Ant sampling: the importance of pitfall trap depth as a bias factor

Jiménez‐Carmona, Francisco; Carpintero, Soledad; Reyes-López, Joaquı́n

doi:10.1111/eea.12965

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Standardized annual camera trapping protocol to monitor ground‐dwelling mammals and relatively larger vertebrates have been formed (Jansen et al., 2014 ; Meek et al., 2012 ), and some studies have followed these standards (Gorczynski et al., 2021 ). At the same time, several studies have evaluated different factors that influence the capturing efficiencies of pitfall traps for ground‐dwelling invertebrates, such as diameter (Brennan et al., 2005 ), depth (Jiménez‐Carmona et al., 2020 ; Pendola & New, 2007 ), color (Buchholz et al., 2010 ), presence and type of preservative (Luff, 1968 ), sampling duration (Jung et al., 2019 ), and sampling intensity (Rivera & Favila, 2022 ). This study only evaluated the effects of one important factor (i.e., shooting area of ICTs) on the diversity of ground‐dwelling invertebrates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shooting area of infrared camera traps affects recorded taxonomic richness and abundance of ground‐dwelling invertebrates

Gao,

Sun,

Jiang

et al. 2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ground‐dwelling invertebrates are vital for soil biodiversity and function maintenance. Contemporary biodiversity assessment necessitates novel and automatic monitoring methods because of the threat of sharp reductions in soil biodiversity in farmlands worldwide. Using infrared camera traps (ICTs) is an effective method for assessing richness and abundance of ground‐dwelling invertebrates. However, the influence that the shooting area of ICTs has on the diversity of ground‐dwelling invertebrates has not been strongly considered during survey design. In this study, data from six ICTs with two shooting areas (A1, 38.48 cm2; A2, 400 cm2) were used to investigate ground‐dwelling invertebrates in a farm in a city on the Eastern Coast of China from 20: 00 on July 31 to 00:00 on September 29, 2022. Over the course of 59 days and 1420 h, invertebrates within 9 taxa, 2447 individuals, and 112,909 ind./m2 were observed from 222,912 images. Our results show that ICTs with relatively large shooting areas recorded relatively high taxonomic richness and abundance of total ground‐dwelling invertebrates, relatively high abundance of the dominant taxon, and relatively high daily and hourly abundance of most taxa. The shooting areas of ICTs significantly affected the recorded taxonomic richness and abundance of ground‐dwelling invertebrates throughout the experimental period and at fine temporal resolutions. Overall, these results suggest that the shooting areas of ICTs should be considered when designing experiments, and ICTs with relatively large shooting areas are more favorable for monitoring the diversity of ground‐dwelling invertebrates. This study further provides an automatic tool and high‐quality data for biodiversity monitoring and protection in farmlands.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shooting area of infrared camera traps affects recorded taxonomic richness and abundance of ground‐dwelling invertebrates

Gao,

Sun,

Jiang

et al. 2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Trap counts depend on various biological, physical or environmental factors that can influence locomotor activity of arthropods (Baars, 1979; Engel et al, 2017; Koivula et al, 2003; Melbourne, 1999; Petrovskii et al, 2012; Raworth & Choi, 2001). Moreover, experimental design such as trap type (shape, size, depth, inclusion of bait/attractant, killing agent) and sampling strategies (spatial arrangement, number of traps, number of trap‐nights, digging‐in effect) are additional parameters that can potentially affect trap counts and the taxa caught (Brown & Matthews, 2016; Digweed et al, 1995; Engel et al, 2017; Greenslade & Greensladed̊, 1971; Hohbein & Conway, 2018; Jiménez‐Carmona et al, 2019, 2020; Koivula et al, 2003; Work et al, 2002). Understanding the impact of these methodological factors on trap counts is thus crucial to draw inferences and conclusions in ecology (Cheli & Corley, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulating capture efficiency of pitfall traps based on sampling strategy and the movement of ground‐dwelling arthropods

Ahmed,

Beidas,

Petrovskii

et al. 2023

Methods Ecol Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pitfall traps are frequently used to capture ground‐dwelling arthropods, particularly beetles, ants and spiders. The capture efficiency of a pitfall trapping system strongly depends on the number and opening size of traps, how traps are distributed over the sampling area (spatial arrangement) and the movement characteristics of arthropods. We use numerical simulations for a single species to analyse the trap count patterns that emerge from these variables. Arthropod movement of individuals is modelled as correlated random walks, with multiple traps placed over an area, and catches are simulated as individual interaction with traps. We consider four different types of spatial arrangements of traps across a homogeneous landscape: grid (i.e. rectangular array), transect, nested‐cross and randomised. We contextualise our results by considering the locomotion of Pterostichus melanarius, a highly active carabid beetle often serving as a biocontrol agent for the suppression of pest insects and weeds. By simulating the trapping of randomly moving ground‐dwelling arthropods, we show that there is an optimal inter‐trap separation distance (trap spacing) that maximises captures, that can be expressed using exact formulae in terms of trap opening sizes, sampling area and trap number. Moreover, for the grid and nested‐cross arrangements, larger trap spacing to maximise spatial coverage over the whole sampling area is suboptimal. Also, we find that over a large sampling area, there is a hierarchical order for spatial arrangements in relation to capture efficiency: grid, randomised, transect, followed by the nested‐cross. However, over smaller sampling areas, this order is changed as the rate at which trap counts accumulate with trap number varies across arrangements—eventually saturating at different levels. In terms of movement effects, capture efficiency is maximised over a narrow diffusive range and does not depend strongly on the type of spatial arrangement—indicating an approximate optimal mode of arthropod activity, i.e. rate of spread. Our approach simultaneously considers several important experimental design aspects of pitfall trapping providing a basis to optimise and adapt sampling protocols to other types of traps to better reflect their various purposes, such as monitoring, conservation or pest management.

show abstract

A comparison of two methods for quantifying ant diversity and community in an East Himalayan montane forest mosaic

Zhang¹,

Cheng²,

Luo³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sampling efficiency, composition and detection biases associated with pitfall-trap and sample plot methods were compared at seven montane sites at Lasha Mountain, Yunnan, China. On average, sample plot samples contained 1.5 times more taxa than pitfall-trap samples; however, we found no significant difference between of alpha and beta diversity in pitfall-trap and sample plot site samples. Rarefaction-interpolations curves revealed significantly higher total diversity from sample plot methods; that sample plot methods would require three times more sampling to reach asymptote of true diversity; and that sample plot samples achieve higher sample coverage across sample sizes. Permutational multivariate analysis of variance showed community composition and dominant species differed between methods. Of all taxa collected, the two methods had 16 species in common, accounting for 52% of the total species; 29% were exclusive to sample plot samples and 16% were exclusive to pitfall traps. Implications for insect conservation: Our findings suggest that results from the two methods cannot be directly compared and are imperfect substitutes to one another. For long-term monitoring of biodiversity, we suggest integrating multiple complementary methods, including standardised active collection methods, such as the sample plot method, to achieve more complete representation of ant composition and diversity.

show abstract

Ant sampling: the importance of pitfall trap depth as a bias factor

Cited by 4 publications

References 31 publications

Shooting area of infrared camera traps affects recorded taxonomic richness and abundance of ground‐dwelling invertebrates

Shooting area of infrared camera traps affects recorded taxonomic richness and abundance of ground‐dwelling invertebrates

Simulating capture efficiency of pitfall traps based on sampling strategy and the movement of ground‐dwelling arthropods

A comparison of two methods for quantifying ant diversity and community in an East Himalayan montane forest mosaic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About