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。

Effect of the improvement of traditional light trapping method based on the investigation of insect diversity in different forest stands

Insects play an irreplaceable role in biodiversity survey, while light trapping is one of the most efficient methods in the insect collection and it is widely used for investigation of nocturnal insect communities. The traditional light trapping method, however, has the problem that affects the reliability of the survey results. Firstly, its lighting range is not controlled, which the trapping area cannot be defined. Secondly, while the standardization and stability of data acquisition is essential in insect ecology researches, the manual collection is not as standard as automatic methods. Therefore, we devised an improved device called "spotlight box trap" (SBT), and used the moth collecting tent (MCT) as the traditional method. The insect collection comparison study of the two light trapping devices was carried out in the sample plots and involved two forest stands (the pure plantation of Populus×beijingensis and Pinus tabuliformis), with moths (night active Lepidoptera) as the representative insect groups. The two light trapping methods were evaluated by comparing the differences and error levels of the number of individuals and species, species composition and dominance, species diversity index and morphological parameters of collected moths. A total of 6728 moths'' specimens of 24 families, 164 species were collected; 1164 of 19 families, 93 species by SBT and 2573 of 22 families, 125 species were collected by MCT in Populus×beijingensis forest; 1044 of 21 families, 87 species by SBT and 1947 of 22 families, 117 species were collected by MCT in Pinus tabulaeformis forest. The results showed that:(1) the number of individuals and species in MCT was higher than that in SBT, and overall SBT had lower level of data error across sites. (2) Within the same month, the dominant moth community structure collected by the two devices was significantly different (P<0.05), and the proportion of shared species was lower in MCT than that in SBT, that is, the former device collected more endemic species. (3) In different plots, the data error levels of richness, diversity and evenness index of SBT were higher than those of MCT. (4) The moth species collected by MCT had overall larger body size (1.20 times that of SBT) and stronger flight ability (the relevant parameters are about 1.20 to 1.36 times than those of SBT). In conclusion, we consider that in the investigation of forest insect diversity, although the traditional light trap is commonly used, the data stability of the method is not reliable, and its representation of the forest is insufficient. This makes it difficult to conduct insect communities based on forest stands. The improved device, "spotlight box trap", is more stable due to its controllability of light domain and standardization of collection process, and has better applicability and application prospects in forest insect diversity investigation and monitoring.