Sampling Bee Communities (Hymenoptera: Apiformes) in a Desert Landscape: Are Pan Traps Sufficient?

Wilson, Joseph S.; Griswold, Terry; Messinger, Olivia J.

doi:10.2317/jkes-802.06.1

Cited by 188 publications

(194 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

175

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The blue/yellow capture ratio varies according to different studies, A higher number of captures of blue bowl traps, measured by richness and abundance, has been observed in other studies, such as those of Campbell & Hanula (2007), Grundel et al (2011), while Krug & Alvesdos-Santos (2008) found yellow bowl traps as more efficient, and Wilson et al (2008) found almost the same species numbers from yellow and blue traps. In PESC, blue bowl traps sampled more bees at the border transect, but in the trail transect yellow traps performed better.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Another important issue when designing sampling is the low cost-benefit of bowl traps (Westphal et al 2008): commercial plastic bowls are cheap and only water and soap are added. Wilson et al (2008) reported the superiority of bowl trapping when few flowers are available in a transect, thus bowls could be a promising application on forested and fragmented areas where collecting flower visiting bees is difficult.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, they have a low performance when compared with hand-netting and malaise traps in dense forested areas (Gonçalves & Brandão 2008;Gonçalves et al 2012). Other important issues are related to the type and placement of bowl traps, which can influence their efficiency (Gollan et al 2010), such as spacing among each unit (Droege et al 2010), elevation of the traps (Campbell & Hanula 2007;Tuell & Isaacs 2011), bowl colors and selectivity of bees (Campbell & Hanula 2007;Krug & Alves-dos-Santos 2008;Wilson et al 2008), habitat heterogeneity (Droege et al 2010), and fragment size (Aizen & Feinsinger 1994). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Preliminary results of bowl trapping bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) in a southern Brazil forest fragment

Gonçalves

Oliveira

2013

J. Insect Biodiversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In recent years bowl traps have gained attention as a useful method for sampling bees and are now commonly used across the world for this purpose. However, specific questions about the method itself have not yet been tested on different regions of the globe. We present the preliminary results of bowl trapping in a Semidecidual Seasonal forest fragment in southern Brazil, including the test of two different color bowls, two different habitats, and the interaction of these variables in bee species number and composition. We used blue and yellow bowls in the border and in the core trails of the forest fragment. In five sampling days between October to December bowl traps captured 745 specimens of 37 morphospecies, with Halictinae bees being the richest and most abundant group. Non parametrical statistical analyses suggested that different colors of bowl traps influenced bee richness and composition and thus, they should be used together for a more complete sampling. Different trails influenced only the composition, while the interaction with different colors did not have a significant effect. These results, as well as the higher taxonomic composition of the inventoried bees, are similar to other studies reported in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Preliminary results of bowl trapping bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) in a southern Brazil forest fragment

Gonçalves

Oliveira

2013

J. Insect Biodiversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, the attractiveness of YPWT probably increases after the removal of flowering plants (Wilson et al, 2008). This explanation is also supported by the results of the functional trait analysis, which revealed a significant increase in the species richness of nectarophagous beetles at recently mown, i.e., flowerless sites (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although YPWT are generally used for sampling flower-visiting insects (Kuras et al, 2000;Monsevičius, 2004;Campbell & Hanula, 2007;Wilson et al, 2008) they provide a standardized method of sampling mainly flying insects at different sites (Wilson et al, 2008). Moreover, previous studies successfully used this method for other guilds of invertebrates, e.g., Homoptera (Mochida & Suryana, 1976;Boiteau, 1990), Araneae (Blades & Marshall, 1994), orthoptera (Evans & Bailey, 1993) and Coleoptera (leksono et al, 2005).…”

Section: Sampling Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responses of grassland arthropods to various biodiversity-friendly management practices: Is there a compromise?

Mazalová¹,

Šipoš²,

Rada³

et al. 2015

Eur. J. Entomol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The rich species pool in semi-natural grasslands is associated with high spatial and temporal heterogeneity. This empirical study is one of the first to jointly analyze the response of orders, individual species and functional richness of arthropods to particular management practices and to linear landscape features, such as strips of grass and belts of trees. Mostly it was the less mobile, flightless taxa that were negatively affected by immediate disturbance caused by mowing. At a larger time-scale, grasslands managed by mowing once every year, and especially by a combined regime of mowing and grazing, supported the highest species richness of butterflies and beetles. Most functional diversity measures reached maximum values soon after mowing. Both strips of grass and belts of trees substantially affected the invertebrate community structure as the majority of taxa were positively associated with these linear features. Based on our results, we propose postponing mowing to later in the year, mowing in gradual stages, maintaining uncut strips primarily along permanent landscape features and establishing both strips of grass and belts of trees in submontane grassland environments.

show abstract

Relative bee abundance varies by collection method and flowering richness: Implications for understanding patterns in bee community data

Kuhlman

Burrows

Mummey

et al. 2021

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Recent declines in wild bee populations have led to increases in conservation actions and monitoring of bee communities. Pan traps are a commonly used sampling method for monitoring bee populations due to their efficiency and low cost.However, potential biases inherent in different sampling techniques may result in misleading characterizations of bee communities across space and time.2. In this paper, we examined how bee communities sampled using pan traps and aerial nets changed seasonally, and if they were affected by the availability of floral resources.3. We found strong seasonal changes in the abundance, but not the richness, of bees captured in pan traps. Notably, we captured the fewest bees during weeks in spring when most flowering plant species were in bloom, suggesting that floral resource availability influences pan trap captures. We also compared patterns of bee abundance in pan traps to those captured by aerial netting. Bee richness in pans and nets was positively correlated, but relative abundances in pan and net samples were dominated by different bee genera. Furthermore, most genera decreased in pans with increasing floral richness, but patterns were mixed for nets. When using presence/absence data, rather than abundance, community composition was more similar between netted and pan-trapped bee communities and changed less substantially across the floral richness gradient. 4. Overall, these differences led to sampling substantially different bee community compositions in pan traps versus nets, especially when using abundance-based methods to characterize the bee community. By examining multiple years of intensive seasonal sampling of plant and bee communities, we document potential pitfalls with methods commonly used to sample bee communities.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Sampling Bee Communities (Hymenoptera: Apiformes) in a Desert Landscape: Are Pan Traps Sufficient?

Cited by 188 publications

References 9 publications

Preliminary results of bowl trapping bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) in a southern Brazil forest fragment

Preliminary results of bowl trapping bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) in a southern Brazil forest fragment

Responses of grassland arthropods to various biodiversity-friendly management practices: Is there a compromise?

Relative bee abundance varies by collection method and flowering richness: Implications for understanding patterns in bee community data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About