Is pitfall trapping a valuable sampling method for grassland Orthoptera?

Common methods to assess diversity and abundance of Orthoptera are sweep netting, transect counts and box-quadrat sampling. Pitfall trapping, by contrast, is rarely used, and the value of this method is still being questioned. In 2008, we studied Orthoptera species richness and abundance in five vegetation types along a gradient of dune succession on the Baltic Sea island of Hiddensee (NE Germany) by comparing transect-count and pitfall-trapping data. Using transect counts, 12 species were detected in the study area. With pitfall traps, three chorto- and thamnobiont Ensifera species (C. dorsalis, M. roeselii and T. viridissima) were not caught at all, and it was only in low-growing and sparsely-vegetated grey dunes that all present species were detected. With pitfall traps, the proportion of present species recorded strongly declined with increasing height and density of the vegetation type. Assuming that transect counts are a good proxy for relative Orthoptera densities, densities ascertained by pitfall traps are strongly biased by vegetation structure and locomotive behaviour of the species. More than 80% of all individuals were caught in sparsely-vegetated grey dunes. Frequency patterns of the species also differed. Using pitfall traps, especially chortobiont species were significantly underrepresented. Qualitative and quantitative sampling of Orthoptera using pitfall traps seems only reasonable in habitats with low and sparse vegetation and a high proportion of geobiont species.     

Sampling arthropod diversity for urban ecological landscaping in a species-rich southern hemisphere botanic garden

Arthropods were sampled using pitfall traps, sticky traps, sweep netting, Malaise traps and visual sampling at a national botanic garden, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, where the taxonomic impediment is great. The aims were to compare two sites, one of native vegetation and the other of mainly exotic plants, to determine the possible localized extent of biodiversity change across the land mosaic, and to test and compare methodologies and indicator taxa and to make recommendations for ecological landscaping of a botanic garden. Species richness and evenness varied considerably with sampling technique used. From results of a single replicate of data from all trapping methods including 821 arthropod species and 3831 individuals, a number of conclusions could be drawn. Trapping procedures such as sweep netting and pitfall traps, which focus on species with restricted mobility and/or host plant requirements, indicated greatest differences in diversity between two closely located sites. Taxa varied in sensitivity to microlandscape, again depending on the extent of their mobility. Cicindelid and carabid beetles were particularly good indicators of habitat disturbance and type. The management recommendations are that in a species-rich urban botanic garden such as this, as many ecotopes as possible should be preserved or created. These should vary in topography, landscape characteristics and vegetation composition, with as much connectivity as possible. This is a feasible blanket approach to give home to a large number of nameless species and morphs. Patches of different ecotopes should not be separated by more than a few metres by expanses of mown lawn which isolates much of the fauna.     

A comparison of pitfall traps with bait traps for studying leaf litter ant communities.

A comparison of pitfall traps with bait traps for sampling leaf litter ants was studied in oak-dominated mixed forests during 1995-1997. A total of 31,732 ants were collected from pitfall traps and 54,694 ants were collected from bait traps. They belonged to four subfamilies, 17 genera, and 32 species. Bait traps caught 29 species, whereas pitfall traps caught 31 species. Bait traps attracted one species not found in pitfall traps, but missed three of the species collected with pitfall traps. Collections from the two sampling methods showed differences in species richness, relative abundance, diversity, and species accumulation curves. Pitfall traps caught significantly more ant species per plot than did bait traps. The ant species diversity obtained from pitfall traps was higher than that from bait traps. Bait traps took a much longer time to complete an estimate of species richness than did pitfall traps. Little information was added to pitfall trapping results by the bait trapping method. The results suggested that the pitfall trapping method is superior to the bait trapping method for leaf litter ant studies. Species accumulation curves showed that sampling of 2,192+/-532 ants from six plots by pitfall traps provided a good estimation of ant species richness under the conditions of this study.     

Hand searching versus pitfall trapping: how to assess biodiversity of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in high altitude equatorial Andes?

The use of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) as bioindicators of environmental change depends on the reliability and the effectiveness of the sampling methods. Those that have been tested in the temperate zone and in tropical forests still await experimentation in tropical high-altitude environments. For the first time, pitfall trapping and hand searching have been compared in Ecuadorian páramo above 4000 m a.s.l., in terms of practical effectiveness. The study was performed on six volcanoes and was based on the comparison of 28 sampling sessions (pitfall trapping and hand searching) performed along two different elevational belts [lower superpáramo (LSP) and upper superpáramo (USP)]. Analyses of sampling sessions showed that detected species richness is slightly higher with hand searching than with pitfall trapping, regardless of the elevation. Additionally, hand searching is more time-effective than pitfall trapping. The performance of the sampling method slightly varies when species assemblage composition is analysed in relation to elevational belts. In the LSP, hand searching and pitfall trapping should be simultaneously used to obtain exhaustive inventories of carabid biodiversity, since different species are likely to be collected by each method. In the USP, hand searching and pitfall trapping efficiency is very similar, but hand searching allows to collect a slightly larger number of species. Lastly, the sample-based rarefaction curves showed that four temporal replicates are mandatory to obtain a robust dataset and an exhaustive inventory of the true species richness and species assemblages composition. Our findings suggest a combined use of hand searching and pitfall trapping in the LSP, while both methods can be used alone for surveying carabids in the USP. Furthermore, hand searching is recommended if the aim is to obtain an inventory of species diversity, whereas pitfall trapping seems more convenient for fine grain ecological and comparative studies.     

Measuring Spider Richness: Effects of Different Sampling Methods and Spatial and Temporal Scales

Assessing the richness of invertebrate taxa to aid conservation and management requires a better understanding of the potential sources of error. Patterns of richness for heathland spiders at the species and family levels were compared across three sampling methods, four spatial scales, and monthly intervals (for 16 months). A total of 33 families and 130 species was collected: pitfall traps collected 94% of species, sweep net, 25%, and visual search, 41%. The sampling methods produced variable results. Pitfall trap and sweep net techniques identified significant, yet contrasting spatial differences in the number of families and species at one spatial scale. Pitfall trap data reflected strong temporal variation that influenced spatial patterns in richness (across one spatial scale for families and two for species). The use of broader temporal scales introduced a potential failure to detect significant differences in the richness of ground active spiders, and this risk varied spatially. The sweep net is not recommended for this habitat, although a method that targets the foliage is required for a more complete faunal assessment. Visual searches detected no significant patterns in richness, yet given its potential and increasing use for rapid biodiversity surveys, ways to improve sampling efficiency are suggested.     

Inventory and Bioindicator Sampling: Testing Pitfall and Winkler Methods with Ants in a South African Savanna

The sampling efficiency and consistency of pitfall traps and Winkler samples for inventory, bioindicator and ecological studies in savanna habitats was compared using ants. Pitfall traps are often used for ant collecting while Winkler litter sampling has until now had rather limited use. We test Winkler sampling for the first time in a South African savanna. Pitfall traps were more efficient and productive than Winkler sampling for epigaeic ants, with a greater total species richness and higher abundance of ants recorded. Winkler samples contributed few additional species. The relative abundance of different sized ants was different with the two collection methods. Winkler sampling was found to catch greater numbers of smaller ants than pitfall trapping, whereas pitfall trapping caught more larger ants. The standard collecting Winkler quadrat size of 1m² did not perform as well as 2× m² quadrats combined for one sample.     

Comparison of two methods for sampling invertebrates: vacuum and sweep‐net sampling

ABSTRACT With numerous invertebrate sampling techniques available, deciding which technique to use under certain circumstances may be difficult. Many researchers interested in invertebrate abundance and availability relative to the foraging ecology of birds may use a technique (e.g., vacuum sampling or sweep‐netting) without understanding the impacts their choice may have on the samples collected and the ability of the method to meet research objectives. We compared the characteristics, including overall biomass, morphospecies richness, average size, diversity, and body length categories, of invertebrates collected using a sweep‐net and a Dietrick vacuum sampler along paired transects in Woodward County, Oklahoma, from May to July 2007 and 2008. These sampling techniques differed in the taxa collected, with the orders Diptera, Homoptera, and Hymenoptera dominating vacuum samples and the orders Homoptera, Orthoptera, and Araneae dominating sweep‐net samples. Although morphospecies richness was similar for the two techniques, the mean size of invertebrates collected and overall invertebrate biomass were greater for sweep‐netting than vacuum sampling. Vacuum sampling was more effective at collecting small (e.g., <5 cm) invertebrates, whereas sweep‐netting captured large (>5 cm) Orthopteran and Lepidopteran larvae at higher rates. Thus, our results indicate that neither sampling method effectively sampled all invertebrate families and investigators should be aware of the potential biases of different sampling techniques and be certain that the technique selected will allow study objectives to be met.     

A comparison of three methods to survey saproxylic beetles in hollow oaks

One of the most endangered assemblages of species in Europe is insectsassociated with old trees. For that reason there is a need of developing methodsto survey this fauna. This study aims at comparing three methods – windowtrapping, pitfall trapping and wood mould sampling – to assess speciesrichness and composition of the saproxylic beetle fauna in living, hollow oaks.We have used these methods at the same site, and to a large extent in the sametrees. Useful information was obtained from all methods, but they partiallytarget different assemblages of species. Window trapping collected the highestnumber of species. Pitfall trapping collected beetles associated with treehollows which rarely are collected by window traps and therefore it isprofitable to combine these two methods. As wood mould sampling is the cheapestmethod to use, indicator species should preferably be chosen among specieswhich are efficiently collected with this method.     

Efficient sampling of ground-dwelling arthropods using pitfall traps in arid steppes

Pitfall trapping is probably the most frequently used method for sampling ground-dwelling arthropods. While the capture of specimens in pitfall traps largely depends on the number of individuals in the sampled area, trap design and trapping effort for a given environment, can also affect sampling success. The aim of this study was to determine the best pitfall trapping design for collecting ground-dwelling arthropods in the wind-blown and cold arid steppe areas of Patagonia. We tested four designs of traps, six types of preservative and different times of activation as well as the quantity of traps. Both preservation attributes and sampling efficiency differed between different trap designs and fluids compared. We conclude that in order to obtain reliable data on the structure of a community of ground-dwelling arthropods in Patagonia, at least three pitfall traps per experimental unit are required. In addition, traps should be opened for a minimum of 10 days filled with 300 ml of 30% ethylene glycol. We also suggested the use of a simple trap design (i. e. without funnel or roof). We believe these findings will contribute to more appropriate sampling of the ground dwelling fauna of Patagonia as well as other arid areas, leading to more reliable diversity studies.     

The influence of weed-cover on the mortality imposed on artificial prey by predatory ground beetles in cereal fields

Summary Pitfall trapping was carried out in a field of winter wheat in the Vale of York to determine the levels of abundance of adult carabid and staphylinid beetles, (which formed the bulk of the natural predator complex) in the field. A point quadrat survey was carried out at the same time to assess the vegetation cover round each trap. Predation pressure by the beetles in the field was monitored using fruit fly (Drosophila) pupae as artificial prey. These artificial prey were attached to small cards inserted in the field adjacent to the pitfall traps.The numbers of beetles caught were found to be directly related to the frequency and density of Poa annua L. (annual meadow grass) the only abundant non-crop plant present at the time. More beetles were caught in areas where Poa was abundant than where Poa was scarce. This was probably related to the more suitable environmental factors offered by these of the wheat itself was found to be unrelated to captures.The number of fruit fly pupae taken was shown to be related to the numbers of carabid and staphylinid beetles present, and also to the type of vegetation occuring around each card.The implication of these results for the effects of predation on potential pest-outbreaks in the crop are discussed.     

Habitat Specificity and Variation of Coleopteran Assemblages Between Habitats in a Southern African (Swaziland) Agricultural Landscape

Assessment of Coleopteran diversity and abundance was carried out in the lowveld region of Swaziland by pitfall trapping in five distinct habitats. Additionally, the study was to ascertain if any of the families collected illustrated habitat fidelity. 18 coleopteran families, comprising 2903 individuals were collected, with an additional 29 unidentified specimens, totalling 2932 beetles. Numerically, the top five families were the Scarabaeidae (2425), Carabidae (211), Tenebrionidae (149), Nitidulidae (37) and Curculionidae (22). 66.6% of all specimens collected were harboured within the pine windbreak while the lowest number (2.6%) was collected from the mature citrus orchard. The highest proportion (77%) of scarabaeid beetles collected occurred within the pine windbreak. Habitat specificity was illustrated by one family, Meloidae, which was found only in the young orchard. Community analysis was further carried out to ascertain distribution patterns of the dominant coleopteran families. Three scarabaeid species were found only in the pine windbreak while three carabid species occurred only in the indigenous savanna. Significant differences between habitats were observed in the number of beetles collected while no significant differences were observed in terms of the number of families observed in each habitat (p<0.05). Results indicate that conservation of the various habitat patches within the mosaic studied could facilitate conservation of whole communities rather than individual species thus facilitating effective conservation of the agricultural landscape.     

Effects of Pitfall Trap Spacing on the Abundance, Richness and Composition of Invertebrate Catches

Pitfall trapping is one of the most commonly used methods to survey surface-active invertebrates, but has many potential biases that may affect the catch of invertebrates. The distance between pitfall traps (inter-trap spacing) is one such factor. The abundance, richness and composition of invertebrate orders, and species of ants and beetles was examined for three commonly used inter-trap spacings (1, 5, 10m) in a grassy-woodland ecosystem in Victoria, Australia. Abundance and composition was not significantly different between treatments for any taxa. A significant difference in richness between treatments was found only for beetles. The 5 and 10m treatments had a significantly higher number of beetle morphospecies than the 1m treatment. Knowledge of such biases, and how subtle variations in trap design affect efficiency, is important for designing invertebrate surveys.     

Sweeping beauty: is grassland arthropod community composition effectively estimated by sweep netting?

Arthropods are critical ecosystem components due to their high diversity and sensitivity to perturbation. Furthermore, due to their ease of capture they are often the focus of environmental health surveys. There is much debate regarding the best sampling method to use in these surveys. Sweep netting and pan trapping are two sampling methods commonly used in agricultural arthropod surveys, but have not been contrasted in natural grassland systems at the community level. The purpose of this study was to determine whether sweep netting was effective at estimating arthropod diversity at the community level in grasslands or if supplemental pan trapping was needed. Arthropods were collected from grassland sites in Montana, USA, in the summer of 2011. The following three standardized evaluation criteria (consistency, reliability, and precision) were developed to assess the efficacy of sweep netting and pan trapping, based on analyses of variations in arthropod abundances, species richness, evenness, capture frequency, and community composition. Neither sampling method was sufficient in any criteria to be used alone for community‐level arthropod surveys. On a taxa‐specific basis, however, sweep netting was consistent, reliable, and precise for Thysanoptera, infrequently collected (i.e., rare) insects, and Arachnida, whereas pan trapping was consistent, reliable, and precise for Collembola and bees, which is especially significant given current threats to the latter's populations worldwide. Species‐level identifications increase the detected dissimilarity between sweep netting and pan trapping. We recommend that community‐level arthropod surveys use both sampling methods concurrently, at least in grasslands, but likely in most nonagricultural systems. Target surveys, such as monitoring bee communities in fragmented grassland habitat or where detailed information on behavior of the target arthropod groups is available can in some instances employ singular methods. As a general ecological principle, consistency, reliability, and precision are appropriate criteria to evaluate the applicability of a given sampling method for both community‐level and taxa‐specific arthropod surveys in any ecosystem.     

Comparison of carabid beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) occurrence in rain forest and human-modified sites in south-eastern Madagascar

High species diversity and endemism make Madagascar one of the world's biodiversity hot spots. However, forest cover and, thereby, biodiversity are decreasing rapidly due to human activities. Most of Madagascar is now covered by secondary vegetation, which is species-poor and contains many introduced species. In this study, the effect of human impact through alteration in vegetation on carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) was assessed. The study was conducted in montane rain forest in the Parc National de Ranomafana (south-eastern Madagascar), and in a nearby village area with various types of secondary vegetation. Beetles were collected by hand and by pitfall traps from ten sites from both areas. A total of 246 specimens belonging to 54 species were collected. Pitfall traps yielded only six specimens, which clearly shows that pitfall trapping is not a feasible method for catching carabids in such habitats. From the forest in the national park, 38 species were collected and from the village area 28 species. Species compositions and the dominant species were different: 12 species were found from both areas, while 16 species were unique to the village area and 26 species were unique to the forest. Half of the species were singletons and three most abundant species formed 31% of the total number of individuals. We conclude that because forest-dwellers do not occur in the human-modified environment, such species are at great risk of becoming extinct if current rates of forest decline continue in Madagascar.     

Effects of pitfall trap size and sampling duration on collection of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in temperate forests

Pitfall trapping is a standard sampling method to compare the abundance or community structure of ground beetles. However, effects of sampling duration on biodiversity estimation of ground beetles according to different trap sizes have not been experimentally evaluated in temperate forests in Korea. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the interaction between trap sizes (SB, small‐sized bottle; MB, medium‐sized bottle; PC, plastic cup; PJ, plastic jar; PT, perforated type trap; FT, funnel‐type trap) and sampling duration (T1, 2 weeks × 2 sessions, 28 days; T2, 2 weeks × 4 sessions, 56 days; T3, 4 weeks × 2 sessions, 56 days) on estimation of ground beetle assemblages in Naejangsan National Park, a temperate forest in Korea. Funnel type and larger pitfall traps collected higher numbers of individuals and species than other trap sizes. Species composition of ground beetles was different by size of traps (SB, MB, and PC vs. PJ, PT, and FT). In particular, ground beetle composition in larger traps (PJ, PT, and FT) appeared to be influenced by environmental characteristics according to localities (e.g., soil characters and dominant tree species). These findings from our study support that pitfall trapping of ground beetles can be influenced by trap sizes per se as well as sampling durations and environmental characteristics. Thus, biodiversity monitoring in temperate forests should be conducted with long sampling duration (at least 28 days) using large‐sized traps (> 7.5 cm in diameter of trap mouthpart) considering expenses and study aims.     

Are sweep net sampling and pitfall trapping compatible with molecular analysis of predation?

Molecular analysis of predation enables accurate and reliable elucidation of trophic linkages in complex food webs, but identifying the strength of such interactions can be subject to error. Currently two techniques dominate: monoclonal antibody-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Although the optimization and characterization of these systems ensures their sensitivity and specificity, predator collection protocols such as sweep-netting and vacuum sampling could overestimate feeding rates because of surface-level contamination, yielding positive reactivity or predation within the sampling device. Therefore, two sampling techniques (sweep-net sampling and hand collection) were compared within an alfalfa agroecosystem using a monoclonal antibody-based ELISA to test the hypothesis that cross-contamination is a source of error, i.e., significantly more predators (linyphiid spiders) would test positive for prey (Diptera) proteins. A concurrent study examining the viability of trapping predators into saline solution was also undertaken. No significant differences were found between the proportions of spiders screening positive for Diptera when collected by sweep-net versus hand collection, rejecting the hypothesis that sweep-netting predators for subsequent molecular gut content analysis overestimates predation frequency. ELISA was also capable of detecting prey proteins in predator guts from pitfall traps containing phosphate-buffered saline, indicating the suitability of this approach for the collection and analysis of epigeal predators. Although these results indicate that sweep netting and pitfall trapping into solution is appropriate in this predator-prey and ELISA analysis system, caution should be exercised with other interactions and PCR-based analysis. The likelihood for false-positive reactivity should therefore be considered on a case-by-case basis.     

Carabidae diversity along an altitudinal gradient in a Peruvian cloud forest (Coleoptera)

Carabid beetles were sampled at five sites, ranging from 1500 m to 3400 m, along a 15 km transect in the cloud forest of Manu National Park, Perú. Seasonal collections during a one year period yielded 77 morphospecies, of which 60% are projected to be undescribed species. There was a significant negative correlation between species richness and altitude, with the number of carabid species declining at the rate of one species for each 100 m increase in altitude. The majority of species (70.1 %) were restricted to only one altitudinal site and no species was found at more than three of the five altitudinal sites. Only one genus, Pelmatellus (Tribe Harpalini), was found at all five sites. Active (hand) collections yielded approximately twice as many species per individuals collected than passive (pitfall trap) collections. This study is the first systematic sampling ofcarabid beetles of a high altitude gradient in the cloud forests of southeastern Perú and supports the need to conserve the zone of extremely high biodiversity present on the eastern slopes of the Peruvian Andes.     

Time‐lapse camera trapping as an alternative to pitfall trapping for estimating activity of leaf litter arthropods

Pitfall trapping is the standard technique to estimate activity and relative abundance of leaf litter arthropods. Pitfall trapping is not ideal for long‐term sampling because it is lethal, labor‐intensive, and may have taxonomic sampling biases. We test an alternative sampling method that can be left in place for several months at a time: verticallyplaced time‐lapse camera traps that have a short focal distance, enabling identification of small arthropods. We tested the effectiveness of these time‐lapse cameras, and quantified escape and avoidance behavior of arthropod orders encountering pitfall traps by placing cameras programed with a range of sampling intervals above pitfalls, to assess numerical, taxonomic, and body size differences in samples collected by the two methods. Cameras programed with 1‐ or 15‐min intervals recorded around twice as many arthropod taxa per day and a third more individuals per day than pitfall traps. Hymenoptera (ants), Embioptera (webspinners), and Blattodea (cockroaches) frequently escaped from pitfalls so were particularly under‐sampled by them. The time‐lapse camera method effectively samples litter arthropods to collect long‐term data. It is standardized, non‐lethal, and does not alter the substrate or require frequent visits.     

Detecting invertebrate responses to fire depends on sampling method and taxonomic resolution

New knowledge about the responses of species to fire is needed to plan for biodiversity conservation in the face of changing fire regimes. However, the knowledge that is acquired may be influenced by the sampling method and the taxonomic resolution of a study. To investigate these potential sampling biases, we examined invertebrate responses to time since fire in mallee woodlands of southern Australia. Using a large‐scale replicated study system, we sampled over 60 000 invertebrates with large pitfall traps, wet pitfall traps and sweep nets, and undertook analyses at morphospecies and order level. Large pitfalls and sweep nets detected several strong fire effects, whereas wet pitfall traps detected few effects. Invertebrate abundance in sweep nets was highest shortly after fire because of grasshopper outbreaks. Several additional morphospecies showed strong preferences for different stages in the post‐fire succession. In contrast with morphospecies effects, analyses at order level either failed to detect fire effects or were driven by the most abundant species. For fire research to produce credible results with the potential to guide management, it must use a range of sampling techniques and undertake analyses at (morpho)species level. Homogeneous fire management, such as fire suppression in fragmented landscapes or widespread frequent burning for asset protection, is likely to cause declines in fire‐affected invertebrates.     

Ecological structure of the West Siberian forest-steppe spider community (Arachnida,Araneae) and its comparison with the ground-beetle (Coleoptera,Carabidae) community

An investigation of the spatiotemporal management of the ground-dwelling spider community has been carried out at the continuous habitat gradient from the forest outlier center to the meadowland center in the southern part of the forest-steppe zone of Novosibirsk oblast in 2007?2008. We apply two sampling methods which complete each other: pitfall trapping and hand separation of soil samples. Eighty-three species of spiders from 14 families are determined. Spiders are most abundant in the early summer and less abundant in the middle of summer. Representatives of different families are of maximum abundance in different sites: Lycosidae and Gnaphosidae mainly in the forest and Philodromidae in the solonetz meadow. The distribution of diversity and abundance of spiders and ground beetles throughout the habitat gradient are generally similar. This is contradictory to the spatial interactions of these two groups in Arctic and extreme ecosystems. Niche distinguishing between ground beetles and spider species is not only topical. It includes the usage of different strata of vegetation, various seasonal activity, and trophic specialization.