Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

What window traps can tell us: effect of placement, forest openness and beetle reproduction in retention trees

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Insect Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The use of flight interception traps (window traps) has been criticized for catching too many species without affinity to the immediate surroundings. We study aspen retention trees left for conservation reasons in a boreal forest in south-eastern Norway, and investigate how placement of window traps affects the beetle species assemblage, abundance of habitat specialists, saproxylic species and vagrant species. We also test the correlation between beetle trappings and beetle exit holes in wood. The window traps clearly responded to the immediate surroundings of the trap. Traps located on tree trunks had a different species assemblage than traps hanging freely. Traps mounted on trees caught more aspen associated beetles and less vagrant species than their free-hanging counterparts. The differences were larger when trees were dead than alive. There was a significant positive correlation between presence of individuals in the trunk-window traps and presence of exit holes for three aspen associated species. Thus, the trapping results indicated successful reproduction, showing that aspen associated beetles are not only attracted to but also utilise aspen retention trees/high stumps left in clear-cuts. This indicates that this conservation measure in forest management can have positive, alleviating effects concerning the dead wood deficit in managed boreal forest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alinvi O, Ball JP, Danell K, Hjalten J, Pettersson RB (2007) Sampling saproxylic beetle assemblages in dead wood logs: comparing window and eclector traps to traditional bark sieving and a refinement. J Insect Conserv 11:99–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bílý S, Mehl O (1989) Longhorn beetles (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Ent Scand 22:1–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlberg A, Stokland J (2004) Vedlevande arters krav på substrat—sammanställning och analys av 3 600 arter. Rapport fra Skogsstyrelsen No. 7. 75 pp (In Swedish, English abstr.)

  • Ehnström B, Axelsson R (2002) Insektsgnag i bark och ved. Artdatabanken, SLU, Uppsala 512 pp. (In Swedish)

  • Hansen V, Henriksen K, Rye B, Jensen-Haarup A 1908–1965: Danmarks Fauna, Biller 1–21. Copenhagen: G.E.C. Gads Forlag

  • Hansson L (1997) Boreal ecosystems and landscapes: structures, processes and conservation of biodiversity. Ecol Bull 46:1–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter MLJ (1990) Wildlife, forest and forestry. Principles of managing forests for biological diversity. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 370 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyvarinen E, Kouki J, Martikainen P (2006) A comparison of three trapping methods used to survey forest-dwelling Coleoptera. Eur J Entomol 103:397–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsell M, Weslien J (2003) Felled or standing retained wood—it makes a difference for saproxylic beetles. For Ecol Manage 175:425–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaila L, Martikainen P, Punttila P (1997) Dead trees left in clear-cuts benefit saproxylic Coleoptera adapted to natural disturbances in boreal forest. Biodiv Conserv 6:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Kålås JA, Viken Å, Bakken T (eds) (2006) Norsk Rødliste 2006-Norwegian red list. Artsdatabanken, Norway, 416 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindhe A, Lindelow A, Asenblad N (2005) Saproxylic beetles in standing dead wood density in relation to substrate sun-exposure and diameter. Biodiv Conserv 14:3033–3053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martikainen P, Kouki J (2003) Sampling the rarest: threatened beetles in boreal forest biodiversity inventories. Biodiv Conserv 12:1815–1831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moen A (1998) Vegetasjonsatlas for Norge. Statens kartverk, Norge

    Google Scholar 

  • Økland B (1996) A comparison of three methods of trapping saproxylic beetles. Eur J Entomol 93:195–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Palm T (1951) Die Holz- und Rinden-Käfer der nordschwedischen Laubbäume. Meddn St SkogsforskningsInst 40(2):1–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Palm T (1959) Die Holz- und Rinden-Käfer der süd- und mittelschwedischen Laubbäume. Opusc Entomol Suppl 16:1–371

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranius T, Jansson N (2002) A comparison of three methods to survey saproxylic beetles in hollow oaks. Biodiv Conserv 11:1759–1771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saint-Germain M, Buddle CM, Drapeau P (2006) Sampling saproxylic Coleoptera: scale issues and the importance of behavior. Environ Entomol 35:478–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokland JN, Meyke E (in press) The Nordic saproxylic database—an emerging overview of the biological diversity in dead wood. La Terre et la Vie—Revue d’Ecologie

  • Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Borg P, Bergsaker E (2005) Miljøhensyn på hogstflatene—før og etter Levende Skog. NORSKOG-rapport No.1-2005, 62 pp (In Norwegian, English abstr.)

  • Sverdrup-Thygeson A, Ims RA (2002) The effect of forest clearcutting in Norway on the community of saproxylic beetles on aspen. Biol Conserv 106:347–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikars LO, Sahlin E, Ranius T (2005) A comparison of three methods to estimate species richness of saproxylic beetles (Coleoptera) in logs and high stumps of Norway spruce. Can Entomol 137:304–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Espen Wandås for assistance in field, to Sindre Ligård for identification of beetles and to Steve Coulson, Erik Framstad and Frode Ødegaard for useful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. The study was possible due to grants from the Norwegian Research Council (Part of NFR project no. 140161/110 and 163230).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Sverdrup-Thygeson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sverdrup-Thygeson, A., Birkemoe, T. What window traps can tell us: effect of placement, forest openness and beetle reproduction in retention trees. J Insect Conserv 13, 183–191 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-008-9141-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-008-9141-x

Keywords

Navigation