Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T10:55:55.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using Malaise traps to sample ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Michael D. Ulyshen ,
James L. Hanula  and
Scott Horn
Michael D. Ulyshen*
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 320 Green Street, Athens, Georgia 30602-2044, United States of America
James L. Hanula
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 320 Green Street, Athens, Georgia 30602-2044, United States of America
Scott Horn
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 320 Green Street, Athens, Georgia 30602-2044, United States of America
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Pitfall traps provide an easy and inexpensive way to sample ground-dwelling arthropods (Spence and Niemela 1994; Spence et al. 1997; Abildsnes and Tommeras 2000) and have been used exclusively in many studies of the abundance and diversity of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Despite the popularity of this trapping technique, pitfall traps have many disadvantages. For example, they often fail to collect both small (Spence and Niemela 1994) and “trap-shy” species (Benest 1989), eventually deplete the local carabid population (Digweed et al. 1995), require a species to be ground-dwelling in order to be captured (Liebherr and Mahar 1979), and produce different results depending on trap diameter and material, type of preservative used, and trap placement (Greenslade 1964; Luff 1975; Work et al. 2002).

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 137 , Issue 2 , April 2005 , pp. 251 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abildsnes, J., and Tommeras, B.A. 2000. Impacts of experimental habitat fragmentation on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) in a boreal spruce forest. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 37: 201–212.Google Scholar
Adis, J. 1979. Problems of interpreting arthropod sampling with pitfall traps. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 202: 177–184.Google Scholar
Benest, G. 1989. The sampling of a carabid community. I. The behavior of a carabid when facing the trap. Revue d'Ecologie et de Biologie du Sol, 26: 205–211.Google Scholar
Boer, P.J., den. 1970. On the significance of dispersal power for populations of carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). Oecologia, 4: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardenas, A.M., and Bach, C. 1992. The influence of environmental changes on wing development in carabids (Col. Carabidae) in the Guadiato River basin (SW Spain). Vie Milieu, 42: 277–282.Google Scholar
Ciegler, J.C. (Editor). 2000. Ground beetles and wrinkled bark beetles of South Carolina (Coleoptera: Geadephaga: Carabidae and Rhysodidae). Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina.Google Scholar
Darlington, P.J. 1943. Carabidae of mountains and islands: data on the evolution of isolated faunas and on atrophy of wings. Ecological Monographs, 13: 37–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Digweed, S.C., Currie, C.R., Carcamo, H.A., and Spence, J.R. 1995. Digging out the “digging-in effect” of pitfall traps: influences of depletion and disturbance on catches of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Pedobiologia, 39: 561–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenslade, P.J.M. 1964. Pitfall trapping as a method for studying populations of Carabidae (Coleoptera). Journal of Animal Ecology, 33: 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larochelle, A., and Lariviere, M.-C. 2001. Natural history of the tiger beetles of North America north of Mexico. Cicindela, 33: 41–162.Google Scholar
Larochelle, A., and Lariviere, M.-C. 2003. A natural history of the ground-beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) of America north of Mexico. Pensoft Series Faunistica No. 7. Pensoft Publishers, Sofia and Moscow.Google Scholar
Liebherr, J., and Mahar, J. 1979. The carabid fauna of the upland oak forest in Michigan: survey and analysis. Coleopterists Bulletin, 33: 183–197.Google Scholar
Luff, M.L. 1975. Some features influencing the efficiency of pitfall traps. Oecologia, 19: 345–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maelfait, J.P., and Desender, K. 1990. Possibilities of short-term carabid sampling for site assessment studies. In The role of ground beetles in ecological and environmental studies. Edited by Stork, N.E.. Intercept, Andover, Hampshire, United Kingdom. pp. 217–225.Google Scholar
New, K.C., and Hanula, J.L. 1998. Effect of time elapsed after prescribed burning in longleaf pine stands on potential prey of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, 22: 175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paarmann, W., and Stork, N.E. 1987. Seasonality of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in the rain forests of N. Sulawesi (Indonesia). Insect Science and its Application, 8: 483–487.Google Scholar
Spence, J.R., and Niemela, J.K. 1994. Sampling carabid assemblages with pitfall traps: the madness and the method. The Canadian Entomologist, 126: 881–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, J.R., Langor, D.W., Hammond, H.E.J., and Pohl, G.R. 1997. Beetle abundance and diversity in a boreal mixed-wood forest. In Forests and insects. Edited by Watt, A.D., Stork, N.E., and Hunter, M.D.. Chapman and Hall, London. pp. 287–301.Google Scholar
Ulyshen, M.D., Hanula, J.L., Horn, S., Kilgo, J.C., and Moorman, C.E. 2004. Spatial and temporal patterns of beetles associated with coarse woody debris in managed bottomland hardwood forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 199: 259–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Usis, J.D., and MacLean, D.B. 1998. The ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) of Stillfork Swamp Nature Preserve, Carroll County, Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science, 98: 66–68.Google Scholar
Work, T.T., Buddle, C.M., Korinus, L.M., and Spence, J.R. 2002. Pitfall trap size and capture of three taxa of litter dwelling arthropods: implications for biodiversity studies. Environmental Entomology, 31: 438–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar