采用马氏诱集器法对不同小生境昆虫相的初步研究

本文采用马氏诱集器法对6种不同小生境的昆虫相进行初步研究。对采集到的昆虫进行整理和数据分析后表明,采用马氏诱集器法对不同昆虫的诱集效果不同,其中对双翅目、鳞翅目和膜翅目的诱集效果较好。根据诱集结果,不同生境的昆虫种类和数量都存在明显差异。     

不同取样方式在稻田节肢动物采集中的效率评估

水稻是我国主要粮食作物,每年都会因虫害造成大量的经济损失,为了挽回害虫造成的损失,必须对害虫进行防治。田间节肢动物群落调查是评价害虫防治效果的重要依据,取样方式对节肢动物群落调查的准确性具有重要的影响。另外,对转基因作物对稻田生物多样性安全性进行评价时,取样方式对多样性评价的准确性也具有重要的影响。本文采用吸虫器法、盆拍法和马氏网诱集法3种取样方式进行稻田节肢动物调查,并评估不同取样方式的采集效率。得到的结果有:1.采集到的节肢动物物种数:马氏网诱集法吸虫器法盆拍法;2.采集的节肢动物数量:盆拍法吸虫器法马氏网诱集法;3.吸虫器取样法在调查叶蝉科、秆蝇科、茧蜂科、姬蜂科、金小蜂科、缘腹细蜂科、蕈蚋科时,取样效率较高;4.盆拍取样法在调查叶蝉科、瘿蚊科、微蛛亚科、跳蛛科、狼蛛科、猫蛛科、弹尾虫目、飞虱科时,取样效率较高;5.马氏网诱集法在调查缟蝇科和毛蠓科时取样效率较高。马氏网诱集法善于采集具有飞行能力的节肢动物;吸虫器法对不同习性的节肢动物采集效果均较高;盆拍法适合采集活动于水稻基部的节肢动物。     

阎甲采集方法的比较及应用

结合阎甲的生活习性介绍了野外采集阎甲科昆虫的方法,主要分为客观采集法(包括引诱物法、土网筛法、巴氏罐诱法和灯诱法)和特殊生境(树皮下、动物巢穴和储藏物)主观采集法;并比较各种方法的特性和优缺点,认为引诱物法采集效率最高。通过分析各种方法所采集的主要阎甲种类,说明主观采集法的类群针对性强。探讨各种采集方法在不同研究方向的现状和潜在的应用前景。     

山东省探照灯诱虫器和地面灯诱虫器诱集昆虫群落结构

[目的]山东省是昆虫南北迁飞的关键路径,了解山东省的迁飞性昆虫群落结构,对明确迁飞性昆虫种类,并对其进行预测预报具有重要意义.[方法]在山东省14个地区建立监测点,每个监测点于2018年9月-10月利用探照灯诱虫器和地面灯诱虫器诱集昆虫.[结果]14个监测点共诱捕到昆虫有12目54科408种,其中探照灯诱虫器诱集到11目45科388种,地面灯诱虫器诱集到12目46科365种,探照灯诱虫器诱集的主要昆虫类群为鳞翅目(79.12％)、鞘翅目(9.42％)、直翅目(8.14％)和脉翅目(2.26％).地面灯诱虫器诱集的主要昆虫类群为鳞翅目(68.84％)、鞘翅目(23.46％)、膜翅目(3.69％)、直翅目(1.50％)、半翅目(1.14％).探照灯诱虫器诱集昆虫数量显著多于地面灯诱虫器.[结论]阐明了山东省昆虫群落结构和多样性,并证实了许多重大昆虫在山东省存在迁飞性.     

浙江清凉峰昆虫物种组成及其多样性

2008年5月至2013年12月,利用网捕、马氏网诱捕、灯诱等方法对浙江清凉峰进行了昆虫资源调查,共发现27目256科1598属2567种,优势类群鳞翅目、鞘翅目、半翅目、同翅目、双翅目、膜翅目的科数分别占总数的17.19%、12.5%、9.77%、9.38%、7.42%和6.25%,其种类数分别占25.42%、15.81%、4.96%、10.23%、11.71%和13.08%。优势类群的科属多度分析表明,该地区昆虫群落结构稳定。同时,多种物种多样性指数也表明浙江清凉峰昆虫物种昆虫多样性指数较高,群落稳定性好。     

基于林分昆虫多样性调查的传统灯诱法改进效果分析

昆虫在生物多样性调查中具有不可替代的地位，灯诱法是效率最高的昆虫采集方法之一，然而传统的灯诱方法存在诱集范围无法界定、采样流程标准性不足等问题。为此，使用自制的聚光灯诱箱（Spotlight Box Trap，SBT）作为改进灯诱方法，并使用灯诱帐（Moth Collecting Tent，MCT）作为传统灯诱法进行对照；以北京杨（Populus×beijingensis）与油松（Pinus tabuliformis）人工林为样地，对两种灯诱装置采集的蛾类数量及物种组成、物种多样性指数与形态参数等多个指标进行评价。共采集蛾类24科164种6728号，其中北京杨林分SBT采集19科93种1164号，MCT采集22科125种2573号；油松林分SBT采集21科87种1044号，MCT采集22科117种1947号。分析显示：（1） MCT采集的个体数量与物种数量均高于SBT，总体上SBT在不同样地间的数据误差水平更低。（2）两种灯诱装置采集的蛾类优势种组成显著不同（P<0.05）；SBT共有种的数量比例始终高于MCT，即后者的特有种占比例更高。（3）总体上SBT物种多样性指数的数据误差水平更低。（4） MCT采集的蛾类物种体型更大（体长约为SBT的1.20倍）、飞行能力更强（相关参数约为SBT的1.20倍至1.36倍）。结果表明，在林分昆虫多样性的调查中，传统灯诱法的数据稳定性较差，对林分的代表性不足。聚光灯诱箱因其对光域的可控性和采集昆虫的规范性，具备更高的稳定性，在森林昆虫多样性调查与监测中具有更好的适用性与应用前景。     

三种诱捕器对天牛科昆虫的诱集效率

【目的】不同诱捕器类型可以有效诱集不同昆虫物种,为了更准确的判断某地区的物种丰富度,更高效的进行不同物种的诱集,开展不同诱捕器类型对昆虫诱集效率的对比研究是至关重要的。【方法】研究了档板、漏斗和马氏3种不同类型诱捕器在吉林省松花湖库区蒙古栎林中对天牛科昆虫的诱集数量和种类。【结果】在相同地点和相同时间段内,漏斗诱捕器共诱集189头天牛科昆虫、分属于4亚科、11属、12种;挡板诱捕器共诱集134头天牛科昆虫,分属于5亚科、15属、17种;马氏诱捕器共诱集99头天牛科昆虫,分属于4亚科、16属18种。从诱集到的物种丰富度看,诱集效率顺序为:马氏诱捕器>挡板诱捕器>漏斗诱捕器;从诱集到的个体数量看,诱集效率顺序为:漏斗诱捕器>挡板诱捕器>马氏诱捕器;从诱集到的优势种数量看,诱集效率顺序为:漏斗诱捕器>挡板诱捕器>马氏诱捕器。【结论】从成本和效率的综合因素考虑,在一般性天牛科昆虫调查和种群监测时,可以选择以联合使用挡板和漏斗诱捕器为主,马氏诱捕器辅之的调查设计,可达到高效且经济的调查天牛科昆虫的目的。     

城市森林不同林分类型的昆虫多样性:以南京紫金山南麓为例

为阐明影响城市森林昆虫多样性的关键因素,本研究采用扫网法与马氏网法,于2020年7月下旬至2021年7月上旬对江苏南京紫金山南麓阔叶混交林、针阔混交林、针阔混交沼泽地、针阔混交绿道、人工阔叶绿道和人工针叶林6类生境开展昆虫多样性调查。累计采集昆虫9目78科145种59,648头,其中鳞翅目、半翅目、膜翅目与双翅目的物种数和个体数相对较高。α-多样性分析结果显示,阔叶混交林昆虫多样性最高,人工针叶林最低。仅针阔混交沼泽地与阔叶混交林的昆虫群落中等相似,其他生境昆虫群落均互相中等不相似或极不相似。冗余分析与Pearson相关性分析结果表明,虽然各主要昆虫类群α-多样性与环境因素的相关性存在差异,但总体而言,影响紫金山南麓昆虫多样性的环境因素主要为人为干扰程度、人流量、气温、日照时长、降水和海拔,其中植被人为干扰程度影响最为显著,干扰程度越强,昆虫多样性越低。科学地规划和管理植被结构是保护城市森林昆虫多样性的关键。     

浙江宁波镇海工业园区昆虫多样性研究

于2008年7-11月,对宁波镇海工业园区的昆虫群落多样性进行调查,选取林地、农田、人工苗圃、生态园和工厂区5种具有代表性的生境类型,每月对该地区的昆虫种类及数量进行抽样统计和数据分析.结果表明:该地共有昆虫284种,分属13目108科,其中优势类群为同翅目、直翅目、半翅目、鞘翅目和鳞翅目.在不同功能类群中,从个体数看...     

燕山地区访花昆虫多样性及其影响因子

为了解燕山地区访花昆虫的群落结构及与其生境类型、干扰程度、海拔之间的关系, 本文采用样线法和灯诱法于2019年、2020年每年的7-8月对该地区湿地、森林、灌丛、草地、农田5种生境, 不同海拔梯度(0-1,200 m)的访花昆虫进行了采集。共采集访花昆虫1,306头, 隶属7目44科153种, 其中鳞翅目昆虫物种数最多, 半翅目昆虫个体数最多。灌丛生境的访花昆虫多样性最高。在中低海拔200-400 m段, Shannon-Wiener多样性指数、Margalef丰富度指数和Simpson优势度指数均最高。双变量回归结果表明, Shannon-Wiener多样性指数和Margalef丰富度指数分别与最暖季降水量和年降水量显著正相关(P < 0.05)。冗余分析(redundancy analysis)结果表明, 环境因子显著影响访花昆虫多样性, 但不同测度之间存在一定差异。温度和湿度均与Pielou均匀度指数呈正相关, 与Shannon-Wiener多样性指数、Margalef丰富度指数和Simpson优势度指数呈负相关; 弱干扰和中干扰程度对访花昆虫多样性影响最小, 科学管理农牧活动是保护访花昆虫多样性的关键。     

三种被动式采集方法对甲虫收集效果的比较研究: 以香港城门样地为例

标本标准化采集是昆虫多样性研究的根本。昆虫种类繁多、习性复杂、分布广泛, 基于不同的研究目标, 昆虫学家会选用不同的采集方法。由于主动式采集方法存在较多干扰因素和重现性差等问题, 以飞行阻隔器(flight interception trap, FIT)、马氏网(Malaise trap, MT)和罐诱(pitfall trap, PT)为代表的被动式采集方法被广泛应用, 并在昆虫多样性研究中展现独特的优势。然而关于这些被动式采集方法的收集特点和采集效果等还缺乏系统性研究。本研究选取香港城门13个样点, 利用上述3种被动式采集方法共156个采集装备开展为期24天的鞘翅目昆虫采集工作, 并通过多样性指数分析、多度分析、体型与食性相关分析、相似性分析以及物种累积曲线分析评估了不同采集方法对甲虫的收集效果。本研究共采集甲虫6,380头, 涉及40科197种, 分析结果显示: (1)采用不同采集方法获得的物种数量和组成存在差异。从科级和种级的数量来看, FIT (36科, 149种) > MT (24科, 79种) > PT (17科, 60种); 在物种组成方面, FIT与PT之间、MT与PT之间区别较大, FIT与MT对应的物种相似度稍高于前两组。(2)多样性指数和物种多度分布分析显示: 丰富度指数为FIT > MT > PT, 优势度指数为FIT > PT > MT, 多样性指数为MT > FIT > PT, 均匀度指数为MT > PT > FIT。3种方法采集到的甲虫个体数为1头的种较多, 个体数超过1头的种在时间和空间方面的分布较广, 优势科的种类较少, 但其个体数占总个体数的比例较高。(3) FIT和PT均采集到了6类食性的甲虫, 其中藻食性的缨甲科甲虫仅见于FIT和PT采集方法。(4)物种累积曲线的结果表明3种采集方法效果均较好。3种采集方法各有特点, 但FIT采集的综合效果最优。FIT和MT两种方法的结合提升了采集甲虫的种类、食性和体型等方面的覆盖度, 更利于对甲虫多样性及类群与生态环境功能互作的研究。3种方法所收集到的甲虫存在一定差异, 因此可以针对不同研究目的选取适宜的采集方式。     

A comparison of two common flight interception traps to survey tropical arthropods

Tropical forests are predicted to harbor most of the insect diversity on earth, but few studies have been conducted to characterize insect communities in tropical forests. One major limitation is the lack of consensus on methods for insect collection. Deciding which insect trap to use is an important consideration for ecologists and entomologists, yet to date few study has presented a quantitative comparison of the results generated by standardized methods in tropical insect communities. Here, we investigate the relative performance of two flight interception traps, the windowpane trap, and the more widely used malaise trap, across a broad gradient of lowland forest types in French Guiana. The windowpane trap consistently collected significantly more Coleoptera and Blattaria than the malaise trap, which proved most effective for Diptera, Hymenoptera, and Hemiptera. Orthoptera and Lepidoptera were not well represented using either trap, suggesting the need for additional methods such as bait traps and light traps. Our results of contrasting trap performance among insect orders underscore the need for complementary trapping strategies using multiple methods for community surveys in tropical forests.     

An Efficient Pit-light Trap to Study Beetle Diversity

A new, highly efficient pit-light trap is described and results of experiments on its efficacy that were carried out in various types of forests are presented. The Luminoc® insect trap is made of two parts: a 1-L collection container inserted into the ground and an upper container which houses a 6-V lantern battery and a circuit for electronic control of a 1.8-W miniature fluorescent tube. A cover is fixed under the upper container to prevent rainwater from entering the collection container. The pit-light trap caught significantly more specimens, species and families of Coleoptera than passive pitfall traps. Many species of common families, such as Carabidae, Cantharidae, Curculionidae, Elateridae, Pyrochroidae, Scarabaeidae, Silphidae and Tenebrionidae were mainly caught in pit-light traps. Several species of uncommon families such as Byrrhidae, Melandryidae, Scraptiidae, Stenotrachelidae and Throscidae were caught only in pit-light traps. The light source increases the sampling area of a trap to include many micro-habitats, which makes pit-light traps more efficient tools that provide less variable results than the passive pitfall traps. The use of only three pit-light traps allows the capture of three times more 'abundant and common' species than any number of passive pitfall traps could provide. Thus, the pit-light trap allows an easier and more accurate characterization of Coleoptera communities than the passive pitfall trap. Because of its high efficacy, the pit-light trap should be considered as a standard tool to study, monitor and inventory beetle diversity.     

Can Malaise traps be used to sample spiders for biodiversity assessment?

Malaise traps are typically used to sample a range of flying insect groups; however non-target taxa such as spiders may also be collected in large numbers. In this study, spiders were sampled in peatlands and wet grasslands and catches in Malaise and pitfall traps were compared in order to determine the adequacy of Malaise traps for use in spider biodiversity assessment. Overall, the number of species and individuals caught in Malaise and pitfall traps were comparable, although more species were sampled in Malaise traps in locations with a greater structural diversity of the vegetation. The spider fauna sampled by the Malaise traps differed from that of the pitfall traps, but both methods consistently separated the species assemblages by biotope. These results demonstrate that Malaise traps are effective at sampling spiders and indicate that they can be used in biodiversity assessment. In addition the complementary species sampled by each method mean that employing both techniques will be useful where a full inventory of the species is required. The authors do not suggest that Malaise traps should be used solely to sample spiders; however, if traps are set to collect insects, identification of the spiders sampled may reduce the need to employ additional sampling techniques.     

Efficiency of Malaise traps and colored pan traps for collecting flower visiting insects from three forested ecosystems

Pan and Malaise traps have been used widely to sample insect abundance and diversity, but no studies have compared their performance for sampling pollinators in forested ecosystems. Malaise trap design and color of pan traps are important parameters that influence insect pollinator catches. We compared pan trap (blue, yellow, white, and red) and Malaise trap catches from forests in three physiographic provinces (Piedmont, Coastal Plain, and Blue Ridge) of the southeastern United States. Similarities in trap performance between sites were observed with blue pan traps being most effective overall. Our results showed that various pollinator groups preferred certain pan trap colors and that adding color to Malaise traps influenced insect pollinator catches. However, pan traps generally caught more pollinators than Malaise traps. Because of their low cost and simplicity, using several colors of pan traps is an effective way to sample relative abundance and species richness of flower-visiting insects.     

广西花坪SITE100样地甲虫标本照片数据集

通过在全球定点布设长期样地, 定量评估昆虫多样性与环境之间的关系具有重要意义。“SITE100”国际大科学计划在全球选定100个大样地, 每个样地统一选用罐诱法、马氏网法和飞行阻隔法三类采集装备, 从物种、形态和遗传多样性三个维度探究全球昆虫多样性格局。花坪被选为全球100个大样地之一。本文的数据集为花坪样地2020年生长季期间的鞘翅目收样结果, 历时7个月(2020.05.09-2020.11.23), 涵盖10个样点, 每个样点包括1套飞行阻隔器、1套马氏网和10个埋罐, 平均每周访问全部样点1次。研究期间共采集甲虫8,914头, 被划分为563个形态种, 涵盖57个科。数据集包括四部分, 第一部分为各样点每个采集装备每次收样所获得甲虫标本的集体照原图, 共计644张, 压缩后为照片1.zip; 第二部分为标注了形态种编号的甲虫标本的集体照, 共计644张, 压缩后为照片2.zip; 第三部分为甲虫标本数量统计数据, 涵盖2020年5月2日至2020年11月23日期间3种采集方式各日期采集甲虫的数量、采集样点的经纬度以及海拔信息, 共2个文件, 压缩后为数据1.zip; 第四部分为甲虫标本高级阶元(科级或亚科级)鉴定信息, 共计2个文件, 压缩后为数据2.zip。该数据集除了可以用于与其他SITE100样地结果进行联合分析之外, 还可用来比较不同栖境中甲虫的类群分布和形态差异, 部分类群的背面观图片为后续的几何形态学或者形态学研究提供数据支持。该数据集还是对花坪甲虫多样性的首次定量评估, 对于丰富我国生物多样性本底数据和了解我国南方昆虫区系的来源具有重要意义。     

Optimizing Diversity Assessment Protocols for High Canopy Ants in Tropical Rain Forest

The canopies of tropical rain forests support highly diverse, yet poorly known, animal and plant communities. It is vital that researchers who invest the time needed to gain access to the high canopy are able efficiently to survey the animals and plants that they find there. Here, we develop diversity assessment protocols for one of the most ecologically important canopy animal groups, the ants, in lowland dipterocarp rain forest in Sabah, Malaysia. We design and test a novel trap (the purse‐string trap) that can be remotely collected, thus avoiding disturbance to ants. We compare this modified trap with two other methods for surveying canopy ants: precision insecticide fogging and baited pitfall trapping. In total, we collected 39,351 ants belonging to 173 species in 38 genera. Fogging collected the most individuals and species, followed by purse‐string trapping with baited pitfall trapping catching the fewest. Fogging also resulted in samples with a different species composition to purse‐string trapping and baited pitfall trapping, which were not different from one another. Using a ‘greedy algorithm’, which guides the selection of inventory methods in order to maximize new species discovered per researcher‐hour, we show that projects allocating fewer than 132 researcher‐hours to canopy ant collection and identification should sample exclusively using fogging. Those with more time should use a combination of methods. This prioritization technique could be used to accelerate species discovery in future rapid biodiversity assessments. Abstract in Malay is available in the online version of this article.     

甘肃子午岭天然次生林区三种植被类型中土壤蜘蛛群落的组成及多样性

2004年4—10月,在甘肃子午岭天然次生林区采用巴氏诱罐法采集土壤蜘蛛2164头,隶属于19科43种。研究表明辽东栎林(Quercusliaotungensis)、油松林(Pinustabulaeformis)和杨树林(Populusdavidiana)3种森林植被类型中土壤蜘蛛群落组成有明显的差异;不同生境蜘蛛群落的组成成分和多样性指数各异;从各生境中捕获的蜘蛛个体数量分析,皿蛛科、平腹蛛科和科狼蛛科的数量最多,优势类群的组成相似;各生境类型中蜘蛛功能集团的组成及多样性也有明显差异。同时,分析了影响蜘蛛群落组成和多样性的主要因子是生境的植被类型和生境异质性。     

Adapting light trap to catch household insects in central Cameroon: a pilot study

Various trapping methods and techniques developed for entomological studies are inefficient in attracting all arthropod groups. A new simple light trap, the basin light trap (BLT), to collect arthropod fauna around household in central Cameroon was thus designed. Its performance is evaluated by comparing collected data with those obtained by the Centre for Disease Control light trap (CDC) commonly used in mosquito studies. BLT were activated between 6 and 10 pm and CDC between 5 pm and 8 am. A total of 36,804 arthropods specimens were collected and sorted into 115 families within 20 orders and three phyla (Myriapoda, Arachnida and Hexapoda). BLT attracted more individuals (22,250 vs 14,554), families (106 vs 65) and significantly more families per night (33.0 ± 15.9 vs 21.0 ± 8.5) than CDC. Some families were collected by only one specific trap type while others overlapped between the two traps. Prosopistomatidae (Ephemeroptera) was the most abundant family collected by BLT. In contrast, Cecidomyiidae (Diptera) was the most abundant taxon trapped by CDC. These results indicate that collecting methods such as BLT complement available trapping methods in evaluating arthropod fauna in and around households.