creative whether tangible or intangible ones. The more the intangible values the higher the social and cultural advancement.

A partir de dos relaciones ecológicas básicas, ferocidad / depredación y angelicalidad / protección, se ensayan diferentes progresiones biológico-sociales y culturales. La primera relación está directamente referida a las figuras presa y depredador en cadenas tróficas y ecosistemas de competitividad y convivencia. La segunda magnifica el valor y significado del cuidado y supervivencia del recién nacido. Se revisa el origen evolutivo, ecológico y etológico de ambas relaciones como balance conductual entre situaciones extremas de cada individuo y especie, abriendo un nuevo insight sobre viejos problemas de la Biología, la Sociología, la Etica y la Economía. La clave es lo que relaciona a estas dos relaciones con valores materiales tangibles y valores in materiales intangibles, respectivamente. Resulta directo asociar la primera relación con la satisfacción inmediata de necesidades básicas, juzgadas como materiales y tangibles. En contraste, la segunda relación viene como un complemento que genera nuevos significados y riqueza de sentidos ecológico-etológicos de toda forma de vida. Los valores se estiman como un sistema abierto y creciente. A más valores intangibles, mayor es el avance en representaciones significantes.