Dung Beetles and Ecosystem Services: What They Do for Us

Dung beetles are insects in the families Scarabaeidae, Geotrupidae, and Aphodiidae that feed on and breed in animal dung. Their activities produce measurable ecosystem services including waste decomposition, nutrient cycling, soil fertilization, and secondary seed dispersal. This article explains those services, how they operate in farming and natural systems, and how land managers can assess whether beetle communities are functioning effectively. The content is written for students, researchers, life-science professionals, and informed general readers who want to understand the ecological role of dung beetles and the practical implications of their decline.

At a Glance: Dung Beetle Activities and Ecosystem Services

The table below maps specific dung beetle behaviors to the ecosystem services they support. This framework helps observers connect what beetles do with the benefits that follow.

The Ecological Role of Dung Beetles in Terrestrial Ecosystems

Dung beetles occupy a specialized niche as consumers of vertebrate dung. Their dependence on dung as a food source for adults and larvae places them at the intersection of herbivore populations, soil processes, and plant communities. Research on dung beetle biology has grown substantially, with ecosystem function becoming the most prevalent topic in the peer-reviewed literature over the last two decades [8]. This shift reflects a broader recognition that dung beetles are active participants in nutrient cycles that sustain productive landscapes.

The ecological role of dung beetles begins with their feeding and nesting behaviors. Adult beetles locate fresh dung using olfactory cues, then either tunnel beneath the pat, roll portions away, or dwell within the dung itself. Each strategy moves organic material from the soil surface into the soil profile or across the landscape. The consequences of this movement extend beyond the immediate removal of waste. Dung that remains on the surface can smother pasture plants, harbor parasites, and release nutrients slowly through leaching. Dung that is buried becomes incorporated into the soil where plant roots can access it.

Dung beetles also function as connectors in food webs. Their reliance on mammal dung means that changes in mammal communities can cascade through beetle populations. Research in East Africa demonstrated that elephants are central to a generalized network of interactions between dung beetles and large herbivores. Computer simulations predicted disproportionate dung beetle losses if elephants went extinct, and a 15-year experiment confirmed that excluding elephants diminished dung beetle abundance, diversity, and ecosystem functions, while excluding smaller ungulates had little added effect [3]. This finding affirms the long-standing idea that large animals act as keystone species by provisioning many linked consumers with essential resources, thereby sustaining biodiversity and ecosystem services [3].

Waste Decomposition and Dung Removal

The most visible service provided by dung beetles is the physical removal and decomposition of dung from the soil surface. When livestock or wildlife deposit dung, it becomes a resource that beetles colonize rapidly. The rate at which dung disappears depends on beetle abundance, species composition, and environmental conditions.

Dung removal is a measurable process that researchers have studied across pasture systems worldwide. A field experiment replicated in 38 pastures around the world investigated the effects of cattle-grazing intensification on dung removal by dung beetles. The impacts of intensification were heterogeneous, either diminishing or increasing dung beetle species richness, functional diversity, and dung removal rates. Dung removal increased with species richness across sites, while functional diversity consistently enhanced dung removal within sites, independently of cattle grazing intensity or climate [5]. This finding indicates that, despite intensified cattle stocking rates, ecosystem services related to decomposition and nutrient cycling can be maintained when a functionally diverse dung beetle community inhabits the human-modified landscape [5].

The practical significance of dung removal is substantial for livestock producers. Dung left on pasture surfaces can cover forage, reduce grazing area, and create conditions favorable for pest flies and internal parasites. When beetles remove dung quickly, the pasture remains cleaner and more productive. The rate of dung removal also affects nutrient distribution. Dung that is buried delivers nitrogen, phosphorus, and other nutrients directly to the root zone instead of allowing them to volatilize or wash away.

Dung beetle introductions in Australia, New Zealand, and North America were undertaken specifically to accelerate the degradation of cattle dung on pastures. A review of these introduction programs identified a combined total of 37 introduced and 47 adventive dung beetle species that have become established in the Antipodes and North America, with exotic species dominating dung beetle assemblages from pasture habitats [10]. Climatic and edaphic matches, the size of founding populations, abiotic and biotic stressors, and the time of year when releases are made are all critical determinants that affect the success of dung beetle introduction programs [10]. These programs demonstrate that dung removal is a service that land managers can actively enhance through deliberate species introduction, though the risks and challenges associated with such programs require careful consideration [10].

Nutrient Cycling and Soil Fertilization

Dung beetles contribute to nutrient cycling by moving organic matter from the surface into the soil, where decomposition continues and nutrients become available to plants. The burial of dung also influences soil physical and chemical properties, including structure, porosity, and nutrient content.

The effect of dung beetles on plant growth has been quantified through meta-analysis. Researchers identified 28 publications that investigated dung beetle effects on plant growth, with 24 containing the minimum quantitative data necessary for inclusion. Overall, dung beetles increased plant growth by 17%, with the 95% confidence interval for the true increase ranging from 1% to 35% [9]. The dung beetle-plant growth relationship is influenced by the plant measurement type and the number of beetles accessing the dung. However, beetles did not increase plant growth in all quantitative trials, as individual effect sizes ranged from -72% to 806%, suggesting important context-dependence in the provision of ecosystem services [9].

The mechanisms behind this plant growth response involve both nutrient availability and soil structure. When beetles bury dung, they create tunnels that improve soil aeration and water infiltration. The dung itself becomes a slow-release fertilizer as it decomposes in the soil. Plant roots can then access nutrients that would otherwise remain locked in surface dung or lost through volatilization.

Dung beetle activity also shapes soil microbial communities. Research on short-term microbial dynamics in cattle dung treated with ivermectin found that the bacterial phyla Firmicutes, Bacteroidota, and Proteobacteria dominated the dung microbiota. Temporal analysis of microbial succession revealed a gradual coalescence between gut-derived and soil-native prokaryotic assemblages. Anaerobic taxa predominated at initial time points, while aerobic, soil-associated families became more prominent after 24 to 48 hours [15]. This microbial succession is part of the decomposition process that dung beetles initiate and accelerate.

Secondary Seed Dispersal

Dung beetles act as secondary seed dispersers when they move seeds that are already present in dung. Many mammals consume fruits and defecate seeds within dung pats. When beetles process that dung, they inadvertently move the seeds, either vertically by burying them or horizontally by rolling them away. This movement can affect seed survival, germination, and the spatial distribution of seedlings.

The functional guilds of dung beetles mediate secondary seed dispersal in different ways. Tunneling beetles, known as paracoprids, bury dung and seeds beneath the soil surface. Rolling beetles, known as telecoprids, transport dung balls away from the source before burying them. Dwellers, known as endocoprids, remain within the dung pat itself. Each guild moves seeds to different depths and distances, with consequences for seedling establishment.

Research comparing the functional capacities of dung removal and secondary seed dispersal among two telecoprid and two paracoprid dung beetle species in a remnant of Atlantic Forest in southern Brazil found that paracoprids were more efficient than telecoprids in all ecological functions evaluated [20]. When evaluating dung removal capacity by standardized biomass, the species Canthon rutilans and Dichotomius sericeus were the most efficient, demonstrating that paracoprids are usually more efficient because of their greater body biomass [20]. Different functional groups provide complementary services, meaning that diverse beetle communities are more likely to deliver complete seed dispersal functions [20].

The effects of horizontal seed movement by dung beetles have been studied in tropical rainforest systems. Field experiments in Mexico using seeds experimentally embedded in pig dung found that dung beetle activity reduced the spatial clumping of seeds and seedlings for two tree species, Bursera simaruba and Poulsenia armata. However, this reduced clumping did not increase the probability of seedling establishment [23]. The researchers discussed the context- and species-specificity of the combined effects of horizontal and vertical dispersal of seeds by dung beetles, and the need to quantify long-term seedling fates to more accurately determine the effects of seed movement by dung beetles on plant recruitment [23].

Seed dispersal by dung beetles can also involve unusual ecological relationships. Research on Ceratocaryum pulchrum, a plant in the Restionaceae family, documented another example of faecal mimicry in plants, where seeds visually resemble antelope dung and are dispersed by dung beetles that attempt to roll and bury them [21]. This example illustrates the depth of the evolutionary relationship between dung beetles and the plants whose seeds they disperse.

Functional Diversity and Ecosystem Service Delivery

The capacity of dung beetle communities to deliver ecosystem services depends on their functional diversity, which refers to the range of ecological roles represented within a community. Species that tunnel, roll, and dwell in dung perform different functions, and communities with representatives from multiple functional groups tend to provide more complete services.

Research on functionally rich dung beetle assemblages has demonstrated that multiple ecosystem services require diverse communities [24]. The relationship between functional diversity and service delivery is not simply a matter of species count. Communities with similar species richness can differ in functional composition, and this composition determines which services are provided and how efficiently.

The importance of functional diversity for dung removal was demonstrated in the global pasture study described earlier. While dung removal increased with species richness across sites, functional diversity consistently enhanced dung removal within sites, independently of cattle grazing intensity or climate [5]. This finding has practical implications for land management. Practices that maintain or enhance functional diversity, such as reducing chemical inputs and preserving habitat heterogeneity, are more likely to sustain dung removal services than practices that merely maintain species numbers.

Density-dependent effects also influence ecosystem service delivery. Research on density-dependent ecosystem service delivery under shifting temperatures by dung beetles has shown that the number of beetles accessing dung affects the rate and extent of dung processing [25]. Temperature interacts with beetle density to determine service delivery, meaning that climate change could alter the relationship between beetle abundance and ecosystem function.

Threats to Dung Beetle Communities and Services

Dung beetle populations face multiple threats that can reduce their abundance, diversity, and functional capacity. The most significant threats include veterinary chemical residues in dung, habitat loss and fragmentation, and the loss of large mammal populations that provide dung resources.

Veterinary Chemical Residues

Ivermectin is the most common endectocide used to control parasites affecting livestock. Short-term physiological and behavioural effects of ivermectin on dung beetles may have long-term consequences for beetle populations and ecosystem functioning [4]. Research in Doñana National Park in southwestern Spain compared dung assemblages and ecosystem functions in areas with conventional ivermectin-treated livestock and environmentally similar areas in which livestock were not treated with veterinary medical products. Short-term differences were observed in the total amount of dung relocated by dung beetles at different colonization versus emigration stages, suggesting that dung beetles in this area were affected by recent treatments of livestock with ivermectin. Conventional use of ivermectin disrupted ecosystem functioning by affecting species richness, abundance, and biomass. The decrease in diversity parameters was related to a reduction in functional efficiency, which resulted in the long-term accumulation of dung on the ground and considerable changes in soil functionality [4].

The effects of ivermectin extend beyond beetle populations to greenhouse gas emissions. Research on short-term microbial dynamics and changes in greenhouse gas emissions in cattle dung treated with ivermectin found that greenhouse gas emissions at least double in the absence of dung beetles, reinforcing the causal link between ivermectin use and increased carbon dioxide and methane emissions [15]. The anthropogenic introduction of bioactive compounds such as ivermectin into grassland ecosystems may disrupt key functional taxa, with potential consequences for plant cover, soil fauna, greenhouse gas emissions, and the long-term sustainability of livestock production [15].

Habitat Loss and Fragmentation

Agricultural expansion and intensification are major threats to global biodiversity, ecological functions, and ecosystem services. The rapid expansion of oil palm in forested tropical landscapes is of particular concern given their high biodiversity [7]. Research in an oil palm-dominated landscape in Sabah, Malaysian Borneo, surveyed communities of dung beetles and measured dung removal activity. The species richness, diversity, and functional group richness of dung beetles in riparian reserves were significantly higher than in oil palm, but lower than in adjacent logged forests. The community composition of the riparian reserves was more similar to logged forest than oil palm. Despite the pronounced differences in biodiversity, there were no significant differences in dung removal rates among land uses [7]. Weak but significant positive relationships were found between riparian reserve width and dung beetle diversity, and between reserve vegetation complexity and dung beetle abundance, suggesting that these features may increase the conservation value of riparian reserves [7].

Habitat type also shapes the temporal dynamics of dung beetle communities. Research in a heterogeneous tropical mountain landscape in Brazil found that forest islands sustain more temporally stable insect metacommunities, while open environments and more mobile organisms have greater temporal dynamics [14]. For dung beetles in forest islands, extirpations and colonizations were balanced, while open environments showed greater temporal dynamics in species richness and composition [14].

Loss of Large Mammals

The dependence of dung beetles on mammal dung means that declines in mammal populations can have cascading effects on beetle communities. The research on elephants in East Africa demonstrated that removing a keystone herbivore can diminish dung beetle abundance, diversity, and ecosystem functions [3]. Dung beetle abundance was depressed in nearby landscapes where livestock had displaced elephants, corroborating the experimental results [3]. This finding affirms the long-standing idea that large animals, which are inordinately extinction-prone, act as keystone species by provisioning many linked consumers with essential resources, thereby sustaining biodiversity and ecosystem services [3].

Dung Beetles in Agroecosystems

Dung beetles provide valuable services in agricultural landscapes, including pastures, plantations, and mixed farming systems. Their presence and activity can reduce the need for mechanical dung removal, improve soil fertility, and support plant growth.

Pasture Systems

In cattle-grazed landscapes, dung beetles support key ecosystem functions including dung removal, nutrient cycling, soil aeration, and pest suppression [12]. Their activity is strongly seasonal in temperate systems, driven by temperature and moisture, and can be further reshaped by pasture management such as changes in grazing regimes and dung availability [12]. Year-round, standardized datasets from oceanic islands have documented the seasonal variation of dung-associated arthropods in cattle pastures, providing benchmarks for seasonal windows of activity under climate variability and land-use change [12].

The relationship between grazing intensification and dung beetle services is complex. The global pasture study found that the impacts of intensification were heterogeneous, either diminishing or increasing dung beetle species richness, functional diversity, and dung removal rates [5]. This variability means that management recommendations must be tailored to local conditions instead of applied uniformly.

Plantation Systems

Shaded coffee plantations are increasingly recognized as important agroecosystems for biodiversity conservation in the tropical Andes. Research in 14 shaded coffee plantations in southern Ecuador recorded 209 individuals belonging to 14 genera and 42 species of dung beetles. Habitat type and altitude significantly influenced dung beetle abundance, with a predominance of coprophagous and paracoprid species [13]. Shaded coffee plantations maintain dung beetle communities comparable to those of natural ecosystems, emphasizing their contribution to ecosystem services such as nutrient cycling, soil improvement, and biological pest control, and supporting the promotion of sustainable coffee management practices in Andean agroecosystems [13].

Riparian Reserves and Habitat Connectivity

Riparian reserves, strips of forest retained alongside rivers in cultivated areas, can support a range of forest-dependent species and ecosystem services. Research in oil palm-dominated landscapes found that riparian reserves supported higher dung beetle diversity than surrounding plantations, though dung removal rates did not differ among land uses [7]. The similarity between riparian reserves and logged forest in terms of community composition suggests that these reserves have conservation value, particularly when they are wider and have more complex vegetation [7].

Practical Assessment of Dung Beetle Services

Land managers and researchers can assess whether dung beetle communities are providing ecosystem services effectively. The following steps outline a practical approach to evaluating dung beetle activity and identifying potential problems.

Step 1: Observe Dung Disappearance Rates

The most direct indicator of dung beetle activity is the rate at which fresh dung disappears from pasture or forest surfaces. Select fresh dung pats and mark their locations. Check them at regular intervals over several weeks and record the time until the dung is fully processed or incorporated into the soil. Slow disappearance rates may indicate low beetle abundance or activity.

Step 2: Conduct Pitfall Trap Surveys

Pitfall traps baited with dung provide a standardized method for sampling dung beetle communities. Traps consist of containers buried flush with the soil surface, baited with fresh dung, and checked at regular intervals. Record the number of individuals, species, and functional groups captured. This information allows assessment of species richness and functional diversity.

Step 3: Measure Functional Diversity

Functional diversity refers to the range of ecological roles represented in a community. For dung beetles, this includes tunneling, rolling, and dwelling species. Communities with representatives from multiple functional groups are more likely to provide complete ecosystem services. Compare the functional composition of your site with reference sites or published benchmarks.

Step 4: Assess Soil Incorporation

Dig beneath dung pats to assess whether beetles have buried dung in the soil. Look for tunnels, chambers, and brood balls containing dung. The depth and extent of burial indicate the intensity of beetle activity and the potential for nutrient delivery to plant roots.

Step 5: Monitor Seed Dispersal

In systems where seed dispersal is a management goal, monitor the fate of seeds in dung. Place seeds of known size and identity in dung pats and track their movement. Record whether seeds are buried, rolled, or left on the surface. This information helps determine whether beetle communities are providing secondary seed dispersal services.

Records and Measurements

Maintaining records of dung beetle activity and community composition allows land managers to track changes over time and evaluate the effects of management interventions. The following measurements are useful for monitoring programs.

Common Failure Patterns in Dung Beetle Service Delivery

Several recurring patterns indicate that dung beetle communities are not providing expected ecosystem services. Recognizing these patterns allows early intervention.

Dung Accumulation on Pasture Surfaces

When dung pats persist for extended periods without visible beetle activity, the beetle community may be depleted or inactive. This pattern is often associated with recent veterinary chemical use, cold or dry conditions, or habitat degradation. Dung accumulation reduces available grazing area and can increase parasite and pest fly pressure.

Low Species Richness with High Abundance

Communities dominated by a single species may remove dung but provide limited functional diversity. This pattern can occur in heavily disturbed or chemically treated systems where sensitive species are eliminated. The loss of functional diversity reduces the range of services provided, even when total beetle abundance appears adequate.

Absence of Tunneling Beetles

Tunneling beetles are responsible for burying dung in the soil, which delivers nutrients to plant roots. When tunneling species are absent, dung may be removed from the surface but not incorporated into the soil. This pattern reduces the fertilization benefit of dung beetle activity.

Seasonal Gaps in Activity

Dung beetle activity is strongly seasonal in temperate systems, driven by temperature and moisture [12]. Gaps in activity during critical periods, such as spring growth or summer drought, can reduce service delivery even when beetle populations are healthy. Management practices that support beetle activity across seasons, such as maintaining dung availability and habitat heterogeneity, can reduce these gaps.

Limitations and Context Dependence

Dung beetle ecosystem services are not delivered uniformly across all systems and conditions. Research has documented substantial context dependence in the provision of these services. The meta-analysis of dung beetle effects on plant growth found that beetles did not increase plant growth in all quantitative trials, with individual effect sizes ranging from -72% to 806% [9]. This variability means that the benefits of dung beetle activity cannot be assumed without local assessment.

The relationship between dung beetle diversity and dung removal also varies across scales. The global pasture study found that the effects of beetle diversity on dung removal were more variable across sites than within sites [5]. This finding suggests that local factors, including climate, soil type, and management history, mediate the relationship between beetle communities and ecosystem services.

Research on riparian reserves in oil palm landscapes found no evidence that reserves enhance dung removal rates within surrounding oil palm, contrasting with previous studies showing positive relationships between dung beetle species richness and dung removal in tropical forests [7]. This discrepancy highlights the need for site-specific assessment instead of reliance on general relationships.

Welfare and Safety Context

Dung beetle conservation and management intersect with animal welfare and human safety in several ways. Veterinary chemical use for livestock parasite control can harm dung beetle populations, creating a tension between animal health management and ecosystem service preservation. Research has documented that ivermectin residues disrupt dung beetle diversity, soil properties, and ecosystem functioning [4]. Land managers must balance the need for parasite control with the preservation of beneficial insect communities.

The use of dung beetles for biological control of pest and parasite species has been explored in introduction programs. A review of dung beetle introductions identified a list of pest and parasite species whose populations can be reduced by dung beetle activity [10]. However, the introduction of exotic species carries risks, including unintended effects on native communities. The review discussed opportunities, plus the risks and challenges associated with dung beetle introductions [10].

Dung beetle research methods, including pitfall trapping and gut-content analysis, involve handling insects and may require appropriate permits and ethical considerations. Research on mammal dung-dung beetle trophic networks using gut-content DNA analysis requires careful attention to specimen handling and laboratory protocols [6].

Professional Escalation Criteria

Land managers and researchers should seek professional assistance when dung beetle communities show signs of severe decline or when management interventions produce unexpected results. The following situations warrant consultation with entomologists, ecologists, or extension specialists.

Sudden Collapse of Dung Beetle Activity

If dung disappearance rates decline sharply over a short period, investigate potential causes including recent veterinary chemical applications, extreme weather events, or habitat disturbance. Professional assessment may be needed to identify the cause and recommend corrective actions.

Evidence of Chemical Contamination

If dung beetle communities show signs of decline following veterinary chemical use, consult with a veterinarian or entomologist to evaluate alternative parasite control strategies that minimize impacts on beneficial insects. Research has documented that ivermectin use can disrupt ecosystem functioning by affecting species richness, abundance, and biomass [4].

Planning Species Introductions

Dung beetle introduction programs require careful planning and assessment of climatic and edaphic matches, founding population sizes, and potential risks [10]. Professional expertise is essential for evaluating the suitability of candidate species and designing release programs.

Research or Monitoring Design

Designing rigorous studies of dung beetle communities and ecosystem services requires specialized knowledge of sampling methods, statistical analysis, and ecological interpretation. Researchers should consult with experienced dung beetle ecologists when developing study protocols.

Frequently Asked Questions

What ecosystem services do dung beetles provide?

Dung beetles provide waste decomposition, nutrient cycling, soil fertilization, and secondary seed dispersal. They also contribute to soil aeration, pest suppression, and greenhouse gas mitigation. Research has documented that dung removal increases with species richness and functional diversity in pasture systems [5].

How do dung beetles improve soil fertility?

Dung beetles improve soil fertility by burying dung in the soil, where nutrients become available to plant roots. A meta-analysis found that dung beetles increased plant growth by 17% on average, though individual effects ranged from -72% to 806% depending on context [9].

What is secondary seed dispersal by dung beetles?

Secondary seed dispersal occurs when dung beetles move seeds that are already present in mammal dung. Beetles may bury seeds vertically or roll them horizontally as they process dung. This movement can reduce seed clumping and affect plant recruitment patterns [23].

How does ivermectin affect dung beetles?

Ivermectin residues in livestock dung can disrupt dung beetle diversity, soil properties, and ecosystem functioning. Research in Spain found that conventional use of ivermectin affected species richness, abundance, and biomass, resulting in long-term accumulation of dung on the ground and considerable changes in soil functionality [4].

Why is functional diversity important for dung beetle services?

Functional diversity refers to the range of ecological roles represented in a community, including tunneling, rolling, and dwelling species. Research found that functional diversity consistently enhanced dung removal within sites, independently of cattle grazing intensity or climate [5].

Do dung beetles help control livestock parasites?

Dung beetles can reduce populations of pest and parasite species whose life cycles depend on dung. A review of dung beetle introductions identified a list of pest and parasite species whose populations can be reduced by dung beetle activity [10].

How can farmers assess dung beetle activity on their land?

Farmers can assess dung beetle activity by marking fresh dung pats and recording the time until they disappear, conducting pitfall trap surveys to measure species richness and abundance, and excavating beneath dung pats to assess burial depth and tunnel presence.

Are dung beetle introductions always successful?

No. The success of dung beetle introduction programs depends on climatic and edaphic matches, the size of founding populations, abiotic and biotic stressors, and the time of year when releases are made [10]. Professional expertise is essential for planning and evaluating introduction programs.

Related Articles

• Secondary Protein Structure
• Single Cell Reference Mapping
• DNA Models: What They Show and What They Leave Out
• Immunofluorescence Microscopy: Controls for Specific and Reproducible Images
• Genomics Services: How to Evaluate Sequencing, Analysis, and Reporting Options

References and Further Reading

• NCBI Literature Resources. National Center for Biotechnology Information.
• PubMed. National Library of Medicine.
• Importance of elephants for dung beetle biodiversity and ecosystem functions.. Science (New York, N.Y.), 2026.
• Ivermectin residues disrupt dung beetle diversity, soil properties and ecosystem functioning: An interdisciplinary field study.. The Science of the total environment, 2018.
• Dung removal increases under higher dung beetle functional diversity regardless of grazing intensification.. Nature communications, 2023.
• Mammal dung-dung beetle trophic networks: an improved method based on gut-content DNA.. PeerJ, 2024.
• Do riparian reserves support dung beetle biodiversity and ecosystem services in oil palm-dominated tropical landscapes?. Ecology and evolution, 2014.
• Spatial and temporal trends in dung beetle research.. PeerJ, 2025.
• Dung beetles increase plant growth: a meta-analysis.. Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2024.
• A Review of Dung Beetle Introductions in the Antipodes and North America: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges.. Environmental entomology, 2021.
• How does dung burial by coprophagous beetles modify the emergence of infectious strongyle nematode larvae? An experimental test across different soil depths. 2026.
• Seasonal variation of dung-associated arthropods in cattle pastures of Terceira Island (Azores): a year-round, event-based dataset.. 2026.
• The Critical Role of Dung Beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae) in Agroecosystems: Richness, Abundance, and Structure in Coffee Plantations of Southern Ecuador. 2026.
• Forest islands sustain more temporally stable insect metacommunities in a heterogeneous tropical mountaintop landscape.. 2026.
• Short-term microbial dynamics and changes in greenhouse gas emissions in cattle dung treated with ivermectin. 2026.
• Evaluation of secondary seed dispersal by dung beetles in a temperate region. Acta Oecologica, 2025.
• The functional guilds of dung beetles mediate secondary seed dispersal in a tropical savanna. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Applied Soil Ecology, 2024.
• Impacts of warmer temperatures on secondary seed dispersal by Phanaeus vindex dung beetles (Scarabaeinae). Current Research in Insect Science, 2026.
• The role of dung beetles in seed dispersal in an arid environment. Ecología Austral, 2023.
• Comparative Analysis of the Ecological Functions of Dung Removal and Seed Dispersal among Two Telecoprid and Two Paracoprid Dung Beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). The Coleopterists bulletin, 2022.
• Seed dispersal by dung beetles in Ceratocaryum pulchrum (Restionaceae): Another example of faecal mimicry in plants. 2021.
• Behavioral Ecology and Secondary Seed Dispersal by Two Roller Dung Beetles, Sisyphus rubrus (Paschalidis, 1974) and Sisyphus spinipes (Thunberg, 1818) (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). The Coleopterists bulletin, 2020.
• Horizontal seed dispersal by dung beetles reduced seed and seedling clumping, but did not increase short-term seedling establishment. PLoS ONE, 2019.
• Functionally rich dung beetle assemblages are required to provide multiple ecosystem services. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, 2016.
• Density-dependent ecosystem service delivery under shifting temperatures by dung beetles. Science of the Total Environment, 2022.
• The “hidden workers”: livestock farmers’ perceptions of ecosystem services provided by dung beetles. Ecology and Society, 2025.

This article is educational and does not replace institutional policy, professional advice, or applicable safety and regulatory requirements.