2010
DOI: 10.1007/s00040-010-0078-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hypogaeic pitfall traps: methodological advances and remarks to improve the sampling of a hidden ant fauna

Abstract: Ant assemblages present a great vertical stratification, with microhabitats showing strong differences in relation to species composition. Among the microhabitats, the hypogaeic has been poorly studied. Hypogaeic or subterranean ants live in the deeper soil layers, which make the sampling logistics and operability a difficult work. The fact that the hypogaeic ant fauna is diversified and abundant, with low similarity to ant assemblages in other microhabitats, has promoted the development of several collecting … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
29
0
3

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
29
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In each of the five plots, five sampling points set 10 m apart were selected, representing a total of 25 points per stage. As different strata may have different ant assemblages (Schmidt & Solar, 2010), unbaited pitfall traps were installed at each sample point in hypogaeic (underground), epigaeic (ground level) and arboreal strata, totaling 75 points overall (5 plots x 5 sampling points x 3 pitfall traps = 75). Arboreal pitfalls were designed based on the description in Ribas et al (2003), and epigaeic pitfall were similar to the arboreal pitfall but was buried so that the opening of the container was located at ground level.…”
Section: Ant Samplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In each of the five plots, five sampling points set 10 m apart were selected, representing a total of 25 points per stage. As different strata may have different ant assemblages (Schmidt & Solar, 2010), unbaited pitfall traps were installed at each sample point in hypogaeic (underground), epigaeic (ground level) and arboreal strata, totaling 75 points overall (5 plots x 5 sampling points x 3 pitfall traps = 75). Arboreal pitfalls were designed based on the description in Ribas et al (2003), and epigaeic pitfall were similar to the arboreal pitfall but was buried so that the opening of the container was located at ground level.…”
Section: Ant Samplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The differential use of a specific strata or microhabitat is commonly found in ant communities in several systems (Vasconcelos & Vilhena, 2006;Schmidt & Solar, 2010;Wilkie et al, 2010), including non-forest ecosystems as savannas (e.g. Cerrado: Campos et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At each point we installed two pitfall traps, in each pitfall trap we placed 200 ml of solution of water, detergent (0.6 %) and salt (0.4 %). One trap was placed in the epigaeic microhabitat and other in the hypogaeic (for trap details see Bestelmeyer et al, 2000;Schmidt & Solar, 2010). All traps remained in the field for 96 hours.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%