A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Ramp traps versus pitfall traps for collecting epigeal arthropods: a case study in a coniferous forest in Southwest Finland
Tekijät: Österman Emil M., Hopkins Tapani, Zamani Alireza
Kustantaja: Taylor & Francis
Julkaisuvuosi: 2024
Journal: Biodiversity
Vuosikerta: 24
Numero: 1
Aloitussivu: 78
Lopetussivu: 87
eISSN: 2160-0651
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14888386.2023.2294795
Verkko-osoite: https://doi.org/10.1080/14888386.2023.2294795
Rinnakkaistallenteen osoite: https://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/381063193
Pitfall traps are commonly used to sample epigeal arthropods, but they are not ideal in areas where soil disturbance is restricted or not possible. Ramp traps are a less well known alternative that does not require excavation. To compare the performance of the two trap types in capturing epigeal arthropods, both ramp (n = 12) and pitfall traps (n = 12) were set up in four paired transects in Korkiakallio forest (Turku, Finland), in summer 2022. The project team identified adult spiders to the species level, and other arthropods to the family level. Ramp traps captured significantly more individuals of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), beetles (Coleoptera), true bugs (Hemiptera), and spiders of the species Minyriolus pusillus (Wider, 1834) (Araneae: Linyphiidae), while pitfall traps captured more myriapods (Myriapoda). Our findings provide additional evidence that ramp traps are not only a viable alternative to pitfall traps in challenging environments, but also complement (and should ideally be used alongside) pitfall traps.
Ladattava julkaisu This is an electronic reprint of the original article. |