Influence of pitfall trap size and design on herpetofauna and small mammal studies in a Neotropical Forest

AbstractPitfall traps containing a preservative have become the standard method of sampling for epigeal invertebrates such as carabid beetles and cursorial spiders. However, they often result in high levels of mortality for small mammals and amphibians. We compared the carabid, spider, and vertebrate captures within five pitfall trap types (conventional trap, funnel trap, shallow trap, Nordlander trap, and the ramp trap) to determine the trap type that would reduce vertebrate incidental catch without compromising the capture of invertebrates. We also examined the effect of a mesh screen over pitfall traps on carabid beetle and vertebrate catches. All modifications to the conventional trap design resulted in a reduction in both small mammal and amphibian captures. The shallow pitfall trap and the funnel trap captured a carabid beetle and spider fauna similar to that captured by the conventional trap. The species compositions of the ramp trap and the Nordlander trap were different from those of the other trap types, but these traps were more efficient, capturing more species per individual captured. The ramp trap appeared to be the method of choice for sampling epigeal spiders. Thus, the choice among trap designs for invertebrates depends on the objectives of the study. However, an alternative to the conventional trap design should always be considered to reduce small mammal mortality.

Download Full-text

Effect of pitfall trap size on the abundance and diversity of ground dwelling insects in an arable land within Erbil Province- Kurdistan region-Iraq

ZANCO Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences ◽

10.21271/zjpas.29.2.15 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 29 (2) ◽

Keyword(s):

Arable Land ◽

Pitfall Trap ◽

Kurdistan Region ◽

Abundance And Diversity ◽

Trap Size

Download Full-text

Non-volant small mammals at an Atlantic forest area situated nearby a limestone quarry (Limeira quarry), state of São Paulo, Brazil

Biota Neotropica ◽

10.1590/s1676-06032012000400020 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 12 (4) ◽

pp. 191-197 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Natália Oliveira Leiner ◽

Wesley Rodrigues Silva

Keyword(s):

Atlantic Forest ◽

Small Mammals ◽

Small Mammal ◽

Pitfall Trap ◽

Forest Area ◽

Conservation Strategies ◽

Southeastern Brazil ◽

Mammal Species ◽

Limestone Quarry ◽

Mammal Communities

Our aim was to survey the non-flying small mammals inhabiting an Atlantic forest area situated nearby a limestone quarry (Limeira quarry), located at Ribeirão Grande municipality (SP), southeastern Brazil. Species were captured with pitfall and Sherman traps along eight pairs of 60 m transects distributed at four different distances from the quarry (60, 220, 740 and 1300 m). Between October 2005 and January 2008, 20 small mammal species (11 rodents and nine marsupials) were captured through 4080 pitfall trap-nights and 2040 Sherman trap-nights. The high values of richness, diversity (H' = 2.65) and equability (J = 0.88), and the presence of endemic and threatened species indicates a preserved study site and small mammal assemblage. Marmosops incanus, Monodelphis americana and Oligoryzomys nigripes were the commonest species at the study site. Trapping sites located closer to the quarry (60 and 220 m away from the quarry) presented lower richness and were dominated by disturbance-tolerant species, such as O. nigripes, that usually benefit from habitat alterations. On the other hand, sites located away from the quarry and closer to Serra do Mar Protected Area (740 and 1300 m away from the quarry) presented higher richness and diversity, and a higher abundance of disturbance-intolerant species. These results suggest a negative distance-dependent impact of quarrying on small mammal communities. In this way, our results point out to the importance of long-term monitoring of quarrying impacts on small non-flying mammal communities and populations, and the need of conservation strategies in order to ensure species persistence in these areas.

Download Full-text

Factors Affecting Efficacy of Pitfall Traps For Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae and Tenebrionidae)2

Journal of Entomological Science ◽

10.18474/0749-8004-25.2.284 ◽

1990 ◽

Vol 25 (2) ◽

pp. 284-293 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

Wendell L. Morrill ◽

Donald G. Lester ◽

Alan E. Wrona

Keyword(s):

Pitfall Trap ◽

Pitfall Traps ◽

Plant Debris ◽

Factors Affecting ◽

Trap Size

Numbers of trapped beetles in the field and a laboratory arena increased with pitfall trap size. Size and configuration of guides affected catch size. Beetles which moved rapidly were more likely to be captured. Non-captures resulted when beetles turned away from traps or pulled out of the trap cones. Plant debris in traps reduced catch size.

Download Full-text

The effect of funnel trap type and size of pitfall trap on trap success: implications for ecological field studies

Amphibia-Reptilia ◽

10.1163/156853807781374746 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 28 (3) ◽

pp. 321-328 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Bryan Maritz ◽

Gavin Masterson ◽

Darian Mackay ◽

Graham Alexander

Keyword(s):

Field Studies ◽

Pitfall Trap ◽

Trap Design ◽

Traditional Design ◽

Extensive Field ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Funnel Trap ◽

Trap Size ◽

Installation Time ◽

Capture Rates

Abstract Funnel and pitfall traps that are set in association with drift fences are powerful tools for field herpetologists. Innovations in trapping techniques continue to improve capture rates, portability and affordability of trap materials, and to decrease construction and installation time. In this paper we test a new design for funnel traps and test the effect of pitfall trap size on trap success. Our new funnel trap design was significantly easier and quicker to construct, but captured fewer specimens than the traditional design. There was no significant difference in the capture rates of the two sizes of pitfall trap that we tested. This finding was confirmed by a second, more extensive field survey. The implications of trap efficacy on ecological investigations are discussed.

Download Full-text

Pitfall trap efficiency: do trap size, collecting fluid and vegetation structure matter?

Entomologica Fennica ◽

10.33338/ef.84167 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 40

Author(s):

Matti Koivula ◽

Johan Kotze ◽

Laura Hiisivuori ◽

Hannu Rita

Keyword(s):

Propylene Glycol ◽

Salt Water ◽

Habitat Type ◽

Pitfall Trap ◽

Carabid Beetles ◽

Pitfall Traps ◽

Pitfall Trapping ◽

Habitat Types ◽

Clear Cut ◽

Trap Size

Apart from experimental design, the selection of pitfall trap size, collecting fluid and habitat type sampled may also influence the capture efficiency of the method. We combined three field studies from two very different geographic areas, in which the efficiency of pitfall traps, using carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae), is evaluated. First, we showed that ethylene-glycol is a more efficient collecting fluid compared to commercial anti-freeze, paraffin and salt water in collecting beetles in a forest patch in South Africa. Second, we showed that larger traps (90 mm mouth diameter) are more efficient in collecting carabids than small traps (65 mm) in a meadow in Finland. We also showed that for these large traps, commercial vinegar was a better collecting fluid than propylene-glycol, but that for small traps, propylene-glycol was superior to vinegar in collecting carabids. Finally, we showed that the trappability of Pterostichus oblongopunctatus and Carabus hortensis differed in enclosures placed into two different habitat types (a forest and a clear-cut in Finland), while trappability did not differ significantly for two other species (Calathus micropterus and Pterostichus niger) in these habitat types. However, for the two Pterostichus species studied, the catches in traps placed in the centre of the enclosures were slightly higher in the clear-cut, compared to the forest, and catches were higher in enclosures with rich field-layer vegetation, compared to enclosures with poor vegetation. The three studies re-emphasise the uncertainties of using pitfall traps in ecological studies. However, with careful planning and standardisation to help avoid erroneous interpretations, pitfall trapping is an invaluable method for the field ecologist.

Download Full-text