Their results suggest that there is no advantage to using deep pitfall traps in addition to surface traps to sample the beetles in wet forest stands. They counted the beetles they trapped in each type of trap and determined how many different species they captured over the summer. In May 2005, they set some traps at the surface and sank others 20–30 cm below the surface. The authors of this study looked at the effectiveness of pitfall trap sampling for one type of arthropod (beetles) in wet forested sites in the lower foothills of Alberta, Canada. Higher diversity levels were found in Malaise traps in summer whereas soil samples showed a diversity peak in winter, highlighting the seasonal habitat preferences and life strategies of arthropods. It is more challenging to sample arthropods in wetter areas where there is a porous matrix below the surface, because arthropods may be active both on and below the surface. Pitfall traps that capture arthropods at the soil surface are commonly used to sample arthropods in forests. Little is known about the arthropods (e.g., insects, spiders, and crustaceans) that live in these areas and about how they might respond to long-term disruption of their habitat. Semiaquatic landscapes are increasingly being explored for possible industrial development, such as oil and gas extraction. To surface traps to sample the epigaeic fauna of wet forest stands and peatlands. We found no advantage to using deep pitfall traps in addition Trap types were collecting similar faunas. Similarity of pooled catches between deep and surface traps was on average 75%, suggesting that both Rarefaction estimates of species diversity were higher in surface pitfall traps for both taxa. There were no significant effects of trap depth on catch. The simplicity of this method appeals to many wildlife researchers who wish to investigate patterns of arthropod abundance. A total of 5289īeetles representing 75 taxa were collected. The fundamental pitfall trap design is a container buried into the ground with the top flush with the soil surface. Traps were installed at seven sites, with six surface traps (the pitfall trap lip 20 cm below soil surface) at each site. It couples the fitting of single hyperbolic functions to trap data with the use of a ‘nested-cross array’, a cross-shaped trap arrangement with distances between traps doubling with increasing distance from the central trap. The depth at which pitfall traps were sunk into the ground and the resulting catches ofĮpigaeic Carabidae (Coleoptera) and Staphylinidae (Coleoptera) assemblages in subhygric to hydricĮcosites with very deep organic soil layers was investigated in the upper foothills ecoregion of Alberta,Ĭanada. 1 A new procedure for estimating the population densities of ground-dwelling arthropods with pitfall trapping is described. The Canadian Entomologist 150(6):813-820. Pitfall traps were used to study the diversity and seasonal abundance of arthropods, especially ground dwelling darkling beetles (Tenebrionidae) at five desert sites in the west of Abu Dhabi Emirate in Al Dhafra Region from March 2009 to February 2010 (Saji and Al Dhaheri, 2011). Effect of pitfall trap depth on epigaeic beetle sampling (Coleoptera: Carabidae and Staphylinidae) in wet forested ecosites in Alberta, Canada.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |