Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants?
Ants and dung beetles are widely used in monitoring biodiversity and are considered excellent environmental indicators. Although the pitfall trap is the most commonly used method to sample dung beetles and ants in ecological studies, beetles are usually sampled using dung‐baited pit...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana
2020-09-01
|
| Series: | Sociobiology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://periodicos.uefs.br/index.php/sociobiology/article/view/5201 |
| _version_ | 1819225638476709888 |
|---|---|
| author | Kelley Rita Przybyszewski Ricardo José Silva Ricardo Eduardo Vicente João Victor Garcia Freitas Mônica Josene Barbosa Pereira Thiago Junqueira Izzo Danielle Storck Tonon |
| author_facet | Kelley Rita Przybyszewski Ricardo José Silva Ricardo Eduardo Vicente João Victor Garcia Freitas Mônica Josene Barbosa Pereira Thiago Junqueira Izzo Danielle Storck Tonon |
| author_sort | Kelley Rita Przybyszewski |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Ants and dung beetles are widely used in monitoring biodiversity and are considered excellent environmental indicators. Although the pitfall trap is the most commonly used method to sample dung beetles and ants in ecological studies, beetles are usually sampled using dung‐baited pitfall traps while ants are sampled using un‐baited pitfalls. In the protocol for collecting the beetles it is necessary to have attractive baits in pitfalls. In order to minimize collection effort and costs and to facilitate logistics, it is necessary to determine if there is an effect of the baits on the biodiversity of ants collected in the same traps. Therefore, the objective of this work was to find out whether baited pitfalls could replace conventional pitfalls for the capture of ants. In a total of 42 areas of native habitat, three baited pitfall traps and three without bait were installed, all in the same transect, equidistant ten meters and in activity for 48 hours. In total, 150 species were collected, of which 131 were recorded in non‐baited pitfalls and 107 in baited pitfalls. Traps without bait contributed to 28% of the total number of species captured in this study, whereas pitfalls with bait contributed only to 12% of the total species caught. However, 60% of the total species were captured regardless of the method. In addition to the loss of species among the types of traps, the effect of the method modifies the species composition. We concluded that depending on the type of study, a small decrease in the number of species and change in the composition can influence the results. Thus, we recommend that baited pitfalls should not replace conventional pitfalls.
Palavras-chave: Método de coleta; Protocolo de coleta; Desenho da amostra; Esforço de amostragem. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-23T10:12:47Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-77085a66dffc4b9f943f9a655ee38464 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0361-6525 2447-8067 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-23T10:12:47Z |
| publishDate | 2020-09-01 |
| publisher | Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sociobiology |
| spelling | doaj.art-77085a66dffc4b9f943f9a655ee384642022-12-21T17:50:54ZengUniversidade Estadual de Feira de SantanaSociobiology0361-65252447-80672020-09-0167310.13102/sociobiology.v67i3.5201Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants?Kelley Rita Przybyszewski0Ricardo José Silva1Ricardo Eduardo Vicente2João Victor Garcia Freitas3Mônica Josene Barbosa Pereira4Thiago Junqueira Izzo5Danielle Storck Tonon6Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso (UNEMAT), Programa de Pós‐Graduação em Ambiente e Sistemas de Produção Agrícola, Tangará da Serra-MT, BrazilState University of Mato GrossoState University of Mato GrossoState University of Mato GrossoState University of Mato GrossoFederal University of Mato GrossoState University of Mato GrossoAnts and dung beetles are widely used in monitoring biodiversity and are considered excellent environmental indicators. Although the pitfall trap is the most commonly used method to sample dung beetles and ants in ecological studies, beetles are usually sampled using dung‐baited pitfall traps while ants are sampled using un‐baited pitfalls. In the protocol for collecting the beetles it is necessary to have attractive baits in pitfalls. In order to minimize collection effort and costs and to facilitate logistics, it is necessary to determine if there is an effect of the baits on the biodiversity of ants collected in the same traps. Therefore, the objective of this work was to find out whether baited pitfalls could replace conventional pitfalls for the capture of ants. In a total of 42 areas of native habitat, three baited pitfall traps and three without bait were installed, all in the same transect, equidistant ten meters and in activity for 48 hours. In total, 150 species were collected, of which 131 were recorded in non‐baited pitfalls and 107 in baited pitfalls. Traps without bait contributed to 28% of the total number of species captured in this study, whereas pitfalls with bait contributed only to 12% of the total species caught. However, 60% of the total species were captured regardless of the method. In addition to the loss of species among the types of traps, the effect of the method modifies the species composition. We concluded that depending on the type of study, a small decrease in the number of species and change in the composition can influence the results. Thus, we recommend that baited pitfalls should not replace conventional pitfalls. Palavras-chave: Método de coleta; Protocolo de coleta; Desenho da amostra; Esforço de amostragem.http://periodicos.uefs.br/index.php/sociobiology/article/view/5201Método de coletaProtocolo de coletaDesenho da amostraEsforço de amostragem. |
| spellingShingle | Kelley Rita Przybyszewski Ricardo José Silva Ricardo Eduardo Vicente João Victor Garcia Freitas Mônica Josene Barbosa Pereira Thiago Junqueira Izzo Danielle Storck Tonon Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants? Sociobiology Método de coleta Protocolo de coleta Desenho da amostra Esforço de amostragem. |
| title | Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants? |
| title_full | Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants? |
| title_fullStr | Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants? |
| title_short | Can Baited Pitfall Traps for Sampling Dung Beetles Replace Conventional Traps for Sampling Ants? |
| title_sort | can baited pitfall traps for sampling dung beetles replace conventional traps for sampling ants |
| topic | Método de coleta Protocolo de coleta Desenho da amostra Esforço de amostragem. |
| url | http://periodicos.uefs.br/index.php/sociobiology/article/view/5201 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kelleyritaprzybyszewski canbaitedpitfalltrapsforsamplingdungbeetlesreplaceconventionaltrapsforsamplingants AT ricardojosesilva canbaitedpitfalltrapsforsamplingdungbeetlesreplaceconventionaltrapsforsamplingants AT ricardoeduardovicente canbaitedpitfalltrapsforsamplingdungbeetlesreplaceconventionaltrapsforsamplingants AT joaovictorgarciafreitas canbaitedpitfalltrapsforsamplingdungbeetlesreplaceconventionaltrapsforsamplingants AT monicajosenebarbosapereira canbaitedpitfalltrapsforsamplingdungbeetlesreplaceconventionaltrapsforsamplingants AT thiagojunqueiraizzo canbaitedpitfalltrapsforsamplingdungbeetlesreplaceconventionaltrapsforsamplingants AT daniellestorcktonon canbaitedpitfalltrapsforsamplingdungbeetlesreplaceconventionaltrapsforsamplingants |