Comparing methods of weed seed exposure to predators

Several methods of seed exposure are used in seed predation studies, but how these methods influence the results remains poorly studied. In this article, two commonly used methods of seed exposure – seed cards and plasticine trays – were compared in the field and in the laboratory using three species of weed seeds. In the field, cards or trays with seeds were exposed either with or without cages to keep vertebrates out and either with or without impermeable roofs to provide protection from the weather. The overall seed retrieval from the control stands varied significantly between the methods of seed exposure, roof treatment and the species of seeds, and the scatter in the seed retrieval increased or decreased monotonically with the temperature or precipitation for some species of seeds. This indicates that the controls were more or less relevant depending on the weather conditions and species. The seed removal from cards varied between the species of seeds. The effect of exclosure cages indicated that invertebrates were the dominant seed predators of Capsella bursa‐pastoris, while in Poa annua and Stellaria media both vertebrates and invertebrates were important. Higher seed removal from plasticine trays compared to seed cards was found for all three species of seeds, and placing roofs over the seeds affected seed removal in C. bursa‐pastoris and P. annua. In the laboratory, seed consumption varied with the method of exposure in 10 out of 12 combinations of seed species and predator (two species of carabids and two species of isopods). The overall tendency was the opposite of the field observations: seed consumption was higher for seeds on filter paper and cards compared to seeds on tin trays. We conclude that seed cards are more convenient for short term studies in the field, while tin trays are useful in laboratory multi‐choice experiments. To measure the realistic consumption of invertebrate predators in the laboratory, filter paper seems to be the best option as it does not present an obstacle to predators eating the seed. Using roofs introduced further bias regarding the estimates of seed removal in the field and thus should be avoided.