Evaluation of species diversity for highly diverse taxa is extremely time-consuming and costly; thus, there is a need to develop efficient sampling strategies. We established a short-term, efficient sampling scheme to produce samples that represent a full-season sampling of moth assemblages with a high degree of seasonality. We sampled adult moths monthly for the duration ofthe moth fiying season by using light traps in five forest stands in a cool-temperate region in central Hokkaido, northern Japan. From this sample, we generated various subsaniples that reduced the sampling period and the number of traps per stand, and tested whether these subsamples provide estimates of species richness, abundance, and species turnover representative of those revealed by the whole season sample. Comparisons between the whole season sample and each subsample indicated that setting one light trap on a night in July and August, which shortened the sampling period to 25% and reduced sample size to 38%, was the most efficient sampling scheme to estimate abundance, species richness, and similarity in the whole season sample. The comparisons also suggest that it is efficient to use rarified species richness as a species richness estimator, and the Bray-Curtis index or Morisita's C¡^ for estimating species turnover between sites in moth assemblages.
KEY WORDS biodiversity, Lepidoptera, seasonality, species richness estimator, species turnoverPervasive habitat loss and associated species extinction have emphasized the urgent need to evaluate species diversity. However, evaluating species diversity for highly diverse taxa, such as insects, is extremely time-consuming and costly because there are so many .species in one area (Lawton et al. 1998). Given the limitations in resources available for intensive, longterm surveys, there is a need to develop efficient sampling methods for evaluating biodiversity (Ozaki et al. 2006). Efficient sampling methods should reduce time and cost needed for sampling without causing significant information loss in .species richness (number of species) at sites (a diversity) and species turnover (dissimilarity of .species composition) between sites (ß diversity) (Jones and Eggleton 2000). Several species richness estimators (Colwell and Coddington 1994) and similarity indices (Chao et al. 2005) that substantially reduce undersampling bias have been developed to estimate species richness and turnover. These estimators and indices might provide tools to achieve