4.6 Article

Efficiency of a rapid assessment of the diversity of ground beetles and ants, in natural and disturbed habitats of the Nahuel Huapi Region (NW patagonia, Argentina)

Journal

BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages 2061-2084

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10531-005-2931-5

Keywords

ants; beetles; extrapolation; Patagonia; rarefaction; species richness

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We use sample-based rarefaction curves to evaluate the efficiency of a rapid species richness assay of ground beetles and ants captured in pitfall traps in the Nahuel Huapi National Park (NW Patagonia, Argentina). We ask whether ant species richness patterns show some concordance with those of beetles, and use several extrapolation indices for estimating the expected number of species at a regional scale. A total of 342 pitfall traps were spread in groups, at an intensity of 9 traps/100 m(2), with two collection stations, at each of 19 sites representative of burned and unburned habitats in the forest, scrub and steppe, along a west-to-east transect of 63 km long. The high regional habitat heterogeneity along the west-to-east gradient is paralleled by a turnover of beetle and ant species, although different families of Coleoptera show idiosyncratic responses across habitat types. Spatial strati. cation of sampling over three major habitats along with the inclusion of burned and unburned environments may improve sampling efficiency. The observed and extrapolated species richness suggests that we captured a high proportion of the total number of species of beetles and ants known for the region. However, trends in species richness of ants may not indicate similar trends in beetles. Ants and beetles cannot be used as surrogate taxa for the analysis of species richness patterns. Instead, both taxa should be considered as focal as they may over complementary information for the analysis of the effect of disturbance and regional habitat heterogeneity on species diversity patterns at a regional scale.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available