4.7 Article

Pollinator sampling methods influence community patterns assessments by capturing species with different traits and at different abundances

期刊

ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS
卷 132, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108284

关键词

Monitoring; Rarefaction; Syrphidae; Anthophila; LTER

资金

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  2. Helmholtz Association
  3. Federal Ministry of Education and Research
  4. eLTER PLUS project under the HORIZON 2020 program [871128, INFRAIA-01-2018-2019]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study compared the impact of two common sampling methods on wild bee and hoverfly communities in Germany. The results indicated that the differences in species richness across sampling methods were mainly attributed to the number of individuals captured, rather than species diversity.
In order to synthesize changes in pollinating insect communities across space and time, it is necessary to understand whether, and how, sampling methods influence assessments of community patterns. We compared how two common sampling methods-yellow combined flight traps and net sampling-influence our understanding of the species richness, abundance and composition of wild bees and hoverflies, and addressed whether these patterns resulted from potentially biased sampling of individuals or species with different types of functional traits. We sampled bee and hoverfly communities in six sites over three seasons in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. We captured more species and individuals of bees with traps and more species and individuals of hoverflies with net sampling. However, rarefied richness results were less dramatic between the sampling methods for bees and were not different between the sampling methods for hoverflies. Thus, differences in species richness across sampling methods were mostly due to differences in the number of individuals captured in the different methods. We captured more small-sized bees and hoverflies with traps. We tested if the different methods collected individuals and species with different functional traits, such as nesting preferences, sociality and flower specialization for bees and floral preference, migratory status and habitat preference for hoverflies. For most traits, we collected more individuals but not more species with a certain trait in the different methods. This was mainly due to a high abundance of one species being collected in the different methods. These results suggest that the best methodology depends on the aim of the survey, and that the methods cannot be easily combined into synthesis research. Our results have implications for the development of monitoring schemes for pollinators and for synthesis of trends that can identify threats to pollinators and inform research of pollinator conservation strategies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据