Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/182945
COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
logo share SHARE logo core CORE BASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE

Invitar a revisión por pares abierta
Título

New litter trap devices outperform pitfall traps for studying arthropod activity

AutorRuiz-Lupión, Dolores CSIC ORCID CVN; Pascual, Jordi CSIC; Melguizo-Ruiz, Nereida CSIC ORCID; Verdeny Vilalta, Oriol CSIC; Moya-Laraño, Jordi CSIC ORCID
Palabras claveAnimal movement
Dispersal
Activity-density
Abundance
Activity
Soil meso- and macrofauna
Animal trapping
Fecha de publicación23-may-2019
EditorMultidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
CitaciónInsects 10(5): 147 (2019)
ResumenSoil fauna play a key role in nutrient cycling and decomposition, and in recent years, researchers have become more and more interested in this compartment of terrestrial ecosystems. In addition, soil fauna can act as ecosystem engineers by creating, modifying, and maintaining the habitat for other organisms. Ecologists usually utilize live catches in pitfalls traps as a standard method to study the activity of epigeic fauna in addition to relative abundance. Counts in pitfall traps can be used as estimates of relative activity to compare among experimental treatments. This requires taking independent estimates of abundance (e.g., by sifting soil litter, mark–recapture), which can then be used as covariates in linear models to compare the levels of fauna activity (trap catches) among treatments. However, many studies show that the use of pitfall traps is not the most adequate method to estimate soil fauna relative abundances, and these concerns may be extensible to estimating activity. Here, we present two new types of traps devised to study activity in litter fauna, and which we call “cul-de-sac” and “basket traps”, respectively. We experimentally show that, at least for litter dwellers, these new traps are more appropriate to estimate fauna activity than pitfall traps because: (1) pitfall traps contain 3.5× more moisture than the surrounding environment, potentially attracting animals towards them when environmental conditions are relatively dry; (2) cul-de-sac and basket traps catch ca. 4× more of both meso- and macrofauna than pitfall traps, suggesting that pitfall traps are underestimating activity; and (3) pitfall traps show a bias towards collecting 1.5× higher amounts of predators, which suggests that predation rates are higher within pitfall traps. We end with a protocol and recommendations for how to use these new traps in ecological experiments and surveys aiming at estimating soil arthropod activity
Descripción© The Author(s).
Versión del editorhttps://doi.org/10.3390/insects10050147
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/182945
DOI10.3390/insects10050147
ISSN2075-4450
E-ISSN2075-4450
Aparece en las colecciones: (EEZA) Artículos




Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato
New_Ruiz_Art2019.pdf3,23 MBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Mostrar el registro completo

CORE Recommender

PubMed Central
Citations

1
checked on 27-mar-2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

4
checked on 16-abr-2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

4
checked on 23-feb-2024

Page view(s)

194
checked on 19-abr-2024

Download(s)

176
checked on 19-abr-2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Artículos relacionados:


Este item está licenciado bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons