Agricultural and Forest Entomology (2015) 17, 36-47
Kevin J. Dodds, Jeremy D. Allison, Daniel R. Miller, Ryan P. Hanavan and Jon Sweeney (2015)
Considering species richness and rarity when selecting optimal survey traps: comparisons of semiochemical baited flight intercept traps for Cerambycidae in eastern North America
Agricultural and Forest Entomology 17 (1), 36-47
Abstract: - We compared standard multiple-funnel, modified multiple-funnel, intercept panel and canopy malaise (SLAM) traps with top and bottom collecting cups for their effectiveness (species richness, rarity, abundance) at capturing Cerambycidae in eastern North America.
- Experiments were conducted in New York, Louisiana, Massachusetts and Georgia in 2011 and 2012. A combination of pheromones and host volatiles chosen to match local forest types were used as lures.
- Species richness tended to be higher in SLAM and modified funnel traps than standard funnel and intercept panel traps. SLAM traps also captured the highest number of species, unique species, rare (species accounting for < 1% of total cerambycids at a site) and singleton species at each site.
- Individual-based rarefaction and sample-based species accumulation curves suggested that SLAM traps are more effective for capturing cerambycid species. For many estimates, modified funnel and funnel traps were lower than SLAM traps but greater than intercept panel traps for describing cerambycid communities.
- Modified funnel and SLAM traps generally captured the highest abundance of cerambycids but the response of the individual subfamily and species varied by trap type.
- SLAM traps should be considered as a strong tool to describe cerambycid communities when used in conjunction with pheromones and host volatiles.
(The abstract is excluded from the Creative Commons licence and has been copied with permission by the publisher.)
Link to article at publishers website
Database assignments for author(s): Kevin J. Dodds, Jeremy D. Allison, Jonathan D. Sweeney, Daniel R. Miller
Research topic(s) for pests/diseases/weeds:
Pest and/or beneficial records:
|Monochamus carolinensis||U.S.A. (NE)|
|Xylotrechus colonus||U.S.A. (mid S)|
|Xylotrechus colonus||U.S.A. (NE)|
|Xylotrechus colonus||U.S.A. (SE)|
|Xylotrechus sagittatus||U.S.A. (mid S)|
|Neoclytus acuminatus||U.S.A. (SE)|