Nicholas Anderson, Steven Petersen, Robert Johnson, Tyson Terry, Jacqueline Kunzelman, David Lariviere, Val Anderson
{"title":"盘式诱捕和马来诱捕:亚高山草甸蜜蜂采集技术比较","authors":"Nicholas Anderson, Steven Petersen, Robert Johnson, Tyson Terry, Jacqueline Kunzelman, David Lariviere, Val Anderson","doi":"10.3390/d16090536","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Public lands, managed for multiple uses such as logging, mining, grazing, and recreation, also support vital environmental services like wild bee pollination. A trending decline in wild bees has heightened interest in documenting these key pollinators in their native habitats. Accurate assessment of pollinator community diversity is crucial for population monitoring and informing land management practices. In this study, we evaluate the efficiency of Malaise traps and pan traps in sampling wild bees over three growing seasons in subalpine meadow communities in central Utah. Sixteen trapping sites were established, each with a Malaise trap and an array of blue, white, and yellow pan traps, nine at each site. Weekly collections were made through summer months and a comparison of their effectiveness in capturing bee abundance and species richness was made. Malaise traps captured significantly greater abundance of bees on average, though this was species-dependent. Malaise traps were especially effective at capturing Bombus spp. and larger species. Pan traps were generally more effective with smaller species such as Hylaeus spp. White pan traps outperformed yellow and blue pan traps in terms of abundance and only yellow pan traps in terms of richness. Both methods contributed unique species to the overall collection effort, suggesting that a combination of trapping methods provides a more comprehensive understanding of bee communities. Species accumulation curves indicate that species existing within the community went unencountered in our samples and that more time or perhaps additional methods could aid in best describing the entire community.","PeriodicalId":501149,"journal":{"name":"Diversity","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pan Trapping and Malaise Trapping: A Comparison of Bee Collection Techniques in Subalpine Meadows\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas Anderson, Steven Petersen, Robert Johnson, Tyson Terry, Jacqueline Kunzelman, David Lariviere, Val Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/d16090536\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Public lands, managed for multiple uses such as logging, mining, grazing, and recreation, also support vital environmental services like wild bee pollination. A trending decline in wild bees has heightened interest in documenting these key pollinators in their native habitats. Accurate assessment of pollinator community diversity is crucial for population monitoring and informing land management practices. In this study, we evaluate the efficiency of Malaise traps and pan traps in sampling wild bees over three growing seasons in subalpine meadow communities in central Utah. Sixteen trapping sites were established, each with a Malaise trap and an array of blue, white, and yellow pan traps, nine at each site. Weekly collections were made through summer months and a comparison of their effectiveness in capturing bee abundance and species richness was made. Malaise traps captured significantly greater abundance of bees on average, though this was species-dependent. Malaise traps were especially effective at capturing Bombus spp. and larger species. Pan traps were generally more effective with smaller species such as Hylaeus spp. White pan traps outperformed yellow and blue pan traps in terms of abundance and only yellow pan traps in terms of richness. Both methods contributed unique species to the overall collection effort, suggesting that a combination of trapping methods provides a more comprehensive understanding of bee communities. Species accumulation curves indicate that species existing within the community went unencountered in our samples and that more time or perhaps additional methods could aid in best describing the entire community.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diversity\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diversity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/d16090536\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diversity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/d16090536","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pan Trapping and Malaise Trapping: A Comparison of Bee Collection Techniques in Subalpine Meadows
Public lands, managed for multiple uses such as logging, mining, grazing, and recreation, also support vital environmental services like wild bee pollination. A trending decline in wild bees has heightened interest in documenting these key pollinators in their native habitats. Accurate assessment of pollinator community diversity is crucial for population monitoring and informing land management practices. In this study, we evaluate the efficiency of Malaise traps and pan traps in sampling wild bees over three growing seasons in subalpine meadow communities in central Utah. Sixteen trapping sites were established, each with a Malaise trap and an array of blue, white, and yellow pan traps, nine at each site. Weekly collections were made through summer months and a comparison of their effectiveness in capturing bee abundance and species richness was made. Malaise traps captured significantly greater abundance of bees on average, though this was species-dependent. Malaise traps were especially effective at capturing Bombus spp. and larger species. Pan traps were generally more effective with smaller species such as Hylaeus spp. White pan traps outperformed yellow and blue pan traps in terms of abundance and only yellow pan traps in terms of richness. Both methods contributed unique species to the overall collection effort, suggesting that a combination of trapping methods provides a more comprehensive understanding of bee communities. Species accumulation curves indicate that species existing within the community went unencountered in our samples and that more time or perhaps additional methods could aid in best describing the entire community.