Effectiveness of Bowl Trapping and Netting for Inventory of a Bee Community

By R. Grundel, Krystalynn J. Frohnapple, Robert P. Jean, N. Pavlovic. 2011

103 citations recorded by the source corpus.

ABSTRACT Concern over the status of bees has increased the need to inventory bee communities and, consequently, has increased the need to understand effectiveness of different bee sampling methods. We sampled bees using bowl traps and netting at 25 northwest Indiana sites ranging from open grasslands to forests. Assemblages of bees captured in bowl traps and by netting were very similar, but this similarity was driven by similar relative abundances of commonly captured species. Less common species were often not shared between collection methods (bowls, netting) and only about half of the species were shared between methods. About one-quarter of species were more often captured by one of the two collection methods. Rapid accumulation of species was aided by sampling at temporal and habitat extremes. In particular, collecting samples early and late in the adult flight season and in open and forest habitats was effective in capturing the most species with the fewest samples. The number of samples estimated necessary to achieve a complete inventory using bowls and netting together was high. For example, ≈72% of species estimated capturable in bowls were captured among the 3,159 bees collected in bowls in this study, but ≈30,000–35,000 additional bees would need to be collected to achieve a 100% complete inventory. For bowl trapping, increasing the number of sampling dates or sampling sites was more effective than adding more bowls per sampling date in completing the inventory with the fewest specimens collected.

Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dbd74f3a6801654f5e0a7691d77767174e459f2e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecological Modeling

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

The relative performance of sampling methods for native bees: an empirical test and review of the literature (2020, background): “…on tropical forest agroecosystems (Prado et al. 2017), and almost all other empirical studies explicitly comparing sampling methods have been restricted to natural or agricultural ecosystems in the Northern Hemisphere (Wilson et al. 2008, Grundel et al. 2011; see also Appendix S1: Table S1).”
Diversity and abundance of solitary and primitively eusocial bees in an urban centre: a case study from Northampton (England) (2015, methodology): “Therefore a combination of methods is recommended to produce a comprehensive inventory of solitary bees (Grundel et al. 2011).”
Bees in the trees: Diverse spring fauna in temperate forest edge canopies (2021, background): “Bees in the families Andrenidae and Halictidae dominate bee bowl collections, while Colletidae and Apidae (including Bombus and Apis) are under-sampled in bee bowl schemes (Grundel et al. 2011).”