학술논문
Kdo je v pasti, aneb problémy sběru terénních dat o hmyzu
In a trap or, challenges of collecting field data on insects
In a trap or, challenges of collecting field data on insects
Document Type
Text
Author
Source
Živa | 2015 Volume:63 (101) | Number:6
Subject
Language
Czech
Abstract
Vybrat vhodnou metodu sběru hmyzu tak, aby byla efektivní a přitom poskytovala relevantní data, není vůbec snadné. Na základě rozsáhlého datového souboru se ukázalo, že zemní pasti, standardně používaná metoda při ekologickém výzkumu epigeických členovců, zaznamenaly jen polovinu druhů střevlíků ve srovnání s metodou individuálního sběru. Výrazně se lišily i vlastnosti zaznamenaných druhů, v pastech převládaly druhy velké, kdežto ve vzorcích z individuálního sběru druhy drobné. Ale i metoda individuálního sběru má své mouchy, protože její účinnost do značné míry závisela na terénních zkušenostech sběratele. Ideálním řešením zajišťujícím co nejkompletnější záznam společenstev střevlíků se zdá být kombinace obou metod sběru dat.
Michal Knapp.
The selection of a proper sampling technique for ecological research into insect assemblages is a tough nut to crack. Based on extensive field study, I have shown that the commonly employed "pitfall trapping" technique recorded just half the number of carabid species compared to the individual collection technique. There were also differences in species trait representation in samples originating from each particular technique. Pitfall traps efficiently recorded large species but missed smaller ones, which were frequently recorded by individual collection. The main shortcoming of the individual collection technique is the dependence of its efficiency on the field experiences of each particular researcher. A combination of both investigated sampling techniques seems to be the best way to gain as complete records of carabid assemblages as possible.
Michal Knapp.
The selection of a proper sampling technique for ecological research into insect assemblages is a tough nut to crack. Based on extensive field study, I have shown that the commonly employed "pitfall trapping" technique recorded just half the number of carabid species compared to the individual collection technique. There were also differences in species trait representation in samples originating from each particular technique. Pitfall traps efficiently recorded large species but missed smaller ones, which were frequently recorded by individual collection. The main shortcoming of the individual collection technique is the dependence of its efficiency on the field experiences of each particular researcher. A combination of both investigated sampling techniques seems to be the best way to gain as complete records of carabid assemblages as possible.