We compared fruiting data derived simultaneously from fruit traps placed on the ground and from canopy‐surveyed plots in a terra firme rain forest, Colombian Amazonia. Values derived from the canopy‐surveyed plots were higher than fruit‐trap estimates. Fruiting patterns obtained throughout both methods were not correlated. Our results showed that the fruit‐trap method does not accurately reflect fruiting patterns occurring at the highest levels of the forest, while the canopy‐surveyed plots provided both quantitative and qualitative information on canopy fruit production, and each species contribution.