Potential Terrestrial Arthropod Indicators for Tallgrass Prairie Restoration in Iowa

Orlofske, Jessica M.; Ohnesorg, Wayne J.; Debinski, Diane M.

doi:10.3368/er.28.3.250

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pan trapping is thus inexpensive, but it is also very sensitive to environmental conditions including rainfall and high winds (Yi et al 2012), and is also biased toward capturing specific arthropod taxa (Nuttman et al 2011;Saunders and Luck 2013). Conversely, sweep netting is robust and broad in terms of arthropod taxa capture (Orlofske et al 2010), but requires more human effort and an experienced sampler. These two methods are both appropriate for grassland arthropods, but to date, they have not been contrasted in parallel at the community level in a natural grassland system.…”

Section: Habitat Typementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sweeping beauty: is grassland arthropod community composition effectively estimated by sweep netting?

Spafford

Lortie

2013

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arthropods are critical ecosystem components due to their high diversity and sensitivity to perturbation. Furthermore, due to their ease of capture they are often the focus of environmental health surveys. There is much debate regarding the best sampling method to use in these surveys. Sweep netting and pan trapping are two sampling methods commonly used in agricultural arthropod surveys, but have not been contrasted in natural grassland systems at the community level. The purpose of this study was to determine whether sweep netting was effective at estimating arthropod diversity at the community level in grasslands or if supplemental pan trapping was needed. Arthropods were collected from grassland sites in Montana, USA, in the summer of 2011. The following three standardized evaluation criteria (consistency, reliability, and precision) were developed to assess the efficacy of sweep netting and pan trapping, based on analyses of variations in arthropod abundances, species richness, evenness, capture frequency, and community composition. Neither sampling method was sufficient in any criteria to be used alone for community-level arthropod surveys. On a taxa-specific basis, however, sweep netting was consistent, reliable, and precise for Thysanoptera, infrequently collected (i.e., rare) insects, and Arachnida, whereas pan trapping was consistent, reliable, and precise for Collembola and bees, which is especially significant given current threats to the latter's populations worldwide. Species-level identifications increase the detected dissimilarity between sweep netting and pan trapping. We recommend that community-level arthropod surveys use both sampling methods concurrently, at least in grasslands, but likely in most nonagricultural systems. Target surveys, such as monitoring bee communities in fragmented grassland habitat or where detailed information on behavior of the target arthropod groups is available can in some instances employ singular methods. As a general ecological principle, consistency, reliability, and precision are appropriate criteria to evaluate the applicability of a given sampling method for both community-level and taxa-specific arthropod surveys in any ecosystem.

show abstract

Section: Habitat Typementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conversely, sweep netting is robust and broad in terms of arthropod taxa capture (Orlofske et al. ), but requires more human effort and an experienced sampler. These two methods are both appropriate for grassland arthropods, but to date, they have not been contrasted in parallel at the community level in a natural grassland system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sweeping beauty: is grassland arthropod community composition effectively estimated by sweep netting?

Spafford

Lortie

2013

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although individual plant fitness may be reduced by crab spiders, crab spiders may still promote the pollination of a diversity of species by reducing pollinator foraging activity on only high reward or common flowers (Benvenuti, 2022; Heiling & Herberstein, 2004). Because of their close association with the floral community and role in trophic interactions, crab spiders have been suggested as indicators of prairie restoration success (Orlofske et al., 2010). Despite this, little research considers the role of crab spiders in restoration and the effect of floral resources on crab spider interactions (Benvenuti, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seed mix design and floral resources drive multitrophic interactions in prairie restoration

Hulting,

Kemmerling,

Griffin

et al. 2024

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological restoration often targets plant community recovery, but restoration success may depend on the recovery of a complex web of biotic interactions to maintain biodiversity and promote ecosystem services. Specifically, management that drives resource availability, such as seeding richness and provenance, may alter species interactions across multiple trophic levels. Using experimentally seeded prairies, we examine three key groups—plants, pollinators and goldenrod crab spiders (Misumena vatia, predators of pollinators)—to understand the effects of species richness and admixture seed sourcing of restoration seed mixtures on multitrophic interactions. Working with prairie plants, we experimentally manipulated seed mix richness and the number of seed source regions (single‐source region or admixture seed sourcing). In each experimental prairie, we surveyed floral abundance and richness, pollinator visitation and plant–M. vatia interactions. A high richness seed mix increased floral abundance when seeds were sourced from a single geographic region, and floral abundance strongly increased pollinator visitation, M. vatia abundance and prey capture. Seeding richness and admixture seed sourcing of the seed mixture did not affect floral species richness, but floral species richness increased pollinator visitation. Pollinators interacted with different floral communities across seeding treatments, indicating a shift in visited floral species with restoration practices. Synthesis and applications. Long‐term success in prairie restoration requires the restoration of plant–arthropod interactions. We provide evidence that seed mix richness and admixture seed sourcing affect arthropod floral associations, but effective restoration of plant–arthropod interactions should consider total floral resource availability. Incorporating a food web perspective in restoration will strengthen approaches to whole ecosystem restoration.

show abstract

Tallgrass prairie ants: their species composition, ecological roles, and response to management

Nemec

2014

J Insect Conserv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Potential Terrestrial Arthropod Indicators for Tallgrass Prairie Restoration in Iowa

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Sweeping beauty: is grassland arthropod community composition effectively estimated by sweep netting?

Sweeping beauty: is grassland arthropod community composition effectively estimated by sweep netting?

Seed mix design and floral resources drive multitrophic interactions in prairie restoration

Tallgrass prairie ants: their species composition, ecological roles, and response to management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About