Effects of Pitfall Trap Spacing on the Abundance, Richness and Composition of Invertebrate Catches

By D. Ward, T. New, A. Yen. Journal of Insect Conservation, 2001

192 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Interpreting insect declines: seven challenges and a way forward (2020, background): “…could occur due to a depletion effect from removal sampling (e.g. kill-trapping of insects) in species that have low intrinsic rates of population increase and very low dispersal ability (e.g. large-bodied, flightless Carabidae beetle species in pitfall trap sampling programmes; Ward et al., 2001).”
Insect species composition and diversity on intensive green roofs and adjacent level-ground habitats (2011, methodology): “This technique permits easy removal of the trap contents without disturbing the trap site (Ward et al. 2001).”
Non-native plantation forests as alternative habitat for native forest beetles in a heavily modified landscape (2008, background): “It is widely recognised that pitfall trapping has inherent biases ( Ward et al. 2001 ).”
Pitfall trap efficiency: do trap size, collecting fluid and vegetation structure matter? (2003, methodology): “This was shown by Spence & Niemelä (1994) who compared capture efficiencies of different traps, and by Ward et al. (2001) who studied the effects of inter-trap distances on surface arthropod catches.”