sampling efficacy
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

9
(FIVE YEARS 2)

H-INDEX

3
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fallon Fowler ◽  
Tashiana Wilcox ◽  
Stephanie Orr ◽  
Wes Watson

Abstract Understanding collection methodologies and their limitations are essential when targeting specific arthropods for use in habitat restoration, conservation, laboratory colony formation, or when holistically representing local populations using ecological surveys. For dung beetles, the most popular collection methodology is baited traps, followed by light traps and unbaited flight-intercept traps during diversity surveys. A less common collection method, flotation, is assumed to be laborious and messy, and so only a handful of papers exist on its refinement and strengths. Our purpose was threefold: First, we tested the recovery and survival rates of Labarrus (=Aphodius) pseudolividus (Balthasar) and Onthophagus taurus (Schreber) when floating beetle-seeded dung pats to determine potential collection and safety issues. We collected 72.4 and 78% of the seeded L. pseudolividus and O. taurus, respectively, with >95% survival rating. Second, we developed a flotation-sieving technique that enables users to rapidly collect and passively sort dung beetles with less time and effort. Specifically, we often collected 50–100 g of wild dung beetles within a couple of hours of gathering dung and sorted them in a couple more by allowing dung beetles to sort themselves by size within a series of sieves; Third, we reviewed flotation-based advantages and disadvantages in comparison to other methodologies.


2019 ◽  
Vol 79 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 433-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent C. Newman ◽  
William B. Sutton ◽  
Yong Wang ◽  
Callie J. Schweitzer ◽  
Abelardo C. Moncayo ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 847-860 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhengyang Hou ◽  
Qing Xu ◽  
Sauli Hartikainen ◽  
Perttu Antilla ◽  
Tuula Packalen ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 1276-1284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lloyd D. Stringer ◽  
David Maxwell Suckling ◽  
David Baird ◽  
Robert K. Vander Meer ◽  
Sheree J. Christian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2010 ◽  
Vol 67 (6) ◽  
pp. 651-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Débora Rodrigues de Souza ◽  
Erich Stingel ◽  
Luiz Carlos de Almeida ◽  
Marco Antônio Lazarini ◽  
Catarina de Bortoli Munhae ◽  
...  

The harvest of sugarcane is still traditionally done manually with the burning of straw in most cultivated areas in Brazil. However, burning has been gradually eliminated with the relatively recent use of mechanical harvesting. This will result in significant changes in the agroecosystem, as the straw will remain in the field. No investigation on Formicidae found in sugarcane plantations in Southeastern Brazil harvested by this new system has been done yet. Because of their feeding habits, many species of this family may act as predators of several sugarcane pests. In this study, the sampling efficacy of pitfall traps, baits, and underground traps with two types of attractants were evaluated. Pitfall traps gave the largest richness, while abundance was the highest from baiting. Community composition and structure differed in relation to the sampling methods used. The myrmecofauna collected with the same method with different baits was similar. Pitfall trapping was the most efficient method in this type of ecosystem; and sardine, the best attractant, due to its easy handing in the field.


2001 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 1432-1437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z. Dou ◽  
D.T. Galligan ◽  
R.D. Allshouse ◽  
J.D. Toth ◽  
C.F. Ramberg ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document