Cargando…
Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches
Abstract. The results of pitfall trapping are often interpreted as abundance in a particular habitat. At the same time, there are numerous cases of almost unrealistically high catches of ground beetles in seemingly unsuitable sites. The correlation of catches by pitfall trapping with the true distri...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Pensoft Publishers
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3131019/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21738415 http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.100.1530 |
_version_ | 1782207680053510144 |
---|---|
author | Matalin, Andrey V. Makarov, Kirill V. |
author_facet | Matalin, Andrey V. Makarov, Kirill V. |
author_sort | Matalin, Andrey V. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Abstract. The results of pitfall trapping are often interpreted as abundance in a particular habitat. At the same time, there are numerous cases of almost unrealistically high catches of ground beetles in seemingly unsuitable sites. The correlation of catches by pitfall trapping with the true distribution and abundance of Carabidae needs corroboration. During a full year survey in 2006/07 in the Lake Elton region (Volgograd Area, Russia), 175 species of ground beetles were trapped. Considering the differences in demographic structure of the local populations, and not their abundances, three groups of species were recognized: residents, migrants and sporadic. In residents, the demographic structure of local populations is complete, and their habitats can be considered “residential”. In migrants and sporadic species, the demographic structure of the local populations is incomplete, and their habitats can be considered “transit”. Residents interact both with their prey and with each other in a particular habitat. Sporadic species are hardly important to a carabid community because of their low abundances. The contribution of migrants to the structure of carabid communities is not apparent and requires additional research. Migrants and sporadic species represent a “labile” component in ground beetles communities, as opposed to a “stable” component, represented by residents. The variability of the labile component substantially limits our interpretation of species diversity in carabid communities. Thus, the criteria for determining the most abundant, or dominant species inevitably vary because the abundance of migrants in some cases can be one order of magnitude higher than that of residents. The results of pitfall trapping adequately reflect the state of carabid communities only in zonal habitats, while azonal and disturbed habitats are merely transit ones for many species of ground beetles. A study of the demographic structure of local populations and assessment of the migratory/residential status of particular carabid species are potential ways of increasing the reliability of pitfall trap information. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3131019 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Pensoft Publishers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31310192011-07-07 Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches Matalin, Andrey V. Makarov, Kirill V. Zookeys Article Abstract. The results of pitfall trapping are often interpreted as abundance in a particular habitat. At the same time, there are numerous cases of almost unrealistically high catches of ground beetles in seemingly unsuitable sites. The correlation of catches by pitfall trapping with the true distribution and abundance of Carabidae needs corroboration. During a full year survey in 2006/07 in the Lake Elton region (Volgograd Area, Russia), 175 species of ground beetles were trapped. Considering the differences in demographic structure of the local populations, and not their abundances, three groups of species were recognized: residents, migrants and sporadic. In residents, the demographic structure of local populations is complete, and their habitats can be considered “residential”. In migrants and sporadic species, the demographic structure of the local populations is incomplete, and their habitats can be considered “transit”. Residents interact both with their prey and with each other in a particular habitat. Sporadic species are hardly important to a carabid community because of their low abundances. The contribution of migrants to the structure of carabid communities is not apparent and requires additional research. Migrants and sporadic species represent a “labile” component in ground beetles communities, as opposed to a “stable” component, represented by residents. The variability of the labile component substantially limits our interpretation of species diversity in carabid communities. Thus, the criteria for determining the most abundant, or dominant species inevitably vary because the abundance of migrants in some cases can be one order of magnitude higher than that of residents. The results of pitfall trapping adequately reflect the state of carabid communities only in zonal habitats, while azonal and disturbed habitats are merely transit ones for many species of ground beetles. A study of the demographic structure of local populations and assessment of the migratory/residential status of particular carabid species are potential ways of increasing the reliability of pitfall trap information. Pensoft Publishers 2011-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3131019/ /pubmed/21738415 http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.100.1530 Text en Andrey V. Matalin, Kirill V. Makarov http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Article Matalin, Andrey V. Makarov, Kirill V. Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches |
title | Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches |
title_full | Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches |
title_fullStr | Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches |
title_full_unstemmed | Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches |
title_short | Using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches |
title_sort | using demographic data to better interpret pitfall trap catches |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3131019/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21738415 http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.100.1530 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT matalinandreyv usingdemographicdatatobetterinterpretpitfalltrapcatches AT makarovkirillv usingdemographicdatatobetterinterpretpitfalltrapcatches |