Carabid beetle assemblages in three environments in the Araucaria humid forest of southern Brazil

How informative is the response of Ground Beetles' (Coleoptera: Carabidae) assemblages to anthropogenic land use changes? Insights for ecological status assessments from a case study in the Neotropics

“…More disturbed environments have reduced resources and microhabitats, supporting lower richness and are dominated by generalist and/or opportunistic RTU (e.g. Moraes et al, 2013).…”

“…a decrease in the respective values as the disturbance level increase. Thus, different aspects of RTU diversity suggest that GB assemblages are distinct among ecosystem, land uses and soil conditions (Moraes et al, 2013), namely because: a) litter type and litter depth are important determinants, providing GB hunting and foraging niches, protection from predators, desiccation (Pearce et al, 2003) and providing attachment points for web building (Leclerc and Blandin, 1990); b) coarse woody debris is fundamental as overwintering site and for oviposition and larval development for many GB species (Lövei et al, 2006). For example, cattle trampling in grassland areas contributes to soil compaction, resulting in reduced pathways through the litter layer, hiding surfaces and hunting places.…”

“…Various studies have used GB for indicating successional stages, the degree of ecosystems fragmentation, urbanization pressures, metal contamination in soils, disturbance gradients, responses to environmental characteristics, regeneration in natural areas and ecosystem "health" (Fujita et al, 2008;Silva et al, 2008;Uehara-Prado et al, 2009;Moraes et al, 2013). Despite the recognized importance as ecological indicators, their application in the Neotropics, such as the Brazilian Amazon (Amazonia), has been extremely limited.…”

Edge effects on carabid beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) between forest fragments and agricultural fields in south‐east Brazil

“…Surveys on carabids in Brazilian forests are usually related to species richness only, and the values reported in those surveys are close to the ones found for carabid species richness in the forest fragments of the present study (Table ). Uehara‐Prado et al () found 14 carabid species either in disturbed or undisturbed sites in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest located in the eastern region of São Paulo, while in three environments in the Araucaria humid forest of southern Brazil, Moraes et al () observed 14 carabid species in the primary forest, 13 species in a secondary forest and 10 species in a Pinus forest. However, Vieira et al () reported a carabid species richness higher than the one found in this study; they found 64 species in six forest patches (capões) in the Pantanal of Mato Grosso de Sul.…”

“…Studies on carabids in Brazilian agroecosystems are related to population survey (Thomazini ; Specht & Corseuil ; Lacerda et al ; Auad & Carvalho ), effects of intercropping and no‐tillage systems (Cividanes & Barbosa ; Seffrin et al ) and species diversity and distribution in orange orchard adjacent to forest fragment (Cividanes et al ). There is also information on carabids in Pinus and Eucalyptus plantations and degraded area by soil use (Fagundes et al ; Moraes et al ).…”