Breeding Nosoderma diabolicum?

[radjess331]

Any tips on getting Nosoderma diabolicum to breed? Ive kept them on sand, mixes of soil. Now just keeping them on rotting wood. Have never seen a larvae. No idea how to sex these beetles so I guess that could be the problem too. But with 5-6 of them was hoping to have a mix. But it’s been a few years with no larvae.

 

[ReignofInvertebrates]

What temperature are you keeping them at? I’m not sure if anyone has gotten these to reproduce in captivity before but other desert beetles generally require high temperatures to stimulate breeding.

 

[mantisfan101]

I think these eat some sort of wood/fungus

 

[pannaking22]

I'd say keeping them on rotting wood is the way to go, though I admit I don't know if they have a specific wood preference or not. Temps could be the key or giving them a sort of dry/wet seasonality to simulate the monsoon season.

 

[radjess331]

Im keeping them bedroom temp. So rn its 80 during the day 60 at night. We don’t get monsoons here in Redlands.

 

[Hisserdude]

I think the larvae feed on shelf fungi is the problem, rotten wood is not enough. Even people who've given them shelf fungi in captivity have struggled to get any eggs from adults, I don't know if they'll ever be bred in captivity successfully.

 

[radjess331]

That’s a different species. We don’t have any monsoons in Redlands and no shelf fungus at all. We sometimes get some mushrooms. But this is a desert.

I think the larvae feed on shelf fungi is the problem, rotten wood is not enough. Even people who've given them shelf fungi in captivity have struggled to get any eggs from adults, I don't know if they'll ever be bred in captivity successfully.

 

[Hisserdude]

That’s a different species. We don’t have any monsoons in Redlands and no shelf fungus at all. We sometimes get some mushrooms. But this is a desert.

I had always heard it was this species that fed on bracket fungi... If that's wrong though, there's still gotta be SOME fungi growing on the rotten wood in the area, and I suspect that's what they feed on, since rotten wood alone doesn't get them breeding much.

 

[radjess331]

Feeding isn’t a problem. They like roaches will eat literally anything i offer them. From oranges to lettuce. Anything.

 

[Hisserdude]

Feeding isn’t a problem. They like roaches will eat literally anything i offer them. From oranges to lettuce. Anything.

I meant the larvae, the larvae likely feed on the fungi, and if that's true then the adults probably won't oviposit unless they know there is fungi nearby. Rotten wood alone never seems to work as an oviposition impetus, it's possible they may just need a very specific type of wood though...

 

[pannaking22]

I meant the larvae, the larvae likely feed on the fungi, and if that's true then the adults probably won't oviposit unless they know there is fungi nearby. Rotten wood alone never seems to work as an oviposition impetus, it's possible they may just need a very specific type of wood though...

I'm in the camp of them needing a specific type of wood (maybe there's a specific fungus that grows in it?). It seems that the big Zopherus nodulosus tend to be associated with cottonwoods in central Texas, so there may be something there. Though I've found other species in that genus without any large trees around sooo...? Weird family.

 

[davehuth]

I've kept 9 or 10 P. diabolicus for more than a year, while providing white (softer) shelf fungus. The adults seem to like eating the fungus, but also no sign of larvae for me. It's a real puzzle.

 

[Hisserdude]

I'm in the camp of them needing a specific type of wood (maybe there's a specific fungus that grows in it?). It seems that the big Zopherus nodulosus tend to be associated with cottonwoods in central Texas, so there may be something there. Though I've found other species in that genus without any large trees around sooo...? Weird family.

Could be that they need a specific wood I guess, usually beetles that breed in hardwoods don't care which hardwood you use though, so that'd be kinda weird... Then again this does appear to be a weird family, so who knows...
Also, as far as Z.nodulosus goes, I think I've seen someone try to breed those on actual cottonwood, and I believe still no offspring were produced.

Maybe people are keeping them too dry? The larvae of ironclads don't appear to be dry resistant at all, so the substrate would have to be pretty humid for them and probably the eggs to survive, (though adults probably still need decent airflow).

 

[davehuth]

A number of entries on bugguide report Z. nodulosus on Pecan. I tried with Pecan wood, with lots of lichen added, and no success.

My Nosoderma diabolicus have continued to eat white shelf fungus for more than a year. I also have slabs of bark stacked up that they spend a lot of time crawling and resting between. I also mist the bark periodically.

Careful observations of their habits and behaviors will eventually help us crack the code.

 

[Hisserdude]

@radjess331 @davehuth This is all I can find on the supposed dietary needs of larvae of this species, which may provide a clue as to what adults need for oviposition:



Additionally, I do not know why people are using the old name "Nosoderma diobolicum", this paper is the most recent revision and analysis of the Zopherini, and clearly states within that Phloeodes diobolicus is the correct name, N.diobolicum is just a synonym, (for more, you can download the whole paper here).

 

[Hisserdude]

Basically, in layman's terms, there were two different Nosoderma, the first (and thus the VALID one) is Nosoderma Guérin-Méneville 1838, as opposed to the later described Nosoderma Solier 1841. Now, since Solier's genus was errected after the original Nosoderma Guérin-Méneville 1838, his genus "Nosoderma" was later declared a homonym and the species within were placed in the genus Verodes in 2007, (see the abstract to that paper here).

Back in 2006 though, Phloeodes was erroneously synonymized with "Nosoderma" Solier 1841... However that genus is now known as Verodes, and further examination shows that Verodes and Phloeodes are definitely two different genera, so in the most recent revision to the tribe Zopherini, Phloeodes was restored as a genus.



And here is the formal, (most recent) analysis of Phloeodes diabolicus, in typical fashion the current name is displayed in bold on top, with all known synonyms listed underneath. Nosoderma diabolicum is right at the top of the list of synonyms.

 

[davehuth]

OK thanks, I had seen the 2006 Garcia-Paris et al paper and hadn’t realized it has since been Successfully contradicted to restore Phloeodes. Thank you!

Abstract of the 2006 paper here:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00379271.2006.10700625

 

[Hisserdude]

OK thanks, I had seen the 2006 Garcia-Paris et al paper and hadn’t realized it has since been Successfully contradicted to restore Phloeodes. Thank you!

Abstract of the 2006 paper here:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00379271.2006.10700625

Yeah it seems that old 2006 paper is what hobbyists are referring to when calling these "Nosoderma", hope to see more people recognizing the current name is still Phloeodes diabolicus.